The Future of Science - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/29/the-future-of-scienc

<comment><USER2> On a related note, some years ago I read an academic paper -- alas, it was printed on a dead tree, and I can't find a link to a digital version of it -- which pointed out that the rate at which papers were cited was driven primarily by the rate at which papers were cited. This is not as much of a tautology as it sounds like.

Think about the process of writing a paper: you do some keyword searches for recent articles on related subject. You then look at the bibliographies for those articles, pick out whatever looks relavent to your topic, look at the bibliographies of _those_ articles, etc. What this means is that apart from your initial keyword search, the primary criteria for including an article in your research is: "has it been cited already?". Relevance is merely a secondary filter.

This paper pointed out the effects of this phenomena: the vast majority of published scientific papers are _never_ cited again; a moderate number are cited only a few times, and the remaining few -- having reached a bibliographic critical mass -- are cited thousands of times. The authors of the paper made a strong case that this was not a good reflection of the quality of research. In many cases, the process of reaching bibliographic critical was simply based on the almost random chance of acquiring those first few citations. The authors provided several examples of important scientific ideas which had been lost for decades, arguably because they had not attracted a critical mass of citations in the years immediately after publication.

In other words, humans suck at pagerank.

Anyhow, it occurred to me that this is a problem which could be solved with technology. Imagine an online word processor which -- in a sidebar -- suggests potentially related articles from ArXiv and Google Scholar. This would be based not on crawling bibliographies, but rather on semantic analysis of the adjacent paragraphs.

I think this would create some real benefits. It would remove much of the problems with citation bias, ensuring that important ideas aren't lost, and also that prior research isn't unwittingly duplicated. Wish I had time to implement something like this!

<comment><USER3> I think that your impression of doing related work is overly simplified. Since you are submitting to a conference/journal in your field, chances are high that the reviewers are knowledgable in the subject area and will point out errors in attributing due credits to related work.

While I agree that there are systemic problems with peer review and how the science "enterprise" works, there is fitting analogy from politics by Winston Churchill: "The worst form of government except for all the others."

<comment><USER2> I think you misunderstand. I'm not talking about attribution errors. I'm talking about the fact that discoverability and cross-linking is severely hampered the bias towards previously cited works. This doesn't create _errors_ per se, but can narrow the scope of inquiry to the point where it becomes detrimental to the institution of science as a whole. It's a naturally emergent silo, but a silo nonetheless.

A NLP-based referencing system would not need to be _correct_ all the time; it would merely need to be helpfully _suggestive_. As you're writing your paper, it would put tips in the sidebar: "Maybe this is relavent? (Hover to read abstract)". As long as there aren't an intolerable number of false positives, it would be quite a useful tool, I think.

<comment><USER3> Well, actually I was not only having attribution errors in mind, too. Peer review ensures that colleagues will tell you about related work that you don't know about. Sometimes, people will tell you that something is related, even though you yourself don't actually think it's related work. Only with some time and acceptance, you will see that the remarks are really related, probably not directly to your own contribution, but to the bigger field that you orient yourself in.

Come to think of it that this is probably the most important detractor for having an NLP based "recommender." Personally, something like this might be interesting, probably even a great help, but at the end of the day, people need to really read _a lot_ of papers, follow the proceedings of their target conferences, journals, and asking colleagues for their bibliographies. This has the added benefit of teaching them how to present their own work in contrast to others, do meaningful evaluations (in the best of all worlds, of course!) and figure out who is doing interesting work and might be valuable to get into contact with. Of course, some parts could be automated, but there is currently no incentive for scientists to do so.

IMHO, it would be a much more important step for CS researches to publish their code, too, because I frequently come across papers that have no implementation or evaluation at all--and that's really bad, because then the least-publishable unit becomes an idea with nice pictures. Researchers can be very successful using this "publication strategy." Come to think of it, there should be another approach to rank scientists by the number of publications, or their impact; unfortunately, I have no idea what could work instead.

<comment><AUTHOR> I totally agree about the importance of scientists to publish their code. That is critical. It's one of the many parts of the scientific process where the community would benefit from greater sharing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Yes, there is a time lag problem. However, instant distribution has been around for a long time (in the case of arXiv.org, since 1991). It's widely accepted in the physics community, but it hasn't gained much traction in most other scientific disciplines. I think there are two reasons for this: the chicken and egg problem, and the peer review problem.

The chicken and egg problem is that no one in these disciplines publishes unreviewed manuscripts because no one reads them. The corollary here is that if you do something interesting and someone happens to read it, take your idea, and publish first, as far as credit goes, you're fucked. This happens with any form of public presentation of ideas, not all that often but often enough that every scientist knows someone who it has happened to. If you just sank a year of your life into a project, you want to make damn sure you're going to get credit for it. At present, instant distribution is too risky. If the profile of instant distribution can rise to the point where a manuscript will be sufficiently widely read to be acknowledged as the source of an idea, scientists in less competitive areas may be more open to it.

The bigger issue is, I think, that scientists actually appreciate peer review. Peer review ensures both quality and fairness in research. If I read a paper in a high-impact journal, I generally believe can trust the results regardless of who wrote it. By contrast, any reputation-based metrics will be strongly colored by the reputation of the lab from which the paper originates. (I have a hunch that this is already true for citation metrics.) Replacing peer review with reputation-based metrics may mean research gets out there faster, but it may also mean that a lot of valuable research gets ignored. This still sucks, and it may suck more. Turning a paper into a startup that may succeed or may fail depending on how well a scientist can market his or her findings would absolutely suck ass. IMHO, scientific funding is already too concentrated in the hands of established labs, and these labs are often too large to make effective use of their personnel. Reputation-based metrics would only contribute to this problem. They would also lead to confusion in the popular press, which is already somewhat incapable of triaging important and unimportant scientific results. This is a much bigger deal in biomedical science than in theoretical physics, because the former has direct bearing on individuals' lives.

On top of this, citation metrics are simply not peer review. In his previous article, Richard Price pointed out that researchers need to spend a lot of time performing peer review. This is absolutely the way it should be. Researchers should spend hours poring over new papers, suggest ways of improving them to the authors, and ultimately ensure that whatever makes it into press is as high quality as possible. IMHO, the easiest way to get quality research out faster is to encourage journals to set shorter peer review deadlines and encourage researchers to meet them, not to throw away the entire system.

OTOH, I think open sharing of data sets among researchers will massively enhance scientific progress, and has a reasonable chance of happening because the push is coming from funding agencies, not startups. As a scientist, the idea of being able to ask my own questions with other people's data gets me far more excited than being able to read their papers before release.

<comment><AUTHOR> I totally agree with you about data-sharing. I wanted to spend more time on that in the article, but didn't because I didn't want to make the article longer. I think the ability to share and ask questions about data really has enormous potential to drive science forward. The fact that enormous amounts of scientific data remains private to the lab, and not shared, is really a big loss to science. It's going to be very exciting as that data starts getting shared more.

The key to making that happen is disrupting the credit system. Right now scientists aren't incentivized to curate and share their data, so they don't put in the work to do it. You can't put data-sets on your resume, much like you can't put blog posts, or anything that is not a paper. As soon as scientists start getting credit for sharing data-sets, I think we'll start to see it happen.

Similar points apply, as you mention, to instant distribution. Instant distribution will happen more as scientists start getting credit for scientific ideas that they distribute instantly. You are already seeing some disruption to the credit system. In the last 5-10 years, since citation counts have been made publicly available by Google Scholar, citation counts have started to play a much larger role in resource allocation decisions, e.g. decisions by hiring committees and grant committees. I did my PhD at Oxford in philosophy from 2001-2007, and remained involved with some of the hiring decisions at the Oxford philosophy department until 2011, and it's been very interesting to watch the increased influence, over those years, of citation counts in hiring decisions.

Citation counts aren't perfect, but they are another signal. Hiring committees, I have experienced, are desperate for more signals that they can take into account when comparing candidates. Comparing candidates is a tough job. As with any signal, to wield it properly, you need to know its pros and cons. Fundamentally what the community is looking for here is a variety of signals that show how much a highly respected chunk of the scientific community has interacted with a piece of your content, and found it useful.

To get data-sets, and other media, to attract scientific credit, we need to develop metrics that demonstrate the traction that those pieces of media are getting in highly respected parts of the scientific community. I think those metrics will get developed, and that new metrics will play an enormous role in allowing different kinds of media to be shared, and everything to be shared faster.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Admirable cause, but the author doesn't do themselves any favors by dramatically overstating the role of publication in knowledge sharing (informal channels & conferences exist, publication serves more of a recognition purpose), and with somewhat offensive, unsupported claims like,

"The stakes are high. If these inefficiencies can be removed, science would accelerate tremendously. A faster science would lead to faster innovation in medicine and technology. Cancer could be cured 2-3 years sooner than it otherwise would be, which would save millions of lives"

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't think informal channels, and conferences, which are infrequent, and really expensive to travel to, are enough. Before the 1600s, science was largely done by wealthy people who had large enough houses to have a laboratory in. Scientific results weren't publicly shared; at best they were shared between the experimenter and a few of his/her friends, who communicated by private letters.

In the late 1600s, the first journal was founded, which meant that it became the norm for all scientific results to be shared publicly. This era coincided with the birth of the Scientific Revolution, which was an incredible flourishing of scientific thinking, that formed the basis of modern science.

