Forget self improvement - <AUTHOR> http://www.deliberatism.com/editorial/forget-self-improvement/ <comment><USER3> _On the other hand, you might consider simply finding what you love, and letting the rest take care of itself._

Yep, this works great for me. Because I'm never bored by what I love, never discouraged by what I love, never heedlessly irresponsible about what I love, never sick of what I love, never resentful of what I love, never scared to death of what I love. I'm never distracted by what I don't love, never seduced by what I don't love, never fooled by what I don't love. I'm never foolish in my love, never shallow in my love, never fickle in my love, never maturing or changing in my love. And of course I never, ever love more than one thing at a time.

<comment><USER4> I don't think that's really the author's point. I think his point is that when you find something you love, you will forgive the little aggravations and just power through them, because they are _part_ of this activity that you love. You find yourself loving the aggravations as much as the achievement, so that it's the process that pulls you along.

I'm debugging a double-free in a C library right now. I have basically no information to go on other than the failing test; ASAN/Valgrind was no help, and the liberal assertions sprinkled throughout the code aren't catching it. Many people would say that this is a pretty sucky task, but it is challenging and engrossing enough that I debated not writing this comment (I'll try and keep it short so I can return to my work soon ;-)).

That's why people usually use the metaphor of running. Running is hard work; it is hard on your joints, it is hard on your muscles, it gives you a hell of an aerobic workout and leaves you sweaty and out of breath afterwards. Yet many runners (not I) get a high from the process - not from having finished the race, nor from how fast they finished the race, but just from having run.

<comment><USER5> > Yet many runners (not I) get a high from the process

I think it's within the grasp of anybody. You just have to learn to enjoy the pain running (or any other workout) brings. It sounds perverted but it does help to approach exercise with such mindset.

Now, how to convince yourself to enjoy it, is an interesting question. For me, the realization that we (as animals) were meant to run much (if not most) of our waking day did wonders (the aha moment, if you will).

<comment><USER6> Even games consist of work. If they don't they tend to be rather boring.

I think it's not good for humanity to be forced to things, because it prevents them from learning to love them. As an example everyone loves to read books unless they are for school. Everyone loves to read stuff on Wikipedia unless it's for university and everyone loves to solve puzzles unless it's to make money. Well, or you learn to carry over that love.

Seriously, I think all these "get people interested into math/science/engineering" things wouldn't be necessary if one of the first experiences wouldn't be to be forced to do it, forced to do lots of boring homework, to sit still in class listening to the teacher, preventing you from being outside.

I think the only reason I am into computer science is because I never really had it in school.

(And now I am studying CS and suddenly history and languages are interesting as hell)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is fucking bullshit. In the words of Jake, sucking at something is just the first step to being kinda good at something. Often when you are bad at something, you don't enjoy it, often when you are good at something you still don't enjoy it, but the ability to self-discipline, to get good at something despite not enjoying it, translates to power over oneself.

If we all just gave up because we didn't enjoy shit initially, nothing we love would ever have happened.

<comment><USER8> \+ 1, complete BS article, the author seems to have a very naive understanding of what self-improvement is and what it's benefits are. We can also use self improvement proven techniques to get at the next level that we aspire.

PS. I'm obsessed with Self Improvement and I've grown a lot using those techniques.

<comment><USER7> Well the way I see it, self improvement is like playing guitar - <USER2> it's bloody hard and doesn't make sense and when you do lock down a chord it takes ages to then play the next one and is a whole mess and is super awkward and annoying, however, once you get vaguely good at it then it becomes less about the gruelling learning and more about playing around and enjoying what you're good at - it's not just a learning exercise, it's something you understand and can develop in your own sweet way.

Self improvement, learning, guitar skill - nobody, unless you're innately talented, is something anyone just "slips into" naturally because it "feels right and is easy" as this article suggests - making the most out of this pointless spec of time takes hard work, paying attention, taking risks, learning the hard way, but it's like, deferred gratification...being bored easily helps (otherwise we'd just devote our lives to the mundane shit children enjoy), it's a fantastical journey of discovery, and it's not necessarily easy to reach things that can reward us the most.

<comment><USER4> I thought the point of the article was that hard work, paying attention, and taking risks can itself be fun. Perhaps I'm just projecting my own views onto the author.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "Maybe you aren't supposed to bother with the tedious stuff. Perhaps the reason you haven't done it yet, is that you weren't meant to. "

I don't like being meant to do anything, I choose what I work on and falling back to "well maybe I wasn't meant to" is using magical thinking and silly escapism to avoid a simple truth: You. Are. Lazy. And. Procrastinating.

Here's what I suggest to everyone who gets discouraged by some schlep work: Either find somebody else who will do it, or just get it over with, the sooner you are done with the enablers the sooner you can get to doing the things you love.

For instance: Most business owners find it tedious, boring and utterly painful to do accounting. But accounting is important. They don't say "Well maybe I wasn't meant to be a business owner", no, they hire a bloody accountant.

<comment><USER10> I think this author's point was more of a person that would find working on a business more interesting but instead is painting right now and hating every single day that they have to put brush to canvas. Some people find certain sets of activities more interesting than others. If I were a professional farmer, I would not enjoy it very much; but there are many people that would. Similarly, there are people that would find developing or testing software to be the most boring job they'd ever seen ... and yet I enjoy it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I mostly agree with the author's message that we spend far too much time trying to "improve" ourselves through knowledge-seeking, rather than simply _doing_.

However, simply "doing what you love" ignores the reality that our level of interest and passion waxes and wanes, and sometimes willpower is needed to pull us through those times where we're waiting for our feelings to "catch up" with what our mind knows to be true (that we really do love something). I've been a runner for two decades now and genuinely love the pleasure of an intense puke-worthy workout, but some days running doesn't immediately fall under the category of "doing what I love", until I coax myself to get out there and take a few steps.

He does touch on another great point, which is man's want for eternal significance - that desire to be known long after he is dead. It often does manifest itself as an increasing incline on the treadmill of "achievement".

<comment><USER12> "man's want for eternal significance - that desire to be known long after he is dead"

That's something I've never understood. What does it matter whether you're known after you're dead? You'd never know anyway since you're dead, and you couldn't derive any benefit from it since you're dead!

<comment><USER10> People fear being forgotten. That their life had no significance or impact on the world at large. Some people even believe that you live on through the collective memories of those that knew you and those that you influenced.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "I play tennis for a living even though I hate tennis, hate it with a dark and secret passion and always have."- Andre Agassi

What if the things you are good at are not the things you love? What about the opposite? It is too complex to boil down to 'do what you love'.

<comment><USER14> What is the point of doing something you are good at if it makes your life worse?

Andre Agassi is one of the most interesting people, though.

<comment><USER15> My guess is that they are doing something that makes life worse in certain ways and better in others.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'm surprised people are even responding to this. How much nuance did you expect from a 8-paragraph, 18-sentence blog post titled "Forget self improvement"?

If the author can't be bothered, why should you? I realize 99% of blog posts are half-baked throwaway propositions like this one but that doesn't mean we have to validate them with serious rebuttals.

<comment><USER17> 330 words. I dislike it yet cannot downvote. Time to make some rebuttals to earn the karma.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This is good advice, but I think he's missing a distinction between "finding what you love" and "being good at something". I see a lot of people who seem to feel a ton of pressure to find what they're good at struggling and becoming frustrated.

Find something you like to do, even if you don't feel like you're naturally good at it. Don't worry about being good at it, just make sure it continues to make you happy and eventually you'll realize that you're better than most.

</comment><comment><USER19> I am so tired of this same idea popping up over and over on the blogosphere. It's complete nonsense, as other commenters have pointed out. But what makes me really angry is that it really devalues the hard work of people who do accomplish amazing things.

"She just won a gold medal in the Olympics? Oh, it wasn't hard for her, she loves to do it. If only I could just find the thing I really love, I could get up off this couch and really _make_ something of myself, you know?"

Yeah, I'm sure.

<comment><USER20> Really? Personally, I think the more people recognise that hard work can actually be enjoyable, the better. I don't think that recognition devalues the achievement of those who accomplish amazing things.

At an old job, I used to deal with a co-worker who'd complain continuously about the work they had to do. I figured they were trying to, in an odd way, impress us ("Oh, X hates their job - it must be really difficult"). I really do think some people would benefit from recognising that it's possible to achieve great things while also finding some form of enjoyment in the work involved.

