Evernote lost its CTO, CFO, CPO and HR head as it eyes another fundraise - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/04/evernote-lost-its-cto-cfo-cpo-and-hr-head-in-the-last-month-as-it-eyes-another-fundraise/ <comment><USER2> If Evernote hasn't found a set of features people would be willing to pay for in their ten years of existing, I doubt another round of funding is really the solution. I'd much rather see them reduce their staff to an amount they can afford given their MRR, and focus on fleshing out the features that people are actually willing to pay for.

<comment><USER3> Evernote is not a product, it's a feature.

Hence why you have equivalent or better software from other companies

Also, it also struck me as not very user friendly and a tad bureaucratic

<comment><USER4> Maybe I'm oblivious, but I've never heard bureaucratic applied to software. I've got to say it fits perfectly in this case.

<comment><USER5> JIRA also fits the bill.

<comment><USER6> "enterprisey" is a word I've heard used to describe jira a few times. Its meant as an insult.

<comment><USER7> Enterprise software:

\- Slow GUI

\- Horrible Java thing

\- Complicated

\- Weird patching process

\- Doesn't integrate with what you want (or does but costs more)

\- Bought and mandated by somebody that doesn't need to use it

(:

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > "In the past three months (June, July, August), Evernote has been downloaded > 2.5 million times worldwide," a spokesperson for analytics firm Apptopia > said. "After store fees, the app has brought in revenues of $2.9 million > through in-app purchases."

That seems like... not a lot... for a company that has raised $300 million in funding.

<comment><USER9> $1 per download isn't enough to pay the bills. That's not much more than a 99¢ game. It means people don't actually value the product enough to pay for it.

<comment><USER10> One huge problem is that there's a lot of competition that provides most of the same core features for free—like Apple Notes, for example. It's also easy to repurpose apps like MS Word and Google Docs to achieve the same functionality. Obviously they're very different apps designed for a different purpose, but many of my friends don't seem to mind. They just want a reasonably functional way to take notes for free.

<comment><USER11> OneNote is a direct competitor and honestly a better one

<comment><USER12> The OneNote web clipper is a disgrace compared to Evernote's. How do you get around this problem?

<comment><USER13> Evernote's Skitch was absolutely fantastic and I still haven't found a better replacement

<comment><USER11> Nice little program, but Evernote's main contribution was buying it and killing the iOS/Android/Windows versions. I liked it better as an independent app that cost a couple bucks instead of a freebie that died for not fitting the "core Evernote experience."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I've been an Evernote user for a long time, but it's been _ages_ since I've felt that they're actually user-focused by way of improving holes like poor functional parity across their apps(1). As a outsider, a huge amount of energy felt squandered on a shotgun-strategy of special-purpose apps while a stream of core app rebuilds launched, none of which significantly moved the functional needle.

I've been exploring alternatives, but so far nothing has stuck. Last time I looked at OneNote it seemed promising, but the lack of tags (seriously?) was a showstopper. DevonThink Pro was interesting, but the Mac experience and UI is archaic to the point of being unusable IMO. Esp. the way that DT bakes a really terrible styling onto imported Evernote notes.

I'd love to hear migration success stories from those of you who've moved on.

(1) One example: Want to create or modify a table on the iPad app? Nope. Baffling.

<comment><USER15> I would be happy if Evernote was "done". I pay for a subscription, I am not interested in paying for new features, I would simply be happy if it went into eternal feature freeze and only did security and compatibility updates.

Of course this kind of thing won't happen but maybe it says something about the optimization pitfalls of our economy.

<comment><USER16> This would never happen for numerous reasons, but imagine if you could fork a company somehow. Take the existing state, but just take it in an entirely different direction.

For companies that don't produce physical goods, this would actually be somewhat doable..

<comment><USER17> Netflix did something sort of like that when they split off shipping dvds into a completely different unit.

<comment><USER10> They announced it (Qwikster, I believe), and then they immediately canceled that plan after massive backlash.

<comment><USER18> It's back. DVD.com is Netflix's DVD by mail business.

<comment><USER19> Really? I wonder how it will compete with Redbox? We rarely watch movies (we don't even have a Netflix subscription), but when we do it is a spur of the moment thing so we just run around the corner to redbox and grab something. Waiting for a movie in the mail? That's so 2010 ;-)

<comment><USER20> Netflix still has almost 3 million DVD subscribers. ([https://www.statista.com/statistics/250940/quarterly- number-...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/250940/quarterly-number-of- netflix-dvd-subscribers-in-the-us/#0))

They compete by having a larger library.

But before you get too smug, the idea of going to Redbox to get a physical disc is not exactly cutting edge compared to just clicking on a button and renting a movie on demand from your cable provider/Apple/Amazon/Google/Vudu.

<comment><USER19> Sorry if I came off as smug. Wasn't my intent. We typically spend about $1-2 a month on Redbox. Any streaming movie rental would be at least four times that amount.

<comment><USER20> Usually $3.99-$5.99.

I'm lazier than I am cheap.

But honestly, most of my movies fall off the back of a truck onto my Plex server.

And I was just giving you hard time about being smug.....

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Also long gone from the company: the Skitch founders.

They "sold" their company to Evernote for stock in 2011-12. Let's just say that didn't work out so well for them.

Not that it's clear they'd have been much better off had they stayed independent. They had millions of users but no revenue.

Startup life can be brutal.

[https://www.smartcompany.com.au/startupsmart/advice/skitch-c...](https://www.smartcompany.com.au/startupsmart/advice/skitch- co-founder-cris-pearson-discusses-the-toll-the-startup-cult-took-on-his- mental-health/)

<comment><USER22> That was a nice read.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I have been using Evernote for over 10 years now. The core note taking experience has never been close to good, but two things have made me stick by it through the years (powered through the nagging for business subscription)

1\. Web clipper, which I use as a bookmark replacement, as well as for keeping copies of articles. Great for searching and knowing that I will always have a copy if a site suddenly disappears.

2\. PDF ocr / search. I store a lot of receipts, contracts, invoices, manuals and other docs in Evernote, most of which are in PDF. I find the search-in-pdf feature indispensable.

I would love to move to something simpler like Bear ([http://www.bear- writer.com](http://www.bear-writer.com)), which has a superior writing experience. However, the two points above always make me come back to Evernote.

Edit: Also forgot to include the ability to take unstructured notes and sketches using the Apple Pencil on an iPad, while a bit cumbersome in Evernote, at least works.

<comment><USER24> My biggest gripe with the clipper when used on pdf's is the lack of any metadata searching in the pdf for a title suggestion.

I hate that I have to type in the title of the pdf as the title is usually "PDF - www.example.com".

<comment><USER25> Yeah, it seems like it would be pretty easy to grab a meaningful title. Hell even the filename would be better in most cases.

OTOH, it's the best web clipper -- even with the stupid PDF name thing -- of any of the notetaking apps. So I can see why they don't put a lot of developer time into it... they're already beating the competition.

If OneNote had a decent web clipper that was on par with Evernote's, I'd probably switch: EN has done some shifty stuff, killing features and then selling them back to users as premium-tier stuff when they get pressed for money, and I can imagine that's going to happen again soon.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I have been using evernote since it practically launched. I only use Evernote these days because there is no competitor I like a lot. Not because it's good.

The app crashes, it takes forever to open, and the company has not improved anything in a long time.

Now they even changed the logo making it harder for my mind to locate the app.

Total disaster at Evernote.

I can't believe Microsoft hasn't bought it yet.

<comment><USER27> _I can 't believe Microsoft hasn't bought it yet._

Why on earth would they want to? OneNote runs on everything, ties in well with Office, and covers the big ticket features that Evernote does. I'm a vimwiki user for the most of what Evernote/OneNote cover, but what I can't believe is that Evernote users haven't saved Microsoft the trouble, and just switched to OneNote. I mean, if you're going to go walled-garden, Microsoft has some nice landscapers.

<comment><USER28> I use OneNote - it's really great. Until it suddenly decides it doesn't want to sync anymore.

<comment><USER29> I would pay to be able to make onenote only use the local filesystem and not be allowed to connect to the internet at all except when I manually decide to. Their syncing is garbage! Lord forbid you find yourself on a plane. Suddenly all your notes, inaccessible, even if you synced them an hour prior.

