For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong? - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/06/for-decades-the-government-steered-millions-away-from-whole-milk-was-that-wrong/ <comment><USER2> I love whole milk. Plain and simple. It's delicious. It's got a ton of good fat and protein in it. My entire family drinks it and always has. We're all of healthy weight (my brother and I are actually pretty skinny, although he has a bit of a gut now that he's 32, I'm still 25 and because of handstands and pull ups you can see my abs a bit).

We also eat very healthy in general as a family. Lots of pasta with clam sauce, red sauce, alfredo sauce. Lots of vegetables. Avocados. Clementines.

And we all lead healthy lifestyles in regards to exercise. Lots of musical instruments being played, hiking, canoeing, walking, and biking.

So, I'm not sure what my comment is here really, but the moral of the story seems to be for me: If you eat healthy foods (and don't eat too many processed items), and if you partake in healthy activities, you'll probably end up pretty healthy.

How much of it is genes? I have no idea.

<comment><USER3> Sometimes genes are a good bit of it. In my family we have ~150lb people who eat endlessly, thousands of calories a day. 6 ft tall, thin as a rail. Many of them. So that's got to be genes.

<comment><USER4> Or, you know, behavioral things like activity patterns, which can be quite heavily influenced by culture even at the level of a family, without being genetic. Or gut flora, which, though there are good reasons that they can tend to be quite closely similar in families, are environmental rather than genetic.

"X seems particularly common in family" does not imply "X is genetic".

<comment><USER3> Cool; thanks! Didn't consider all that. For us, activity isn't the factor. We were all pretty sedentary as kids. If gut flora is environmental, then that's a no-go since we span 5 states. So in our case, genes is the winner so far.

<comment><USER4> > If gut flora is environmental, then that's a no-go since we span 5 states.

Its environmental, but one of the key environments for transferring them is mother-to-child, particularly at birth.

A lot of things that are environmental rather than genetic are shaped particularly strongly by the _early_ (prenatal, perinatal, or early childhood) environment, which can confound efforts to intuit the degree to which a feature is genetic vs. environmental based on unstructured observations of the degree to which it seems to be associated with families.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _" [Whole milk] was banned from school lunch programs."_

Most schools don't even have 1% milk, but they all have chocolate milk with tons of added sugar. Great healthy choice there.

<comment><USER6> Gah, school lunches and nutritional recommendations make me so mad.

Everyone thought eggs and butter were unhealthy too. 6-11 servings of grain though! The "food pyramid" was beaten into my head repeatedly as a child, with some suspicious board of agriculture sponsored exercises too. Turns out it was total bullshit.

We feed our kids the worst garbage, at least we did from 1992-2005. A nation should want its kids to grow up big and strong. But nope, let em eat french fries and pears in heavy syrup.

<comment><USER3> Times changed. The Pentagon (who owns school lunch program) set their standards because they rejected too many recruits for malnutrition in WWII, usually insufficient calories/stunted growth.

The 50's saw that change with widespread refrigeration and more varied diets. The standards should have changed but once instituted change comes hard.

Now the Pentagon responds to obesity by restricting school lunch calories. Misguided in my opinion; school kids are growing fast and need _good calories_. Restrict calories at lunch, and the kids eat junk after school to make up for it. I would much rather schools provided unrestricted salad bars etc. instead of trying to put all the kids on a diet.

<comment><USER6> Yes that is absurd. So absurd. I would be furious if I were a parent.

The real reason? Good calories are expensive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've switch my family to all whole-milk unhomogenized dairy products (if I can find it). Why should I pay more for less calories and modified fat?

<comment><USER8> Homogenization just mixes the fat it into the milk. What do you do with it?

<comment><USER7> It is more than mixing. It is a reduction in the size of the fat molecules which changes the way the fat acts in the mixture. Shaking the milk before drinking is not the same thing.

<comment><USER9> Creating an emulsion, which is exactly what homogenization is, does not do anything to the molecules. It reduces the size of the clumps of molecules, which simply allows it to exist in a consistent suspension. It has no effects whatsoever on how those compounds behave in the digestive tract.

<comment><USER10> Right. Homogenization should not impact fatty acid chain length. Dairy systems are complicated though, and there are protein interactions that help the emulsion by supporting the formation of micelles[1]. It's the same stuff after pasteurization, just distributed differently.

Pasteurization is an entirely different matter though. Heat treatment will convert some fraction of lactose into smaller sugars, including its constituent galactose and glucose[2]. This is why ultra-pasteurized can taste a bit sweeter than untreated milk. Pasteurization also inactivates lipases which would otherwise cleave the fat molecules, reducing the likelihood of rancidity[3].

1\. [https://books.google.com/books?id=1OhFPZ7tFz8C&pg=PA864&lpg=...](https://books.google.com/books?id=1OhFPZ7tFz8C&pg=PA864&lpg=PA864&dq=homogenization+micelle&source=bl&ots=TijzrSunwJ&sig=5jv8hG6VbC4dScg0Ddie4h1uw70&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CE8Q6AEwB2oVChMIts3L-9i1yAIVBhkeCh2CWQmm#v=onepage&q=homogenization%20micelle&f=false)

2\. [https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=6Q8mX8DsDe4C&oi=...](https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=6Q8mX8DsDe4C&oi=fnd&pg=PR13&dq=pasteurization+dairy+lactose+glucose&ots=kyJLjSE6AZ&sig=L1ziZX3JRl2AXNFY0GEeS7vjzcM#v=onepage&q=pasteurization%20dairy%20lactose%20glucose&f=false)

3\. [https://books.google.com/books?id=gJ6jA7LG- bsC&pg=PA276&lpg=...](https://books.google.com/books?id=gJ6jA7LG- bsC&pg=PA276&lpg=PA276&dq=dairy+homogenization+chain+lengths&source=bl&ots=AV7I1-NGVn&sig=gI5ncJwP22hvc0A9WuVyHs_ZOYk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAjgKahUKEwjz1J_U17XIAhXGph4KHVZSA_o#v=onepage&q=dairy%20homogenization%20chain%20lengths&f=false)

<comment><USER11> How did you learn?

I learned about lipase when I was a kid and followed my dad around at the farm. According to him it was the lipase in the homogenized whole milk that made the difference in taste that I recognized between milk from the storage tank on the farm and bought milk.

Reading up on it now it seems to be a bit more complicated but still.

<comment><USER10> From a quick reading it looks like homogenization may make fatty acids more accessible to lipase (greater accessible surface area, maybe also charge interactions?). Of course enzyme activity is also a function of pH and temperature. If it was a chilled storage tank, perhaps the taste was different because lipase had not yet had a chance to work--if homogenization happens before pastuerization, it could cause some breakdown after storage but before heat-moderated lipase inactivation.

I have some formal training in biology, but I'm certainly no expert and may be incorrect. What I do know is that _dairy systems are complicated_.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The problem, IMHO, is that dietary science makes recommendations based on gross over-simplifications. Creating guidelines based on such overly simplistic grouping of information leads to sub-optimal results because it glosses over important nuances.

The saturated v. unsaturated distinction is one that we are finally realizing is not an important to overall health. However, this has been replaced by another is the trans fat v. cis fat distinction.

The government is pushing for the removal of trans fats from foods without consideration to the fact that vaccenic acid is a trans fat that is extremely good for mammals (it's found in high quantities in breast milk, for instance) while elaidic acid is what has been linked to low HDL and heart disease.

Of course, the population as a whole is no better. They also cherry-pick things they want to be healthy with little consideration of the science behind it. So I'm not sure this is an issue that needs addressing.

</comment><comment><USER13> According to a front page article this week, milk contains a progenitor to NAD. There may be no causation, but it's an intriguing correlation.

<comment><USER5> NAD?

<comment><USER13> [http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/20/anti- ageing-h...](http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/20/anti-ageing-human- trials)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> For decades, government ______ only to find out later that it was really bad.

The social engineering has got to stop. A free people should not be subject to the latest schemes of self-appointed masterminds. The most evident and dangerous venue for such engineering is the public schools, in which the government subjects _our children_ to every sort of social experiment, and what have we to show for it?

<comment><USER15> > The most evident and dangerous venue for such engineering is the public > schools, in which the government subjects our children to every sort of > social experiment, and what have we to show for it?

First two to spring to mind: A dramatic drop in violent crime since the 1970s because the "self-appointed masterminds" restricted lead. A dramatic drop in road deaths because the "self-appointed masterminds" required seatbelts, airbags, and crash standards.

<comment><USER16> I think the key argument in favor of the usefulness of these sorts of policies is that if I had to worry about all this stuff myself it would take _a ton of time_ and I'd almost certainly _still_ do a worse job than government regulators.

That regulators make mistakes, even fairly often, doesn't necessarily convince me my life would be better without them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you want a treat, try taking a sip of half-and-half before you pour it in your coffee...