And I honestly don't think the Olympian cares what the viewer on the couch thinks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Running the marathon is the easy part, it's the training that'll get you. The vast majority of runs when I'm training for a marathon are not tranquil, peaceful, or enjoyable. In fact, the runs that matter, the ones that make the difference between a PR and a disappointing race, are the ones that suck the most. Forcing yourself to run when you're tired, burned out, have other things you want to be doing, _that_ is what it means to be a runner. I love to run, but it would still be a hell of a lot easier to go home tonight and veg out in the couch instead of getting out and putting rubber to pavement, and that's a temptation tat hasn't gone away, even after 10 years of running.

Perhaps the lesson isn't "Find what you love", but rather, "Decide what's worth loving and force yourself to grind your teeth and power through no matter what". Summoning the grit to power through and do what you love even when it sucks is what separates the marathoner from the runner that never steps up to the start line.

<comment><USER22> _Forcing yourself to run when you're tired, burned out, have other things you want to be doing, that is what it means to be a runner._

I really respect your approach to running. You sound like someone who likes to get your times down, ya? I bet you're fast. Good on you.

But I just want to throw out there that there are lots of kinds of runners. I, for one, do NOT run when I'm burnt out, or have other things I want to be doing. I run when my body says "mmm... let's go for a run!" I run to get closer in tune with my body, and to get better at listening to myself. And when I'm out on the road or the trail, I don't push myself, I just listen. I get into a groove, and I see how far my body can take me.

I'm never going to be fast, and that's OK with me. That's what being a runner means to me. I think we all have different reasons for why we get out and do stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I remember my Aikido club in Uni. At the beginning of every year, we held welcome tea with flashy demonstration to attract freshmen. The demo always looked so good that we often got ~40, 50 new members easily. By the end of the third months, can you guess how many new members stay? On average, 3, f __king 3 out forty something new members. Why is that so? Because the first 3 months are boring. You stretch and learn to roll. That's it. And it sucks, you look like a fish out of water, awkwardly trying not to hurt yourself. But the three who endured all that and stayed, they became permanent members and almost all went on to become black belts few years later.

What I want to say is that loving something is hard work and usually the initial period is the hardest. If you don't grind your teeth to overcome this, you will _never_ find what you love.

</comment><comment><USER24> It's all very simple. The trick to always succeeding is to take all your failures and make yourself think they're successes. If you can't fail, you've got no fear. Being delusional or mentally/emotionally unstable helps.

<comment><USER25> This post was another success for you.

<comment><USER24> I'm a visionary.

<comment><USER26> This entire exchange read almost exactly like an exchange from the comic Dilbert, to the point that I still have a bit of a suspicion that it might be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Let's say I'm lazy. Sure, maybe I "haven't found what I'm meant to do" quite yet, but if I'm lazy AND armed with the "I don't want to do it - the universe is telling me not to!" rhetoric then how will I ever find something I love? You have to be willing to invest effort into things that hold your interest, but until you've done something for a while the aspect that holds your interest is the result and not the process. For example, I didn't get into programming because I loved programming. I got into programming because I didn't know what to do and I thought making video games would be cool. After a couple of semesters (yes, this was late in my life >.<) I realized that hey, programming is actually quite enjoyable! Now I try to invest in opportunities for self-improvement in the programming space (among others).

"Self-help books and workshops arm us with ways to trick ourselves into doing things we perhaps should, but generally don't want, to do."

That seems like quite a generalization. I get that it's hard to create a catchy title without making some form of generalization, but... really? I guess the author is talking about workshops like "How to write and sell your awesome novel in 7 days", but what comes to my mind when hearing "self- improvement" is something like the 7 habits. I hardly saw the latter as an attempt to trick myself into doing things I don't want to do.

</comment><comment><USER28> Research heavily contradicts the idea of finding something you love, then getting good at it-it's usually the other way around (though it's a bit more complex than just that). Cal Newport recently released a book around this topic: [http://www.amazon.com/Good-They-Cant-Ignore- ebook/dp/B0076DD...](http://www.amazon.com/Good-They-Cant-Ignore- ebook/dp/B0076DDBJ6/ref=dp_kinw_strp_1)

</comment><comment><USER29> This article has a good point - better than you'd think from reading the quotes in the comments.

It's rather easy to fool yourself into thinking that you want to do what you're currently doing, or the thing that you've already sunk time and effort into. It's rather easy to fool yourself into thinking you want to be a great writer, when actually you just want to have people respect you.

A bit of time spend honestly examining whether there's a path you'd rather your life was taking is rarely wasted - not least because if you conclude that you're on the right track, it's a good way to quiet nagging doubts.

OTOH, as dkarl says, we don't always feel the same way about what we love, either, and that's worth remembering too.

</comment><comment><USER30> I agree with a bit here (doing what you love) and disagree with a whole lot more. I'll just make two quick points.

First, self improvement is a broad area that covers many topics. How can the author discuss one topic, make a vague claim, and then dismiss the whole area?

Second, things in life are rarely black and white. Saying 'forget self improvement' is like saying 'self improvement is the most important thing in the world'. Both stick to one end of the spectrum. What is right probably lies somewhere in the middle of this spectrum, and changes depending upon the person.

</comment><comment><USER31> One thing this article doesn't seem to address is that some things take some work before you can appreciate them. Most runners don't remember how hard it was when they were first starting out - how much it hurt and how little encouragement there was, and no runner's high. Same thing goes for writing: I doubt anyone reading this can remember how hard it was to learn how to even read. Some things are an "acquired" taste and take more than simply trying them out once before making a decision one way or the other.

</comment><comment><USER32> "On the other hand, you might consider simply finding what you love, and letting the rest take care of itself."

damned if this isn't the mantra of pretty much every self-help/self- improvement guru out there. And in writing this, the article basically goes back on its own premise.

</comment><comment><USER33> I disagree. There's usually a difference between the easy and unrewarding thing that I love and the thing which requires real effort. Sometimes I have to force myself to write some code instead of play a video game. This is just the way it is for me. YMMV.

</comment><comment><USER34> I kind of read it as this: in light of all the self-help "do the work" type discourse that's been flying around the internet/HN, maybe think about how much time you're spending reading that sort of stuff. What does that tell you?

</comment><comment><USER35> Love and hate are emotions taking you away from the real question - is this the right thing for you to do.

If this one thing is your deliberate decision and goal then forget about emotions. Just do it.

</comment><comment><USER36> I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit. Enjoying something usually comes after hating it. Did you love beer the first time you tried it? Coffee? Sushi? Programming? etc...

<comment><USER37> I know I loved programming the first time I tried it. The other 3 I still don't love, and I didn't love them when I first tried them either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> The best do it because they can't not do it.

<comment><USER39> Heh, is that like "Those that cannot do, teach"?

<comment><USER14> As I always say- What about those that cannot teach?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> It's the journey, not the destination.

</comment><comment><USER41> The process is the purpose</comment>


One mobile phone charger fits all: IEC publishes global standard - <AUTHOR> http://www.iec.ch/newslog/2011/nr0311.htm

<comment><USER2> People tend to focus on the plug formfactor, and I am sure it will be convenient for every charger plug to fit.

But such standards inherently limit what you can do. By defining a charger you are also defining a voltage and current capacity of that charger. This means that you can't build bigger batteries or charge them faster than the lowest common denominator charger.

Apple, for instance, does this already. The iPad pulls 10W out of a USB port. This is more than the USB spec allows but apple built a special charger to support the iPad. (and has had higher power ports on their computers for awhile.)

The lowest common denominator is what USB was built around which is why it is anemic with power, unlike, say, firewire which provides enough power to drive two or three external 2.5" hard drives (often you can barely drive one from a typical USB port.)

Now the next iPad will have to be limited so that whatever lowest common denominator feature phone charger can charge it?</comment>


The Derivative of a Number - <AUTHOR> http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/2014/08/19/the-derivative-of-a-number/ <comment><USER2> Here's a lemma that helps to prove D(n) is well-defined:

LEMMA: D(pq•r) = D(p•qr):

D(pq•r) = pq D(r) + r D(pq)

= pq D(r) + rp D(q) + qr D(p)

= p (q D(r) + r D(q)) + qr D(p)

= p D(qr) + qr D(p)

= D(p•qr)

There are a number of generalizations of the notion of "derivative"; in particular, you can take the derivative of a regular expression:

[https://github.com/scythe/dreg/blob/master/re- deriv.pdf](https://github.com/scythe/dreg/blob/master/re-deriv.pdf)

...which I've been slowly turning into a regex matcher.

<comment><USER3> If you're interested, regex matching via derivatives have been done before, see e.g. [http://matt.might.net/papers/might2011derivatives.pdf](http://matt.might.net/papers/might2011derivatives.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Barbeau was a professor of mine back in the late 1980s, great to hear that he's still around. It was a wonderful class, with Ravi Vakil [1] and Nima Arkani-Hamed [2] in it.