I think that with a much more connected scientific community, that operated more as a global brain, rather than relatively disconnected nodes, scientific progress could double. So if cancer would normally be cured in, x years, I can see that coming down to 1/2x years, with an accelerated science, and, given the length of x, that shortening is likely to be a matter of years.

<comment><USER5> Best of luck with academia.edu!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is a time for revolution in the methods of science and the funding of science, long overdue and enabled by the internet. It will be a mix of removing the barriers to entry, blurring the priesthood at the edges, open and iterative publishing of data, drawing crowdfunding directly from interested groups of the public rather than just talking to the traditional funding bodies.

Astronomy has long been heading in this direction, actually - it's a leading indicator for where fields like medicine and biotechnology are going. People can today do useful and novel life science work for a few tens of thousands of dollars, and open biotechnology groups are starting to formalize (such as biocurious in the Bay Area).

There is a lot of good science and good application of science that can be parallelized, broken up into small fragments, distributed amongst collaborative communities. The SENS Foundation's discovery process for finding bacterial species that might help in attacking age-related buildup of lipofuscin, for example: cheap, could be very parallel. In this, these forms of work are much like software development - consider how that has shifted in the past few decades from the varied enclosed towers to the open market squares below.

This greater process is very important to all of us, as it is necessary to speed up progress in fields that have great potential, such as biotechnology. Only a fraction of what could be done will be done within our lifetimes without a great opening of funding and data and the methodologies of getting the work done.

<comment><USER7> I agree with a lot of what you said, but this:

> People can today do useful and novel life science work for a few tens of > thousands of dollars

makes me wonder if you've ever done bench work or furnished a lab. Sure, you can do a few weeks or months of work for tends of thousands of dollars (which doesn't produce _a lot_ of useful results in that time frame, but can produce some), but that's assuming you have a functioning lab. It often takes $100K just to stock one, which is why most new investigators get special startup money just for that. To produce _useful_ results often takes years at a rate of at least $100K a year. Equipment and reagents (especially enzymes) can be expensive. $300 for a gel box here, $1000 for a pipette there, $5000 for a thermocycler, $2000 for an enzyme, it adds up. And that's not even getting into salaries. Most people don't work alone.

I think it would be incredibly difficult to crowdfound science a la something like Kickstarter, especially with the amount of money currently spent on science (about $50 billion annually in the US alone). But maybe someone on HN will be the person who proves me wrong.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> The problem with distributed, grass roots peer review is that you get poor quality reviewers. The current structure is slow and very "old media", but it is this way because it's the only way to guarantee quality peer reviews.

If journals cease to exist, and a new publish-it-anywhere-then-publicize-it paradigm emerges, along with some associated metrics (kinda sorta like Reddit), then I predict that conference presentations will become the new metric of success. They have gatekeepers, and scarcity due to limited bandwidth (i.e. there are a limited number of time slots available). The whole journal publishing infrastructure will just be shifted over to conferences... along with the ecosystem of for-profit vs. trade group, etc., and the Slowness and Single Mode of Publication problems that the OP describes.

</comment><comment><USER9> "The norms don't encourage the sharing of an interactive, full-color, 3 dimensional model of the protein, even if that would be a more suitable media format for the kind of knowledge that is being shared."

This is simply wrong - when you solve a protein structure is is mandatory that you submit it to the pdb (i.e <http://www.pdb.org/pdb/101/motm.do?momID=148>) and nearly every journal I read has both color figures and extensive online supplementary materials.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're right, there are some trends in the right direction, which is terrific. But these are early. By and large scientists only get credit for publishing papers, which means they aren't taking advantage of the full interactive power of the web.

It's rare for scientists to share things like data sets, or other things like a video of a certain physical process that is going on. Most graphs or tables in scientific papers are non-interactive: you can't change the x and y axes, or other properties of the graph, as you can with graphs in Google Analytics, or generally data that is displayed for native web consumption. Similarly the code that scientists use to run on their data sets, which generates conclusions that end up in their papers, doesn't get shared.

I think the key to opening up richer sharing is to provide credit metrics that incentivize this kind of activity. When scientists can get credit for sharing data-sets, code, videos, and a wider array of rich media, they will start sharing more, and taking greater advantage of the rich media power of the web.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> No 3d models for new proteins?

The protein databank exists precisely for that reason.

<http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/home/home.do>

<comment><USER11> More broadly, lots of data that doesn't lend itself to a single figure has either repositories (like the Gene Expression Omnibus) or supplemental attachments to the paper that can be included.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm glad that the author is thinking about ways to increase communication between scientific authors, but some of the statements he made, specifically regarding "curing cancer 2-3 years sooner" make him sound ignorant of some of the challenges facing researchers. Not all scientific knowledge is presented only through journal articles. As others have already mentioned, conferences with "poster presentations" are pretty common in medicine to discuss ideas before the paper comes out. In addition, labs across the country working on similar problems often exchange ideas and substrates by email and mail respectively. I agree that it would be great if there was a more centralized repository of information online to get information. If anyone has any experience with blogs, forums or websites specifically addressing oncology (that are not just press releases) I would appreciate learning about them.

</comment><comment><USER13> _Imagine if all the stories in your Facebook News Feed were 12 months old. People would be storming the steps of Congress, demanding change._

To play devil's advocate, the time lag forces your conversations to strive to a higher standard of quality, comprehensiveness, correctness, and context than Facebook updates could even be compared to.

Then again, striving for the higher standard also invents pseudosciences, bad stat, and outright fraud.

In short, I don't think the solution is to replace the paper with something instantaneous. I agree that instantaneous (public) communication could be better used in the academic community, but there's a trend that way already as blog posts begin to signal a certain kind of good advisor.

I especially don't agree that search engines have any business replacing peer review.

</comment><comment><USER14> Many of the new approaches to science publishing I've seen haven't done enough to directly address the silo problem or provide significantly improved alternatives. I suspect this is primarily because they're trying to create viable scientific publishing businesses of their own. I believe taking a different approach around free, distributed, open source publishing and aggregation software would be better suited to transforming scientific communication into a more open, continuous, efficient, and data-driven process.

more here: <http://tldr.person.sh/on-the-future-of-science>

</comment><comment><USER15> It always strikes me how much time it takes to finish your paper (eg. conference template, correcting spelling mistakes, formatting figures etc.) while you could outsource this. Student-assistants are an option

Furthermore it would be nice to discuss your ideas without having to spend months writing a paper. Guess there is a difference between alpha and beta sciences.

Finding relevant conferences is a challenge as well (since I'm still a junior researcher).

</comment><comment><USER16> I recently had a chit-chat with a 5th year phd friend of mine in front of the stanford bookstore. We both did academic research, and both know all too well the incredible frustration of tech not-having full penetrated academic research. If ever you'd like to work toward making research faster, reply to this. We could think about a couple of things and start cranking out some solutions.

<comment><USER17> (since you're in cali, and I'm not) I'd like to draw your attention to the science hack days in SF. Have a look at this wiki[0]. WilliamGunn and cazDev on github are two people I know who've participated in / have some connections that might help a project like this happen.

[0] [http://sciencehackday.pbworks.com/w/page/45740104/SFideas#ag...](http://sciencehackday.pbworks.com/w/page/45740104/SFideas#agora)</comment></comment>


New F.A.A. Report Tallies Drone Sightings, Highlighting Safety Issues - <AUTHOR> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/26/new-f-a-a-report-tallies-drone-sightings-highlighting-safety-issues/?ref=technology

<comment><USER2> >>On Aug. 19, the police in Washington arrested a person stuck in a tree at Freedom Plaza after he climbed it to retrieve a drone that had crashed into its branches.

Does this need to be added ?

>>He said its No. 1 market was celebrities who used DroneShield to detect when paparazzi and others were trying to snoop on them. The company's second- biggest market is airports.

Is snooping a prime-use-case for drones?</comment>


My Airtable spreadsheet of vetted Fiverr illustrators under $10 - <AUTHOR> https://airtable.com/shr7gTQ1CrDUY9jHK <comment><AUTHOR> Started life as a private list for a small group of hacker friends - we've tried over 200 between us and waded through a lot of rubbish! Hopefully helpful for bootstrappers :)

</comment><comment><USER2> you might post this on indiehackers.com

<comment><AUTHOR> Ha I'm literally typing the post as we speak! Thanks :)</comment></comment>


Fashion advice from a true intellectual - <AUTHOR> https://blog.paperpile.com/chomsky-fashion-advice/ <comment><USER2> I first heard of him in regards to Chomsky Hierarchy. What an interesting person.</comment>


The Woman Who Needed to Be Upside-Down - <AUTHOR> http://discovermagazine.com/2012/jul-aug/06-vital-signs-woman-needed-upside-down

<comment><USER2> This sounds a lot like the occasional support request that comes in to me....

At first it's dis-believable and impossible, and you think the person is crazy, but after "troubleshooting" something rational pops up.

I can't tell you how many times this has happened. But it really doesn't help having a product/service that manages (on Windows) an underlining system of Virtual Hosts, dozens of configuration files, Apache, PHP, and MySQL, and a bunch of other software and tools (<http://www.devside.net/server/webdeveloper>).

<comment><USER3> It very much reminds me of one time when I had a spare screw that had fallen behind the motherboard, in the case.