<comment><USER30> Maybe it is because we are still using onenote 2010 but we have one note books on our network drive and just sync to that. Works great for a team of 6.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Has anybody tried Joplin? [https://github.com/laurent22/joplin](https://github.com/laurent22/joplin)

On paper, their feature set looks great, with various synchronisation options (Dropbox, WebDAV, OneDrive) and apps on Windows, Linux, macOS, Android and iOS.

<comment><USER32> Well, I will _now_.

<comment><USER33> Boostnote is another great alternative, though it currently lacks a mobile app.

<comment><USER34> I love Boostnote too. It seems like they had a mobile app but the maintainer left a while ago [https://github.com/BoostIO/boostnote- mobile](https://github.com/BoostIO/boostnote-mobile)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I'm another one of the "long-time but unhappy Evernote users" club.

I've been using it for many years, and have a lot of stuff stored there. I don't know of a competitor that does everything I want, although it's entirely possible that I haven't searched enough, since switching costs are huge in this case.

That said, Evernote is pretty bad. I mean, the experience has gotten _marginally_ better over the last few years, but there are so many random bugs, so many random differences in behaviour of the same features across different apps...

And I'm not talking about non-core features. I'm talking about things like _tags_ , which is as central to Evernote as anything. Just as an example, there's an open bug that if you type in a dash "-" in a tag, it will auto- complete the tag. So if you have tags like "t- something" and "t- something else, writing "t-" will auto-complete one of them. Since many people use tags with a dash to structure their notes, this is _incredibly annoying_.

The bug has been open for 3 years.

<comment><USER36> I'm more annoyed that we cannot encrypt our full notes/account and they only offer selections of text from inside a single note.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I fondly remember Evernote talking about being a company that lives around for a hundred years. It had really great leadership, smart staff, a desire to be as independent as possible, keep data as belonging to the user as much as possible, and away from subpoena, and then a vision to help people become more productive.

Sometime later the vision floundered and staff became bored. Lots of people left for something more exciting. And the product went through its dark period.

Now the flaws are too many to mention and too well known too repeat but my question remains the same: what is there to do as a company that it makes sense to last a hundred years independently?

No. More than that. How can a company become so important just by collecting thoughts and memories?

FB survived because they had complete open access to how users were using the product. And they pivoted from their earlier promises.

Evernote stayed loyal. They suffered.

</comment><comment><USER38> >"Susan Stick, another recent hire (June 2018) who is the company's general counsel — a role that appeared to be vacant for two years before she joined — is expanding her role to include people operations as well."

So they have a lawyer being asked to take on what are essentially HR duties? If that's not the sign of a sinking ship I don't know what is. I wouldn't expect that individual to be there for much longer either.

Also "People Operations" is a load of shit, another Silicon Valley invention that seemingly all startups now feel compelled to have. I've had a few People Operations departments in jobs past and their duties largely consisted of brining the credit card to company "drink ups" and ordering dart boards and ping pong equipment for the office. The bar for this role is even lower than that of regular HR.

<comment><USER32> Ugh, the company toys and bullshit. I market my team to candidates by saying that we don't have any of that garbage.

HR is the most critical part of a corporation, but I've never worked anywhere that seemed to treat it seriously.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> I dont know, why there is soo much hate for evernote in here. I understand , the valuation seems crazy. I have been using evernote for years and it suits my needs. I write journals daily and tag them with keywords. That way, i can read my past journal and laugh at myself.

<comment><USER40> Do you pay for it?

<comment> rm_-rf_slash I journal on and off like parent and yes, I do pay. Might be planning to offload to iCloud given the news though...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> I replaced Evernote with Dropbox Paper and haven't looked back.

<comment><USER42> Dropbox Paper is a good Evernote replacement- cutover one year ago, very satisfied. Great note taking tool, markdown engine has very efficient keyboard shortcuts to generate inline blocks and other useful formatting (incl code blocks), easy to drop photos or files inline, good search, good sharing, reliable sync, and a "Save to Dropbox" icon on IOS (send to from Safari) to use as a replacement for Evernote webclipping ( clip as pdf, then insert pdf into Dropbox paper doc).

<comment><USER43> I finally subscribed to Evernote a month ago but hadn't considered Dropbox Paper as an alternative. Very interesting idea. What do you do for web clipping on your desktop?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Can't recommend notion.so enough as a modern replacement for Evernote.

<comment><USER45> what's better about it?

<comment><USER46> I prefer notion because it enables powerful structures around individual notes. From when I used evernote, it was limited to folders of lists of notes sorted by some not very useful criteria (towards the end I was naming my evernote notes with certain prefixes to try to instill more structure), or sets of notes grouped by tag.

In contrast, notion allows notes to coexist with other notes within a single "meta" note, ad nauseum. You can organize them in rows and columns and insert arbitrary text or whatever other content to label notes, for instance. One particularly powerful structure is using notes in a kanban or trello like setup, while enjoying the full evernote-like features provided within any individual note.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Would love folks to check out our app, Notejoy, at [https://notejoy.com](https://notejoy.com) \- an Evernote alternative with apps for Mac, PC, iOS, web, and Android coming soon. Complete with markdown support, integrations with Slack, Trello, G Suite, and Office. Powerful search with snippets & highlights. Great for team collaboration as well, with real- time editing, threaded comments, and more. Would love your thoughts!

<comment><USER48> I actually want to move away from Evernote but you guys dont have Android which is a deal breaker for me.

<comment><USER47> The Android app is almost ready! A preview: [https://twitter.com/sachinrekhi/status/1036844114841493504](https://twitter.com/sachinrekhi/status/1036844114841493504)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> As someone who dropped Evernote several years ago in favor of OneNote, did they ever improve the merging behavior? I gave up on Evernote due to daily merge conflicts that I got tired of manually resolving.

<comment><USER50> Not really. I've heard they're getting ready to release some updates soon that will address it in part, but who knows.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> It's sad because it's a genuinely good but rusty product. I've tried all other note taking applications - OneNote, Notion, Bear etc. and each has their own problems. I don't like OneNote's strict "notebook" organizational structure. Notion also forces you to put notes into notebooks, the interface is annoyingly slow, mobile app is just a web app that's packaged for your device, no Chrome extension, no handwriting support etc. etc. but it has a TON of amazing formatting features that I would love to see in Evernote. Bear, Google Keep etc. in my opinion are just toys.

To me, Evernote would be just perfect if it could combine the handwriting flexibility of OneNote with the advanced formatting features of Notion. Also, is it really that hard for the Evernote team to add templates?

<comment><USER52> Thanks, you made me switch to Notion. I've been hating Evernote since the start, the limit on 3 devices and the excruciating way it handles fonts, yuck. Notion looks perfect for me so far!

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> I think it's apparent that Evernote and similar single-feature companies pproviding these single features like notes or reminders or to do lists or contacts are doomed unless they get bought by one of the big players.

I'll happily pay $10 / month to Apple or Google or MS, assuming basic privacy, to deal with everything - my email, notes, sketches, brainstorms, files, bookmarks, reminders, calenders, contacts, etc.

But I'm not paying ten separate companies $1 each for the same features, even if the individual companies are better than whatever the large providers include.

I just don't want to deal with more subscriptions, credit card bills, and the potential for surprise charges - been shafted too many times by companies that became shady as things became financially desperate.

<comment><USER20> What does that say about DropBox?

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've been using Evernote for a few years (I got it for free back when Apple was doing app of the week). I've never signed up for a subscription. Frankly I have another note app that I prefer (trunk notes) and use for important things I want to save. The main thing I like about the other app is it does auto backups to dropbox, the notes are in plain text (markdown), and I can easily email a zipped up backup to myself. Supposedly you can download notes from Evernote, but after reading the instructions I didn't bother to do it. Its not anywhere near as easy to do. I've seen too many cloud services go belly up over the years to trust my important notes to Evernote.

</comment><comment><USER54> Oy.

I use Evernote because of its excellent image markup. You can mix images and text in notes and really document an image-based or figure-based data flow. Not sure if there's any alternative that does this as well.

<comment><USER55> The new Apple Notes app does all this beautifully.