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravi_Vakil](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravi_Vakil) [2] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nima_Arkani- Hamed](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nima_Arkani-Hamed)

<comment><USER5> He taught our Calculus II course a few years ago, which had rather famous exams.

A couple years later I was poking around the library and found a book he'd just published entitled something like "50 challenging undergraduate mathematics problems", of which I was annoyed to recognize several :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I feel like I'm missing something. Isn't the derivative of a constant just defined to be 0? Why does the definition in the article restrict it to primes?

<comment><USER4> You're right, it's not the normal definition of derivative. He's defining a function on numbers that has some similarities to the derivative (the multiplication rule is the same, and therefore so are some other properties), but isn't the derivative.

It's common in mathematics to take a word that already means something, and re-use it for a different but related concept. For example, in group and field theory, you talk about addition and multiplication, but they're not necessarily the standard definition.

<comment><USER7> > It's common in mathematics to take a word that already means something, and > re-use it for a different but related concept. For example, in group and > field theory, you talk about addition and multiplication, but they're not > necessarily the standard definition.

That's true, but I feel like the article mislead me because it didn't give me a proper and timely explanation of what it means by "derivative".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Shouldn't derivatives by respect to change of another variable. For example d/dx of f(x).

<comment><USER9> That's the intuition used to develop the concept, but it becomes increasingly difficult to apply that intuition to in more exotic locales.

Thus, it's important to eventually seek out more abstract ways of characterizing the derivative (and integral). In more advanced mathematics, you usually state that the derivative is any operation which follows two rules

        1. Linearity, d(ax + by) = a d(x) + b d(y)
        2. The Product Rule, d(xy) = x d(y) + d(x) y

and then try to squeeze things until that operation is defined uniquely.[0]

Likewise, it's often valuable to define integration as nothing more than the relationship such that

          I(region, derivative(quantity))
        = I(boundary(region), quantity)

which is known as the Generalized Stokes Rule. It basically is the "Fundamental Theorem of Calculus" on steroids and it gives a characterization of integration in terms of nothing more than it's algebraic/topological relationship with derivation... which is itself abstracted as mentioned above.

\---

Why do all this? Because you can squeeze most of Calculus so that it depends only upon this "abstract interface" and then apply things you learned from calculus all over the place.

\---

Finally, note that this is more like a "proposed" derivative than "the" derivative on natural numbers. The author notes that linearity fails, for instance. Thus, some intuition might "port over" but we shouldn't expect too much of it to do so.

Which echoes back to your original question—there's not really a notion of instantaneous change for us to be talking about... so how much sense does it make to talk about a derivative here?

Apparently, more than no sense at all, but less than you might want.

[0] Note that all we need to state this property of the derivative is a notion of multiplication and addition. This structure is, at its most abstract usually called a ring (but can be made even weaker if needed). An example "exotic" ring might be concurrent processes. If P and Q are two processes then P*Q is P "followed by" Q and P + Q is P and Q "together". Can we write a derivative here? Who knows? (As another comment in this thread suggests, this kind of formulation can be used to consider the "derivative of a grammar" to be a parser! It's also well-known that the derivative of an algebraic data type is its "zipper"!)

<comment><USER10> > That's the intuition used to develop the concept, but it becomes > increasingly difficult to apply that intuition to in more exotic locales.

Then maybe it's better to use a different term for things that are different. Maybe it's better to keep the term "derivative" for the rate of change of one thing with respect to another thing, and to let the generalizations that aren't that be called something else.

<comment><USER11> Perhaps. Would you also say "Maybe it's better to keep the term 'sum' for combining the count of two sets, and to let the generalizations that aren't that (e.g., adding integers, adding vectors, adding polynomials, ...) be called something else"?

<comment><USER10> I'd say that you're historically wrong - that "sum" was used for adding integers, and then found to extend naturally to adding vectors, polynomials, matrices, real numbers, complex numbers, quaternions, and so on. If you want to extend it to combining the count of two sets (because you're trying to re- found all of mathematics on set theory), then the word still fits.

Just don't try to make the set theory version the "real" version, and then try to deny the use of the word in other places. Those other places were using it first; you don't have the right to hijack the word.

<comment><USER11> By "count of two sets", I don't mean to invoke set theory in any imposing, modern sense. Just the observation that, historically, we were adding counting numbers (in particular, non-negative ones with such properties as "The sum of x and y is always at least as large as x itself") long before we were adding integers.

Regardless, the point still stands: why would you allow the word "sum" to fit all those uses (disparate, but with a web of family resemblances), but not grant the same to "derivative"?

<comment><USER10> Because it seems to me that the web of family resemblances for "derivative" should include the rate of change of one thing with respect to another, not just that the product rule is satisfied. That is, it seems to me that the attempts to extend "derivative" are extending it to the point that the web of family resemblances no longer fits.

<comment><USER9> Unfortunately, all I can say to comfort that is that choosing "rate of change" as your centralizing analogy for "derivative" has been shown through the history of mathematics to be a great start, but a slow finish.

Frequently mathematics benefits a lot from abstracting to algebra because, at this point, it's purely about how to define elements and operations by their apparent behavior instead of by their metaphor or interaction with a larger idea (such as notions of space, continuity, rate, change... all of those require quite a _lot_ of mechanics to get in place, while algebra is very light-weight).

As an example, there have been a lot of attempts to discretize calculus for computers. Usually, the goal here is to create a scheme of discretization which, in the limit, resembles the smooth computations we'd like to perform. This has been a successful program in practice, but it's known to be fraught with weird edge cases. It's easy to create discretized situations which violate intuition.

Much of the reason these failed is because they attempted to generalize from the notion of "rate of change".

There's also the idea of discrete calculus (not "discretized") which is what you get when you apply the algebraic laws _alone_ to some very standard notions of discrete spaces (oriented simplicial complexes, in particular—the simplest discrete object which "has enough topology" to meaningfully have the algebraic laws of integration applied to it).

What you get in this case is a rich theory of discrete calculus which rederives half of manifold learning and graph theory as a special case. All of the laws follow precisely—and they must, as the entire construction was built to prevent such violations.

Finally, you can examine discrete calculus to find a notion of "rate of change" if you like. But it's alien from that which you might be familiar with from continuous domains. It would have been very difficult to arrive at this point trying to generalize that intuition.

But it's practically inevitable (not to say it's easy, just inevitable) to if you say that you want to take the algebraic structure of derivatives and integration and apply it to oriented simplicial complexes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Wonderfully strange. I had to implement it as a shell command:

[https://github.com/tempodox/NumberDerivative](https://github.com/tempodox/NumberDerivative)</comment>


The race to find the 'holy grail' of drone technology - <AUTHOR> http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/british-columbia/the-race-to-find-the-holy-grail-of-drone-technology-1.3671065 <comment><USER2> I would have thought the holy grail would be a battery that lasts a week of continuous usage.

And we have self driving cars, arguably far more complex than the relatively simple task of flying through empty space.

<comment><USER3> That would be a holy grail for a lot more than the drone industry

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Why do you need AI for collision avoidance? Even the simplest fly can handle that.

<comment><USER5> Flies are far from simple. Read up on their biomechanics sometime. They have six degrees of freedom--forward, backward, up/down, side to side, and rotating around all three axes. They're fantastically sophisticated flying machines.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Anyone know the latest about ADS-B or ADS-B like initiatives for drones?

<comment><USER7> What we really miss is an ADS-B low-cost variant for drones. Safety requirements are different if ones takes into account the unmanned characteristic of drones. Furthermore it will be a great exercise in solving the known problems with the existing version. The main idea of broadcasting navigation data is worth the shot to optimise even more the use of airspace. Without lives at risk technical iteration can be, at least in theory, faster. We need more IETF-style drafts and RFCs rather than classic standards (i.e that require often more than 10 years to reach the market) to see a clever use of such a technology in our daily-routine.

<comment><USER8> That's available. ADS-B receive only in a 6 gram package. A full ADS-B transponder in a 20 gram package.[1] Now your drone is visible to ATC and aircraft, and in turn, can see other aircraft, in areas where there's ground radar.

This is more for commercial operations in class B airspace, where you need to get permission from the controlling FAA tower. Real estate photography in a city or shooting a movie, for example.

This doesn't help with avoiding stationary objects; that's a separate problem and requires sensors. ADS-B just tells all the players in controlled airspace where the other players are.

[1] [http://www.uavionix.com/products/ping2020/](http://www.uavionix.com/products/ping2020/)

<comment><USER7> Yes I agree with you but you are point out the existance of low weight packages while I would say that cost is a more important constraint for drones. I guess users can argue with the idea of equipping their low-cost drone with an expensive certified ADS-B receiver. It won't be as cost effective as one may think.