Every once in awhile, I'd bump my desk and the computer would shut down, and wouldn't boot until I thumped it. ("Russian components, American components, ALL MADE IN TAIWAN!")

Completely baffled me until I was upgrading something with a friend, and he found the little guy rattling around.

<comment><USER4> My favorite example of this was a user who wrote to me about audio streaming software that he could use with classical music, but that disconnected when used to stream rock and roll.

After a great deal of highly baffling troubleshooting, I finally figured it out. The streaming software sent the music over UDP, where each packet contained a pre-set amount of audio encoded with a lossless codec. Classical compresses better than rock, so it generated smaller UDP packets. The guy had somehow managed to set the MTU of his LAN interface to 1200 bytes, and the software was using IPv6, which doesn't do IP-level fragmentation when the MTU is below 1280 bytes.

When playing classical music, every audio packet was less than 1200 bytes. When playing rock, an occasional packet would not compress well and end up too large, then fail to send. The software would then abort the connection in response to the error.

<comment><USER5> Wow, that is absolutely insane. You get major kudos for going to all that trouble to find out the answer to that one.

<comment><USER6> Agreed - you are my hero for today.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This was a great story, and really demonstrates the value of being calm and accessing a situation. This could have easily turned into a worse situation had the doctors forced the man to drop his wife and then examine the situation.

</comment><comment><USER8> It's like the medical version of the 500-mile email.

<comment><USER9> In similar vein here is a case of the programmer who couldn't login to his system when he entered password standing up. <http://netlib.bell- labs.com/cm/cs/pearls/sec0510.html>

<comment><USER10> Now that is an interesting story, and one I've never seen before. I'll have to keep that in my back pocket.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Good to remember the next time you get a bug report from a user. Perhaps your system really isn't as perfect as you think it is.

<comment><USER12> Truly. The story reminds me of all the times I've coded and stumble upon a bug that simply shouldn't happen because it defies logic. It usually takes a nap or re-write to realize the impossible bug was a minor typo.

<comment><USER13> The worst are when you spot a bug that means the functionality should never have worked in the first place, yet somehow has been working fine in production for years. I really rather hate those ones.

<comment><USER14> "Hate" isn't even a strong enough word for how I feel when that happens. The cognitive dissonance is so strong and discomforting that I don't even have a word for it. I mean, there you are, looking at a bit of code that absolutely, totally, _could not possibly work_ , and yet you know that it has been working. When I encounter that, I suspect I feel something like what the characters in H.P. Lovecraft stories[1] feel when they come face to face with some terrible, grotesque, eldritch being that _could not possibly exist._

Iä! Iä! Cthulhu Fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

[1]: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cthulhu_Mythos>

<comment><USER15> Whenever this happens I am tempted to "debug" the non-problem but I know it would be a waste of time to find out why something worked. Drives me crazy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> IDEABOLT: Create a central repository of interesting cases and diagnoses, with a super intuitive UI, make it freely available to _all_ MDs in the world to fill up and consult, sort of like the github for doctors.

You can make money by being the intermediary to find subjects for experiments, e.g. "For a study we are looking for identical twins who cannot see from birth but now one has restored vision where the other does not".

Does something that looks remotely similar exist?

<comment><USER17> I've been thinking about this for a while, in more general terms. Last year I had an issue with my eye. I bumped around from doctor to doctor (including one eye specialist) for nine months, for at least half of that period on two different antibiotics and a ten minute a day eye cleaning ritual. Finally when nothing seemed to be working I was bumped up to an eye doctor at a bigger hospital two hours away. Within a minute of seeing me, he had a diagnosis. It involved no medicine at all, cleared up the problem within 48 hours, and still seems to be working fine nearly ten months later.

My thinking is that a properly programed medical diagnosis expert system probably could have figured out the issue by the second or third trip to the doctor. Further, my guess is that a nurse who has been properly trained to use such a system would be at least as accurate as your average doctor.

Unfortunately, my next guess is that any such system would be opposed by the medical establishment and quickly sued into non-existence by patients it made mistakes on (even if the rate of such mistakes was significantly below that of normal doctors).

<comment><USER18> You're right physicians as a rule generally dislike software like that (partly because of their egos and distrust of software and partly because of job security). There are so many edge cases and so many examples physicians could give you of the AI/computer being wrong. A simple example is that any software will need input regarding the patient's history, his/her vitals. Right now heart rate data in ICUs is fed every second to storage systems. Let's say the this is a NICU and the baby's heart rate is suddenly elevated to extreme levels. The software would assume that something is wrong with the baby, when in reality a nurse is simply taking a blood sample and the baby started crying, being agitated by the nurse/needle. There are a lot of examples like this, it's a non-trivial problem to build use machine learning to take all of these factors into account to produce a diagnosis/treatment/intervention plan.

I was recently at a medical/technology conference and the physicians in attendance were all actually in support of moving to using machine learning/AI (selection bias though, that was what the conference was about). They would rather have a machine with a 5% error rate than a human with 20% error rate. They believe that the role of physicians is going to change and become more of a management role as technology catches up.

<comment><USER17> Sounds like the mother of all selection bias, but still this makes me hopeful!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> As a big fan of House MD and a software engineer I have always been wondering how often doctors turn to the web to look up strange cases, or is there a benefit in creating a better structured and curated site specifically for that? I guess WebMD is this kind of site, but could someone knowledgeable in medical practice share the thoughts on that?

Granted, once I knew she was on pacemaker, I figured that this has something to do with electrical connectivity. But then again, may be this is consequence of my poor soldering skills and watching too much of House MD.

<comment><USER20> A few months after IBM's Watson won Jeopardy, the IBM Research team came to the Texas Medical Center in Houston for a dog and pony show about its possibilities for health care. They presented for two hours to an auditorium of a hundred doctors and administrators from TMC, one of the premiere medical communities in the world. From a technical point of view, it was pretty impressive what Watson can do, reading everything, never forgetting, assigning weights to knowledge over time, able to explain where it got an answer. But when the time came for the doctors to respond ... ouch! One male doctor said "I already have access to a $500,000 decision support system and I don't use that. Why would I start using your stuff?" Another woman cardiologist said she could see using Watson on about ten percent of her office appointments, but she had a hard time seeing how to integrate it and not be slowed down for the other 90% where it was unnecessary. Doctors are a tough crowd.

The Ruby Rogues podcast had Conrad Barski, author of Land of Lisp, a while ago:

[http://rubyrogues.com/043-rr-book-club-land-of-list-with- con...](http://rubyrogues.com/043-rr-book-club-land-of-list-with-conrad- barski/)

Barski is a medical doctor who gave up medicine to code. He explained how it just didn't fit the medical culture to be interested in thinking deeply about an interesting problem, House MD not withstanding. Medical training is designed to give real time answers to presented problems, and it is, er..., 'highly discouraged' to tell a patient "That's an interesting case you have there. I'm going to go google that tonight and I'll have more information in the morning."

<comment><USER21> When I was young enough to be in pediatrics, my doctor once pulled out a pocket-sized electronic device and keyed in my symptoms. The result it suggested matched his guess, but it was unusual enough he was reassured to have a second opinion :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Reminds me of a children's joke - which i didn't even think was funny at the time - but enjoyed anyway:

"Dr, Dr! Every time I drink a cup of coffee, I get a stabbing pain in my right eye..."

(google it if you don't remember)

Exhibits, the same kind of ability to see the whole situation and make a diagnosis

</comment><comment><USER23> Disclaimer: I worked as software engineer for a CRM device company.

From what I learned during my medical training, this king of issue is not so uncommon, but it is usually diagnosed very easily. Her peacemaker can be disabled using a simple magnet. This is a common test in nearly all protocol to check how the heart is working without the help of the device. Doing this simple test while upside-down would have shown that the paecemaker was effectively working in that position. That should have be enough to ring a bell to most of the cardiologists.

</comment><comment><USER24> I just keep wondering why he was picking her up by the ankles in the first place..

<comment><USER25> It someone is feeling faint it is standard practice to lower their head to increase blood flow to the brain. Presumably her husband knew this. I felt faint after donating blood recently (I have low blood pressure) and they have a standard piece of foam to lift your legs up while lying on a bed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I had a feeling she just had a screw loose.

<comment><USER27> She's pretty talented if her craziness can cause a heart monitor to indicate that her pacemaker has stopped working.

<comment><USER28> The joke was that the problem was a screw loose in the pacemaker...

<comment><USER27> Can't believe how far that went over my head.

<comment><USER29> It was a crappy reddit style joke , and I hope it gets down voted.

<comment><USER30> It was funny, and I don't regret reading it, but I regret reading it here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> How did they get her to the hospital if she needed to be upside-down the entire time?

<comment><USER32> She probably 'sat' with her back resting against the bottom of the seat and her legs around the headrest.

<comment><USER33> I had no idea "Mork & Mindy" was a documentary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> No comment on the overall story, but as soon as I heard the description of the man carrying her, and he said "I'm her husband", my thought was Izumi Curtis and her husband Sig. =D

</comment><comment><USER35> Sorry, but I couldn't resist mentioning House. One of the episodes had similar situations. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dont_Ever_Change_(House)>

Since in there they say patient has "Nephroptosis, also known as 'Floating Kidney'", which is a listed medical condition, conditions like OP should not be uncommon.