<comment><USER56> This. I used Evernote off and on until the Apple did a big Notes update. I didn't even install Evernote on my newest computer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> Evernote user for a bunch of years. Then switched to just using Atom + .md files. A couple months ago tried out Ulysses and fell in love. ([https://ulysses.app/](https://ulysses.app/))

Typewriter mode, .md syntax, customizable themes, sweet tagging and filtering / organization (way better than Evernote). And you can save directly to native file structure. Haven't tried out the mobile app yet, but can highly recommend the desktop app.

<comment><USER58> ulysses became popular on their version-based pricing model. now they're subscription and I think there's a split between users who are okay with that and users who are looking / waiting for a replacement. I'm in the latter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> I never really got into Evernote. It's me, I'm horribly unproductive with so called productivity apps and end up abandoning most of them. But I get that the product was hugely popular back in the day and had a loyal group of users.

My impression when I last tried it a few years ago was that it was a product that lacked focus in a bad way. Basically they were bolting on everything and the kitchen sink. The UX wasn't particularly good either. It was trying to be too many things at once; none of them particularly well.

To make this work, they need some fresh ideas and focus. More of the same is not going to cut it: they have to do something different. So getting rid of the CTO, CFO, and CPO sounds about right since clearly things weren't working out with them in terms of technical vision, monetization, or product focus. The question is of course whether there's a better plan now or whether this is just stepping stone towards inevitable acquihire of whatever remains.

</comment><comment><USER60> I wish them well. I was a paying customer for many years but a few years ago I backed up all of my notes and cancelled. I noticed that I spent much more time creating and curating notes than ever using them. Now I use org-mode and occasionally Apple Notes and Keep.

I re-evaluated the utility of long term curation of notes and working material.

<comment><USER61> Same here. I stopped paying since the only premium feature I used was the PDF indexing.

Personally, I've seen more people using Bear recently than Evernote... which is starting to feel a bit ancient. Its biggest strength is that it has Windows and Android clients, where as Bear doesn't.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> I always thought Evernote was just a more updated version of Treepad.

Treepad was a way of making all these labeled leafs of notes and organize it hierarchically. But it ended up being really annoying to manage. It was easy to add notes but easier to never look at them again, rendering them useless. Search or typical tag-based approaches wouldn't solve these problems. I always thought it would require something innovative, perhaps a more atomic line- based input that self organizes as a large list.

I'm not sure Evernote ever really came up with a more innovative solution than an upgraded treepad + cloud + search + tags ?

</comment><comment><USER63> Used evernote a ton for a long time, but their last major overhaul 18 months or so ago left me behind. They switched their UI, process flow and more. It took it from a tool I found indispensable to one that tried to force me to their will.

Eventually, I grew tired of trying to fit into their new methods and moved on.

It doesn't surprise me they haven't been able to grow their paid base.

<comment><USER64> What tools are you using now? Also looking to move away from evernote.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> Still haven't found anything better than Orgzly on Android syncing to the PC and other phones with Syncthing.

</comment><comment><USER66> For an encrypted and open source alternative to Evernote, feel free to check out Standard Notes: [https://standardnotes.org](https://standardnotes.org)

It focuses on simplicity and longevity, and isn't backed by VC. You can also self host both the server and the web app.

</comment><comment><USER67> I mostly use Evernote to save/tag interesting articles for later reference (it sure beats trying to re-find stuff via google). Any good cross-platform replacements for this use case? Especially ones that run as a desktop app and/or are self hosted? I want a solution I can stick with.

<comment><USER68> I use Zotero for the same purpose and it's been great so far: [https://www.zotero.org/](https://www.zotero.org/)

<comment><USER69> How do you save websites on zotero, as pdf?

<comment><USER68> I think I misunderstood what the parent meant by "article". I use Zotero for academic journal articles and books. I think you can import website links too, though.

<comment><USER67> I was mostly talking about non-academic websites, not just the links, but the content too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> I've been a long time user of Evernote and have a love/hate relationship with the product. It really doesn't know how to handle merge conflicts. I've been too lazy to switch but I'm starting to feel enough pain that I may make the leap. Edit:typos

<comment><USER71> ugggghhhh same

</comment></comment><comment><USER72> Seems like a good time for people to backup any documents that are only stored on Evernote.

</comment><comment><USER73> Well, their Android app on ChromeOS is amazing. I hope these people can pull it together.

</comment><comment><USER74> Any self hosted alternative to Evernote? Never used Evernote, but sounds nice.

<comment><USER75> I haven't found _good_ alternatives for my use cases, but depending on your needs, you can host Paperworks[1] on Sandstorm[2].

Synology also has a DSM app "Note Station".[3]

[1] - [http://paperwork.rocks/](http://paperwork.rocks/) [2] - [https://sandstorm.io/apps/index](https://sandstorm.io/apps/index) [3] - [https://www.synology.com/en- us/dsm/feature/note_station](https://www.synology.com/en- us/dsm/feature/note_station)

<comment><USER76> note station is actually decent enough. there's a web clipper, desktop app, mobile apps, and its pretty much a complete clone of evernote. they even managed to add text highlights before evernote did.

the only thing stopping me from importing everything into it is that there is only 1 export option. they need to add a html option and maybe plaintext

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER71> Well crap, I've been using EN for a while. Paying, even. Hope it doesn't vanish; guess it's time to start investigating alternatives.

</comment><comment><USER77> I'm a fan of SimpleNote, which is plain text only and therefore limits the time you spend fussing with notes so you can get back to work.

</comment><comment><USER78> Evernote's founding CTO, Dave Engberg, Berkeley and Stanford grad, left in 2016.

</comment><comment><USER79> I would gladly pay lots of money for a backup feature.

</comment><comment><USER80> i hope i don't lose Skitch. that's a decade or more worth of screenshots and convenient annotations...

<comment><USER81> Let this be a lesson against relying on proprietary walled gardens.

<comment><USER80> Open source companies could run on a blockchain and one could have a smart contract to release the source code or access to one's proprietary data upon company going out of business..

<comment><USER82> They could just as easy use a flux compensator to mangle with the time continuum and use the Bermuda triangle as a energy source for their servers.

<comment><USER83> This wouldn't work. Flux compensator blocksize capacity can't support the throughput of a mangle tangle even with Merkle pruning. That's assuming that the Bermuda triangle would even come close to providing enough energy for your servers.

<comment><USER84> The Mister Fusion company made a Mister Blockchain companion product and it solves all those problems.

<comment><USER32> Well, they will have made it in a few decades, but you can preorder it now, and they'll send one back to you before you preordered.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER85> I moved to Bookmark OS for organizing my notes and bookmarks like Mac OSX and have never looked back [https://bookmarkos.com](https://bookmarkos.com)

</comment><comment><USER86> Sad. What about alternatives?

</comment><comment><USER87> Maybe it's because I code, and tend to prefer plain text, but I never understood mobile apps that do note taking.

I have always just really wanted basic plain text on an SD card file system, but locked Android phones and iOS actively throw up barriers to keep people out of the raw file system. Even Google ships non-rooted flagship smartphones without a default file manager, and like, zero support for core geek features like plain text, folder manipulation and zip files.

So then you have these note taking apps, and they aren't free, and they STILL don't provide these sorts of core geek features.

So then I have to attack my phone, break it with some local exploit, risk bricking it in order to reflash, and THEN maybe I get some of the traditional UNIX style file operations.

I'm not saying Evernote to the rescue, because, honestly, I don't expect that to happen. But FFS, having to nearly destroy a phone, or pay money to gain access with an aftermarket upsell, to add basic features that Linux provides for, native, as a matter of being an operating system, when using a supposedly free OS like Android is absurd.

So, if a CTO for a really popular app can't think of a way to help this situation, I'm pretty luke warm about what your company does for a living. How do your geeks use their phones at work?

A readily recognizable company like Evernote should have a clue about this kind of thing. At this point, I'm sick of scouring walled-garden marketplaces for no name freebie/ad-supported garbage apps, because I'm too lazy to crack my phone, and too cheap to pay. Why is there not some default solution. Even github created Atom because text editing is kind of bullshit, moreso than it should be in a lot of areas. Evernote could probably blast open some kind of mobile IDE/tooling offering, if they wanted to. Not branded as Evernote, but as a sort of power-user product worth paying money for, shipped under some other name.