Also one has to consider that the mode S transponder is using a 24bit identifier. While this has a lot of sense for modern civil aviation (there are not as many planes) the same cannot be guaranteed as soon as you have many more temporary users of your airspace (e.g. swarms of Amazon delivery drones). IMHO regulators should aim first to create an effective solution that works well for drones (e.g. allowing ATC to broadcast digital commands to guide drones if necessary, btw there is a similar effort already for commercial planes) and then find a smart way to integrate commercial and drone aviation systems.

Btw really nice product!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Multiprocessing vs. Threading in Python - <AUTHOR> https://blog.floydhub.com/multiprocessing-vs-threading-in-python-what-every-data-scientist-needs-to-know/ <comment><USER2> Awesome article. I finally feel like I understand everything (in a limited sense) about multi-threading/processing.</comment>


Array Functions and the Rule of Least Power - <AUTHOR> https://jesseduffield.com/array-functions-and-the-rule-of-least-power/ <comment><USER2> Python seems to be going the opposite direction in the name of "Zen". Reduce is gone, we're told not to use filter and map. "Beautiful" code is meant to be filled with boilerplate list comprehensions and for loops? Idgi. This article is way more compelling than "Zen" ever was.</comment>


Newly Released Map Data Shows Frequency of Small Asteroid Impacts - <AUTHOR> http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news186.html

<comment><USER2> One wonders about the mass accretion over billions of years.</comment>


Information is Beautiful Visualization & Design awards - <AUTHOR> http://www.informationisbeautifulawards.com/2013-winners/

<comment><AUTHOR> Also can see the nominees - [http://www.informationisbeautifulawards.com/2013-shortlist/](http://www.informationisbeautifulawards.com/2013-shortlist/)</comment>


Tru.ly launches as your Internet ID for the future [free beta invites] - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2011/02/24/tru-ly-launches-as-your-internet-id-for-the-future-free-beta-invites/

<comment><USER2> I love tautological statements like this:

> Once adopted by other websites, Tru.ly could replace the OpenID, oAuth or > Facebook Connect as the next evolution of an official login.

Once it's widely adopted, it'll be widely adopted! Once my startup makes it big, it'll be big!

And I just don't understand claims like this from a security standpoint:

> With Tru.ly, you can even use a QR reader on your phone to validate a Tru.ly > user on the spot as everyone who signs up gets their own QR code.

Do people think that previous attempts to verify your "real id" have failed because the proponents were stupid, or because it is an incredibly difficult problem, verging on intractable?

EDIT: to the downvoters, it's difficult to even verify the identity of a _website_ , much less humans: [http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/12/forging_ssl_ce...](http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/12/forging_ssl_cer.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> A .ly domain? Really? The website seems to deal with highly confidential data, and they're basing it on a top-level domain from a dictatorship (Libya) whose leader is currently bombing peaceful demonstrators? (That's right, they're using fighter planes against demonstrators!)

Even before the current Libyan revolution there were problems with using .ly domains. E.g., Gadhafi recently made it illegal to use .ly domains for things deemed against Islam.

<comment><USER4> I'm genuinely unable to believe they'd launch with that domain this week, irrespective of how much they'd financially and emotionally invested in the cute domain hack.

It would be amazing even for the beta launch of a service that didn't depend on your trust in their security and ability to maintain uptime.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I don't want to be "verified" badly enough to give some brand-new startup the last 4 of my SSN.

</comment><comment><USER6> This service seems like it could be a privacy nightmare like Facebook.

Will joining affect my credit rating? In other words, will this service be validating my identity based on information in my credit report?

I'd rather stay off the grid until the government threatens to fine me if I don't sign up. (sarcasm)

</comment><comment><USER7> Is that domain Libyan?

<comment><USER8> I think this is a really, really bad idea. It's been known to cause trouble for other companies before when the Lybian administration doesn't like what you're doing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I signed up because I think this is a good idea that has a place on the Internet. However, in order to link to my facebook and twitter accounts it wants permission to post to my wall and send out tweets. I'm tired of apps requesting more permissions than necessary, so that's where I stopped using it. Also, .ly is a bad idea.

</comment><comment><USER10> Whatever designer came up with a site that does this needs to do something else with their life: <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/363028/temporary/truly%20insane.png>

Scroll bar _fail_.

</comment><comment><USER11> The site looks like spam to me.

</comment><comment><USER12> I find the lady in the middle of the page to be kind of creepy...

<comment><USER13> Refresh the page and you'll get a new lady.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> All OK, but I'm European.

I've worked in USA, so I have social-security, but don't have permanent US address. World is a little bigger than USA afterall.

</comment><comment><USER15> USA only?

<comment><USER16> Yes. Not only do they require a part of your social security number, but they also require a US address.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is just a bad idea. Is this going to happen before we all get computer chips implanted in our arms?

</comment><comment><USER17> Terrible landing page

</comment><comment><USER18> Why?</comment>


Ask HN: Any hack/anti-hack resources/experiences? - <AUTHOR>

I and my project mate are currently building an android application for some banks. Application connects to a https server to validate the device plus another server to retrieve data. We write any server and application stuffs. I'm asking you for some nice resources and your experiences. Thanks for any help. <comment><USER2> Working towards PCI compliance would give you a good path to securing your application: [https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/docu...](https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/documents.php)

</comment><comment><USER3> Hi,

Would you like to be part of our study? All of the scanning tools we offer for free are certified for PCI compliance.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3931039></comment>


Ask HN: Looking for a world clock HTML 5 web app - <AUTHOR>

Recently, I found someone created a world clock with HTML 5 with some neat UI on HN. I forgot to bookmark it, and now, I can't find it. Does anyone remember the site? <comment><USER2> this one? <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2149242></comment>


New York vs San Francisco in fight for tech start-ups - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16153167 <comment><USER2> The conversation at the next table in NY is usually about real estate, hedge funds or some wild combination of the two. In SF, it's about the next Dropbox... for cats... on Facebook. Either way you are screwed. Every city is an echo chamber in its own right.

</comment><comment><USER3> If this is a fight, I'm pretty sure only one side is fighting it. I don't remember the last time I had a conversation about NY startups or NY vs SF with anyone who wasn't from NY.

I find all the coverage of NY vs. SF rather strange. For the most part, we don't really compete for the same money or for the same talent. Quite often we don't even compete for the same users.

<comment><USER4> I'm particularly annoyed with the synonymization of "San Francisco" and "Silicon Valley". They are not the same thing.

<comment><USER3> Having grown up in Silicon Valley, I can honestly say that what people consider to be Silicon Valley today was not anything close to what it was 20 years ago. So I don't take it so seriously anymore.

Since San Jose went from the gateway to Silicon Valley to the Heart of Silicon Valley, I feel like San Francisco, which is actually part of the Peninsula, can be part of SV.

<comment><USER4> I've only been here six years, and truth be told I avoid SF at all costs, but all I have to do is look at the job listings. SF listings are full of every Social Web Media Infinity-point-Fad known to man.

South Bay -- Platforms, infrastructure, embedded systems, established technologies, emphasis on availability and reliability. This is what the San Francisco startups rely on to make sure their new web startup doesn't fall over at the first sign of traffic.

One might see this as the traditional Silicon Valley maturing and even stagnating in comparison to San Francisco's young, hip, fast-moving culture, but I don't think it's reasonable to treat them as a unified entity.

<comment><USER5> Well I think it has to do with how difficult it is to find affordable office real estate for businesses that outgrow their space. I can't imagine a company as big as Google or Facebook having their HQ in SF without having to build a giant skyscraper in the Financial District.

<comment><USER6> Zynga's new HQ in SOMA houses upwards of 3,000 employees, which is probably about on par with Facebook.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> As a New Yorker looking longingly westward, I have a question. Is the Valley the only place it makes sense to be, or is it feasible to live in the East Bay?

I know the real answer is that it doesn't matter where you are if you're the right person working on the right project.

That said, I want to be somewhere that the social environment is a positive one for someone living off his savings while trying to build a product and a company. Things like a good coworking space and people who keep you motivated and inspired can help a lot, in my opinion.

The only thing is, I want to move west for a nicer home life and standard of living, I just don't want to leave city life altogether. That's why I'm thinking of living in Oakland or Berkeley, and working in SF.

Bay Area residents, what do you think?

<comment><USER8> I just saw today that Oakland is in the top 5 of the most dangerous cities in the US. I know those Top Anything lists have to be taken with a grain of salt, but Oakland seems to be in the (local) news constantly, and it's mostly not good news. After having lived in the Bay Area for 4+ years, I've been to Oakland only once, and that was to help someone move out of Oakland. I think I'd rather move to San Jose if I wanted some city life, real estate prices there have come down a bit. Avoid the east side though.