<comment><USER36> Correct link: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_Ever_Change_(House)>

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Great story. But I wonder what would have happened if she was not five feet and him seven feet tall !

<comment><USER38> I was wondering about her husband. She's 60 years old, so he's presumably in the same age range. How many 60 year old guys, even big guys, have the strength to carry a full grown woman around by her ankles for a half hour?

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> This is the sweetest story I have ever heard in my life!

</comment><comment><USER40> People who enjoyed this story will love a book by neurologist Oliver Sachs called "The Man who Mistook his Wife for a Cat."</comment>


Snowden didn't turn off emails from Twitter, received 47GB of notifications - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/tldr/2015/10/1/9434581/edward-snowden-twitter-47GB-email-notifications-whoopsies <comment><USER2> This title is gratuitously uncivil. The actual title is 'Edward Snowden didn't turn off emails from Twitter and received 47GB of notifications.'

<comment><USER3> Title changed from "Twitter noob Snowden gets hammered with 47GB of notification emails".</comment></comment>


Who Is Satoshi Nakamoto? An inside look at the man behind Bitcoin - <AUTHOR> http://dave.liberty.me/2014/05/02/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto

<comment><AUTHOR> This footnote is also interesting by itself: [http://cypherpunks.venona.com/date/1993/10/msg00759.html](http://cypherpunks.venona.com/date/1993/10/msg00759.html)</comment>


Ask HN: Read any good books lately? - <AUTHOR> Niall Ferguson's the Ascent of Money and Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian. The former is extremely informative, the later is a work of art. <comment><USER3> The Count of Monti Cristo is a really fun book. It was published as a serial and was kind of like the Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones of 1850s Paris that everyone was talking about at the time. It's fun to read for both the revenge story itself and for the implicit look into the history of the French Revolution and what the life of a (dramatized) high roller was like back then.

<comment><USER4> Oh yes, the unabridged version is huge - and quite daunting at first - <USER2> once you let the thing just flow over you, it's a real great slow burner of a revenge story. Very highly recommended if you like a long read.

<comment><USER5> Read it as a serial. The last time I read it, a couple of years ago, I read a chapter each night. The hardest part was not reading a second or third chapter each night.

Another approach would be to read it as published. That's something like 18 parts in as many months.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I can really recommend The Kingkiller Chronicle. It is an outstanding piece of fantasy. The way of magic is developed / presented in a way you really can feel how it could be possible. A great piece of art by Patrick Rothfuss. The last book (of three) is currently in the making. I am really looking forward to read the first two books again once the last part is published. I want to know more about The Doors of Stone - now! :-)

<comment><USER7> Just finished the second book of this series. I agree with the parent comment - strongly recommend.

I also finished book 10 of the Malazan series.

Imagine Dan Carlin (Hardcore History podcast) and Quentin Tarantino took both the red pill and the blue pill that Morpheus offered Neo and ground both the pills together, snorted it, shook hands and agreed to create something better than Game of Thrones. I imagine they would have come up with something almost as good as the Malazan series.

You'll have to power through the first book (Gardens of the Moon). It is notoriously difficult - I recommend following up each chapter with commentary on Tor's Gardens of the Moon reread. I will also guarantee that the way book 1 ends will not make sense. But keep reading - the payoff is waiting as early as the end of book 2. And again at the end of book 3. And again all through books 4 and 5. And it'll stay that good till the end.

<comment><USER8> I found the Malazan books quite frustrating, every book he introduced a new character and storyline and left so many previous ones unfinished. Too many balls. And the end was just a bit silly for me.

I thought they were pretty good, but I'm enjoying GoT more.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I recently finished The Three-Body Problem, and I think it is the best book I have read in years.

It held my attention all the way through and I am now starting the sequel.

<comment><USER10> It is one the best sci-fi books out there. You will love the way it ends. It brings us to realise what we know and what we presently dont understand in the field of physics.

<comment><USER11> I made it through all three books and really enjoyed them (especially book 2). But I have to admit that I don't know how to feel about the ending. Definitely not the ending I anticipated.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Bad Blood by John Carreyrou, a book about the infamous blood testing startup Theranos. I couldn't put it down. Read the whole thing in a day and a half.

It's basically a gripping thriller set in Silicon Valley. The story focuses on what went on within the company since its inception. It's completely mind boggling how and why it all happened.

<comment><USER13> I'll recommend this as well. Another great book in the "company exploding in a case of massive fraud" genre is Billion Dollar Whale by Tom Wright and Bradley Hope, which goes into the 1MDB scandal.

</comment></comment><comment> jor-el Super thinking: The big book of mental models, it has been discussed on HN before [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20211572](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20211572).

Haven't completed it yet, so far I am finding it good.

</comment><comment><USER14> Zen mind, beginner's mind. It's the first book that I've read about Buddhism and found it quite insightful, will keep on reading more books on the topic.

It introduced me to Zen meditation, which I started practicing a few days ago and find useful.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm working my way through Steven Pinkers "How The Mind Works", it's a really interesting perspective on the brain and how it theoretically might produce human intelligence and consciousness. I didn't expect to be exercising my CS background while reading it, but it's very heavy on CS techniques and jargon despite being a psychology book (the author spends a solid chunk of the first chapter walking the reading through creating what turns out to basically be Prolog).

On the fiction side, I'm on my third Discworld book and loving them (Men At Arms).

</comment><comment><USER16> Non-Fiction:

\- Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman | book on human rationality and irrationality

\- An Astronaut's Guide to Life on Earth by Chris Hadfield

Fiction:

\- Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality | Petunia married a professor, and Harry grew up reading science and science fiction. [http://www.hpmor.com/](http://www.hpmor.com/)

\- Off to Be the Wizard (Magic 2.0 Book 1) by Scott Meyer | Reality is defined in a text file, making the protagonist a wizard when he discovers it while hacking a company.

\- The Magicians (series) by Lev Grossman

<comment><USER6> Regarding Kahneman, keep in mind that in the following years there has been a lot of doubt - including by Kahneman himself - about the scientific validity of the evidence.

See also:

[https://replicationindex.com/2017/02/02/reconstruction- of-a-...](https://replicationindex.com/2017/02/02/reconstruction-of-a-train- wreck-how-priming-research-went-of-the-rails/#comment-1454)

[https://retractionwatch.com/2017/02/20/placed-much-faith- und...](https://retractionwatch.com/2017/02/20/placed-much-faith-underpowered- studies-nobel-prize-winner-admits-mistakes/)

<comment><USER16> Very interesting! I found the chapters on priming hard to believe anyway. Still a lot of good stuff in that book.

It's one of those lessons that you feel you know but get a much better understanding of when reading about it in-depth.

Same as "How to win friends and influence people"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Alchemy by Rory Sutherland.

"Why is Red Bull so popular, though everyone—everyone!—hates the taste? Humans are, in a word, irrational, basing decisions as much on subtle external signals (that little blue can) as on objective qualities (flavor, price, quality). The surrounding world, meanwhile, is irreducibly complex and random. This means future success can't be projected on any accounting spreadsheet. To strike gold, you must master the dark art and curious science of conjuring irresistible ideas: alchemy."

<comment><USER18> I may be utterly alone here, but I actually like the taste. Reminds me of the white Smarties at Halloween as a kid.

<comment><USER19> I love the taste of red bull. Although I agree that their marketing is genius and probably has more to do with their success than anything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> "JCIP - Java Concurreny in Practice", finally was able to complete this monster and now I see the world differently. I had a aha moment, just like Neo in the Matrix.

"The Sandman: Kindly Ones" and "The Sandman: Wake", masterpieces from the master writer Neil Gaimann.

Reading "Never Split the Difference" which is about the art of negotiation and has been an enlightening read as of now. It argues negotiation isn't rational but is an affective exercise and I couldn't agree more.

<comment> jerome-jh Was the haha moment like what can be felt reading "The problem with threads" [https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2006/EECS-2006-...](https://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/2006/EECS-2006-1.pdf) ?

<comment><USER20> I'll confess that I haven't read "The problem with threads", my aha moment was the existence of 'happens-before' relationships and the Java Memory Model which for a good part of my life, I didn't know about.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> "Average is Over" by Tyler Cowen. It maybe isn't revolutionary, but it tied up a LOT of loose ends in my head about where we are and where things are most likely headed.

His thesis statement is that scientific and social progress is now largely in the hands of AI and that those best able to utilize those technologies to augment their decisions, and everyone else will suffer.

I think he overestimates AI in the short term, but in the long term, I don't see how he's wrong. I've started to study AI again (having worked in an AI lab 20 years ago).

From Wikipeida:

Cowen forecasts that modern economies are delaminating into two groups: a small minority of highly educated people who are capable of working collaboratively with automated systems will become a wealthy aristocracy; the vast majority will earn little or nothing, surviving on low-priced goods created by the first group, living in shantytowns working with highly automated production systems.

</comment><comment><USER22> I've been reading Release It - design deploy production ready software.

This is a fantastic book with several lessons my teams learned either by failing. The parts on how so many issues tend to be blocked threads, how you accidentally DDOS yourself, or how scaling/capacity management has failures even when you follow all the textbook, sound patterns... it takes many of my personal experiences and some failures I haven't had (but will) and provides such a fresh perspective.