<comment><USER17> Put it on your cereal for a real delight.

<comment><USER3> Better: whipped cream on corn flakes!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Drinking the milk from another species designed to grow that species babies is wrong. Would you even drink human milk designed for human babies as a grown adult?

<comment><USER19> I know! and so is eating honey! eating food designed for a baby bee to grow is wrong. /s

<comment><USER20> Just don't give honey to baby people.

Totally not what you were saying, I get that, but I think it's always a good public service type message to spread.

[http://www.benefits-of-honey.com/honey-and-infant.html](http://www.benefits- of-honey.com/honey-and-infant.html)

<comment><USER21> That link doesn't mention the dental hygiene problems of sugar. So, even when your child is over 12 months it's probably a good idea to minimise the amount of honey they eat.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Technical co-founder / team member needed - <AUTHOR>

I have developed an interesting idea and do not have the technical skills to develop the web/mobile application. It has got enormous potential, when done right. A right execution needs a right team, and I am building one. Would you join me?
I am looking for a technical co-founder or early technical team member to join me.
The plan is the following: - get the web application beta out with personal investment + technical partner - with first user traction, raise financing
I did not look for financing, but have good connections and avenues to access financing.
The ideal partner or team member would be a talented and experienced developer who is primarily motivated and excited to work on creative solutions for the community. With strong commitment, part-time engagement with long term view is welcome. I am located in Western Europe, current location of yours will be less relevant at the beginning.
Also looking for valuable connections with designers/developers/advisers. <comment><USER2> Good luck. You seem nice, but I doubt anyone on HN will be interested unless you're paying a competitive salary. I think most developers looking for co- founders either want another technical person to share the workload or someone with deep pockets.

</comment><comment><USER3> So you want someone else to provide they money and someone else to do the work?

Have you considered a career in politics?</comment>


The Future of Linux is Google - <AUTHOR> http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/182289/the_future_of_linux_is_google.html <comment><USER2> OS X has been leading Unix into the desktop as well for the last 8 years.</comment>


Machine Learning Model Evaluation: Visual and Interactive - <AUTHOR> https://machine-learning-visualization.herokuapp.com/ <comment><USER2> Application error An error occurred in the application and your page could not be served. If you are the application owner, check your logs for details. You can do this from the Heroku CLI with the command heroku logs --tail

Is it normal ?</comment>


Study confirms link between chemical in red wine and slowed aging in humans - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/medtech/drugs/news/2008/01/resveratrol

<comment><USER2> I don't want to spoil the party, but that same substance is also contained in the juice of red grapes without the alcohol ;-)

<comment><USER3> Yes, but it is possible to take an enhanced version of resveratrol that would be equivalent to thousands of bottles of wine or thousands of bottles of grapes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Study confirms link between constantly regurgitating the "red wine == health" story and plummeting magazine sales

</comment><comment><USER3> I can't wait until this drug hits the market. It is approved for patients with diabetes because you can't get something approved as a general anti-aging drug. But it is clear that it works in all people. I hope I can afford it.

<comment><USER5> In the meantime, get yourself a good bottle of red wine and enjoy it with friends. There's a lot to be said for that, too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> red wine + yc news + startup = happy living</comment>


In defense of the HomePod: Amazon's smart speaker dominance won't last - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/15/in-defense-of-the-homepod/ <comment><AUTHOR> The main thing he says, which I found fascinating, is that you can't succeed longterm in the personal assistant category without a phone, which Amazon doesn't have.

<comment><USER2> I don't mind having multiple assistants. The price of the Echo Dot is hard to beat. I can inexpensively put a few in my house where I want them. It's better than reaching, or yellling, for the phone.</comment></comment>


Google Lunar X Prize Leader Board:  Barcelona Moon Team Leading Astrobotic  - <AUTHOR> http://robohub.org/google-lunar-x-prize-leader-board-barcelona-moon-team-leading-astrobotic-moon-express-and-team-indus/

<comment><AUTHOR> One caveat to the launch date methodology is the failure of the Long March launch for the Brazilians last night.

[http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/12/chinese-long- march-4b...](http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2013/12/chinese-long- march-4b-cbers-3/)

</comment><comment><USER2> I believe the teams in the last America's Cup spent about $100 million each for their boats and R&D.

[http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/25/4771202/larry-ellisons- tea...](http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/25/4771202/larry-ellisons-team-oracle- wins-the-americas-cup-yacht-race)

If we could turn the space race into some sort of competition every 4 years, we might just reignite the space age.</comment>


A Tiny container to watch other containers on a docker host - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/omerh/gowatcher <comment><AUTHOR> A Tiny container to watch other containers on a docker host, once the other containers exits, gowatcher will terminate and reduce autoscaling group count</comment>


The Chinese Wheelbarrow (2011) - <AUTHOR> http://www.lowtechmagazine.com/2011/12/the-chinese-wheelbarrow.html <comment><USER2> The western variant does not necessarily save the driver only half the weight, this depends on how the wheelbarrow is loaded. In the standard arrangement, with handles extending out towards the driver, and the wheelbarrow tipping forwards forcing most of the weight to the front, I could see 3/4 of the weight being offloaded to the wheel. While it still loses to the chinese variant, the trade off is that the "barrow" portion of the wheelbarrow can carry loose items, including dirt or even water, whereas the chinese design requires items to be in bags, which are then tied down. Also, anyone who has ever driven a well loaded wheelbarrow knows that they have a considerable danger of tipping, and I think this would be accentuated in the chinese design. Placing most of the weight near the axle between the wheel and the ground means that any slight tendency towards one side (say by an imbalance while loading, or a bump in the road) is more easily corrected for in the western design.

I wonder if we might liken this to the distinction between the chinese preference for energy saving and the british preference for labour saving, as recorded during the industrial revolution. A chinese wheelbarrow will require much more time to load, and will require more care on behalf of the driver to prevent it tipping, but will require less energy of them. The western variant can be loaded quickly (perhaps with a shovel), but requires the driver to bear some portion of the weight, and thereby use more energy.

<comment><USER3> It is a completely different "intended usage", however.

The "western" version is intended to move materials over extremely short paths (for long distance carriages are traditionally used), the Chinese is to carry materials over long distances (and as mentioned in the article over winding and possibly non-paved roads).

You can loosely compare the "loading" with a modern quarry/mine truck vs. a container truck, besides the different nature of the goods transported the difference is between short and long haul that more than compensates the increased loading time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > The wheelbarrow gave the Chinese armies such an advantage in moving goods > that it was kept secret - early Chinese writings talk about wheelbarrows in > code.

It's strange to think that the wheelbarrow was at one time super high tech and a game changer for military operations.

Added to my list of inventions I'll steal if I ever time travel :)

</comment><comment><USER5> I find the idea that the Chinese wheelbarrow would have been better in the West somewhat suspect.

People are clever everywhere. Such a good idea would have gotten adopted if it were useful.

So, the real question is: Why wasn't it useful in the West?

I suspect the answer is "mud". The West tends to have a lot more continuous rainfall than most of China.

<comment><USER6> >People are clever everywhere. Such a good idea would have gotten adopted if it were useful.

First I thought of Democracy which is not used in China and a clear counterexample. Clearly it's not the dry weather there which is the reason :).

But I deleted that comment as it's political and, although a counterexample, one could argue that the algorithm of counting votes is not the central idea of Democracy, and it is philosophical and cultural rather than technological.

I next thought simply of forks and chopsticks. They're both wildly available, but other than Asians, nobody eats with chopsticks in America and Europe, non- Asian restaurants don't even have any. In China I imagine it's the opposite, and restaurants don't even have a fork for you.

We are not talking about a wheelbarrow here (or Democracy!) - but just a $0.50 piece of wood/plastic/metal.

Clearly it is not true that a good idea is adopted instantly in the same form. Utensils are a great idea. The west uses forks, the East uses chopsticks.

<comment><USER7> they have fork and spoon everywhere in Chinese restaurants, what can be hard to find it's knife

also most of Asia doesn't eat with chopsticks except few eastern Asian countries, heck whole southeast Asia it's fork+spoon for most of the dishes, it's just strange CN/JP/KR preference

<comment><USER6> >they have fork and spoon everywhere in Chinese restaurants

I did a Google search and saw: "It is a good idea as cheaper restaurants will not have forks available."

[https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g294212-i2147-k2629991...](https://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g294212-i2147-k2629991-Chopsticks_vs_fork_knife_spoon- Beijing.html)

This is from 2009, so has this changed in the past 9 years?