<comment><USER9> Ugh, live in San Jose? Never. Statistically, Oakland may be dangerous, but it's also physically a large city. If you are in the right parts, you'll certainly be as safe as if you lived in Berkeley, and safer then a lot of parts of SF. Just stay in the nice parts of the City.

I haven't actually ever lived in Oakland though, but I've lived in Berkeley for 5 years, live in SF now, and have many close friends who live in Oakland. Parts of it are very nice!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'll just leave this here: [http://kellysutton.tumblr.com/post/901431677/choosing-new- yo...](http://kellysutton.tumblr.com/post/901431677/choosing-new-york-over- san-francisco)

</comment><comment><USER11> Am I the only one who thinks this video is silly?

... you need to roll your sleeves, work hard, and don't give up. It's not the city that makes startups, it's you.

<comment><USER12> In pg's words:

"The best one can say is: if you're in a startup hub, unexpected good things will probably happen to you, especially if you deserve them.

[...]

I'm not saying it's impossible to succeed in a city with few other startups, just harder. If you're sufficiently good at generating your own morale, you can survive without external encouragement."

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The reporter/camera man was surprised I stopped for coffee 3 times during the day. Maybe that's why I talk so fast..

</comment><comment><USER13> The NYC v. SF/SV debate might be a headline grabber, but frankly there's no data supporting the fact that NYC is catching up tp the west coast. A more interesting discussion can be found when comparing NY to Mass when it comes to tech:

[http://www.cbinsights.com/blog/venture-capital/new-york- vent...](http://www.cbinsights.com/blog/venture-capital/new-york-venture- capital-widens-tech-gap-massachusetts-q1-2011)

We haven't published the updated figures through Q3, but the trend continues: NY is consistently outpacing Mass in venture tech investment and has been dating back to 2010. We don't publish a similar comaprison of NYC vs. SF/SV for obvious reasons: it's not very interesting. But NYC has made recognizable strides in building a tech ecosystem over the past couple years nonetheless.

</comment><comment><USER14> Every few months for the past decade or so I've seen articles like this comparing the bay area to New York or Seattle. It seems that the New York and Seattle companies all fall off the face of the earth a few minutes after I read the article, never to be heard from again. I think that Seattle just isn't large enough to really matter in the start-up world, and New York has too many bankers and too few engineers. Bankers don't create value or innovate, they just arbitrage. How can you innovate in a culture filled with young, aggressive alpha male frat-boys entirely lacking in empathy who would rather snort coke and go to strip clubs than stay up all night brainstorming or .. working with hackers?

</comment><comment><USER15> Fun video. I want some coffee.

I think there is something to be said about being in the valley and being part of the collective. But, I also think being in other places (ie: LA, ATL, etc) gives you a different perspective on what you're working on. And, for me, having everyone in the coffee shop be part of startup is a bit of a burnout. No escape.

</comment><comment><USER16> It's not clear whether by San Francisco this article is referring to Silicon Valley, but assuming that's the case - NYC has nowhere near the tech ecosystem that the Valley has in place. In the Valley you have the full gamut of software and hardware companies and everything in between. In NYC, you have a mix of pure software startups that have had some success, combined with the typical industries which have deployed technology in a unique way (like Gilt Groupe - where, apparently, only 5% of the employees actually work in tech: <http://gigaom.com/2011/11/22/gilt-groupe-ipo/> ), and the majority of software engineers in NYC still work for banks. It's going to take another decade to realize whether or not NYC has any real potential here.

<comment><USER17> That's only the case if you NYC intends to follow in Silicon Valley's exact footsteps. IMO, it would be stupid to.

As you say, NYC's tech ecosystem isn't as big. But its finance ecosystem is bigger. Also media, and fashion. I'm pretty confident that NYC can map out it's own path, playing to the city's strengths. I don't think it needs to have the same tech ecosystem that SV has.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> When I see these location discussions I'm always curious how much of an impact non-compete clauses play in starting or recruiting for a startup.

California has "16600. Except as provided in this chapter, every contract by which anyone is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void." and without such employee protection in place I would be very nervous about trying to start a company which might compete with a former employeer. Similarly it seems hard enough to find talented designers and developers already without having to consider that the individuals with the most relevant experience might be barred from completing with their current employers.

</comment><comment><USER19> Is that Malcolm Gladwell in the coffee shop at 2:53?

<comment><USER20> yup

<comment><USER21> and Nat Turner at the office

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> There should be a startup that has versus wars between 2 startups everyday, decided by fans.

</comment><comment><USER23> Sounds like PR hit for New York venture capital.

</comment><comment><USER24> Even in the video, they're both talking more about Silicon Valley than NYC = )

</comment><comment><USER25> Blablabla... we are all fools, thinking it's on our hands to decide where the hub is.

It's the VCs that decides that, if they want you in fuckin' Kansas (no offense to Kansas) I bet you all would move there.

</comment><comment><USER26> We could spend a lot of time and energy trying to figure out what city is the "coolest" for startups and produces the most innovative new social photo sharing app.

Or we could simply spend all that time and energy on building our businesses from wherever we are.

I'm doing the latter (from Chicago).

</comment><comment><USER27> It's funny how little press Austin gets, considering the size of the tech community out there.

<comment><USER28> We don't mind. We're doing just fine without more west coast transplants complaining about the heat :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> The one thing I didn't quite like when I heard PG speak at one of YCombinator's events in NYC was his insistence that you need to move to the Valley in order to launch a successful startup. Even at a seed-stage, there's great funds out there (TechStars Network among others) that happily invest in people all over the country.

<comment><USER30> _you need to move to the Valley in order to launch a successful startup_

pg didn't say that at YC NYC. He said he thought that the Valley was still better than New York, but that New York was now good enough that startups could succeed there. He also said he no longer tries to convince founders to stay in the Valley if they're planning on moving back to New York after YC.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Meanwhile, those of us continuing to succeed in the "tech backwaters" of the US will be forever amused by the smug self-satisfaction coming out of the "cool" cities. This little spat being just one example.

<comment><USER5> Yep, there's nothing cool about either of these cities. It stinks here. The nightlife is poor, the people are stupid, the pay is low, the food terrible, and there is no culture. The amount of successful startups is overly exaggerated. There's maybe one. I think most are in Iowa or Austin. Rent is expensive so please no one come to NY or SF.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> What fight? There's an abundance of tech personnel.</comment>


Ask HN: What is the typical time your contracting invoices are paid? - <AUTHOR> We have net 30 terms that we pay our engineering contractors. Most seem to get nervous if we haven't paid in 10 days though. If you are a contracting engineer how long is it before you usually get paid from companies you are working with? <comment><USER2> That's the wrong question.

You have contracting engineers. They get nervous if you pay slow.

Presumably they are good people. You want to keep them. You want to attract more, better engineers.

Pay them in 2 hours.

Imagine what happens then.

Happiness.

Ability to recruit.

Improvement to your cash flow. You don't have to pay more if you remove collection risk from your engineers' brains. And they have instant cash.

Pay instantly and frequently.

</comment><comment><USER3> When I can, they are paid before I send them because I stipulate a retainer in the contract and further stipulate that the retainer is to be applied against _final_ invoice. Likewise, my default terms include _payment is due upon receipt_ and failure to pay is grounds for stopping work.

The only one that really matters is the retainer, because that's the one about who owes who what and it means I owe work instead of the client owing me money. It prevents clients from using me as a bank.

That's not to say that some clients have well defined invoicing processes and that I wont' work with _some_ of those. I say 'some' because some other client side well defined payment processes include partial payment or slow payment or no payment. And those are clients I generally want to avoid.

One of the things a retainer does is that it demonstrates how the client really views the idea of paying me. If they struggle with the idea of writing me a check during the honeymoon, it probably ain't going to get any easier for the client as the project proceeds and when it snags in the middle or when the client has what they want. And deeper down, the basis of good client relations is less contracts and more mutual trust. Clients who default to not trusting professionals tend not to be worth the effort of trying to earn their trust.

Good luck.

<comment><USER4> >It prevents clients from using me as a bank.

Not clear what you mean by this, please explain.

<comment><USER3> A company can go to a bank and ask for a few thousand dollars to be repaid in 30, 60, or ninety days. The bank will charge fees in return for the providing the money. That is the bank's business and how it turns a profit.

On the other hand, there are no fees if the company does not pay me for 30, 60 or ninety days and so it is economically rational for a company to improve cash flow by not paying me rather than using a bank. Worse, collecting delayed payment takes my time and energy and does not produce additional profit for me. Just additional work. Even worse, holding my payment creates cash flow problems for me that provide the company leverage to renegotiate for pennies on the dollar.