Meh. Whatever.

</comment><comment><USER88> I am so on the fence about Evernote. I have used their product for years, but found that they didn't lean into the whole "organizing a zillion things" well enough. I really wanted a replacement for my Franklin Planner that went out in the early 2000's with a fizzle.

Chris if you're reading this email me (contact in the profile) would be happy to share my thoughts on next steps.</comment>


Profit per Employee at Tech Companies Compared to Other Industries - <AUTHOR> http://theonda.org/articles/2009/05/15/there-are-tech-companies-and-then-there-are-tech-companies <comment><USER2> FWIW, this is erosion happening. There aren't, fortunately, that many differences between hn/news and hn/classic, but this is one. A lightweight post that has been voted up almost entirely by accounts less than a year old. I'm not sure what to do about these. It's not offtopic enough to kill, but it doesn't deserve to be ranked #2, as it currently is.

The good news is, these are fortunately still quite rare. If they become more common I suppose I'll finally have to implement vote weighting.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Paul,

I apologize for submitting this article. If it is viewed by the community as sub-par or unworthy please know it was unintentional. My thought was that this take on the article helped put the numbers into perspective relative to other classes of trade. It probably would have made a better comment than submission.

I have a huge respect for what has been created at HN and though my account is less than a year old I've been reading for far longer.

Two thoughts on things that could be done other than weighting (which I'm actually a fan of).

1\. I would make this guideline a bit more explicit "Please submit the original source. If a blog post reports on something they found on another site, submit the latter. -- Reference replies to the primary source in comments unless the analysis is equal to or greater in quality than the original"

2\. Create a 2 column approach for comments with "new" on the right and sequential, or popular on the left. This would help some comments get a fair hearing in heavily threaded stories.

However neither suggestion will take the place of a strong community. Thanks for calling me out.

<comment><USER2> Don't worry about that. The problem is not so much that it got submitted-- all kinds of stuff gets submitted-- but that it got so many votes so rapidly. Could just be a random statistical outlier, come to that.

<comment><USER3> If you aren't yet treating the community like they will aggressively abuse and spam the system, I think you should start.

Are you looking at any other information about how this story got voted up so fast? I haven't looked at the HN code at all, but I wonder if there is anything sophisticated for stopping people from colluding and spamming. Do these accounts come from the same geographic area? ISP? Do they vote like each other in the past?

Vote-weighting doesn't even really seem like it's going to be the solution to the problem. Well, it might end up being the solution if you give a great deal of weight to trusted accounts, but you might in the end discourage new users from contributing.

I think maybe you consider attacking spammers head on. I really don't think the problem is a bunch of newbies up-voted this story. HN is just easy to game.

<comment><AUTHOR> Andrew,

You see spam on HN, but it is hard to believe this is a case. The story about profit per company had been up for about 10 hrs by the time I posted. A respected blogger with impeccable tech/startup credentials (founder of Tabblo acquired by HP) posted a thoughtful reply showing how poor PPE was at some large tech companies relative to other companies. It is related and interesting, if a bit mislocated.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Goldman Sachs is an interesting case: in 2007, it made above a 3 million per employee profit. Of course, not quite as hot this year. But you can see why young people are so interested in finance.

</comment><comment><USER5> You will learn that Exxon is 300 times more profitable per employee than Starbucks.

The original article has more hitech companies [http://royal.pingdom.com/2009/05/14/congratulations- google-s...](http://royal.pingdom.com/2009/05/14/congratulations-google- staff-210k-in-profit-per-head-in-2008/)

</comment><comment><USER6> As of 2007, NTT DoCoMo had a higher profit per employee than Exxon Mobil. Look at the report. <http://www.massmac.org/newsline/0707/McKinsey.pdf></comment>


Ask HN: Should I trademark the name of my startup? - <AUTHOR>

I kept wondering if trademarking the name/logo of my startup is worth it.<p>* If so, when is the best time to do it, before or after launch?<p>* Should I hire a lawyer to do it, or is it simple enough that even I can do it? (I'm a software engineer with no legal background)<p>* What are some of the caveats of the trademark process?<p>Thanks! <comment><USER2> Here's an experience of another startup I read about that fought with Apple over their name:

"Our first contact with Apple was via litigation initiated on their part regarding our company name, SeeqPod. Apple claimed trademark infringement based on the characters 'p', 'o' and 'd', making up 'pod' in our name SeeqPod. This lasted for about 6 months after which we both decided to walk away from any further litigation in this area." [https://medium.com/@492727ZED/steve- jobs-made-warner-music-s...](https://medium.com/@492727ZED/steve-jobs-made- warner-music-sue-my-startup-9a81c5a21d68)

</comment><comment><USER3> Obligatory: IANAL

My understanding is that you gain a trademark by using a mark in trade, so basically as soon as you create a name/logo and start using it, it _is_ a trademark, and it can be enforced. However, there is an optional step of "registering" your trademark with (in the US) the USPTO. Doing this gives you some degree of additional ability to protect/defend your trademark, but I don't know how to quantify how much so.

I did a little bit of research into registering trademarks a while back, and came to the conclusion that it was something an engineer can do on their own, with a little work. There are plenty of books and websites out there that explain how to do it.

Caveat? The only one I can think of off-hand is that it does cost a little bit of money, and some time.</comment>


Google open sources trademarks with the Open Usage Commons - <AUTHOR> https://www.zdnet.com/article/google-open-sources-trademarks-with-the-open-usage-commons/ <comment><USER2> The Linux Foundation (with MS on its board) and Google are now suddenly interested in "helping" with trademark issues.

I smell a rat. This makes no sense.

15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) creates a civil cause of action for claims of false designation of origin and false advertising. This provides federal protection for unregistered marks.

Do you expect that MS and Google are going to fight a civil suit to protect your trademark? Or do you have to sign over the rights to your trademark first, which means you no longer control the trademark. You no longer control your project.

Who benefits? Well if MS and Google get people to "sign over" their trademarks then they can freely define what the trademark means. This would feed into the MS embrace-extend-extinguish technique. The end result is that they effectively "own" open source projects. Imagine if MS or Google owned the Linux trademark and were able to define what was "officially Linux".

This sounds like a "collect the trademarks" competition.

Corporate pokemon.

</comment><comment><USER3> IBM has responded to this development publicly since it includes Istio -- which is a joint project between the companies and apparently was agreed to be contributed to CNCF at maturity: [https://developer.ibm.com/components/istio/blogs/istio- googl...](https://developer.ibm.com/components/istio/blogs/istio-google-open- usage-commons/)</comment>


Controversial U.S. energy loan program has wiped out losses - <AUTHOR> http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/13/us-doe-loans-idUSKCN0IX0A120141113

<comment><USER2> People who want the accounting nitty-gritty should consult the most recent GAO report ont he program: [http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/662944.pdf](http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/662944.pdf)

It's worth remembering a few things in relation to this. One, while this profit is only nominal, interest income will continue and will thus generate a real net profit soon enough, like sometime next year. Total net income to the treasury is anticipated to be about $5bn, assuming no more defaults. Two, Congress originally expected to write off as much as $10 billion at the time it set up the program. The actual default rate has been only about 2.25%, which is very good. Three, the program is often mischaracterized as a giveaway to wind and solar manufacturers, it's also the backstop for a $6.5 bn investment in two new nuclear plants in Georgia that are currently under construction, the first additions to the US nuclear fleet in 30 years.

Bloomberg had a good analysis of the program's history last year, with many interesting facts (eg the administrative costs of the Loan Program Office are covered up front by applicant fees): [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-10/one-of-world-s- bigg...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-10/one-of-world-s-biggest- clean-energy-finance-shops-is-back-in-business.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is good, I hope. Unfortunately, I fear that these loans are earning interest from companies whose revenues are also subsidized by other government programs, which wouldn't be much different from the status quo, where they inflate away their debt.

<comment><USER4> Interestingly, one plant (partially owned by Google) recently applied for a Treasury grant to pay off its DoE loan [1]. As far as I know it has not been approved, but I'd be interested to know whether any companies have successfully done this.