[https://www.amazon.com/Release-Design-Deploy-Production- Read...](https://www.amazon.com/Release-Design-Deploy-Production-Ready- Software-ebook/dp/B079YWMY2V)

</comment><comment><USER23> Mattimeo, the third of the Redwall books by Brian Jacques. Charming, funny and surprisingly action-packed.

Currently reading Northern Lights, the first of the His Dark Materials trilogy by Phillip Pullman. My first time reading it, great so far.

<comment><USER24> I read the Redwall books in high school! Great fun, maybe I'll revisit. My favorites were Mossflower and Martin the Warrior.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Hamilton, Gabrielle. "Blood, Bones & Butter: The Inadvertent Education of a Reluctant Chef." (2011).

This is a chef's journey in the same general category of Anthony Bourdain's "Kitchen Confidential" (2000) or Bill Buford's "Heat" (2007).

Before I had my current fabulous career, I was an out of work marketing / web designer and needed to make money. The latter two books were my 'mentors' for dealing with working in professional kitchens without any experience.

I recommend all three for their insights into the world of professional chefs and food hospitality. And, of course, they all make you hungry. Haha

</comment><comment><USER26> Just finished "Get a financial Life". Pretty good stuff if you want to improve your financial skills and learn about investments, real state and tips on many things related to money.

</comment><comment><USER27> I listened to the Selfish Gene on Audible recently and was blown away by it.

All through school I never had much of an interest in biology or genetics. I think if I'd read this earlier it may have changed my mind.

Planning on reading the Blind Watchmaker at some point.

Spurred on by reading the former I thought I'd listen to A Brief History of Time. Wow that is a whole different kettle of fish. I had to stop because I realized it wasn't the right format (Audiobook), for me at least.

</comment><comment> jerome-jh "Nobody's boy" (Orig title "Sans famille") by Hector Malot. A huge classic in Vietnam, I have been said, but a little bit forgotten in France. Bar a couple of unlikely events, pretty enjoyable. Absolutely very much superior to the anim. Emphasize on education throughout the book.

</comment><comment><USER4> The Oranges of Hieronymus Bosch by Henry Miller and Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas by Hunter Thompson. There's something I really enjoy about these two almost magical realisim type books that never tires and I re-read them both at least once every few years.

</comment><comment><USER28> The Overstory

PS Does anybody use Goodreads anymore?

<comment><USER29> I do. Mostly I use it to log the annual reading challenge. I have mixed feelings about it because of Amazon's ownership, and that probably results in me using it less than I would otherwise.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I just finished Shogun and The Terror one after the other.

The reason I liked these is that I found the dogged determination of the respective captains in the face of adversity (especially in The Terror) inspirational.

<comment><USER31> Shogun is such a great book. I like to escape to it every year or so.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Just finished Higginbotham's Midnight in Chernobyl on the accident, the cleanup and its consequences. At times it read almost like a thriller, while still being extremely informative.

</comment><comment><USER33> 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' can't stop recommending it. I am currently reading the 3rd book 'Life, the Universe and Everything'

<comment><USER34> Can I ask what is so fascinating about it, It's been recommended to me a couple of times and I've tried everything to enjoy it and failed.

I got the book, tried the audio-book and even tried watching the movie, I couldn't get myself past the first half of the book or the movie.

It just seems (to me) so childish and incoherent, am I missing somthing?

<comment><USER35> It's one of my favorite books too, but I couldn't drag myself through Catch 22. And a lot of people are fanatical about it.

Different type of people like different things :) no need to feel bad about it.

p.s I would use word playful instead of childish.

<comment><USER36> I tried reading catch-22 twice before successfully getting through it. I felt the same as you did. I think my problem the first 2 times was that I was looking for the 'hook' or whatever it was that people were so fanatical about. As a consequence, I think I was glossing over the dialogue and not really ingesting what was going on. The third time I decided to just take it at face value, try and enjoy the dialogue and if no bigger picture emerges, so be it. This approach turned out to be the key. It's an incredibly funny and poignant book and what happens is that while you get through all these seemingly (initally) trivial scenes, a point does in fact start to emerge. The triviality is actually central to the main point. People keep dying off for arbitrary reasons and the being part of the war is so detached from the apparent reasons for the war is actually taking place. It's one of my favorite books. I truly recommended trying to read it again.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I am reading An Anonymous Girl by Greer and Sarah and it's a hell of a ride. I try to answer the questions asked by the doctor and makes me wonder about myself.

</comment><comment><USER38> David Eddings The Belgariad series ( 5 books) and then the Mallorean series (5 more books) which follows on from the Belgariad. An amazing piece of fantasy writing.

</comment><comment><USER39> House to House by David Bellavia. It's an account of his part in the 2nd Battle for Fallujah and how he won his Medal of Honour. Really well written.

</comment><comment><USER40> I am finally reading "The Subtle art of not giving a f*ck". First 3 chapters in. Good read and more importantly, it's very well written.

<comment><USER41> All those f __ks in the first chapter really put me off..

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Just finished the "four steps to epiphany". A must read for any startup founder. 10/10

Currently reading "never split the difference".

</comment><comment><USER43> The Cuckoo's Egg: Tracking a Spy Through the Maze of Computer Espionage

Does anyone have other hacking related books with story telling like in this book?

<comment><USER4> Well I remember reading in one or two sittings "Cyberpunk: Outlaws and Hackers on the Computer Frontier" by John Markov and Katie Hafner just before I discovered The Cuckoo's Egg and both gripped me in the same way.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Graham Allison's Destined for War about Thucydides Trap with an examination of the US and China was quite good

</comment><comment><USER45> The Peregrine - the way the author describes nature and the beauty and focus of everyday life is awe-inspiring.

</comment><comment><USER46> Ryan Holiday - 366 days of stoic (journal)

<comment><USER26> Also reading that. One per day. I would say one every 5 or 6 meditations I find very valuable stuff.

<comment><USER46> I read the whole book man. The questions are just tools. You should read any stoic you like, preferably the one who you relate the most with (Zeno of citium even to Taleb doesn't matter)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> The Fifth Season by N K Jemisin (and then the rest of the Broken Earth series) great dystopian sci-fi

</comment><comment><USER48> Moby Dick

Finally got around to reading it, I was amazed at how modern it felt for a book written in 1850.

<comment><USER3> This is an amazing book, though I jokingly like to describe it as the best beginning and ending prose ever written with 100 chapters of whalefacts.tumblr.com sandwiched in between.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> The Song of the Dodo: Island Biogeography in an Age of Extinctions by David Quammen

</comment><comment><USER50> Lenins Tomb: Soviet history primarily focused on the later years.

</comment><comment><USER51> Belonging by Nora Krug.

Nice mix of personal narrative and history, and the visuals were wonderful.

It's about the authors investigation to uncover her family's role during Nazi rule, to hopefully absolve her sense of inherited guilt and to discover her "heimat" \- a German word used to describe where you come from.

The author presents the story through a mix of handwritten letters, old pictures, and drawings, weaved together into a very creative scrapbook style.

Something I really enjoyed were the cultural and historical sections that started each chapter. I was able to learn something new that was separate from the narrative, yet still keep my mind in the story world.

One of those parts I found interesting was on how important bread is to Germans...so much as to file their recipes for recognition by UNESCO! I had no idea.

Not to say that was the best part. The story itself was very good.

</comment><comment><USER52> Psychedelic Information Theory: Shamanism in the Age of Reason

</comment><comment><USER53> Gut by Julia Enders, a pop-sci book on our digestive system.

</comment><comment><USER54> Gravity's Rainbow

</comment><comment><USER55> Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind is blowing my mind.

</comment><comment><USER56> 150 pages into The Fountainhead at the moment. So far, I can highly recommend it.

<comment><USER46> Ayn Rand... Please don't

<comment><USER28> No, it's good. It stands alone as a piece of literature. Atlas Shrugged doesn't - it's skippable. The Fountainhead is about work, art and passion. It's also just a much better story.</comment></comment></comment>


5 Reasons You Shouldn't Buy An iPad Mini - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2012/10/23/5-reasons-you-shouldnt-buy-an-ipad-mini/?utm_campaign=forbestwittersf&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social <comment><USER2> "Today they debuted a clone which is inferior to the vast majority of products it's attempting to copy."

Most consumers would disagree however... because its an Apple product. Like it or not, people instantly judge Apple products to be of higher quality than others, and are willing to pay for it.

<comment><USER3> They judge on looks. Nexus 7 is a mediocre looking tablet. It wastes far too much space on bezel and has an awkward shape. I love Google and wanted to love this tablet but was let down.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Refreshing to see some legitimate criticisms of an Apple product in the mainstream press. I'm a fanboy too, but they don't ALWAYS get it right.</comment>


Time Travel in Haskell (a function's output is passed as a parameter to the same function) - <AUTHOR> http://community.livejournal.com/evan_tech/216270.html <comment><USER2> Okay... how do you do this in Lisp? Also, PG, does Arc support Time Travel instructions? ;)

<comment><USER3> Fully reentrant continuations feel a lot like time travel.