At worst, I have learned in one of the harder ways that I don't want to loan money in the form of delayed payment to businesses with cash flow problems. A company that cannot write me a check before the project starts does not have sufficient funds to complete the project. Better I forego fantasy profits and play the odds.

<comment><USER4> I get it now, was not clear earlier because the fees are not present in your case, so the analogy did not seem exact, though I did think about it before asking. Thanks for the detailed answer. Makes good sense. I've had a few cases like that too, as a consultant, and have learned from them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have found people typically have a certain way of paying. Some companies pay late on principal, some pay early on principal, some pay late due to dysfunction or cash problems, some pay on time on principal. Over time I think you learn to set prices accordingly, offer _small_ discounts for timely payment, and big discounts for prepayment.

</comment><comment><USER6> In my contracts I normally require half up front before works starts and payment within 2 business days after work completion. If it is a long range project (two or more weeks) I require ACH direct deposits every Friday morning before 7AM. When doing this clients will normally insure they have the payment scheduled to be paid on time automatically.

If the client is late paying they are charged 10% or more interest depending on the value that is charged on a monthly basis. If they are not paid up in full within 60 days I take out a Judgement Lien on their personal and business properties to recuperate any losses I may have had to incur due to the none payment.

</comment><comment><USER7> 7 days. I'm not in the money lending business. If you're late, I'll send you an angry owl picture (cute and worked well so far), or if I think you'll get it, a video clip of Malcolm Reynolds saying "I do the job, and then I get paid" (sorry, too slow internet to look that one up on youtube for you).

If a client is regularly very late, I send a more serious email and if they can't get a grip on it, I dump them.

So far I've never not gotten paid and only ever dumped one client who was a pain in the ass in many other ways too.

Oh, forgot to mention, I invoice weekly.

</comment><comment><USER8> In my current contract I'm invoicing weekly. First invoice is paid 5 weeks after I submit it and from there on I get paid every every week.

So when I started the contract there was 1 month period before my invoice from first week got paid. After contract ends client will continue paying me for 4 more weeks to pay all my invoices.

This is usually also same with monthly invoicing. Invoice for my first month would get paid one month later after I submit it. So first invoice is paid 2 months after I started working for the client and from there on I'm paid every month. When the contract ends I'll get paid for one additional month as all invoices were shifted by a month.

</comment><comment><USER9> When I was a contract iOS engineer, I've had the following payment situations:

\- Paid 1x/week at a design agency with regular hours \- Paid 1x/2weeks at a company with regular hours \- 50% of contract value down with next 25% paid at project milestone and remaining 25% paid at completion.

As a contractor, getting paid on a regular, expected time schedules relieves so much stress. If you can commit to regular payment schedules, I guarantee your contractors will be happier, at least related to receiving payment.

</comment><comment><USER10> I use net 30 terms. Average time between invoice delivery to invoice deposit in my bank account appears to be approximately 2 weeks, depending on whether they decide to pay by snail mail or ACH transfer.

I've never had a client be late with payment. I wouldn't say I get "nervous" if they don't pay within 2 weeks, but given that I'm spoiled by the average I've experienced, it would probably prompt my attention if they'd not at least started the process within that time frame.

From what I can tell most of the companies I work with appear to be eager to get the invoice process over and done with.

</comment><comment><USER11> Depends on the client. Some clients pay within 3 days and some delay the payment for weeks. Some companies even have policies to pay invoices only after the second reminder (for cash flow reasons...). For me, early payments are sign of reliability and trustworthiness. I get a bit nervous and stressed if I have to remind clients to pay my invoices. Clients who repeatedly forget or delay payments go way down my "want to work with again"-list and get sorted out this way sooner or later.

</comment><comment><USER12> I contract direct. I allow 30 day net terms with a 25% discount for paying within 15 days. All my clients have opted to save $50hr instead of borrowing my money for a month.

<comment><USER13> Much larger discount for early payment than I've heard of.

At this large of discount doesn't it sound like the original rate is just obviously marked up to account for this offer?

Related, but wouldn't this lose potential clients that think the rate is too high, unless/until you quickly explain there's a discount for early payment or without their being confident that they will always be able to take you up on that offer?

<comment><USER12> Yes, it is a much larger discount than normal. In reality it is a disguised punishment for paying late but cauched in nicer terms. The bill paying arm of a companyee prefers to effectively borrow money from people they owe for 30 days. It isn't because they _can 't_ pay promptly. The $50hr difference changes that calculus for them. I did have a client that couldn't get its act together and pay promptly and I was actually happy to get paid late - at the higher rate.

As for the rate, I'm a software developer with a skill set that, while not in high demand, is rare enough to let me charge $20 more than I was being billed out at 10 years ago (of which I would get half).

As far a losing clients based on the rate: It hasn't happened yet but if it did, that would be a good thing. A client who can't appreciate/profit from the value I bring to the table is a client I don't want. I just don't want to work for a client I can't make happy. That just doesn't do anyone any good and since my reputation is livelihood, I actually can't afford to make unhappy customers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I've worked in several places as a contractor in London and it was pretty normal to get paid 1 month after you invoice.

Now that I run a company about 50% of my customers wait 1 month before paying and about 50% pay immediately. The ones that pay immediately are always much better clients as a whole and this is a good indicator of their general business health.

</comment><comment><USER15> As someone who's only hired freelancers through Upwork, something I really like was that they required I pay them every week. Once the first payment went through the freelancer knew I was legitimate. It also made it easier for me to budget since I had small numbers I could extrapolate out for how much the project will cost.

</comment><comment><USER16> I usually get paid within 5, max 10 days.

I pay other contractors and basically any invoice instantly. There is no reason for me to wait 30 days to pay them. If they have the money the next day they are happy and will gladly work for me again.

</comment><comment><USER17> Depends. Some contracts I get paid weekly and the money is in the bank within a few days of the week end.

Getting paid monthly I would normally expect to have the money cleared in the bank by 10th at the very latest in the following month.

</comment><comment><USER18> I always negotiate net 15 and usually am paid by 10-15 days.

</comment><comment><USER19> I get paid in 30 or 60 days usually.</comment>


Ask HN: What are the technological gadgets you are craving for? - <AUTHOR>

Arduino, Raspberry Pi, Google self-driven car… <comment><USER2> Some gadget that will instantaneously inject me with the ability to make enough money online to clean up my financial mess and support myself (as in with housing and everything)...

</comment><comment><USER3> Do you mean a wishlist or ones that might be in the work already (like google self driven car). I personally would like to have a flying gadget.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ones that might in the work already.</comment></comment>


Seized Sports Streaming Site Makes a Blazing Comeback  - <AUTHOR> http://torrentfreak.com/seized-sports-streaming-site-makes-a-blazing-comeback-120203/ <comment><USER2> wow, what a shock...a site that streams unlicensed content gets seized by the FBI.

I wonder..if I started a site called torrentfreak.___ (on another TLD), copied all of their content,but replaced the ads with my own, would the people from torrentfreak try to come after me? It would be ironic if they did.

They seem to be all about sharing other peoples' work (for free) why not their own?</comment>


Ask HN: Why does Bluetooth still suck? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Interference from wifi, marketing based on looks or numbers instead of real world performance, apathy, also a lack of diversity reception on headphones.

<comment><AUTHOR> Could you please elaborate on interference with WiFi?

What exactly do you mean by diversity reception?

Why is a simple device handshake such a pain sometimes?

<comment><USER2> WiFi and Bluetooth use the same 2.4 Ghz frequencies. Today there are more WiFi hotspots than ever before, sometimes they use double or triple channels, etc.

Usually Bluetooth is degraded more by WiFi than the other way around. The problems are particular bad if the WiFi radio is near a bluetooth radio and can be worst if both of those are in the same device.

Quality electronics, proper antennas, and proper firmware behavior all help, but often WiFi and Bluetooth can conflict for the same device. My Nexus 7 cannot connect to both at the same time, for instance. On my computer, listening to music through Bluetooth works better (in terms of range, dropouts) if I am on Ethernet instead of WiFi.

You start getting dropouts on headphones when you move your head to a position/angle which is particularly bad (you could lose 20 decibels, or a factor of 100, easily that way.)

Diversity reception solves that problem by having two or more antenna and choosing the best the signal.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Timely – Scheduling and Time Tracking, Simultaneously - <AUTHOR> http://www.timelyapp.com/?hn <comment><USER2> I find it so weird that they look like a calendar, but they only keep track of durations. They explicitly reject start and stop times.

For me, that makes scheduling hard, and reconciling my time & efficiency at the end of the month near impossible. I'm disappointed since everything else looks excellent.