<comment><USER7> well i lived there for years, honestly i don't have problem to eat with chopsticks, after all i think i am better with them than my wife who used them since birth, but spoon is quite usual item in any restaurant, forks maybe not that common though when i need them for visitors that always had them

after all you think all those instant noodles sold in shops are eaten with chopsticks instead folding fork which it's in package? it's not like fork it's some strange concept for Chinese. every Chinese eat instant noodles more or less, majority of them eat them often with fork (when on train or traveling elsewhere)

but yeah all dishes from food delivery are accompanied by cheap short bamboo chopsticks

<comment><USER8> > _after all you think all those instant noodles sold in shops are eaten with > chopsticks instead folding fork which it 's in package_

That's interesting, in Japan you get chopsticks with your instant noodles (although they're put in your bag by the check-out staff, not included in the package)

<comment><USER6> At any rate we can agree that the point has been made. It's not like you need some external factor (prove that the reason for this is the fact that Japan is an island, or any other thing.)

China doesn't need to be "drier" to make the Chinese wheelbarrow we're reading about more useful, with the idea that the wheelbarrow difference can be explained in full by the presence of mud in the west.

You don't need any difference like that. It can just be a cultural map of adoption, with no real reason for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> >The Chinese and Roman road systems were built (independently) over the course of five centuries during the same period in history. Curiously, due to (unrelated) political reasons, both systems also started to disintegrate side by side from the third century AD onwards

All ancient societies were Malthusian, living at the limit of their food supplies. A period of global cooling started in the third century, knocking down the Roman and Chinese empires at the same time, for the same reason: [https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/12/famine-fever-and-the- fal...](https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/12/famine-fever-and-the-fall-of- rome/)

</comment><comment><USER10> > Before the arrival of the steam engine, people have always preferred to move > cargo over water instead of over land

People have always preferred moving cargo over water than land period, that's still the case today. Steam and combustion engines made overland transport faster and more flexible and thus took over some of the more time-sensitive transport, but the bulk of manufactured chinese goods don't travel to europe or the middle-east overland, neither do central and south-american goods to the US or canada.

</comment><comment><USER7> how it's this better than two wheeled cart, which is much more stable? this has benefit only on very narrow paths somewhere in mountains/forest, but otherwise carts are superior, you don't need to balance them, so I can see why this never took off outside China since there is obviously better solution to this problem

<comment><USER11> There is no comparison between the 'Western' and 'Eastern' variants.

The article is in a way very misleading.

'Wheelbarrow' in 'The West' is generally a local tool, used to move things like dirt and what not 50 feet to somewhere else.

What the Chinese have there is a '1 wheeled cart' for transportation, which in the west would have '2 wheels' or even '4 wheels'.

And yes, one would be right to question why on earthy they wouldn't add another wheel or two. Maybe resources?

<comment><USER12> According to Richard Bulliet's History of the World lectures (available online), four-wheeled wagons are globally less common than wheelbarrows or two-wheeled carts because: (a) extra wheels add considerable weight and friction (b) wagons have a larger turn radius (See also [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagon_wheel_(transportation)#T...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagon_wheel_\(transportation\)#Terminology_and_design))

TFA answers the question "why a wheelbarrow and not a two-wheeled cart": "Compared to a two-wheeled cart or a four-wheeled wagon, a wheelbarrow was much cheaper to build because wheel construction was a labour-intensive job. Although the wheelbarrow required a road, a very narrow path (about as wide as the wheel) sufficed, and it could be bumpy."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "Our road infrastructure - mostly based on asphalt - is more similar to that of the Ancient Chinese and will disintegrate at a much faster rate if we lose our ability to maintain it. The Chinese wheelbarrow - and with it many other forgotten low-tech transportation options - might one day come in very handy again."

It's funny how such intelligent and thoughtful people can write a serious article topped off by this. At first I think it's tongue-in-cheek humour, but then I realize, no, they're half-serious.

I should add - this is a great magazine, nice find!

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't think it's crazy to suggest that roads and the standard of living in some places could decline to the point that it becomes more common to use currently-outmoded methods to transport goods over land. What if the future sees:

\- Oil production decline to the point of significant scarcity

\- 20000km supply chains falling out of the profitability zone

\- Under-funded municipalities on the edges of civilization not able to maintain their roads. Some parts of the United States are already starting to un-pave their roads: [https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/7/26/the-un- paving-...](https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2016/7/26/the-un-paving-of- american-roads)

\- Large-scale decline in standard of living

...Et cetera.

Given enough neglect and time, everything we have built will crumble. When "developed" places fail, they will start to look more like "developing" places. Dirt roads, bicycles, working animals, reduced conspicuous consumption, and maybe even wheelbarrows as a seriously-considered form of transportation - all of it could return in the long-term.

<comment><USER13> Venezuelas happen. Civilization rests on the ideas in our heads. If we lose the ideas that got us here, the roads will eventually follow.</comment></comment></comment>


Type Systems and Logic - <AUTHOR> https://codewords.recurse.com/issues/one/type-systems-and-logic <comment><USER2> > Hindley-Milner type systems – which I here use to refer broadly to type > systems like those used by Haskell and OCaml – correspond to propositional > logic.

Is this true? HM type systems at least have a limited form of universal quantification (type schemes), which means we're dealing with predicate calculus, not propositional logic.</comment>


Battery breakthrough: Doubling performance with lithium metal - <AUTHOR> https://techxplore.com/news/2018-08-battery-breakthrough-lithium-metal-doesnt.html <comment><USER2> Another week, another battery breakthrough.

Researchers will continue to chip away at the material science and the chemistry to drive incremental improvements that are safe and economical while our power hungry gadgets will do more with less power.</comment>


Ask HN: What's your url? - <AUTHOR>

What is the url that you use to refer yourself? What do you expect others to use when they are doing it? What are the advantages and disadvantages if they don't intersect?<p>(0) github, (1)twitter,(2)blog hosted at a domain with your name, (3) Linkedin, (4) facebook, (5) g+, (5) other<p>After a hackathon last year, when people were sending goodbye and stay in touch mails - each mail started looking like a json response with a lot of key value pairs ... <comment><USER2> I give people a link to my website (timdavi.es) which is a glorified portal to my various online presences: GitHub, LinkedIn, G+, etc.

</comment><comment><USER3> Wasn't that the problem that about.me was supposed to fix?</comment>


The 'world's first unstealable bike' goes into production - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/05/tech/yerka-unstealable-bike/

<comment><USER2> It's a very cool idea!

But I wonder how secure the wireless lock is.

And how hard cutting the down tube would be.</comment>


Yahoo: More Details on Potential Mass Firings - <AUTHOR> http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/01/yahoo-yhoo-more-on-layoffs-jerry-and-turnaround.html <comment><USER2> Looking at yahoo.sk they should hire not fire :) Or fire Young.</comment>


Apple sold more watches in Q4 2017 than the entire Swiss watch industry - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-outsold-the-entire-swiss-watch-industry-in-2017-2018-2?op=1 <comment><AUTHOR> This is interesting to me, because I've recently gotten into mechanical watches as a hobby. If you don't know how a mechanical watch works, I recommend taking a look at some of these links:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGcoIue1Bs8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGcoIue1Bs8)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh_8BFDcEkg&feature=youtu.be](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh_8BFDcEkg&feature=youtu.be)

[https://torgoen.com/blogs/blog/mechanical-vs-quartz-watch- mo...](https://torgoen.com/blogs/blog/mechanical-vs-quartz-watch-movement-how- do-they-work#)</comment>


South Korea and U.S. Beef Up Efforts to Detect Missing North Korean Submarines - <AUTHOR> http://world.kbs.co.kr/english/news/news_IK_detail.htm?No=112874

<comment><AUTHOR> This article is one of many about current tensions in the Koreas. I'd suggest reading [https://www.reddit.com/r/NorthKoreaNews](https://www.reddit.com/r/NorthKoreaNews) or [https://twitter.com/BuckTurgidson79](https://twitter.com/BuckTurgidson79) for a broader overview of the situation. I bring this up on a tech site because of the potential issues these tensions could create.

</comment><comment><USER2> Good luck finding those diesel-electric boats.

If they manage to creep away from the AOE, they could be anywhere.</comment>


Facebook is Fu*#%$ - <AUTHOR> http://skylarcraig.blogspot.com/2012/11/facebook-is-fu.html

<comment><USER2> I agree, FB is not what it used to be and for that very reason, I stopped using it as one of main ways to keep social.</comment>


Clean Ruby - <AUTHOR> http://www.clean-ruby.com/

<comment><USER2> Just so you know, the content of that page is frustratingly slightly too wide to display on my 1024-pixel-wide netbook screen. (Using Chromium/Chrome on Linux, with Helvetica, it comes out to 1009 pixels.)

This means (a) I have horizontal scroll bar added to my browser window, (b) I need to scroll a bit left/right to read some of the text, (c) it is easy to accidentally "wobble" the horizontal scroll bar when trying to scroll vertically using multi-touch gestures.

If you were to shrink the width just slightly your site would be much more comfortable to read at 1024 pixels wide. As it stands I won't read the long- form letter because of the annoyances above. The bits I read sound interesting.

<comment><USER3> for you rodw, I shortened the width. It should be 970px now.