[1] [http://online.wsj.com/articles/ivanpah-solar-project- owners-...](http://online.wsj.com/articles/ivanpah-solar-project-owners-delay- repaying-loans-documents-say-1411488730)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> _According to a report by the Department of Energy, interest payments to the government from projects funded by the Loan Programs Office were $810 million as of September - higher than the $780 million in losses from loans it sustained from startups including Fisker Automotive, Abound Solar and Solyndra...._

Not sure I agree with that. Sure it has more money than when it started, but you need to take into account what that money would be worth if it had been invested at a risk-free rate during that time period.

If I lose $10 then get $10 back 5 years later, I'm still down $1.59 if you assume that $10 could have gotten a 3% return for each of those 5 years.

<comment><USER6> But the difference between $810 and $780 is greater than 3%. So even using your 3% example they have still broken even.

<comment><USER7> Sticking with the hypothetical, you forgot to calculate 3% per year. That's $23.4 million per year ($70.2 million up to this point +/-).

<comment><USER6> Maybe but that also assumes they had all of the losses at the start of the 10th year and made all of the profits at the end of the 10th year.

Also what returns 3%/year? I could imagine 3%/10 years (or even 15 years).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is a meaningless number, like the ones that say that the bailout was profitable. At least the article realizes this instead of just copying the press release: "The report's findings are more of a political victory than a financial one. It took the program three years to break even after Solyndra's failure, while during that same time the Standard & Poor's 500 index increased 67 percent."

1) Is this 810M nominal, or inflation adjusted?

2) What was the market rate for loans at the time, and what rate did the creditors get from the Treasury? The difference is a loss.

3) How much would insurance have cost for these loans in lieu of the government guarantees they were given? This was also a cost, and a subsidy to the private lenders involved with the program.

I want the government to be spending on research into renewables, and spending generously, but these bullshit press releases are what make Jonathan Gruber's remarks about voter stupidity (which largely boils down to innumeracy) and the need to fool them in order to get policies enacted seem like an overt, conscious policy regarding all of the financial services interventions (including ACA) that have happened during this administration.

You may not agree with Walter Lippmann, but he wasn't proposing a way to structure governance, he was describing how we're already being governed and the inherent hard problems in coming up with any alternative that doesn't either converge to the current form or destroy itself over time.</comment>


Looking for a CTO co-founder for a new music startup. - <AUTHOR>

¿What's up hackers?,
My name is Vincent and I'm looking for a tech co-founder for a new music startup. I've got domain expertise on the music side and the part of the space I want to dive in on is almost untouched (huge growth opportunity).
Future partner should know (or have insanely strong desire to learn):
•	Ruby on Rails •	Html/css •	Javascript •	Objective C •	Jquerymobile •	Web 2.0/AWS/Cloud experience •	API/mash up integrating financial services.
=-=-=-=-=
1. Looking to submit this business idea to next round of Y combinator/TechStars... so I really need help building the framework to pitch it.
2. I have already done lots of research, have business plan, and have tons of graphics for what I want site to look like.
3. If you're down.. I'm a super friendly musician/music biz guy who knows the space intimately. Working with me or getting people to use product won't be the hard part. Plus, the lifestyle will be awesome!! Festivals, concerts, conferences... all if you want that, but cool if you don't.
4. It really kick ass if you lived in Los Angeles so we could work faster and more efficiently, but I've read 'ReWork' from 37signals... I'm not trying to sweat too many meetings or the small stuff. I understand stuff can be done remotely.
5. Perfect for a young cat just out of school... but if you love the music space and are a skilled, "wise," and comfortable house cat (with a job), moonlighting is cool too.
=-=-=-=-=
Bottom line... I'm a good guy and this is a good idea that will make artists happy. Let's get together and live a cool life amongst creative people.
peace,
C. Vincent Plummer Email = email@example.com Twitter = @vintageredmusic <comment><USER2> Hi Vincent,

So you have an idea, are a cool guy, and have some domain knowledge. You'll have to pitch yourself a bit more before you list your demands in a partner.

As a technical person, the first thought I had was "so you expect me to do all the work and you tell me what to do???"

Beyond the idea, what else do you have to offer? Business connections? Funding? Passion? Why is this market untapped?(novel businesses die quickly). What is the idea(ideas are cheap, execution is everything)?

Serious questions. And if you have good answers you'll probably have better luck finding a cto partner.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Lee,

Thanks for your comments. I agree with you... Ideas are cheap, but the pitch disclosing the idea is a little more formal than over an open forum of capable builders, wouldn't you agree? The purpose of my post was to develop some kind of a dialogue with a developer.. someone interested in getting into the music space. If someone said, 'hey man.. I'm interested in taking risks and hearing more, then we go further with the discussion.'

In reference to making you feel like I would ask a technical person to 'do all the work and then tell tehm what to do?' Ummm... What about sales & marketing and all the other roles that go with a CEO responsibilities in a startup? I'm not expecting anything different than a well defined CEO/CTO relationship. The idea is to have a partnership, not a dictatorship.

As far what I bring to the table - I'm a social maven who has access to many music folks who would use the product, business connections, & tons of passion. I don't have funding however. That's what Y Combinator is for... and the idea is to build a framework, get something going, and then pitch to them, Tech Stars, or other incubator programs in hopes of securing series A funding.

Thanks for the feedback though. Ultimately, I'm just trying to put myself out there and make something happen man. I will think of your feedback for future posts.

Take care, Vincent

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Hi Vincent, I +1 everything lee said, and have one more question: it doesn't look like you'd be doing much of the tech work, so why be so specific about the technologies? Why do you want your CTO to code in Ruby, for instance, when it's arguably much easier to find a php ninja? Is it just because 37s do it or is there a particular reason? Cheers!

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Pedro,

I responded to Lee. I hope that answers some of those questions or concerns.

You are correct in the assumption that I wouldn't be doing the tech work (although I do posses graphic design skills to give visual representations of what I would like site to look like.) And I am very clear on it's functional needs.

After consultations with developer friends of mine (who are too busy to jump into a start-up), they have suggested Ruby developers for these reasons.

1\. The project will require a heavy data back end... and version 2.0 an even heavier back end. 2\. There are standards set with the Ruby community that aren't necessarily set with PHP... (I was given the example of having two developers code the same sight with different messy PHP code, or having one developer be frustrated and end up redoing everything after looking at another developers 'functional' but sloppy PHP code. 3\. .Net development standards are too expensive.

The jquery mobile and objective C has to do with the desire to be in a mobile space and have an Iphone app built.

I am definitely not an expert in the development field.. I'm sure that there are arguments that can be put up against my aforementioned reasons. I welcome the feedback so that I might be better informed. Ultimately, my requests are based from the suggestions of 'wiser' developer friends.

Thank you for your response. \- Vincent

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> " Working with me or getting people to use product won't be the hard part. "

This sounds like a MLM pitch....

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not a MLM.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> 8</comment><comment></comment><comment>==D<comment>~

<comment><AUTHOR> back atcha.</comment></comment></comment>


Prospective employee turned down for job because his name is Jeffrey - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/yephph/status/1249246702126546944 <comment><USER2> Didn't even offer him the opportunity to legally change his name upon hire :(

What if it's just an excuse to cover up the real reason he was turned down? _X-Files theme starts playing_

</comment><comment><USER3> The twitter post interestingly seems to disclose the company name.

</comment><comment><USER4> uniqueness constraint on first name?</comment>


What's Next for Wunderlist? - <AUTHOR> https://6wunderkinder.desk.com/customer/en/portal/articles/2790249-what-s-next-for-wunderlist- <comment><AUTHOR> It looks like it really is being retired. Can anybody recommend something as good and simple as wunderlist? That works on smartphones and as well desktops / web browser?</comment>


Ask HN: Faster human data processing using engineered glyps? - <AUTHOR>

Without cracking my skull, the highest bandwidth data channel in is my vision. If I want to start using a display in my FOV (eyetap), is there work in synthetic languages that can communicate information more quickly than English?<p>I'm thinking of an analog to QR codes (matrix barcodes) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_Code <comment><USER2> The keyword here is "constructed" or "engineered" language. You can find the whole lot there: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_constructed_languages>

Try stenography.</comment>


Finding your Unfair Advantage - <AUTHOR> http://theheretic.me/2013/08/07/finding-your-unfair-advantage/ <comment><USER2> The unfair advantage is often one of the hardest (if not the hardest) column to fill out on the lean canvas. I know I had problems.