<comment><AUTHOR> As you probably understood, we do this on purpose. We believe it doesn't matter if you work late in the evening or early in the morning, but that the important thing is that you're going to work on something, and that the task has a certain value, in this case how much time it will take.

Then later on, you can worry about when exactly in the day to do it.

We don't want people to stop using their calendars, so we would encourage you to integrate it with Timely instead.

Appreciate the feedback though, really.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Have you considered a locally-hosted version? Cloud is a no-go for certain markets.

Otherwise, looks phenomenal. I've looked hard for an app that integrates time budgeting, scheduling, and calendaring, but never found anything good.

<comment><AUTHOR> You can actually use the iPhone app without creating an account, so that should be work. But you won't be able to use the desktop web app without creating one.

<comment><USER3> Sweet!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Preface: I really like the overall look and feel, so consider these points really small nitpicks:

\- Your "About" page is missing an "a" in the first line, right before "tiny".

\- You could style the <select> tags on your registration form to match the other inputs, right now it looks a tad unfinished. See [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5912791](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5912791) for example.

<comment><AUTHOR> We love nitpicks! Thank you, will most definitively get these fixed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Very small compliment (I like other things, but commenting about this one):

I love that your call to action button says "Watch the 1-min video". I NEVER click on product videos because I am afraid it will be 6-10 minutes of founders in the studio talking about how great the app is. With the specific detail of "1-min" I immediately watched the video and found out more about the app that I would have from reading the home page for 5-10 minutes.

</comment><comment><USER6> This looks really great! Does this tool have any desktop apps for logging hours? I can't seem to find it on the website. This is the only must-have feature that's missing for me. Logging hours only from the website is not suitable for my workflow.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! We don't have a desktop app right now, but we want to get it done in the future. We are however working on some pretty cool integrations stuff with the web app and the native iPhone app, so stay tuned for that!

<comment><USER7> Definitively +1 on the desktop app. And more that just bc that fits better on some workflows is bc the kind of features that a desktop app leave you to implement. Currently my team is using timedoctor, i hate its ui/ux but they have this feature: "track keyboard activity" that lone is not impressive but their desktop app using this feature after a configurable period of time can alert me to ask if im still working on the selected task and if i don't answer he fallback to a "time break" activity. That is great bc right now with timely i can forget about a timer and let it grow for ever and later will be hard to remember when did I really ended doing that.

Great ui/ux I'm on trial now.. and i love what you got... but w/o this feature my team will keep using ugly timedoctor, nothing personal btw ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Seems to overlap with, err, Timely, which has been around for a while now. I'll let them know (I'm an investor) [http://www.gettimely.com](http://www.gettimely.com)

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually, long story short, I launched a product called Timely long before gettimely.com. It has however been changed and restarted, and since ended up into this. I have already talked about this with the founder of your company ages ago :)

<comment><USER9> And he was okay with it? That seems surprising since your businesses are about as close in scope as you can get without actually overlapping. If I heard about Timely from a friend, and searched for a scheduling app called "timely" on the App Store or the internet, I would just assume the first one I landed on was the correct one. And if it was wrong, then I would see it doesn't do what I want, and leave.

Seems like the naming conflict could canmobalize sales for both of your companies. Why wouldn't you change the name? Especially if you knew so far ahead of time??

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I am guessing you probably have some bade trademark news coming your way... cool app though

[http://www.bitspin.ch/](http://www.bitspin.ch/) (aka timely the clock app aquired by google)

<comment><USER11> If I were Google, I would've continued shopping, and acquired @matmik and Timelyapp.com as well:)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Love it. I wanted to build something just like this in my spare time for personal use. I only made it to the timing portion.

Any plans for Android in the future?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you so much! :)

Absolutely! Started on the design, but we haven't done any programming just yet.

<comment><USER13> Going to need to change the Android app name, too. :-) [http://www.bitspin.ch](http://www.bitspin.ch)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Looks really promising...but without an API you are missing one of the best parts of the what makes Cloud (SaaS) so great.

<comment><AUTHOR> We're almost there! The API is currently in beta: [http://blog.timelyapp.com/post/86357933852/help-us-beta- test...](http://blog.timelyapp.com/post/86357933852/help-us-beta-test-the- upcoming-timely-api)

<comment><USER14> Awesome stuff! I did look and found some of your roadmap, but missed this. Can't wait to give it a go.

<comment><AUTHOR> We're looking forward to having you test it! Email firstname.lastname@example.com, and I'll invite you to the beta if you want.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I'd love to see a $5/mo "me and my SO" type plan for this. Could use something nice for home

<comment><USER16> I have this same exact problem with it. Unfortunately they don't respond to support emails...

<comment><AUTHOR> Crazy days with this and TechCrunch article going on. Lots of things to respond to – so sorry about that!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> matmik, not sure you remember but we met in SF.

I'm still amazed at the level of polish your product has. Lots of subtle animations and transitions.

What tools did you use to produce the video?

<comment><AUTHOR> I remember! Mr. France! :)

Really appreciate your comment, thanks a bunch! We put a lot of time into the polish, so glad to hear people take notice.

I screen recorded everything on a Retina Macbook Pro. iPhone simulator and just a regular chrome browser for the web app.

Then I add the clips into after effects and create the 3d movements with Element3D. I'll export all the clips from there and do the final edits in Final Cut Pro X. Hope that helps :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Great for logging hours, love the new mobile app!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you!

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Looks fantastic! Amazing job Mathias!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks so much! Appreciate it :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Awesome app, really clean and simple!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a bunch!

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Is this basically Trello (w/ Plus for Trello) on a calendar-based grid?

<comment><USER22> did you even watch the video? Trello uses lists (to mimic SCRUM), this uses days (to mimic a calendar). Not that similar.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for clarifying for us :)</comment></comment></comment>


DuckDuckGo is top result for "new search engine" - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/search?q=new+search+engine <comment><USER2> And you know how they got that ranking?

They promoted a widget - <http://duckduckgo.com/karma.html> \- a little while back that when you install it on your site it uses backlink text of "new search engine" to link to their front page (rather than the page with the widget).

Sadly I don't find their actual search engine very useful at all, but the widget is excellent! It shows you your karma count / popularity on a handful of Web services including Hacker News.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for using our widget! There is also a similar profiles one: <http://duckduckgo.com/profiles.html>

If anyone needs/wants any help getting it set up (doubtful on HN), or, needs/wants other services added before use (more likely), then please let me know...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm all for diversity, let's hope this duck doesn't go the way of the dodo!

If anybody out there wants to pit their might against google then I wish them good luck, as long as you find that your relevance for 'new search engine' on your competitors website is of major importance I think you have a ways to go.

Coincidentially duckduckgo gives 'cuil' as the first result for 'new search engine', I'm not sure how to interpret that :)

<comment><USER5> Now that you mention it. Am I the only one seeing this?

For the past month or so, Google has been less satisfying in their search results for me. I've been an avid Google search addict since 1998, I really sense a palpable drop in result quality since before the holidays.

Maybe it's a bad index refresh? Maybe they've got some little issue? Maybe it's my discomfort with the invasion of the top search results with "Did you mean BLAH" results?

Or I'm losing my mind? Or maybe they're losing a bit of their touch?

Recently I had 2-3 technical search results that returned much better hits from Yahoo and Live than from Google. This almost never has happened for me-- certainly never before did I start to think "maybe I'm missing out by using Google exclusively".

For a business perspective, I believe this might be adding to why we're seeing increased traffic for our error search engine (<http://bug.gd>). Our search results differe substantially from Google's because we optimize for errors across our own web index, our community results, and BOSS. Google used to do a better job of finding these errors in haystacks, too.

Is anyone else feeling this drop in Google search results quality lately? Or is it just me?

<comment><USER6> You're not alone. I think it's the suggested search results. Almost never useful. I've switched over to yahoo in my toolbar. I think the top search engines are close enough in quality that their results are only distinguishable by interface (there's been research, though I can't remember where). When they change the presentation with that "did you mean" they do more damage to the brand than improvement to the results. It's Google's version of Clippy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> how many people would go to Google and search for a term "new search engine"?

I'd figure a person would use the term search or search engine, and for those duckduckgo is not even in the top 10 pages

<comment><USER8> "new search engine": Approx search volume January=18,100. Approx search volume average=22,200

(From google adwords tools).

For comparison, "people search" gets 68,000,000 January, and average of 30,400,000

<comment><USER9> Sort of off topic, but is the adwords tool the best one to use to find search volume?

<comment><USER3> If you have a point of reference, I find Google trends useful as well. By point of reference, I mean you have some keywords where you know the actual click volume from personal experience, i.e. you rank 1st on that keyword.