In fact, I once overslept my first class because when my alarm went off and I woke up groggy, I shut off my alarm thinking "I'll just remember my current continuation and if I oversleep I'll call it back later with an error."</comment></comment>


U.S. military suicides last year far exceed combat deaths in Afghanistan - <AUTHOR> http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/14/record-number-of-u-s-military-suicides-last-year-far-exceeding-american-combat-deaths-in-afghanistan/

<comment><USER2> From the article:

 _The Pentagon says that although the military suicide rate has been rising, it remains below that of the civilian population. It says the civilian suicide rate for males aged 17-60 was 25 per 100,000 in 2010, the latest year for which such statistics are available. That compares with the military's rate in 2012 of 17.5 per 100,000._

The quote "Suicides in the U.S. military surged to a record 349 last year, far exceeding American combat deaths in Afghanistan" sounds shocking, but it's pure yellow journalism. The United States armed forces are vast, employing 1.4 million active duty personnel. By the end of 2012, there were only approximately 68,000 troops deployed in Afghanistan.

This is a shameful piece of journalism, authored by someone who is either innumerate or utterly cynical. There is no excuse for misrepresenting data in this manner.

</comment><comment><USER3> I happened to catch a glimpse of the NBC news on TV today, and this was mentioned.

It seemed odd to me that they didn't include a comparison to the expected number of deaths from suicide in a civilian population of this size and demographic makeup.

I could easily see an article like this being generated by a small local newspaper or some random blog, but you'd think one of the major TV networks would have better quality control.

About a month ago, someone on HN actually questioned my assertion that the US news media has a liberal bias...I wish I had the energy to dig through my comments, find that person, and reply to their comment with a link to this story :)

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm pretty positive this was also the case in 2012. Check it out, the official link from data.gov does not resolve to an actual page. Ah, the government and open data, always a tentative relationship: [https://explore.data.gov/National-Security-and-Veterans- Affa...](https://explore.data.gov/National-Security-and-Veterans- Affairs/Updated-US-Army-Total-Force-Suicide-Data/h92d-5zj3)</comment>


California Labor Bill, Near Passage, Is Blow to Uber and Lyft - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/09/business/economy/uber-lyft-california.html <comment><USER2> I'm not a fan of all these moves to treat drivers as employees for one simple reason: you can drive for more than one company at the same time.

Here's what I don't want:

\- I don't want quotas as NYC is doing. This is just recreating the taxi medallion system.

\- I don't want each company to be forced to pay a minimum wage per hour that then means a driver loses the flexibility to drive for multiple companies at once.

\- I don't want regulations to keep smaller competitors out of the market. There's a real risk of this.

\- I don't want drivers to lose the flexibility to do this on a casual or flexible basis. Quotas and the like will mean the only option is to drive full-time. I'm all for people being able to supplement income. I feel like this is useful to a lot of people.

Note: I do want drivers to earn a sufficient income from this. It's just that quotas and company minimum wages aren't the way to do this.

<comment><USER3> I worry that you (and me, and others) have bought in to the "flexibility" bullshit that Uber often spouts.

Most people still have the same rough, basic needs. A "supplementary" income is not enough to do this. Every single Uber driver I've ever asked does it as a full-time job, but doesn't get the pay or protections of a full-time worker.

Especially in the UK and other more regulated countries than the US, becoming an Uber driver takes time and money as you require a licence. People aren't doing it as a side-gig. It's their job. And Uber knows it.

<comment><USER4> So basically desperate people ruin everything?

Say I use Uber to take advantage of HOV lanes going to and from work (and make a little extra cash). Now because desperate people have commandeered the platform as their sole source of income, I should not be able to do that anymore?

Seems like you can't have nice things at all because of this. If I make an app called "Clean Streets" that pays a dime per piece of litter picked up from local streets, desperate people would try to turn it into a full time living and I would be sued for abusing people, not paying living wage, not giving full benefits, etc. (even though I just wanted to incentivize passively cleaning up of litter, geez)

<comment><USER5> Yes? Why do you think we need things like minimum wage and OSHA? Because there are desperate people and people who exploit them.

<comment><USER6> You don't actually need a minimum wage, as it's a very recent invention. Things worked fine before that was introduced. And do you really have to assume employers always "exploit" employees? That's the basic idea of communism and it's always a disaster. Employers don't exploit labour. It's a trade that leaves both sides better off.

<comment><USER3> > Employers don't exploit labour.

lol

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Discussing Uber and Lyft is boring because the companies are so reviled, but this bill is much bigger than Uber and Lyft.

It seems the ABC contracting test is pretty detrimental to any kind of contract hiring that is done in an area which is closely related to a company's core business.

Software development contracting in particular seems like it would be particularly problematic under this test.

I contract out work all the time which I closely manage many aspects of how the work is done, and for work which is core to my business operations, and within my core competency.

Mostly this is to be able to quickly scale up development capacity during a project where there are isolated pieces that can be worked on concurrently. It's often work that I could do, but for scheduling purposes, would rather hire out.

I've also done "micro-contracting" where I break out specific problems which I could eventually figure out a solution but it's easier to find an expert who can spend 5 hours on it while I keep moving on other pieces of the puzzle.

What I'm doing seems like it's exceptionally common, and because of how ABC test is a logical AND I'm not seeing the "escape hatch" where it wouldn't be basically preventing software contracting work for software companies.

<comment><USER8> A lot of people on HN seem to think that this bill mandates (a) full-time employees and (b) fully independent contractors without anything in-between.

There is such a thing as a temporary, part-time job (as an employee). See, e.g., every single Walmart ever. Most major fast food chains. Most retail stores during the holiday season. Etc.

The primary change is that companies will start having to handle payroll taxes for part-time workers rather than pushing these administrative costs onto the workers by claiming that the workers are actually their own businesses.

<comment><USER9> Temp workers and contractors are very different types of employees...

<comment><USER8> Yes, they are.

Temp workers are part-time employees that can be performing any task your business requires, including your primary business activity. While working for you, they aren't working for someone else (though they might be working for someone else when their shift ends for the day).

A contractor is someone with their own client base who handles a specific project that is not your primary business activity (though the project may support that activity). While working for you, they could be working for someone else as well (as long as they're not billing both clients for that time if the contractor bills on a period-basis).

These distinctions above are generally how the difference between employees and contractors are laid out internationally, and especially when dealing with cross-border worker classification issues. These distinctions have also been part of US jurisprudence for many decades, though they've only been formally or informally codified relatively recently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> From the bill:

> a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an > employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity > demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the > hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person > performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's > business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently > established trade, occupation or business.

Under these conditions, what position would qualify as a contractor?

The first clause

> free from control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the > performance of the work

seems awfully broad. If I contract someone to clean my house, I would hope I have some control and direction of the person in connection to them cleaning my house. Or am I reading this wrong.

The second clause

> the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring > entity's business

means I can't contract out work that I normally do? So if I'm a cleaner, I can't contract out other cleaners if I'm swamped.

The third clause

> person is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, > occupation or business

I don't really know what that means

Can someone shed some light on the text?

[0] [https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB5/2019](https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB5/2019)

<comment><USER11> This problem of legally differentiating between employees and contractors has been around for a while and relates to multiple factors so it is informative to look at this in contextual terms. This arrangement has become known as the "ABC Test". There is a good summary of what it means at The Balance Small Business: [https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-is-the-abc-test-for- indep...](https://www.thebalancesmb.com/what-is-the-abc-test-for-independent- contractors-4586615) and discussion of adoption of this test by the California Supreme Court at the California Public Agency Blog: [https://www.calpublicagencylaboremploymentblog.com/wage- and-...](https://www.calpublicagencylaboremploymentblog.com/wage-and- hour-2/california-supreme-court-adopts-new-abc-test-for-classification-of- independent-contractors-potential-risk-and-impact-on-public-agencies/).

To attempt to summarize in a way that answers your questions: First do you know how to do the work and use your own expertise to adapt to circumstances or do you follow specific direction, training, and escalation procedures as dictated by management? If you are following a script as trained and have someone overseeing you as you work then you are an employee. If you know what to do and get only summary instructions then you are likely a contractor. Second, if you are hired by a cleaning company to extend their cleaning capacity using their methods and equipment then you are likely an employee, but if you are hired by a software company to sweep their floors whenever they get really dirty then you are probably a contractor. Finally, if you do cleaning on your own for various clients and are hired to do cleaning then you are likely a contractor, but if you clean for one client by their instruction and with their oversight and support then you are probably an employee. Note that each of these criteria has substantial wiggle room and the idea is they all work together to support a decision one way or the other.

<comment><USER10> If that's true, then I would argue that Uber and Lyft are contractors not workers:

> First do you know how to do the work and use your own expertise to adapt to > circumstances or do you follow specific direction, training, and escalation > procedures as dictated by management? ... If you know what to do and get > only summary instructions then you are likely a contractor

Surely Uber drivers already know how to drive. I'm not sure whether they're under obligation to follow GPS instructions.

> Second, if you are hired by a cleaning company to extend their cleaning > capacity using their methods and equipment then you are likely an employee, > but if you are hired by a software company to sweep their floors whenever > they get really dirty then you are probably a contractor.

The Uber driver uses her own equipment although you could argue that they use Uber's methods.

> if you do cleaning on your own for various clients and are hired to do > cleaning then you are likely a contractor, but if you clean for one client > by their instruction and with their oversight and support then you are > probably an employee

In my experience, almost every single Uber I've been in drives for Lyft as well.

<comment><USER12> > I'm not sure whether they're under obligation to follow GPS instructions.

UberX, no, the GPS is a suggested route. UberPool, yes, you have to follow the GPS as instructed.