The way you explain it makes sense, though it edges the "Unique Value Proposition" rather closely. Would this even be an issue?</comment>


Scientists Identify Gene Pattern That Makes Some Animals Monogamous - <AUTHOR> https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/patterns-genetic-activity-may-play-role-animal-monogamy-180971192/ <comment><USER2> Note: it's a gene _expression_ pattern. It's not like there's a monogamy gene that you have or don't have; rather there are genes that are more active in monogamous species (or vice versa).

So it won't show up on your 23andme test. It's a completely different type of analysis called RNA-seq, and in order to perform it they had to obtain actual brain tissue samples (not blood or saliva), because gene expression is different in every tissue.

</comment><comment><USER3> One mating season is monogamous? Tell my wife that.

Also, this seems to make no mention of 'rearing complexity'. A more developmentally complex brain should imply prolonged rearing and have a bias of survival in favor of shared parenting.

I guess you can find anything you're looking for in gene expressions, if you really want.

<comment> barry-cotter > A more developmentally complex brain should imply prolonged rearing and have > a bias of survival in favor of shared parenting.

Primates are significantly brainier than most of the rest of Mammalia, on average, and humans and gibbons are the only primates that are more monogamous than polygamous. Cetaceans and elephants also have comparatively large brains and aren't monogamous.

<comment><USER4> >humans are more monogamous

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Got any citation for that?

<comment> barry-cotter Humans aren't obligate monogamous but our level of sexual dimorphism is less than polygynous species like gorillas. Against this is the difference in upper strength where men are about twice as strong as women. Also in hunter gatherer societies we're familiar with most men do not have multiple mates at one time and from the varying patterns of inheritance of Y chromosomes and mitochondria which are passed down solely along the male and female line respectively ~40% of men leave descendants. That's not compatible with polygyny. Humans are not obligately monogamous or polygynous but all evidence points to more of the first than the second.

<comment><USER5> From what I can tell, hunter-gather societies, and possibly all of our pre- agriculture ancestors, are serially monogamous with some fooling around on the side. Children probably received support from the whole band or tribe.

The sexual part seems pretty familiar from looking around current society, and the children support part isn't far off from now either.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> coming soon.. Pre marital test..?

</comment><comment><USER7> Would be interesting if certain humans have these genes and some don't. That way couples could be tested before committing to marriage and be more informed. Ideally though, people could know ahead of time what genes a partner carries before going further with a relationship.

This is one example of how using genetics data for a dating network can help produce better matches, and more calculated offspring.

<comment><USER8> Stop.

Seriously. Stop.

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that the reason you're getting downvoted is because you're advocating something that is basically eugenics wearing modern clothing. The practice of eugenics is generally associated with Nazis. Yes, those Nazis. Not just the modern ones, but the Hitler 1920s-1945 ones who started a World War. They used "superior genetics" as a justification for many of their actions before, during, and after the war.

Don't be a Nazi. Accept that this is fresh research, that genetics may set someone out on a different path but that there are many other factors that affect their life and choices. In this study[0], there is no human research, and the definition of monogamy is limited to a single mating season. It's also looking at gene expression, which means that a gene that everyone has is either turned on or off. For reference, genes are expressed differently in various parts of your body, and is a fairly good test for various types of cancer.

[0]: [https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/01/02/1813775116](https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2019/01/02/1813775116)

<comment><USER9> I think the leap to eugenics there is not warranted. Eugenics is about enforced selective breeding. Enforcement being the key. Imagine you are tall and want a child that is also tall and so actively seek out a tall partner. That's obviously not engaging in eugenics, but an enforced prohibition on short individuals procreating would indeed be eugenics.

I would very much oppose any government ever enforcing genetic criterion on a mass level. But I see no qualms about individuals themselves having genetic preferences. Your argument might be that well nobody would want somebody with [undesirable trait x] so it would exclude these individuals from the collective gene pool, yet we see in real life that that's not how things work. Being short is not very desired, is genetically linked, and is immediately visible. Yet in spite of all of that, in practice it in no way stops people from living great lives, raising families, and finding great partners.

<comment><USER10> Dictionary tells us that the term applies even in the absence of enforcement per se:

[https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=Eugenics](https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=Eugenics)

<comment><USER11> The dictionary will tell you only tell you about words, not the reality that the words are meant to reflect. You cannot deduce, from what word a thing is called, whether that thing is good or bad. You must address the thing itself, and not assume that, just because it is called by the same name as some other thing, that they are the same.

(See e.g. [https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yCWPkLi8wJvewPbEp/the- noncen...](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/yCWPkLi8wJvewPbEp/the-noncentral- fallacy-the-worst-argument-in-the-world) for more on this.)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


People watching a German farmer at work on Twitch - <AUTHOR> https://www.twitch.tv/landwirt_in_mv <comment><USER2> There are many seemingly mundane things people watch on Twitch. Farming, Truck Driving, etc. It's not really any more strange than the majority of the 'Just Chatting' section.

<comment><AUTHOR> Totally agree, just shocked that people are interested to watch such things</comment></comment>


The contest between gravity and quantum physics takes a new turn (2015) - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/49/the-absurd/will-quantum-mechanics-swallow-relativity-rp <comment><USER2> > Just as a pixel is the smallest unit of an image on your screen and a photon > is the smallest unit of light, he argues, so there might be an unbreakable > smallest unit of distance: a quantum of space.

I thought that that role was fuffiled with the Planck Length. I've seen it used in conjunction with the speed of light to calculate a theoretical "refresh rate" of the universe, was that based on a flawed assumption?

<comment><USER3> The Planck length has no physical meaning. It's just a combination of physical constants that gives a length. It's considered a scale at which quantum gravitational effects become significant, but it's just that, a scale. It might be a factor of 100 off from something significant, but what that thing is we have no idea.

<comment><USER4> I have read alternate interpretations of the Planck length/time/volume/etc.

One says that they are a mathematical construct with no meaning, the other says that they provide a bound for the limits of the measurement of reality as we understand it (which many people take to mean the smallest unit).

Do you think these definitions disagree? Does one definitely supersede the other? If so, could you point me at some literature?

<comment><USER5> Not a physisist, but I found this link [0] to be understandable. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle says that the more accurately we know position, the less accurately we know momentum. When you formalize this, the result is that as the size size of a particle you are trying to measure decreases, the energy necessary to measure it increases. Since energy causes gravity, there is a length, _l_ , where measuring a particle would require so much energy that the resulting gravity creates a black hole.

I think it is fair to say that _l_ is just a mathematical construct, since nothing _really_ happens at this point. But it is a useful mathematical construct that is, theoretically, relevant to our ability to observe the universe.

Having said all of that, all of this is at a much smaller scale than we have ever been able to observe. Seeing as we needed to invent new physics (relativity) to explain scales as small Mercury's orbit [1], and as large as atoms, and that these two theories are still incompatible, it is highly likely that describing physics near the plank scale would require another reinvention of physics.

[0] [http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2012/01/planck-length-as- mi...](http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2012/01/planck-length-as-minimal- length.html)

[1] Arguably smaller, since we have confirmed relativity without leaving Earth orbit.

<comment><USER3> Yes I too can contrive a thought experiment that combines a bunch of physical constants. It's hardly a construct. It's just a length. It might mean something. It might mean something when multiplied by pi or a tenth or whatever. It's the scale at which quantum gravity might maybe possibly could be important. Nothing more nothing less.

<comment><USER5> I would not consider the explanation I describe to be a thought experiment, but rather a mathematical derivation; although I might showing my roots as a mathematician instead of a physicist there.

Additionally, all the argument, as I presented it, shows is that there is _some_ length beyond which we cannot observe. It turns out that we can calculate this length, and the result happens to be precisely the plank length. As a mathematician, this seems highly unlikely to be a coincidence; however I am not familiar enough with physics to know if this is a deep result, or a trivial consequence of it's definition.

To clarify the disagreement: do you agree that our current theory predicts that there is _some_ length beyond which we cannot measure?