It's just been one of those things: wait to get it perfect or get it done. It's probably not great on a mobile phone either but I haven't had time to tackle that.

<comment><USER2> I sympathize. It can be hard to cover all the browser/platform options.

I'm still getting the scroll bar. There may be other reasons as well, but it looks like your header image[1] is 1016 pixels wide. I tried reloading without cache, but it is possible I'm getting an old version somehow.

I'm not sure how wide the scrollbar/window chrome typically are but I think I'd allow a 20 pixel buffer at minimum (i.e. 996 width). Personally, I'd probably allow a 40+ pixel buffer just to be safe, but I in practice I just use the 960px width that 960.gs and others popularized. 64 pixels might be a little generous, but it does allow the page a little breathing room even on 1024 monitors.

1024 might be becoming a rare screen size (I don't know either way), but the vast majority of the sites I visit work at 1024 without horizontal scrolling. (A bigger problem for me is the 600px height. Even at full screen the modal popups some websites use are off-screen. I know how to scale and/or drag the window to work around that, but I'm sure most users don't.)

[1] <http://s3.amazonaws.com/solarhost/21/assets/57/header.png>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I went to the site, read several things, and still have no idea what you want me to sign up for.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for the feedback. I'll clean up the text a bit then. Subscribers will get a discount on "Clean Ruby" when it's finished.

<comment><USER5> It would be more obvious that this was a listhost and not a "sign up" (per se; you get my meaning) if there was only one text input. Even have the name appear after clicking on the first input.

<comment><USER3> Well, I'm not sure I do know what you mean. If you fill out the form, I'll email you with updates and eventually a discount code.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is one of the reasons why I like Python more than Ruby, the emphasis on not writing documentation, guys, get over it, you _always_ need documentation, self-documented code is a huge lie.

What's next? Tests are a waste of time?

P.S.: Not all Ruby programmers are like that obviously that's why this exists <http://tomdoc.org/> Zack thinks the same way <http://twitter.com/#!/holman/status/144579142367711234> And there's a good movement of Ruby hackers that think that way.

<comment><USER7> I disagree. If you follow test driven development, your tests become your documentation. Want to know what a method does? Look at the tests for the method where it explicitly says what the method is doing and ensures it is functioning correctly.

<comment><USER8> > If you follow test driven development, your tests become your documentation.

That's the shittiest documentation in existence.

Your tests are implementation documentation, they're useful (maybe) for other maintainers, and useless for third-parties trying to actually _use_ your code.

> Want to know what a method does? Look at the tests for the method where it > explicitly says what the method is doing and ensures it is functioning > correctly.

Right, look at 700 lines of edge cases testing, that's informative and helpful. Not.

<comment><USER9> That's the difference between TDD and BDD, if you're practicing BDD then your tests will be documenting how to use your code, not how it's implementation works.

<comment><USER8> > if you're practicing BDD then your tests will be documenting how to use your > code

I'm going to call bullshit on that one all the same.

<comment><USER9> This site builds docs for projects based on their integration tests. I think it's a pretty good example of what you can achieve using BDD for documentation, <https://www.relishapp.com/myronmarston/vcr>

<comment><USER8> > I think it's a pretty good example of what you can achieve using BDD for > documentation

And as expected, it's awful.

The front page looks good. It's also a Markdown document. Open any actual feature dump[0] and you land straight in dreadful-land. The introduction is acceptably readable (since it's written in markdown throughout), the "code samples" are mostly an unreadable mess with little logical flows and huge blocks of unreadable code. It manages to fail both at being a documentation and at being an APIdoc.

The most laughable part is the "Examples" sections as they show not examples but values with which the placeholders in the rspec test can be replaced.

The only part worth reading of these is the heading, which has nothing to do with RSpec, and the only thing rspec doee is makes this "documentation" worse by imposing the test's structure onto the documentation.

It's not even a step _up_ form having only extracted APIDoc, it's a step down.

[0] [https://www.relishapp.com/myronmarston/vcr/docs/cassettes/ca...](https://www.relishapp.com/myronmarston/vcr/docs/cassettes/cassette- format)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Useful background: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data,_Context,_and_Interaction>

<http://www.artima.com/articles/dci_vision.html>

It also reminds me of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class-responsibility- collaborat...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class-responsibility- collaboration_card)

<comment><USER11> Thus far I've found this the easiest article to grok DCI: <https://metacpan.org/module/DCI>

<comment><USER10> I had only _heard_ of such clean perl. Thanks!

From these examples DCI seems a lot like lisp's generic functions..

<comment><USER11> re: _clean perl_ and _generic functions_ \- have a look at Moose. Its Perl's equivalent of CLOS.

* <http://moose.perl.org>

* <https://metacpan.org/module/Moose>

* <https://metacpan.org/module/Class::MOP>

* BankAccount example ( _Practical Common Lisp_ ) - <https://metacpan.org/module/Moose::Cookbook::Basics::Recipe2>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Clean Ruby is all about writing applications that are easy to understand by elevating the use case to a first class citizen. OO programs often split out methods and objects required for a use case like shrapnel. After reading Clean Ruby, you'll know how to bring them all together in one place to reveal your intent.

<comment><USER12> Ok so you're the author but this statement is pretty cryptic can you expand up on how DCI would make things better than the tried and tested test -> programming -> factoring out path most programmers take? Even rails takes this model.

<comment><USER13> DCI doesn't necessarily mean fewer tests - done correctly it can make testing easier since it can help to separate concerns and allow for easy testing of discrete components. I don't think this is the killer feature for DCI though; you can do this with other OO methodologies just as well.

DCI's main advantage is that it encourages you to write code that follows an "assemble the objects I need, then perform a sequence of operations on them" pattern, where the operations generally occur inside a single method. This is your algorithm, and the idea is that you should be able to read that algorithm and get a good idea of what the program is doing. Instead of relying on tests _alone_ to verify that your program does what it's meant to, you should be able to _read_ the code too.

Jim Coplien's talk here is a good intro: <http://www.infoq.com/presentations/The-DCI-Architecture>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> it only says "book" once before the signup form - and it's small text at the bottom of the page.

<comment><USER3> I've updated the text a bit and changed the signup button at the top to be a bit more obvious about it being a book. Thanks for the feedback!

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> When Rich Hickey talks about code simplicity, he is referring to things that Ruby (simply) cannot simplify.

<http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy>

<comment><USER3> I took that quote from that presentation. He hates all OO code, so it's not specifically Ruby that's the problem for him, but object orientation. His point, however, is that being able to reason about your program is important. That is also a driving factor behind DCI. OO programs often hide exactly what happens among objects because we mostly see everything from the perspective of a class, rather than a perspective of being among the communicating objects.

<comment><USER15> I'm not sure that he broadly hates object-orientation as an idea. It's true, he hates much of the conflation that goes in OO (E.g., conflating classes with namespaces, objects with data structures, encapsulation with object ownership, and identity with state). And he hates the reliance on tests to overcome that conflation and confusion--something that's hugely prevalent in the Ruby world. But he does allow most of the features of OO in Clojure.</comment></comment></comment>


Guide to where your cofounders should live in the SF Bay - <AUTHOR> http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=111291639665197066699.00048b3c0d910bf1a232a <comment><USER2> +1 for the mission. moved to a studio here 2 months ago (from Atlanta) and love the area. Amazing restaurants everywhere. tons of great coffee shops to work out of. Mission Beach Cafe, Four Barrel Coffee, Ritual Coffee Roasters. Bi-Rite market has amazing sandwiches (and the creamery has great ice cream). Delfina Pizzeria is fantastic. Frjtz has great fries (get the thai chili ketchup!). Limon has some nice bbq chicken appetizers and they know how to make a capirinha. Luna Park has holy-shit-amazing warm goat cheese fondue (and some great smores). Random mediterranean place on 16th & mission does great shwarma for a few bucks. A short walk up to hayes valley has Patxi's pizza, La Boulange and Samovar Tea Lounge, where you'll often find Kevin Rose.

However -

I'm in a good part of the mission (near dolores) and every other day there is new graffiti on my building, trash everywhere on the streets and broken glass here and there.

related: my moving to SF post [http://paulstamatiou.com/atlanta-to-san- francisco-moving-cro...](http://paulstamatiou.com/atlanta-to-san-francisco- moving-cross-country)

<comment><USER3> Carlos (aristus) and I co-work/hack from cafes in the mission on Wednesdays. Current choice is Sugar Lump at 24th and Byrant.

We'd love people to join us.

<comment><USER4> I'm planning on moving to SF(probably Mission) to work on my startup in about a month or so. It would be great to connect with others doing something similar, send me an email ilya -at- unviral.com .