> The Uber driver uses her own equipment although you could argue that they > use Uber's methods.

This is where I tend to agree, with caveats. A rideshare driver is a contractor. But when it comes to compensation Uber and Lyft want to act as an employer. Currently, compensation has been trending down to the point it's becoming a unprofitable for the driver. A contractor would be able to negotiate a rate saying, "I'll drive for $0.55/mile." What we currently have is an email to all "contractors" stating the rate starting today is X/mile. That sounds more like an employer notice than a contract negotiation.

<comment><USER13> > What we currently have is an email to all "contractors" stating the rate > starting today is X/mile.

By that logic all taxi drivers are employees of the cities of their medallion, because cities set the taxi driver rates.

<comment><USER14> Actually it goes beyond just setting the rates. The state sets the rules. The state can "fire" drivers. Managing transportation is core to what government does. According to the ABC criteria, they should qualify as state employees with all the ensuring benefits and it would be hilarious if all taxi drivers in California sued the state to become state employees just like bus drivers and train operators.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I feel like both sides of the "are they contractors or employees" arguments feel like they are trying to jam puzzle pieces that don't fit together to make an argument.

Clearly drivers are not employees in that they pick their own hours, and they can drive for as long and for whomever they want - and these are all things that make Uber/Lyft a great option for people between jobs, substitute teachers, actors, etc.

At the same time it is pretty clear that your inability set prices, control which requests/routes you accept/decline and lack of differentiated work makes you an employee, especially if you drive 40+ hours a week.

The law needs a way of handling this type of job, without forcing it into one camp or another because there are downsides for everyone by doing so. Let's call them semi-contractors for the sake of differentiation. There should ways of getting health insurance pro-rated by multiple companies if you work X hours a week. There should be requirements around the workers insurance provided to these semi-contractors while on and off the clock. There should be guaranteed minimum wages after expenses. There should be strict rules about building out complex and accurate payout reporting for both regulators and semi-contractors including complex bonus payouts. It should be 100% illegal to steal tips from an app. Semi-contractors should have the right to tell Uber they don't want to drive to east bay without penalty if they're contractors that can have autonomy over their work.

But none of these issues get solved by calling driver employees

<comment><USER16> The insurance issue is a defect in the US insurance system and is not Uber or Lyft's fault IMO. Insurance should either be purchased exclusively by individuals or should be a government service. Employers should not be involved.

As I understand it, the US is essentially unique in the idea that jobs come with insurance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> This looks a lot like rent control to me — optically it's perfect, help the little guy; but in practice supply is restricted, prices rise, competition decreases, service gets worse. the poorest suffer the most (fewer driving jobs, higher prices).

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

— C.S. Lewis

<comment><USER9> Just let them vote for the bill that causes them more unemployment. California needs more homeless.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> The ultimate issue here for Lyft, Uber and such is not contractors vs employees but the amount of subsidy these companies need to give to get people to buy their product. Making people employees is only a big issue for these companies because it further increases the subsidy required to get people to buy.

There's an old saying that's its easy to grow fast if you're selling $2 bills for $1 and the Uber, Lyft, (and WeWorks) and such of the world are simply following that model. The market is finally smelling the BS on this strategy for long established "startups."

If such companies don't have a viable path to profitability then the whole 1099 vs W-2 argument is moot.

</comment><comment><USER19> I haven't read the bill, how does it effect other companies that have traditionally used sub contractors? Like for example, General Contractors? This bill is being touted as a poison pill to harm Uber and Lyft, but based on the articles I have read about it, it sounds more like a bomb with a much larger blast radius.

<comment><USER20> I was the CEO/cofounder of Bloc, an online coding bootcamp. Our mentors started out as tutors but we eventually converted them all to employees and learned a lot about California labor law in the process.

What was frustrating about the labor laws is that there were never any clear rules about what constitutes a contractor versus employee, there are just some "smell tests" and guidelines but it's ultimately deferred to the judgement of California's labor bureau.

> a person providing labor or services for remuneration shall be considered an > employee rather than an independent contractor unless the hiring entity > demonstrates that the person is free from the control and direction of the > hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, the person > performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's > business, and the person is customarily engaged in an independently > established trade, occupation or business

The new laws being proposed here don't look much different from the guidelines that already exist, they're just more black and white leave less room for interpretation. I think the most troublesome one for startups is "the person performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity's business", but it shouldn't affect general contractors unless they're working for a general contracting company.

<comment><USER19> How does the law define the hiring entities business? A general contractor is in the business of building things. Uber is in the business of transportation. The GC contracts out the actual building tasks to sub contractors. Uber contracts out the actual driving to sub contractors.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I wonder when companies will just stop starting up in CA. It seems like they could just operate in another state and everything would be fine. You'd find plenty of programmers in a place like the NC research triangle.

<comment><USER22> This is a question of ethics, not domicile. Any company founded on the premise of an unethical and harmful business model that externalizes all of its costs deserves to be put down the same way.

<comment><USER23> Releasing all of these drivers in to the general workforce could reduce wage pressure employers are feeling right now. While that might be the more ethical thing to do, no one else is going to benefit besides employers who want cheap employees.

<comment><USER22> Simply shutting down the business isn't the only possible outcome, nor the most desirable. The mere fact that Uber's current business model is unethical doesn't imply that it's also incorrigible. Hire drivers as employees, pay Uber management roughly what a SV software engineer makes, and raise prices to compensate for the difference in order to become somewhat profitable, like a real business. The presumption that customers will simply stop using Uber is either naive or purposefully misleading, I really can't tell which.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> Const-me I don't think these drivers are independent contractors. These people don't negotiate prices they charge for their services. How's that independent if the rates they're paid are fixed by some other parties?

<comment><USER24> While I agree with you, the counter argument is that they're not forced to take a fare offered - Uber/Lyft are basically posting the option to take a fare and the driver has to choose to accept it. It's similar to if you posted a project on Upwork for a fixed dollar amount - it's up to the workers on there to decide if it's enough or not without negotiating.

This is why the whole ABC test of the new proposed law came into being.

<comment><USER25> What you're missing is drivers are specifically not told the value of a ride before accepting it.

You often find out after you've driven 5-15 minutes to a pickup that you're about to spend 10-20 minutes in traffic and of the $9 they're paying you're only getting $3.75.

The bad rides are essentially bundled with the good.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I thought this was supposed to be good for uber and lyft since it would choke out any smaller companies with less cash to burn in contrast to uber/lyft who have deep pockets.

<comment><USER27> Uber and Lyft will probably respond by directing the drivers more closely ( [http://coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2019/09/why-california- for...](http://coyoteblog.com/coyote_blog/2019/09/why-california-forcing-uber- drivers-to-become-employees-may-hurt-many-drivers.html) ). They're in a position to do so. You are correct that smaller companies probably couldn't pull that off.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Maybe a start would be having universal healthcare so we don't have to worry _so much_ about someone having a full-time job.

I have to imagine a large part of this argument is rideshare drivers just want some healthcare without it costing a fortune. They are already making a lowish wage driving people around, how the hell can they afford healthcare on their own?

Yes there are other workers rights that might be nice, and things like vacation time etc. But I have to imagine a large part of this conversation is directly related to healthcare...

</comment><comment><USER29> A gentle reminder to every one that Uber and Lyft (though mostly uber) broke the monopoly that was considered un-breakable. Such companies aren't supposed to provide a "living wage", they're supposed to be "gigs" on the side. Some people to live off them because they don't have jobs at the moment, but I'm not sure that makes it incumbent upon the services to change their models. You can have a day-job and also drive a bit for a ride-hailing service. They've provided more opportunities for people to pick up some extra work, in an industry where the previous option was _zero dollars_ for any one trying to drive a taxi on the side.

Bear also in mind that cities may have an ulterior motive of their own. Always ask, "Qui bono?" They sell expensive licenses, and don't like a revenue stream being lost (even if it's better for constituents). Maybe this is for the better, maybe not; but the motive of the cities is likely self-interest.

On the other hand, Uber's long-term play is quite possibly self-driving cars. I'm guessing that this is the route all taxis will go eventually, but it's also worth considering that Uber is not sustainable without continuing investment as it stands today.

</comment><comment><USER30> Now Uber and Lyft will force a ballot measure, as they promised and we will probably learn that Sacramento is out of step with the average voter in California.

<comment><USER31> That's not a given, I'm sure that labor will paint the big corps as taking advantage of the little guy in the name of their stock price. It's easier for riders to empathise with their drivers than rich tech guys and VCs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Ah. I now understand a bumper sticker I saw 2 days ago, to the effect of:

"No on AB5.

I own this truck.

AB5 will put me out of work."

It was on a heavy double trailer dump truck, the kind that hauls dirt and debris to/from construction sites. I guess his thought is that AB5 will limit the ability to subcontract, forcing independent haulers of this type "out of business". As the services are still actually required, why the hiring company can't employ these folks rather than sub them out, I don't know. It might be fear of change.

In my own (limited) 10 minute reading, and from [https://www.mulfil.com/dynamex-borello-prepare-umbrella- stor...](https://www.mulfil.com/dynamex-borello-prepare-umbrella-storms/), ISTM that the existing law governing this is based on "Borello", and I guess that for uber/lyft, "Dynamex" (ABC) would apply instead. AB5 has an explicit carve-out for the construction industry, where the existing Borello test would continue to apply.