<comment><USER3> Yeah, that would make sense, but I don't imagine it's a hard cutoff. It may be that you get diminishing information per unit energy at a length scale related to the Planck length or something.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > Beneath its layers of conceptual complexity, the holometer is > technologically little more than a laser beam, a half-reflective mirror to > split the laser into two perpendicular beams, and two other mirrors to > bounce those beams back along a pair of 40-meter-long tunnels.

> For the scale of chunkiness that Hogan hopes to find, he needs to measure > distances to an accuracy of 10-18 meters, about 100 million times smaller > than a hydrogen atom, and collect data at a rate of about 100 million > readings per second.

How is this different from LIGO in any way?

<comment><USER7> It's the same thing but the Holometer is intended to be more sensitive than LIGO.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> > What if the universe were entirely empty except for two astronauts. One of > them is spinning, the other is stationary. The spinning one feels dizzy, > doing cartwheels in space. But which one of the two is spinning? From either > astronaut's perspective, the other is the one spinning. Without any external > reference, Einstein argued, there is no way to say which one is correct

There is a 50% chance each is spinning, and we'll know which is correct when an external reference "observes" them. The fact that there's no external reference is what makes this situation be "quantum". If the conscious astronauts are conceptually incapable of being 50% "feeling dizzy", then that would mean conscious beings also require the external reference in order to exist.

<comment><USER9> This example totally confused me. An object spinning in space experiences centripetal acceleration, relative to its own center of mass. For sake of example, let's say that instead of spinning in cartwheels, the one spinning astronaut is spinning like an ice skater. OK, which astronaut feels their arms being pulled outwards due to centripetal force, and which one has their arms hanging limply at their sides? Wouldn't that answer the question?

<comment><USER10> in the model where inertia is a result of interacting with all the other gravitational fields empty Universe would mean no inertia and thus no centripetal force. (of course there is another model - that of Higgs boson - for which i haven't so far been able to find how it explains equivalence of inertial and gravitational masses and thus it is so far non-starter for me, i mean not the boson itself - that of course exists, i mean the boson's role in inertial mass story until of course the boson happesn to be the main carrier of the "gravitational charge" then all would fall nicely in place)

<comment><USER9> Correct me if I'm wrong, but without the Higgs boson and its corresponding scalar field, the concept of mass/inertia does not exist. Without mass, can matter still exist? How would this "matter without mass" behave? My mind is close to exploding.

<comment><USER10> imagine that there is only gravitational force in the Universe and the matter has only gravitational mass("charge"). Accelerating any given piece of matter with respect to all the other matter would cause propagation of change (ie. wave) in the gravitational field of the whole system (Universe). Wave is energy and to generate wave a work is required, ie. a force has to be applied to the piece of matter being accelerated - the requirement for that force is what we call inertia.

Now of course the question - what is the carrier of that "gravitational charge". It would be great if Higgs boson was the carrier of that charge.

<comment><USER9> I thought the idea that "the Higgs boson is the field responsible for imparting mass" was the dominant theory, are there reasonable alternative explanations?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> No it will not. Elements from both theories will be used to formulate the structure/theory/paradigm that will then subsume both of them.

</comment><comment><USER12> Can we stop ignoring the fact that Quantum gravity exists and works for the most part.

The parts where it doesn't work are extremes like black holes where GR also breaks apart.

<comment><USER13> Where's the evidence for your statement? This is what Wikipedia says:

> Currently, there is still no complete and consistent quantum theory of > gravity, and the candidate models still need to overcome major formal and > conceptual problems. They also face the common problem that, as yet, there > is no way to put quantum gravity predictions to experimental tests, although > there is hope for this to change as future data from cosmological > observations and particle physics experiments becomes available.

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity#Candidate_theo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity#Candidate_theories)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Has iPhone 3.0 Spotlight changed the way you use your phone? - <AUTHOR>

I've used the iPhone 3.0 beta for all of 10 minutes and I have to say the Spotlight feature has changed the way I approach most tasks on my phone. For searching for emails, contacts, meetings <i>and launching Apps</i>, Spotlight appears to be the way to go. Any other features that boost productivity? <comment><USER2> Not yet! Crikey, give it a day or two.

Although, I have used it quite a bit to look up contacts, and to search for an email. I found the email search a bit wanting though.

Overall a huge improvement, I just wish i could press cmd-space to activate it.</comment>


HighlightCam (YC S09) Releases Video Summarization API - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/p/highlightcam-api/

<comment><USER2> It's fast. I tried a 17MB flv, chose 10% summary and got the response in 1min4sec. Screen: <http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1704650/camapi.png>

It filters the boring moments well. The Animals and YouTube ZeitGeist examples opened my eyes.

Just for fun I tried to stump it with a video I had personally edited. See before and after: <http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/1704650/hlcamtest.html>. Pretty good result, all things considered.

Time to plug my own editing startup: <http://videothink.com>. Host any video file and I will _personally_ cut all the boring moments and serve you the highlight movie. The site is very minimal now but it works.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a really cool product, yet not something I would have imagined there being a startup for. Regardless, great job guys and good luck!

</comment><comment><USER4> Now I finally know what to do with all of my old videos filled with lots of crap. No more lengthy crappy videos.

<comment><USER5> Yeah, funnel all those boring family reunion vacation VHS tapes in there. Though I'm not sure if their algorithm will be smart enough to get all the exciting bits since our camera man has a shaky hand and they probably use some kind of motion detection.

<comment><AUTHOR> We actually just improved the algorithm to address exactly that scenario:

[http://blog.highlightcam.com/post/176798199/highlighting- now...](http://blog.highlightcam.com/post/176798199/highlighting-now-works- with-moving-cameras)

Camera motion is no longer considered "interesting" unless there's other motion against the static background. Works especially well with jittery cameras and panning security cameras.

<comment><USER6> Your debug page is showing: <http://highlightcam.com/about/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed--thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> What are the other YC companies that have released code under a open source / free software license ?

<comment><USER8> Note that this is just sample code to connect to HighlightCam's webservices API.

I think Objective-J is one of the more notable YC-spawned open source thingers:

<http://objective-j.org/>

Virtualmin is also a pretty big contribution:

<http://www.virtualmin.com/download>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I love the concept, but watching the example videos I kinda wish they'd implemented a transition in there. Some of videos were really jarring moving from "interesting" to "interesting" states. A small audio/visual fade out and then in again would help a lot.

</comment><comment><USER10> Looks neat, but with all that javascript, I can't watch the videos or even see the youtube page, so even though I'd like to earn more, I can't.

<comment><USER5> You must be running IE, the only browser with outdated javascript abilities.

<comment><USER10> Was using Opera. Tried in Firefox too. Neither worked. If the hyperlinks were actually hyperlinks, then it'd work.

<comment><USER11> Links are not mere links when they need to perform certain programmatic side- effects, so having them be just regular links wouldn't work.

I am interested in the bug you are experiencing. Could you email me at firstname.lastname@example.com with a more detailed description?

<comment><USER10> I guess here, it's the definition of need. Do you need to track your users every movement more than you need them to learn about your product?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Looking at the youtube zeitgeist page you have, most of the videos seem insanely shortened. What is a more reasonable percentage choice to get just the highlights without feeling like you are talking to a meth-head?

<comment><AUTHOR> With the API, you can choose any desired length of the summarized video, up to 30%. We think of the YouTube summaries as "trailer length", but we might make them a bit longer by default in the future.</comment></comment>


Poor man's dependency injection in Clojure - <AUTHOR> http://spootnik.org/entries/2014/01/25_poor-mans-dependency-injection-in-clojure.html

<comment><USER2> This is just my opinion, but if one is writing dependecy-injected frameworks in Clojure, then they're missing the point of Clojure.

<comment><USER3> That's exactly what I was thinking. I've not used Clojure specifically, but in the sitations where OO people use dependency injection I tend to use a free monad with multiple interpreters. I'm yet to make serious use of an algebraic effect system, but that would make this even simpler and more composable.

<comment><USER4> Could you please share a few examples?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The one-function protocols strike me as unidiomatic; why not use functions directly? `(fn […] …)` would work just as well as `(reify P (f [this …] …))` (`this` is never used).