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Palo Alto, if you can pick the right property, also has the benefit of metro fiber. If you can find a house or office on the right street (Waverly, a few others; ask at City Hall, the fiber utility guy is awesome), you can pay about $2-3k to get linked in, and then have your own fiber for $600/mo from home/office to PAIX. From there, it's pretty easy to get a wave crossconnect to one of the big datacenters in SF or the Peninsula.

For me, I'm willing to pay the extra $1k/mo to rent a house in Palo Alto vs. Mountain View or Menlo Park specifically so I can do this. Having fiber directly to your colo, when you're working on big data, moving virtual machines, etc., is amazing. If you live with cofounders and use it as an office, or live with 3-4 other people and split the cost, it really isn't that bad.

Otherwise, I look for Web Pass connected buildings up in SF, or buildings that have IP Networks fiber over PG&E. Those are mainly in SoMA, although some in the east bay around Emeryville/Berkeley/Oakland.

<comment><USER6> oh man. do you have maps or other resources that describe where this sort of thing is available?

<comment><USER5> centered around university, waverly, and bryant.

I know 365 Forest (condo building) would have been about $3k to add, since the fiber was in the basement.

There is a utilities guy at city hall who has maps, but I don't have the current ones (I last checked in 2008).

When I move back to SFBA next year, I am either getting a house with fiber in PA, or a condo with IP Networks fiber up in 8th/Folsom area of SoMA. 10GE for the win

It would be an interesting niche to work with landlords to wire up their properties, set up some colo space, and rent out house + cage/racks + fiber on a quarterly basis to startup teams. I'd much prefer a (really nice) house, shared with team, to a bunch of crappy apartments, a daily commute, and an office-building office. Although at that point, fixed wireless becomes an option too..

[http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/utl/news/details.asp?New...](http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/utl/news/details.asp?NewsID=467&TargetID=10,11,12)

<comment><USER6> hm. I wonder if this is public data, and how many people would sue me if I went through the effort to dig it up and publish it? many price quotes in the co-location industry are protected by NDA... I wonder if fiber locations are too?

<comment><USER5> private fiber maps are sometimes kept private (post 9-11) on vague "anti- terrorism" grounds.

however, the palo alto metro fiber map is public. I just don't happen to have a copy on my iPad, sorry.

<comment><USER6> wow... this comment is hit 4 on my google search for "palo alto metro fiber map" and the rest seem to be fairly useless. I'll spend some time poking around and maybe contact the city after I sleep.

but thanks, this is useful.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> The funny thing here is that I'm Garry's cofounder, and I don't live in any of the neighborhoods he recommends. Maybe he's trying to tell me to move :)

When Garry and I moved to SF to start Posterous, we moved to SOMA since apartments are abundant and it's startup central. But I found little value in being near other companies. What I did find was a lack of food and culture.

Posterous first got offices in North Beach. I really LOVE North Beach. There's amazing food and it's a beautiful part of town. Plus Jam Legend is there.

+1 for the Mission. We love our new offices. Much cheaper than anywhere else in the city, most people can walk to bike to work, tons of great food, near Bart. We couldn't ask for much more.

However, one point of disagreement with Garry's map: you can't simply write off everything north of Market. Sometimes it seems like people south of market (SOMA and Mission) don't cross north as much as they should. There's a lot of city up there!

San Francisco is one of the greatest cities in the world. If you decide to base your company here, don't optimize to be close to Twitter. Optimize to be in a vibrant neighborhood with great food and great culture.

Believe me, even north of market, you will have no problem immersing yourself in startup culture and surrounding yourself with more tech entrepreneurs than you can handle.

<comment><USER8> +1 for North Beach :)

It seems to have a rep for being pricey, but there are many areas of North Beach/Russian Hill that are no more expensive than the nicer parts of SOMA.

I also really wouldn't recommend to anyone living around Market St between 10th and 6th. Really not a nice area.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Don't forget Berkeley: affordable, interesting, and very easy to get to SF. (Only a 25 min BART ride.)

I would never again live in Mountain View because it's too damn boring. Palo Alto might be tolerable.

<comment><USER10> Boring? I love Mountain View and Palo Alto. Lovely little towns where you can walk everywhere. I guess it depends what you like doing though.

<comment><USER11> Totally agree.

Having lived in London, I personally find San Francisco to have a lot of the downsides of being a "big city", without _actually_ being a big city and so not having enough of the upsides (just to take one example, MUNI/BART is a joke compared to London's tube system).

I love Palo Alto and Mountain View though, and would live in either town again in a heartbeat.

<comment><USER12> _Exactly_. I get blank stares when I make this point around here but S.F. is big enough to be expensive, dirty, and sometimes dangerous but there's very little literary, musical, or otherwise artistic culture here and people just don't seem to be very intellectually curious outside of tech. If you're not into running around naked and high in the desert you'll have a hard time finding a social circle. Mass transit here is terrible and so is traffic and parking.

You can live _well_ here but not _deeply_.

<comment><USER10> >> "and sometimes dangerous"

The number of homeless/crazy people on the streets surprises me when I'm in SF. I know many are probably harmless, but crazy people jumping around, shouting abuse, or acting weird just doesn't make things inviting. Not to mention the beggars at the stop signs.

Is there a system in the US for looking after mentally unstable people? eg would they be put into care if they don't have medical insurance?

<comment><USER13> > Is there a system in the US for looking after mentally unstable people? eg > would they be put into care if they don't have medical insurance?

SF, like most large US cities, has lots of unused shelter and facilities. However, they're voluntary and many people won't volunteer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I moved to the Inner Richmond (sort of by accident, long story) and I'm surprised at how great the neighborhood is. It may be better just for living, but I think it could be practical for a penny-pinching startup too.

\- Much cheaper rents

\- Services: lots of restaurants, especially Asian, many open very late (you have lots of options even from midnight to 3AM), bookstores, bars.

\- If you pick your location properly (close to California or Geary, and near certain stops) you can catch express buses to and from downtown at peak hours. 20-25 min to a BART station or SOMA. Off-peak it's more like 30-40 min.

\- Unlike SOMA, my cell phone works here ;)

\- Downsides: no techie neighbors, except Archive.org who recently took over the old Christian Science building on Park Presidio & Clement.

Just generally, the place feels like a real neighborhood rather than some sort of Potemkin village constructed for yuppies or hipsters. That's important to me, anyway.

<comment><USER15> I lived in the inner richmond while I was working down the peninsula. I agree with everything you've said about the neighborhood - a lot of good bars, inexpensive restaurants, quick access to downtown on express buses, cheaper rents.

Huge downside: very difficult to get south on the freeways. There's no clear path, so you have to fight your way through city traffic. At rush hour, this can easily add 25 aggravating minutes to your commute (and add in an extra 10-15 minutes to find parking in the inner richmond). Really, it's a lot easier to live in the city and work south from the south-central neighborhoods (sunnyside, glen park, mission terrace, bernal).

Ultimately, I'd say that if you work downtown and only need to go to the valley now and then, the inner richmond is a great pick. But if you're in a daily commute type situation going south, I'd avoid it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Pretty cool map.

One note: I discourage Millbrae. I grew up there and it was on the boring side of things, while still being a tad pricey. My life is (somewhat) more exciting living in northeastern Sunnyvale (near Hacker Dojo), and rent is dirt cheap (as low as $450/person). Also, for the carless, biking is much better in Sunnyvale/Mountain View than Millbrae.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've never lived in Sunnyvale. Where would you recommend? Near downtown?

Also agree about Millbrae being boring. I put it there because its kind of a sweet spot due to multiple transit options (both Caltrain and BART). Most startups will be either heads down coding, or heading to meetings. Mainly good if you don't have a car.

<comment><USER16> millbrae without an car seems tough. I'm sure it is done, but ultimately it is auto based suburbia.

Downtown should be relatively cheap.I personally live in the cherry chase area.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> What is the most ghetto part of SF? Like if you had absolutely no fear of getting stabbed by a crackhead girlfriend and your kidneys being harvested if you roll down your windows, where would you live?

Also, does one need to show some type of credit report or can one just come in with a bunch of cash and wave it around and get a place?

<comment><USER18> tenderloin probably has the highest density of crackheads. if you want to get your kidneys harvested i'd go to chinatown or the sunset because i just assume that the chinese are the only ones sophisticated enough to steal and then sell organs. (crackheads just don't have the resources to pull something like that off)

i lived in the tenderloin for a year and some change and i kind of liked it. there's good night life on polk street and good cheap eats there. i had four indian restaurants within a block of my apartment and could walk to the great american music hall or BART. but it takes a certain kind of person to live amongst that kind of drudgery for so long.

if you want true danger, head down to bayview and hunters point. even the tenderloin has its share of wine bars and quaint coffee shops. the 'view is like another world.

<comment><USER19> the danger in the tenderloin is definitely overrated. People who think the tenderloin is dangerous has obviously never lived in places like NYC, Atlanta, or St. Louis. You could get mugged in broad daylight in Atlanta and the cops won't even blink. I've seen it happen.