If that reading is accurate, I don't know why this dump truck driver would have such a sticker on his trailer. The law doesn't change for him.

</comment><comment><USER33> My guess what will happen with the bill

\- drivers cant deduct car expenses, and uber /lyft wouldn't be able to do so easily, which will increase prices and thus decrease total revenue and thus the total amount of people employed by uber / lyft

\- drivers wont be allowed to drive full time to avoid benefit requirements like many places

\- uber / lyft will insist on exclusivity when you are driving, complete with shifts, locations and last minute schedule changes to compensate and because they can because they are employees. Just like working at walmart or mcdonalds. Working at both will be hard to juggle.

</comment><comment><USER34> Can someone more informed than myself explain if this applies to AirBnB?

I'm a host in Seattle. The city now requires short-term rental operators to register as their own businesses.* If I'm a contractor for AirBnb, this makes sense.

However, if I'm an employee of AirBnb, then the Washington State income tax law would prohibit Seattle from collecting taxes on short-term operators.

 _Note that 30+ day stays are_ not* required to register, which doesn't make any sense since you're still operating a business.

</comment><comment><USER35> Because Uber and Lyft drivers are not employees, perverting the law to define them as such will have unintended consequences. Then again, it seems California is the land of unintended consequences.

<comment><USER36> They're definitely employees. I hope the scam ends.

<comment><USER35> By what measure? Most I've seen contract through two or more systems at once, or use it as a way to make a bit of money off carpooling to work. No employee does that.

<comment><USER24> If you're going to post comments like this, please at least make an effort to read some of the content of the thing you are arguing against. In this case it is very clearly explained in multiple places that the proposed bill utilizes the ABC test to determine whether a person is a contractor or employee.

Furthermore, working for multiple companies has absolutely nothing at all to do with whether you are an employee or not. There is nothing preventing a normal W2 FTE from working for two companies, provided their employee contracts allow it and they're able to sustain the hours.

You also seem to be making the argument that since _some_ rideshare drivers only work a few hours a week, the ones who drive full time should just suck it up for less than minimum wage and no benefits.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> This may actually kill Uber.

I hope to see some popular decentralized alternatives (like Arcade City, but better or more popular?) within the next couple of years.

Beyond 1-2 years I expect Waymo, Tesla and others to start deploying on a fairly large scale. At that point people may be discussing "basic income" etc. very seriously.

Meanwhile, the US still will not have much manufacturing and our leads in other areas will be diminishing.

China will be over dollars. Cryptocurrency will be threatening all fiat.

There may be a war at first between China and the US, primarily driven by AGI invented in China.

Then an international group of cyborgs and AIs may decide to end both China and the US and create a new global paradigm.

We may only have another 10 years until the Singularity.

</comment><comment><USER38> This headline could easily have been written, "California Labor Bill, Near Passage, is Boon to Drivers." It's worth contemplating why it wasn't written that way.

</comment><comment><USER39> This reeks of regulatory capture in the making. I don't understand at all.

How we got here: 1\. Taxis are various forms of monopoly everywhere they exist 2\. Startups Lyft/Uber capture market share because riders want an option 3\. Drivers _flock_ to use this system voluntarily that didn't exist at all before and make money if they want to 4\. ??? 5\. Drivers are being taken advantage of by evil corporations

Lyft and Uber are already operating at a loss. If this forces upward wage pressure in CA, do they just stop existing there?

<comment><USER40> two things:

1) Equating Uber and Lyft to taxis in the sense of employment rights isn't a fair comparison.

2) All that's going to happen is that Lyft and Uber are going to increase their prices to cover the cost of the overhead. The market will determine if the increased cost is worth the convenience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Driver here. Several years full/part-time.

This looks like a situation where the solution is worse than the problem. And there is definitely a problem which is that Uber and Lyft (especially Lyft[0]) want to treat drivers like employees. I don't think the solution is to classify us drivers as employees but for them to stop treating us as such.

[0] - the most egregious example of Lyft controlling drivers is the treatment of XL drivers. Uber gives XL drivers a toggle switch where you can turn off regular and carpool rides as desired, this allows you to dual-platform. Lyft does not. In an effort to "keep you busy"[1] Lyft tries to strong-arm you into accepting regular and carpool rides regularly.

If you decide that, as an independent contractor running a small business, you would like to only give XL rides on both Lyft and Uber's XL tiers it's impossible to remain in good standing with Lyft and at all times you will live with the threat of deactivation hanging over your head.

[1] - [https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/115012926367-How- to-...](https://help.lyft.com/hc/en-us/articles/115012926367-How-to-become-a- Lyft-XL-driver)

</comment><comment><USER41> If your business model entirely relies on paying your employees poverty wages, maybe it's not a very good business model.

<comment><USER42> That's true, but yet people still want to drive for Uber/Lyft. Perhaps people are just stupid and don't understand what they are getting into (though, that's a _lot_ of people)... or maybe they truly don't mind/don't care about the wages. I'm sure there are 3rd and 4th options, but regardless--you can piss on people's business models all you want, but they don't force anyone to work for them.

<comment><USER43> The issue behind Uber and Lyft is not compulsory work. The problem is that the depreciation, injury risk, and opportunity cost of the job is misunderstood and people are being taken advantage of. In your argument, no one is forcing them to be taken advantage of and our society should eat the cost.

You could use your same argument to say that businesses don't need to legally pay minimum wage since someone is willing to take less.

These conditions are bad for everybody and create a depressing effect on earnings for workers.

<comment><USER44> Couldn't you simply require Uberlyft to run potential drivers through a quick course on depreciation, injury risk, opportunity cost?

That's really not a bad idea generally. Give them full information and then treat them like adults.

<comment><USER41> Why would they tell the truth?

[https://thinkprogress.org/mcdonalds-tells-workers-to- budget-...](https://thinkprogress.org/mcdonalds-tells-workers-to-budget-by- getting-a-second-job-and-turning-off-their-heat-c3bce1526c1e/)

>McDonalds has partnered with Visa to launch a website to help its low-wage workers making an average $8.25 an hour to budget. But while the site is clearly meant to illustrate that McDonalds workers should be able to live on their meager wages, it actually underscores exactly how hard it is for a low- paid fast food worker to get by.

>The site includes a sample "budget journal" for McDonalds' employees that offers a laughably inaccurate view of what it's like to budget on a minimum wage job. Not only does the budget leave a spot open for "second job," it also gives wholly unreasonable estimates for employees' costs: $20 a month for health care, $0 for heating, and $600 a month for rent. It does not include any budgeted money for food or clothing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> If you believe in the ability of the state to regulate labor, you should have no problem with this bill. Uber and similar companies are exploiting 'independent contractors' to slash their labor prices. Those employees aren't being offered health insurance or even minimum wage. Good for California.

</comment><comment><USER45> Good. To hell with them.

One more time, with feeling: "The Market Fairy Will Not Solve the Problems of Uber and Lyft"

> Here is the thing about Uber and Lyft (and much of the "sharing economy").

> They don't pay the cost of their capital.

> The wages they pay to their drivers are less than the depreciation of the > cars and the expense of keeping the drivers fed, housed, and healthy. They > pay less than minimum wage in most markets, and, in most markets, that is > not enough to pay the costs of a car plus a human.

> These business models are ways of draining capital from the economy and > putting them into the hands of a few investors and executives. They prey on > desperate people who need money now, even if the money is insufficient to > pay their total costs. Drivers are draining their own reserves to get cash > now, but, hey, they gotta eat and pay the bills.

[https://www.ianwelsh.net/the-market-fairy-will-not-solve- the...](https://www.ianwelsh.net/the-market-fairy-will-not-solve-the-problems- of-uber-and-lyft/)</comment>


Loic Le Meur's Vision of Programmable Twitter Clients - <AUTHOR> http://www.loiclemeur.com/english/2009/11/more-on-seesmics-vision-of-programmable-twitter-clients.html <comment><USER2> This could get me to switch to Seesmic, and maybe even learn to program, too.

I see twitter client after twitter client that reproduces the majority of the functionality of its competitors, but each with _one_ unique difference.

It'd be great to not have to always be checking out new clients and deciding if the utility of its unique feature is worth the effort of using another app.

</comment><comment><USER3> Although it sounds fancy, this reminds me the 90s. Sorry.

<comment><USER4> How does this remind you of the 90's?

(I'm involved in Seesmic, as both a disclosure but also a "direct to the source" opportunity!).

<comment><USER3> Programmable e-mail clients e.g. Eudora.

Of course most of the Internet users today, weren't users in the 90s, so this doesn't mean you wont find users to appreciate what you are offering.

<comment><USER4> The idea is not to expect end users to program their client.

The idea is to allow 3rd party developers to build scripts/plugins/etc that users can download and change their twitter client experience.

Think less Eudora and more Firefox plugins.

<comment><USER3> Ideas are personal. I just said I am not impressed. Maybe I will in the future when I see what others have built.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> soooo Seesmic got a lot of money from Microsoft to port their next version to windows first using silverlight.</comment>


Coming to America for Entrepreneurs - <AUTHOR> http://fundersandfounders.com/coming-to-america-for-entrepreneurs-infographic/ <comment><USER2> Some visa type like J1 and F1 are missing. Should be added to the article.</comment>