Update: I looked at the code again and noticed that `stdin-transport` implements _two_ protocols. Guess I need to think a little bit more about this.

</comment><comment><USER6> Check out Stuart Sierra's "component" for another take. Of course, another take is that you're better off just constructing objects by calling their constructors directly.

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed, there are much more elaborate approaches than this one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> A chapter from the O'Reilly book covers this subject pretty well. With Clojure's java interop, you can still use Spring. Thanks to the homoiconicity of the language, support for higher order functions, and with some clever use of Clojure's load-file function in core, you kind of get DI baked into the language for free.</comment>


A new genetic technology that can quickly change entire populations gets broader - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/68/context/gene-drives-reach-mammals <comment><USER2> How long until someone releases a gene-drive that dramatically reduces the yield of a staple food crop? Humanity is nowhere _near_ responsible enough for this technology - we should be terrified of it.

<comment><USER3> We'll have to deal with it the same way we have dealt with nuclear weapons. By the threat of MAD. Since we do not have the maturity as a species not to weaponise in the first place.

<comment><USER4> I'm not convinced MAD actually works. Once you see the bombs flying, the only logical thing to do is to _give up_ your pre-war resolve of retaliation and completely submit - start printing Soviet flags so to speak. Of course, pre- war you'll try to convince the enemy that it isn't so, but they are not stupid.

The only thing that saved us IMO was the power of the political elites (in East and West), that despite all saber-rattling rhetorics, never wanted a war. Now that that power is waning, I'm not sure what will save us this time around. Maybe religious elites can instill a taboo against using this kind of technology for harm?

<comment><USER5> >Once you see the bombs flying, the only logical thing to do is to give up your pre-war resolve of retaliation and completely submit

Not necessarily -- it depends on one's ethical philosophy. And it is well- known that humans do sometimes seek revenge even at the risk of their own lives. Plus, there are procedures in place for retaliating responding to a nuclear attack, so all that is required is for military personnel to act in accordance with the established procedures.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> is this useful beyond improved breeding for genetic experiments? I understand there is scientific value in being able to quickly and cheaply breed in fewer generations a mouse with specific sets of genes as a tool for downstream research.

I have a hard time imagining gene drive is useful for improving some species: how does one determine the utility of one set of genes versus another? we can not accurately reflect the real world in a lab environment to determine if some change is a net advantage or net disadvantage over all environments, situations a species faces. I agree it will be possible to assess the performance of traits in a lab benchmark, but then it's obvious we are over fitting to the genetic fitness of pulling a lever, or running in a wheel etc, and disregarding the cost of the change on all other functions the organism would face in a representative test. The real world with millions or billions of creatures is a much faster and parallellized test, i.e. a lab with space for 1000 mice, could in theory face 1000 micedays per day of artificial selection, while those in the wild are performing giga micedays per day of natural selection over the whole challenge set without overfitting...

Again, I _do see_ the utility for breeding selective traits and downstream learning about the functions of the genome in a cheaper way compared to fifty fifty coin flip breeding...

<comment><USER7> There are quite a few useful applications. Sickle Cell anemia is caused by a recessive gene, "Recessive means that two copies of the gene are necessary to have the trait, one inherited from the mother, and one from the father." If we code the gene out, no more Sickle Cell. There are also a plethora of degenerative diseases such as Huntington's that are caused by a defect in a single gene that this could potentially help eliminate. I would think essentially any disease that can be genetically tested for could be potentially cured by the application of gene drives.

<comment><USER6> what keeps sickle cell anemia in the gene pool? is there some rare beneficial aspect?

or is it because natural selection acts largely on chromosomes instead of genes, and the other variants of the chromosomes have similar negative imperfections? or is it because the chromosome variants that propagate sickle cell anemia contain a different gene that is comparatively better than the equivalent gene on some of the non SCA carrying chromosomes?

i.e. chromosome binding of genes forces natural selection to largely take the good with the bad genes, without cherry picking genes within chromosomes, and mostly operates on chromosome fitness as opposed to gene fitness?

<comment><USER8> Being heterozygous for the sickle cell trait gives some protection against malaria, which explains why the two tend to be common in the same parts of the world:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterozygote_advantage#Sickle-...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heterozygote_advantage#Sickle- cell_anemia)

(Nicely guessed, by the way!)

<comment><USER6> thanks for pointing this out!

does this mene using gene drive to expell SCA alleles from the gene pool would result in a higher malaria rate? it would seem that if one could put both SCA and non-SCA alleles in the same chromosome the advantage would be unconditional?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is one of the many existential risk vectors we face as a species.

It's also disturbing that the same people who brought us widespread hormone- like chemicals leeching into our food are arguing that this, too, is good for us.

Scientists are definitely batting low on responsible R+D and not causing society-wide or global damage through their amoral-to-immoral, ego-stroking work.

But sure. It's about mosquitoes and not some post-doc trying to be alpha nerd to the point they're willing to endanger the species.

> Yet what first drew the developmental biologist Kimberly Cooper to dabble in > gene drive technology for mice was not conservation but evolution. In her > laboratory at UCSD, she and her colleagues study the evolution of the > jerboa, a long-legged rodent with a jumping, bipedal gait, which diverged > from the mouse lineage tens of millions of years ago. Cooper and her > colleagues are trying to find the unknown combination of genetic changes > responsible for that evolutionary transformation by making lab mice carry > incrementally more jerboa traits.

<comment><USER10> > It's also disturbing that the same people who brought us widespread hormone- > like chemicals leeching into our food are arguing that this, too, is good > for us.

I am not sure this argument works, because it's continuation is that "they also brought us autism inducing vaccines, cancer inducing wifi, and potato fish hybrids that are evil in some vague way".

Whether you like it or not eliminating mosquitos, colorado beetle, etc. will help billions of people to live better lives, and your ad hominem at "some post-doc trying to be alpha nerd" is out of place, because no matter their motives, the work of people like this is what allows us to write things on screen, instead of sitting in a cave.

<comment><USER11> > I am not sure this argument works, because it's continuation is that "they > also brought us autism inducing vaccines, cancer inducing wifi, and potato > fish hybrids that are evil in some vague way".

Just because wifi doesn't induce cancer doesn't mean it's a good idea to have plastic leeching into our water. I don't see the correlation.

Also, I should add that messing with the balance of an ecosystem can have drastic unforeseen consequences. China decided to get rid of sparrows (or some other small bird) mid-20th century, and for the next few years they were struck with famine because there were no birds left to control the locust population, which then multiplied out of control.

<comment><USER10> There can be unforeseen consequences, that's why nobody advocates to just randomly create gene drives for all the insects. The targeted species of mosquito is not the only one, it is an invasive species in many places, and everywhere there are other mosquitos that can take its place.

Should we use gene drives to eliminate species with caution? Of course! But does that mean we should not even think about it just because there may be unforeseen consequences (or as the grandparent comment says: because it is invented by scientists who also invented plastic, which other people used as cheap water bottles, and there is an unconfirmed hypothesis about it being bad)?

I think the answer to this question is clearly no, and the way the grandparent comment is written is simply antiscience fear-mongering.

<comment><USER11> I just think that there needs to be significantly more caution - almost a pathologically high amount of caution.

Think of it from a software engineering perspective. All the unit tests that are done to ensure 100% code coverage, all the testing in identical staging environments, and yet we still have to revert sometimes, once the code is in production.

And this all still happens in environment where the code is something we wrote ourselves, is properly and thoroughly documented, with all dependencies and relationships clearly defined. And still, major problems happen but it's nice that we can just go to Git and try again.

With genetic engineering, the genetic code was not written by us, has zero documentation, the relationships are left for us to figure out, and there's no proper staging environment with a working ecosystem for us to test things in. We basically deploy straight to production after a few unit tests. So, yes, definitely I don't think there is currently enough caution being taken.

Of course, the reality is that genetic engineering won't stop, not until we shoot ourselves in the foot a few times and people realize the seriousness of it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> These new biotechnologies are eerily reminiscent of what's in the novel "Oryx and Crake" by Margaret Atwood. In a subplot, an inner circle of biohackers compete to drive species to complete extinction for fun. It's worth a read

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oryx_and_Crake](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oryx_and_Crake)</comment>