<comment><USER5> I lived in the loin around 2003, pretty much at the worst part (6th/Jones). It was bad enough that I got hassled on the streets by drug dealers when I stood outside (I think they assumed I was involved in the business somehow?), and female friends would be really reluctant to visit without an escort to/from BART. I had 2 guys get shot right outside my door, and the police didn't come by to take a statement from me until the next day (I happened to be looking out the window right at the time, and called it in 5 seconds after it happened).

It's definitely gotten better since the 1990s, but I still would really not want to live there and do a startup.

It's nothing compared to HP, Bayview, EPA, parts of East San Jose, or parts of Oakland, though. When in the area, I often am driving to HP at night (to go to 200 Paul Ave, one of the big datacenters on the West Coast), and I'm always relieved when the gate closes behind my car.

The mission has some bad areas too; unfortunately the area right outside Noisebridge is actually pretty sketchy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> "amazing startup vibe (literally buzzing)"

Either they have an electrical problem or you misused the word "literally".

<comment><USER21> Maybe it's a big hub for startups in the apiary sector.

<comment><USER22> Or the vuvuzela industry.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> As a current Berkeley student / start-up intern, I would definitely recommend looking into living on the north side of Berkeley. The neighborhood is quiet and the city is only a short (25 min) BART ride away.

</comment><comment><USER24> Not even a mention of where YouTube grew up? Downtown San Mateo is pretty nice. Thread is there as are a bunch of other smallish startups.

Foodwise, there are plenty of options though in my estimation there is one great hot pot place "Little Sheep Mongolian Hot Pot", a shabu-shabu place, what seem to be three(?) izakaya places and several ramen shops, too.

<comment><USER25> Napster was there too. Pretty quick to get to SF or Palo Alto.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I like how it's broken out and a nice basic list of what is good and bad for a startup / hacker, but for most people won't it come down to cost? What they can comfortably and reasonably afford?

I have never been to California, but I want to check it out someday, possibly give a try as a place to live for a while. I quick googled apartments in Palo Alto because it sounded like the ideal location for me. The cheapest one I saw looked exactly like the place I have now but was > $1000 / month (counter tops, layout, size, etc). I'm currently paying $475 for one of the better 1 br here (Oklahoma). The most expensive I have seen is < $900 here for a 1 br in the newest upscale places with every little bill paid included.

So, unless the pay is significantly higher for the same work that I'm making here, I want to know how people deal with the cost of living in the areas provided in this link? Do you live paycheck to paycheck? Do you save much (I'm saving about 2/3 of my paycheck each month)? I wouldn't want to live in a rundown area with holes in the wall (I have lived in such a place) eating only ramen or the cheapest ground beef on discount from the local grocer. Maybe I just should not be looking at Palo Alto.

I will check these areas when I take some time off to travel out there and I will be doing that someday, hopefully not too far in the future.

I'm grateful to the OP for providing this link. Living out here in OK, having never visited CA/SanFran this provides a better overview of the different parts of the area you often read about on here from people.

<comment><USER27> The pay is significantly higher. But probably not enough to make up for the increased rent. Many people share, or live in studios.

But the climate is probably also better (warmer in the winter, cooler in the summer), so being cramped is less of an issue.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Soma is "Most yuppie / soulless area to live in SF" ?

When I was there, that was the Marina / Cow Hollow. Funny how quickly things change. When I moved down there in 1999, a friend of a friend told me to avoid SOMA if I "didn't like getting stabbed", but I guess that's mostly been gentrified at this point. It was already starting to improve back then.

<comment><AUTHOR> SOMA just has a rather metallic personality. The rest of SF generally has a lot of history and character. SOMA is mainly young urban professionals, many of whom commute to Silicon Valley or peninsula jobs via Caltrain or driving (easy access via 280). Restaurants are on the expensive side, and often overpriced (though there are gems) and I just didn't enjoy living there very much compared to the Mission or even Castro St in Mtn View.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> This maps excludes lots of livable areas in SF like Hayes Valley, Lower Haight, and the Duboce Triangle (where Justin.tv was, many moons ago).

If you don't care about access to public transit then I think its totally reasonable to expand that to places like Nob Hill or North Beach.

It also excludes all of College Terrace in Palo Alto.

</comment><comment><USER30> I came close to signing a lease for a place across the street from the Glen Park BART station before choosing Berkeley. The Glen Park area seems underrated.

</comment><comment><USER31> I'll throw out my vote for the Haight and Hayes Valley in SF, they're pretty laid back, and there's surprising number of tech people.

Just ignore all the 18 year old fauxbos in upper Haight, theyre harmless.

</comment><comment><USER32> I love the "Most yuppie / soulless area to live in SF" aka SoMA. It's also the most practical.

</comment><comment><USER33> I'm moving to SF in 10 days and I'd like to know the best way to go about securing an apartment. I've been trolling Craigslist for a couple weeks but have not received one response despite in-depth emails. Should I just have my credit report, a couple grand and the ability to drop everything and go look at a place? My friend (who, unfortunately for me, is moving from the Mission to Berkeley) suggested that a lot of people just leave things 'til the last minute. Any insight would be appreciated.

<comment><USER34> I lived in SF for a few years and I'm about to go back after dealing with some family nonsense, so I've given this some thought.

There is huge variability in the SF housing market and great deals tend to go quick. I'd put my stuff in storage and stay at a long term hotel for a few weeks and be really careful about this, after all you're talking about spending 12-20K a year.

You can get a decent hotel around the airport for like $60 on hotwire, which is really pretty cheap for SF.

<http://www.housingmaps.com/> This is useful.

>despite in-depth emails Too long and you'll get no response just like any other CL ad?

One random note : some places require a social security card.

<comment><USER33> Luckily I'll be able to crash with the aforementioned friend for about a week — any longer than that and I'll have to hit up acquaintances or dole out for a hotel or a place on Airbnb.

As for the Social Security card, hopefully that's not commonly a dealbreaker…

Thanks for the advice.

<comment><USER35> Just to echo what keefe said, I successfully apartment hunted a few weeks ago and did what you're planning: crash with a friend for a week and obsessively read Craigslist. Something that helped me get a feel for the area was biking/walking around the general vicinity of where I was wanting to live (Berkeley). A lot of apartments have signs outside stating they're for rent too; in general though, Craigslist is pretty comprehensive.

One other point: come with your checkbook and be ready to put down a deposit on the spot. Don't rush your decision of course, but places go /fast/ and you'll want to act quickly to ensure the place you're looking for doesn't get taken.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> This is a great map. I'm considering moving from Europe to SV after my work contract expires to do a startup...so really useful.

It would be very cool to get a similar map of HN startup locations, IT giants' original garage (YouTube etc), well known web 2.0 startups locations etc....obviously some of these won't be easily available due to founders not willing to divulge their location...would still be cool all the same.

</comment><comment><USER37> Berkeley all the way. North side of campus is quiet and cheap, and I'm sure you can get rent down to the $700s if you share a house/apartment. It's also close to all the engineering buildings, so any interns you want to hire will be within shouting distance. South side has more (cheap) food options though, but it's also less quiet and more messy (Telegraph, etc).

<comment><USER38> I lived in Berkeley for a year. The main problem with Berkeley is that if you work in Silicon Valley, the commute truly sucks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Anyone looking for a place to stay, send me an email. There is an extra room available in my 5BR house in North Berkeley, available right now. ~$750/month +utilities.

Live with hacker types, and... me. If you're interested, send me an email and tell me about yourself, what you're looking for in a housing situation, etc.

</comment><comment><USER39> What's the north side of Mission Bay like? I'm not in SF, but "strolling" down Berry on Google Maps, it seems like it's _really_ nice. Anybody on HN live in that area?

<comment><USER40> i live there, expect 1500-1800 a month per person on rent for a 2bd room in one of the high rises. The apartments are all new, though with W/D in unit and other good amenities.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Hi, I'm bootstrapping, just recently moved to SF. Generally clueless of the goings'on around here other than there's stuff goings'on. What should I check out?

</comment><comment><USER42> I will go out on a limb here and say you live in Berkeley. The description should read "Recommended for foodie hackers who don't mind hippies and homeless."

</comment><comment><USER43> Here's a sweet mashup, was posted to Netted yesterday:

<http://nabewise.com/sf/nabefinder>

</comment><comment><USER18> i think there is a bug in his description of the mission. i think Garry meant to say east of valencia

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, you're right. Fixed!

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> This is sort of silly. You can put your start-up anywhere in San Francisco and be reasonably close to the start-up community. The only real benefit to being in SOMA that I see is that it's easier to stumble to events straight after work like SFBeta, New Tech, or any of the various tech parties that happen within 3 blocks of Moscone (including but not limited to conference related parties). Having lived and worked at 3rd & Folsom for the past year and a half, I've become somewhat tired of spending so much time around the start-up community. All restaurants within 3 blocks of my apartment are filled with people talking about Twitter, constantly.