<comment><USER9> Yeah I've used Google Trends and Insights a lot, just wanted to see what everyone else out there is using.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This site is going to have to change it's name to get to the next level. I can't ever see anyone saying "just duckduckgo it".

<comment><USER11> would you be talking about it if the name was something else? Brand is a _BIG_ part of any new search engine, one portion of it is remembering the name -- kinda hard to forget one with the name DuckDuckGo.

<comment><USER8> Very easy to forget IMHO, and hard to remember if it's duckduckgo, duckgoduck, gogoduck, duckgo, goduck, etc etc

<comment><USER12> No, it's easy to remember, if you remember the childrens' game "Duck Duck Goose." If you don't know the game, then yeah, the URL is just pretty nonsensical.

<comment><USER8> Ah. Is this an American game perhaps? Never heard of it. Thanks for explaining. May hamper global adoption :)

<comment><USER3> Yeah, it's an american thing: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_Duck_Goose>

I think pretty much all Americans know it instantly. I'm sure some will pipe up here not knowing it now...it's their queue :)

<comment><USER13> I knew the game once being reminded of it, but I didn't immediately make the connection reading about Duck Duck Go.

I'd throw another hat in the ring of, "Yeah, a better name would help."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> DuckDuckGo gets some interesting results on an ego search compared to Google. I wonder how it ranks results compared to other search engines.

</comment><comment><USER15> "We label official sites, and always put them on top."

How would we torture-test this product claim?

This claim is a lie as to an ego search on my own name. There is an "official" page (one I maintain), but it's not the top result. Do we consider Paul Graham, to give a familiar example, to have an official site?

<comment><USER3> paulgraham.com, which is labeled Official site at <http://duckduckgo.com/Paul_Graham>

Sorry if our text is a bit unclear. We label official sites (that we know about), and always put them on top.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Speaking of new search engines, is there any search engine that just returns a single result for each query typed in?

<comment><USER17> yes, google. The "I'm Feeling Lucky" button is your friend :-)

<comment><USER18> Also, you could set the num parameter: [http://www.google.com/search?q=asdf&num=1](http://www.google.com/search?q=asdf&num=1)

<comment><USER16> What I'm thinking of here is a search engine that returns a single result per item, and then if the result answers your question, it ranks higher in the search result, meaning it answers other peoples questions too. You can click a button to get rid of the current result and view the next. This way, the search engine always gives the best possible reply.

<comment><USER19> Was thinking of something like this, also.

I could see it working, but mainly for queries that have one clearly-best result, or where the 'snippet' itself answers the query. So perhaps for 'answers' search more than general web search.

The implicit user feedback created would be great... but uses might be frustrated by not being able to scan many results quickly. (I always set Google to return 100 results...)

<comment><USER16> At the start, it would suck, but if the search engine reached 98% accuracy rate, you don't need more results. The engine could even learn when results are in order - for example, asking "where is mongolia" will give you a single answer, but "tv review sites" will give you a list of search results.

<comment><USER19> So bootstrapping is a challenge. Will users wait out the 'training' period?

(Or similarly, if a forward-thinking group is willing to help train, are their choices representative enough of what the impatient masses eventually want?)

I think it's a promising area for experimentation.

<comment><USER16> I am going to model this mathematically soon, but with a very small sample size, you can quickly reach a pretty accurate result. And in general, most results are pretty clear - number of states in the u.s will always be the same, no matter how forward thinking you are.

Such an engine has to start small and be trained for a few months, otherwise users will think it sucks. As it grows, it adapts.

I bet one could actually do this very easily using yahoo BOSS. Want to take a stab at it? If anyone wanted to work on this, I'd help, so long it was written in python.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Interesting that you used google to search for a "new search engine".</comment>


H.264 patent license published for the first time by the FSF - <AUTHOR> http://static.fsf.org/nosvn/h264-patent-license.pdf

<comment><AUTHOR> According to John Sullivan, the operations manager for the FSF: "Those terms have previously even been unavailable for examination online. We are publishing them on fsf.org today in order to comment on their unethical restrictions."

Analysis of the H.264 patent licensing restrictions in the context of the Apple/Adobe back and forth on Flash and "open standards":

[http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/pot-meet- kettle-a-...](http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/04/pot-meet-kettle-a- response-to-steve-jobs-letter-on-flash.ars)

The meaty part is that they require all licensed software to include the following notice:

THIS PRODUCT IS LICENSED UNDER THE AVC PATENT PORTFOLIO LICENSE FOR THE PERSONAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL USE OF A CONSUMER TO (I) ENCODE VIDEO IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AVC STANDARD ("AVC VIDEO") AND/OR (II) DECODE AVC VIDEO THAT WAS ENCODED BY A CONSUMER ENGAGED IN A PERSONAL AND NON-COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AND/OR WAS OBTAINED FROM A VIDEO PROVIDER LICENSED TO PROVIDE AVC VIDEO. NO LICENSE IS GRANTED OR SHALL BE IMPLIED FOR ANY OTHER USE. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE OBTAINED FROM MPEG LA, L.L.C. SEE HTTP://WWW.MPEGLA.COM

So even a $12,000 video camera needs to include a limitation on non-commercial "consumer" use. But would it be legal to try and enforce that?

<comment><USER2> Don't you think there is a different license for commercial encoders? That commercial license probably comes with a stunning set of fees outlined in byzantine detail, hence the need to keep businesses from using the consumer license.

(I think the professional camera crowd doesn't do interframe compression in the camera anyway. It makes editing a little funny and they like very high quality source material. Google shopping for "video camera h.264" over $1000 only brought me a bunch of security camera packages.

The Canon Vixia HF S21 is over $1000 and contains the prohibition (well, the MPEG-2 version of it), sadly I can not paste it here because Canon set the no- copy bit on the downloadable PDF manual! Yes! That will defend the company from the evil threat of… umm… I can create no scenario where copying from the users' manual is a threat.)

<comment><USER3> Look for Canon 5D Mark II, it uses h264 and is used for commercial film production

<comment><USER4> I work part-time for a production company and as far as I know, the industry standard is the RED Camera <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RED_Digital_Cinema>, whose standard output is 2K-4K RAW.

Compressed formats that interpolate between keyframes (like MPEG) are generally a bad idea since they make precise cutting between clips a lot harder.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This isn't the first time the licence has been published. There's a copy in a Divx regulatory filing:

[http://apps.shareholder.com/sec/viewerContent.aspx?companyid...](http://apps.shareholder.com/sec/viewerContent.aspx?companyid=DIVX&docid=6470121)

About 4/5 of the way down.

</comment><comment><USER6> That's the 2005 revision, presumably that has been updated in the meantime.

If this license was a computer program I'd have to class it as spaghetti code.

edit: the meat starts on page 11.

</comment><comment><USER7> Warning: This is an 8.7MB, 32 page pdf.

<comment><USER8> That's why there is the scribd link in the title. Click it, to view the pdf online. Very handy!</comment></comment>


The largest benchmark of Serverless providers - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/elbstack/the-largest-benchmark-of-serverless-providers-ac19b55750f4 <comment><USER2> Last week I attend a Meetup where the author of these benchmarks gave a talk about his experiments. While the goal is noble, the benchmark suffers from some serious problems:

\- it's just a snapshot of the performance at one point in time

\- the number of benchmarks is way too low to be statistically significant

\- the benchmarks were invoked from a local PC, so the overhead tests did depend on the location of the author and the network he was connected to

\- the benchmarks don't consider factors like AWS Lambda functions being powered by different types of EC2 instances

Because of these problems I wouldn't count on the results, but as the author himself points out, it might be a good starting point for constantly collecting benchmarks of Serverless providers:

> To improve quality and validity of this data, I want to create a service > that continuously collects data by requesting serverless functions, every > hour and every day and provide the recent data on a dedicated website. This > will cause quiet some costs for the serverless requests, so if you or your > company (talk to your boss!) wants to support me in collecting this data, I > plan on setting up a Patreon or OpenCollective account for that. For now if > you're interested, just leave your mail here and I will contact you as soon > as the project starts.

</comment><comment><USER3> The most popular use cases for serverless are gluing different services together, where critical metrics are network throughput, network latency, and CPU scheduler. Fibonacci is not an interesting use case on its own, nor is time-insensitive computational work in general. Sustained 100% CPU usage is not affordable on these platforms.

When used in conjunction with a database, KV store, or blob storage, total latency for the end user is dominated by the CPU scheduler for small instances, and network quality for larger instances. Except Azure of course, they are still trying to figure out how to bolt serverless onto App Services without re-engineering the stack.</comment>