A cool start-up would get office space in the Outer Richmond so you can hike around Land's End every day before you start working, or maybe up in Nob Hill so you're essentially forcing your employees to use public transit some part of the day, giving them that 15 minutes of zen before work.

</comment><comment><USER45> perfect</comment>


How we interview Engineers at Eventtus - <AUTHOR> https://code.eventtus.com/how-we-interview-engineers-at-eventtus-6b17f7071f3d <comment><USER2> This sounds like a bog-standard technical interview process, with an emphasis on politeness (clear requirements, prompt responses).

I'd be interested to hear about the specifics of their process:

Is their "technical challenge" a take-home test or on-site? How long is it expected to take? Is it open-book, or are candidates limited in what resources they can use to solve the problem?

What sort of questions do they ask during the interview- tree-traversal problems, logic puzzles, architectural challenges, "tell me about a time..." questions?

What do you look for for "culture fit"? Most companies look for that, but that term also has a long history of being used to mask biases. What, specifically, are you looking for? How do you avoid building a homogenous team?

It's cool that they focus on being considerate, but this doesn't really tell us much about their interview process.

</comment><comment><USER3> Company is small currently (LinkedIn shows 20 employees). Some of the things won't scale. Most things mentioned should be standard process (clear job description, interviews with relevant interviewers, relevant questions for the role, etc).

> We won't pick times for phone calls and interviews, we'd rather let our > candidates pick from available slots in our calendars.

This relies on people keeping an updated calendar. Eventually teams will need coordinators where the responsibility of scheduling and rescheduling can be optimized. If a meeting suddenly conflicts with an interview and the interview needs to be rescheduled, it's a worse candidate experience to make them do the rescheduling themselves. Have them provide a few time slots so you have backups in case the original one have conflicts, and always send confirmation emails.

> We don't usually set a deadline for technical challenges, our candidates > pick a convenient deadline for them.

Anyone have drop off rates for this (as in never finishes project)? I think projects/challenges are best after an initial interview with someone on the team (not the recruiter). This way the candidate know more about the role, and the team believes they will be able to complete the project.

Also think that the company has to be very appealing compared to rest of market for a candidate to put in this much extra effort compared to standard on-site interviews.

</comment><comment><USER4> Reads like a rough draft, I found the grammar/typos distracting and a bit ironic at times.

"We do our best write clear job requirements."

"We do our best keep it simple and easy to code and review."

<comment><USER3> Company is in Egypt, likely not their first language.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> wait till you scale.

</comment><comment><USER6> If you don't ask brain teaser questions, you're not going to get the best talent, bottom line. We're always hiring is a bit of red flag. Why are you always hiring?

<comment><USER7> What is it about brain teaser questions do you think helps you get the best talent, rather than the talent who's simply heard that problem before?</comment></comment>


I Joined Airbnb at 52, Here's What I Learned About Age, Wisdom, and Tech Industry - <AUTHOR> https://hbr.org/2017/04/i-joined-airbnb-at-52-and-heres-what-i-learned-about-age-wisdom-and-the-tech-industry <comment><USER2> Here you go, the secret to relevance throughout your career: _" I've spent a lifetime being curious about people and things, which, I guess, means I'm well-read and well connected."_

In my own experience being naturally curious has led me down interesting paths to meet interesting people and learn amazing things. As a parent I tried (and apparently succeeded) in nurturing the natural curiosity in my children, never shutting down a legitimate[1] 'why' question with a curt answer.

If you have forgotten how to be curious it can be hard to rekindle but I think it is more a habit than a permanent change to one's brain. If you practice I like to believe it is possible to rehabilitate curiosity (even if I don't have any research to back that up.)

[1] It helps to distinguish the difference between when your child doesn't understand the answer and when they simply don't like the answer. And the best way to do that is to toss it back to them as "What part of the answer didn't make sense to you?"

<comment><USER3> Survivorship bias. There are plenty of older engineers who are still quite curious on the unemployment line.

<comment><USER4> Note that the author isn't an engineer; he's the ex-CEO of a hotel company.

One believes the situations to be somewhat different.

<comment><USER5> Yeah, hello? This is the most atypical model possible for older tech workers. A hugely successful hospitality CEO joins a tech startup disrupting the global hospitality industry. How is that experience instructive for anyone except Chip Conley? Emotional intelligence in Mr. Conley's world apparently doesn't require any sense of irony. How hospitable.

<comment><USER6> My typical co-workers have always been 20-30 years older. The ones that stand out and have been the most productive teaming across generations have taken Chip's approach. The older engineers that focus on "how to technically implement a feature" miss out on (and often suffocate) the potential creativity of younger engineers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This just feels irrelevant to me. Ageism is directed towards older individual contributors, not higher level executives whose job is mostly strategy. (And unofficially, providing meaning and perspective to the younger workers)

It even seems to provide proof that being an older IC makes you irrelevant because the success story is not a coder. The lesson is that as you age it's either up or out. You either learn higher level skills or slowly fade into irrelevance as your ideological baggage acts as an achor distancing you from keeping pace with the now constant supply of young grads. (Now that coding is "cool")

At the very very abstract level, companies are divided into people seeking meaning and those that provide it. Upper level executives provide meaning in work for the ICs. For the middle level executives they provide meaning in the "company".

As you age, you're expected to be more wise and knowledgeable. Staying as an IC is a black mark of sorts that you've plateaued at some point. You either need to move into a meaning providing (or meaning enforcing) role, or stay as an IC but provide meaning in the form of technical wisdom. Otherwise, all else being equal, you stand out amongst the younger workforce.

Previous rewarding specialization does not mean future rewarding specialization. The world can shift in a way so that your skills and ideologies and perspectives are useless. The ageism prevalent in silicon valley is that it's unkind to equally skilled low level people with one lerson being older.

If your an older person and your skills are actually in great demand but low suppl(strategy and meaning making)y, the ageism doesn't apply.

<comment><USER8> What is IC?

<comment><USER9> Individual Contributor

<comment><USER10> Ah, the strange impenetrable language of corporate America.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's interesting to see this sort of perspective. I would like to see more of it.

I'm not 52, but I'm in my late 30s and as an engineer who works at startups, I find myself unable/uninterested in doing the things I did in the past. For example, I find myself having to work smarter rather than just putting in more hours than everyone else (which is what I did in my 20s).

It's also important to bring my perspective from 15+ years in the industry while at the same time coming into each job with a fresh set of eyes (he touches on this in the article). Just because I've seen a lot doesn't mean that there isn't still a lot to learn.

<comment><USER12> I'm in your same age bucket, and when I hear comments like "work smarter rather than just putting in more hours", I wonder if that's not just rationalization for simply not wanting to work longer hours because people in that age group generally have other life obligations, and eventually become overpaid and uncompetitive status.

You can't always work smarter day in day out, and expect to beat someone who is both smarter and willing to put in more hours.

<comment><USER13>
      > when I hear comments like "work smarter rather than just
      > putting in more hours", I wonder if that's not just
      > rationalization for simply not wanting to work longer hours
      > because people in that age group generally have other life
      > obligations, and eventually become overpaid and
      > uncompetitive status.

When people advise to work smarter than harder, it's often a nod to the fact that longer hours generally produce negative results. [0]

Working smarter generally means planning before writing code, thinking about how one's work will integrate into the larger system and how to make that code reliable, maintainable, and extensible.

It also means picking your battles and directing effort where it will count.

With experience coders learn that endlessly coding generates errors and shortsightedness. Sure, there is a small percentage of coders who can code error-free for much longer than most, but most coders will be most productive when keeping to a regular 40-hour work week. And even super coders are susceptible to burnout. [1]

[0] [http://www.igda.org/?page=crunchsixlessons](http://www.igda.org/?page=crunchsixlessons)

[1] [http://www.alistapart.com/articles/burnout/](http://www.alistapart.com/articles/burnout/)

EDIT: format link list.

<comment><USER14> > Working smarter generally means planning before writing code, thinking about > how one's work will integrate into the larger system and how to make that > code reliable, maintainable, and extensible.

I have a largely different opinion on this, working smarter just means doing the right thing instead of the wrong thing. I realize that is vague and I think the reality is vague here. Investing the time to write 'reliable, maintainable, and extensible' code is the right thing to do when it's the right thing to do, it's the wrong thing to do when the it's the wrong thing to do. Being older shouldn't mean that you always write 'reliable, maintainable, and extensible' code, it should mean that you realize when it's warranted and when it is not. My experience is that this isn't the case, 'older' coders (and I safety quote older because I'm not convinced that age is the true differentiator) tend toward 'reliable, maintainable, and extensible' at all costs. That just isn't the right answer all the time. I'd venture a guess that some of the stigma that exists about 'old coders' is related to this.

<comment><USER15> The journey of right someone told me

\- do the thing \- do the right thing \- do the right thing the right way

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> One thing that people don't seem to talk about is that with age, usually comes a broad network of colleagues and people that you know in an industry. Never underestimate the power of a network.

A 50 year old engineer sitting alone in a remote location on the other side of the world is going to find employment and opportunities much harder to come by than a 50 year old engineer who has lived and worked in Silicon Valley for decades. (Ask me how I know... ;-) )

Just the power of a warm referral, or someone in a meeting to say "Oh, I know so-and-so is really great with database security - I worked with him about 10 years ago...We should get him on board for this project..." can work wonders for a career.

</comment><comment><USER17> I'm 42 now, still highly employable, although not at all companies. And that's fine. They want someone who can churn out cheap but perhaps not so good code, more power to them. That's not what I'm interested in, anyway.

But I know what I'm worth. I know that my code is top notch. I know that my standards are above most things out there, and it shows.

I've released almost half a million lines of code for free as open source projects. I've gotten emails from people in the most remarkable industries, asking questions about something I'd written decades ago (for example, [http://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/linux/sunsite/system/network/daemons/...](http://ftp.lip6.fr/pub/linux/sunsite/system/network/daemons/ringconnectd.lsm)). I've posted the more useful of them to my github account, and that's the first place potential employers look to see if I'm worth my fee. And I am.

Age only becomes a problem if you stop drilling down into the technologies people use and REALLY understand them, and what lies underneath. Otherwise you really aren't worth any more than the guys coming out of college with no experience.

<comment><USER18> That you write "top notch code" isn't really a selling point for most organizations. Management tends to just want to get things done ASAP.

Now, if you're in a field that REQUIRES well written code (mission critical systems etc.) then being able to do so is of course a merit. But using good coding skills as an argument for higher salary at your average tech company just doesn't make sense.

<comment><USER19> Good coding is not just code but design as well, and has a huge effect on outcomes even if many business people don't appreciate that. Some do however, and I believe the niche is much bigger than "just NASA."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I think this is great advice regardless of your age:

> I asked a lot of "why" and "what if" questions, forsaking the "what" and > "how" questions on which most senior leaders focus

<comment><USER21> Maybe it's just my delivery, but in many contexts I've found people who react to "why" questions as confrontational. So much so that of the 6 W's [sic] I think "why" is the line of inquiry most requiring of diplomacy.

<comment><USER22> In my experience:

1\. "Why" is the most important question you can ask, and understand the answer to.

2\. If someone is defensive to being asked why, it's because they can't answer it well.

3\. If you can't answer it well, you haven't thought it through enough.

<comment><USER23> All true in isolation but...

1\. Sometimes "why" can lead to analysis paralysis and procrastination. Sometimes "how" is better -- as in how do we best move on to a solution?

2\. It depends on how the "why" is asked. If the asker is confrontational and implies the burden of proof is on the receiver, then the defensiveness might be warranted. In other words, sometimes people ask "why" because they are being contrarian dicks with axes to grind.

3\. Sometimes you need time to think it through but the "why" asker expects your answer immediately and if you don't have one yet, uses this line of reasoning to conclude you must not have a good answer at all. It can be hard to have presence of mind in a situation like this and realize this fallacy is being thrusted upon you. Not a very fair setup.

<comment><USER22> Yes, those are all problems with asking why and usually show up in a bad environment. Even with all that said, it's the most important question. Your list is a great example as to why having a toxic work environment will kill innovation; because people are afraid to ask and understand, "why."

1\. The "how" is often formed by the "why," as in "why are we writing this software?" What problem are we solving? If you can't answer this well, the "how" is irrelevant. Don't get me wrong, the "how" is important too, but the "how" is dependent on the why.

2\. I agree some people are dicks about it. The best way to counter that is have a good answer to the "why," then ask the person if they have anything to add. If they are just doing it to be a prick, they usually don't have an answer, or come up with something stupid. If they have actually been thinking about it, they might contribute something you haven't thought of, and you'll just have to deal with their abrasiveness to get it.

3\. You absolutely need to think about your "why." If you don't have a complete answer, then say so, but add that you are still "chewing on it." It is intimidating, that's why you should always have a good answer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> "Many young people can read the face of their iPhone better than the face of the person sitting next to them. I'm not saying young people don't understand emotions. Our digital world is full of emojis, and the term "emo" didn't exist back in my schoolyard days. But emojis don't create interpersonal, face-to- face fluency."

I am really tired of statements like these.

<comment><USER25> _> I am really tired of statements like these._

Sure, but is it _wrong_?

<comment><USER24> Yes I think so.

Even if it isn't, I don't think there is any evidence to suggest that its actually true.

The bit about emojis in particular however seems completely out of touch.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> This was the best take-away for me:

       I also learned that my best tactic was to reconceive my bewilderment as curiosity,
       and give free rein to it. I asked a lot of "why" and "what if" questions,
       forsaking the "what" and "how" questions on which most senior leaders focus.
       [...]
       My beginner's mind helped us see our blind spots a little better, as it
       was free of expert habits. We think of "why" and "what if" as little kid
       questions, but they don't have to be.

<comment><USER27> I often try to ask 'why' and 'what if' questions. Maybe I just suck at talking to people but they often become defensive and think i'm trying to question their solutions when i'm really trying to understand how their solution works (i'm young).

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Constant curiosity and learning are two of the things I love about software development... Most people gain and hone knowledge and experience in a particular sector or industry, and usually not very broad. With software development you hone your own craft, with a breadth of knowledge, experience, tools and techniques. You will be exposed to project management knowledge and techniques as well. But beyond all of this, in a career you will have the ability to work with any number of industries and areas of business. From eLearning materials for aircraft engines to business security in banking. It's an incredible opportunity.

The one thing I have learned, is I'm not very interested in pursuing traditional management roles... I've dipped my toes in and hated it. But being able to work with some amazing people, be challenged by very opposing views and ideas and the opportunity to constantly learn from all angles is incredible.

The work itself is often rather mundane, but what you get out of it isn't just the process of making something work.

</comment><comment><USER29> This guy is both non-technical--which I correctly assumed, given that his essay was published in the HBR--as well as a former executive. His life experience is of little relevance to the average 40-something (or is it 30-something, now?) software engineer stifled by ageism.

</comment><comment><USER30> Chip has his own wikipedia page....I think he may be an outlier. It isn't like he is joining airbnb as a Sr developer...

</comment><comment><USER31> Reminds me a little of the movie "the internship". That's a good story.

</comment><comment><USER32> >And yet we workers "of a certain age" are less like a carton of milk and more like a bottle of fine wine

What a classically "Baby Boomer" statement. Confusing age with wisdom.

Yeah as a white male boomer you grew up in an insanely prosperous era with basically everything stacked in your favor.

Like if you'd didn't come out of that on top, WTF was wrong with you?

Edit: Now that I've finished reading, this also stands out:

>Wisdom is about pattern recognition. And the older you are, the more patterns you've seen.

LOL, coming from an older person, this seems awfully convenient.</comment>


Employer "unable to provide any feedback" about interview process - <AUTHOR> This is a rant thread. I know, and apologize in advance. But, if you ask me to give 8-10 hours of my time over a week or two to interview with your company and submit a take home test and then tell me you're moving on with other applicants, please at least give me some kind of feedback that might help me improve.
After receiving the email saying you're moving on with other candidates, I wrote back politely asking for specific feedback. Why did I not meet your company's expectations?
To say that you are unable to provide any feedback at this time is not only terribly unhelpful for any future interviews I need to prepare for, but also just a flat out lie.
This is most upsetting because the rest of the interview process was very professional and timely.
Has anyone had this experience before? <comment><USER2> Sharing feedback is a huge risk for companies. Giving feedback after a rejection provides them ammunition for a potential discrimination lawsuit.

For this specific case, your best bet is to follow up with individuals after the interview, and ask for very specific things, rather than asking someone in HR.

One good way to ask for feedback has been to ask, "Is there anything that is giving you a pause for concern, or anything that gives you uncertainty about continuing the process?" The best time to ask is as the second question after the interviewer asks, "Do you have any questions for me?".

When you get a good response from that question, it allows you to confront your perceived weaknesses. At worst, it tells you something you already knew, "You could have solved the white board question in N time."

Getting good feedback is hard, both for the person to give, and for the asker to receive and process. Don't take it personally that people don't want to give you feedback.

</comment><comment><USER3> Wow, fuck those guys; an 8-10 hour interview process with no feedback? Even if you do receive feedback, I wouldn't take it seriously. This interview sounds abusive and unprofessional, but hey, they wouldn't have done it if they didn't find applicants.

</comment><comment><USER4> Sorry to hear. It is ok to rant and this happens quite often. I personally don't understand why as you want to give the candidate concrete feedback so that they can work on whatever didn't get them the job.

Also, there are legal reasons tied to it.</comment>