Magic Leap is a Tragic Heap - <AUTHOR> http://palmerluckey.com/magic-leap-is-a-tragic-heap/ <comment><AUTHOR> For anyone who didn't happen to notice, it should be noted that this review was written by Palmer Luckey, the founder of Oculus VR and designer of the Oculus Rift.

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

<comment><USER3> True. But his assertions are mostly fact based and support his thesis.

Who really thinks Magic Leap holds up to the hype and is really a good use of its investment capital?

<comment><USER4> Nothing could hold up to the amount of hype Magic Leap got, but based on what I've seen it's been an excellent use of its investment capital. They've been experimenting with new technologies for years now and they finally have a development kit that speaks to the path they plan to follow in the future.

I also wouldn't trust Palmer Lucky to have anything like an objective opinion about it.

<comment><USER5> > They've been experimenting with new technologies for years now

True.

> and they finally have a development kit that speaks to the path they plan to > follow in the future.

...which is following the same path everyone else is, except further behind, because all those new technologies failed to work out?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I've been in AR for almost a decade now and I have always been in the "we really need Magic Leap to work" camp, as well as recognizing just how hard it really is to do AR right. I'm also not a VR fan, but appreciate how its moved the needle on these technologies broadly. That said, Palmer makes his best points with these quotes:

 _sucked all the air out of the room in the AR space...allowed them to monopolize funding in the AR investment community_

That is unquestionably what happened, as, if you talked with any major VC in the last 5 years they would admit that they were waiting on Magic Leap to make a move before they would really think about seriously funding anything else. So in that sense, it's been a constant frustration.

I'm still hopeful that Apple, Microsoft, FB or Google can make something compelling, and I think ML has been generally positively received - <USER2> it's always caveated as "these are the early days." Which is true, but the hype for ML has been unfortunate.

Again, consumer AR - especially HMD AR - is exceptionally hard to do right, so my hat is off to ML and the amazing people they have. However even Rony Abovitz (ML CEO) agrees that they were arrogant in their approach, and I think the end result is that it's hurt the AR industry in the larger sense.

</comment><comment><USER7> This blog is going right into my special bookmarks folder along with "Microsoft Surface is on Slippery Ground" by Tim Cook and "Ford? More like BORED!" by Elon Musk.

<comment><USER8> Links?

I can't find anything relevant by googling those titles myself.

<comment><USER9> I'm guessing that was sarcasm, meaning something along the lines of "would you believe an article about Microsoft by Apple's CEO?"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Been anticipating this teardown ever since this hackernews post [1] comparing the promises with the patents and nailing the prediction that ML1 would be yet-another LCOS headset.

Frankly I've been cheerleading their implosion ever since this farce of a TED talk [2] in 2012. An opportunity to present their technology and they jump around in monster costumes wasting everyone's time. Thwaxo's Strangely Demented Space Fudge ? This was months after securing half a billion in funding. Just left a really bad taste in my mouth.

[1] [https://hackernoon.com/what-is-magic-leap- really-642e1660fcc...](https://hackernoon.com/what-is-magic-leap- really-642e1660fcc4)

[2] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8J5BWL8oJY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8J5BWL8oJY)

</comment><comment><USER11> I was blown away by Magic Leap when I tried it a couple weeks ago. I have no affiliation with the company and was skeptical beforehand. Maybe there are other things that are better, but it was really, really cool. It felt like a new kind of thing entirely.

<comment><USER12> What specifically blew you way compared to other AR headsets like HoloLens for example?

<comment><USER11> That's the thing. I haven't tried the others (except Google Glass 4-5 years ago). They might be better.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Let's assume for the sake of a conversation that this article is right, and Magic Leap (ML) is lackluster. What is it exactly that makes VR tech so difficult, then? ML had all the money in the world, and still (presumably) couldn't hit the mark. What exactly is missing - is it the material sciences for eye-projection systems? Ability to downsize the graphics and processing tech into a small package?

What critical milestones are still missing that, when available, will allow truly immeresive VR? And anyone dare predict when they will be available?

<comment><USER7> So, AR is harder than VR because of things like surface detection and occlusion. That being said, the problems with closed-headset VR are twofold: the price and the arid software landscape.

A Vive Pro headset, the most advanced consumer-ready VR headset, costs $800, plus a few hundred $ more for each of the base stations and controllers. On top of that, you need a good PC to run any VR software. That's a lot of money to invest.

And if you do, you're met with a bunch of weird experiments, a few weird experiments with some polish, and a handful of games that offer a truly novel experience in VR.

But because the barrier to getting into VR is so high, it doesn't make financial sense for most companies to try to make software for the space. And because there are too few games, there isn't a good reason to buy a headset, so the whole ecosystem goes full ouroboros.

So, I guess the thing that is missing is the price falling low enough that the VR ecosystem can become self-sustaining. Good VR systems totally exist; they just cost $4000 and you can't do anything with them, lol.

<comment><USER9> +1 for using the phrase "goes full ouroboros"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Sadly Magic Leap I think had to ship something so they could start up a new hype cycle and get more funding.

Give it 3 months and they will be talking about how they didn't expect to sell many of this first product anyway and now they are working on the "future for sure this time"..

<comment><USER15> I'm surprised they shipped anything. The hype was at perpetual motion machine level.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Ever notice the similarity between Bitcoin and VR blogs and comments? Always, "it's early days," even after years of waiting for something useful.

</comment><comment><USER17> Well, if the technology isn't impressive at least they still have Neal Stephenson. He may be able to create experiences that no other VR platform offers.

[https://magic-leap.reality.news/news/magic-leaps-neal- stephe...](https://magic-leap.reality.news/news/magic-leaps-neal-stephenson- reveals-what-its-like-create-content-for-secretive-startup-0183486/)

<comment><USER18> FWIW Neal Stephenson also supported "Clang!" [0], a notorious early (2013) Kickstarter project (also dealing with "virtual in the real") that failed pretty miserably.

0: [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260688528/clang/descrip...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/260688528/clang/description)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Didn't VR have the same hype train surrounding it that led to Facebook dropping a cool billion on it to acquire Oculus? To date what do we really have to show in VR?

How is Oculus/Palmer any less guilty than Magic Leap? Give it 5 more years and I think we'll call both initiatives a failure when compared against their promises.

<comment><USER20> I don't think your assessment of the VR industry is particularly sharp.

<comment><USER21> Why is that? As an outsider it seems like it launched as a neat gadget, but lacked staying power due to sparse content and high cost to entry.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I got as far as "I want what is best for VR" because in my opinion is a load of crap coming from a sell-out.

</comment><comment><USER23> Does anyone know why he left Facebook?

<comment><USER24> He didn't leave. He was fired for unknown reasons.

But according to Zuck not due to "controversial political views" (Palmer is a passionate libertarian who supported Donald Trump, several Republican senators and the Republican party both in California and Washington.), but that's quite interesting because after word got out he supported Trump he was silently stripped of management responsibilities at Oculus ("In the wake of the revelation, Luckey's role at Facebook was quietly reduced." \-- [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/31/palmer- lu...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/31/palmer-luckey-trump- supporting-vr-pioneer-leaves-facebook) )

Also was a big disappointment for me personally, I got interested into Oculus due to his work and that of Carmack.</comment></comment>


Expo Template for ClojureScript and React Native - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/seantempesta/expo-cljs-template <comment><USER2> As someone who used re-natal previously I'm looking forward to trying this out!</comment>


Ask HN: Review my chatroom web app - <AUTHOR>

I'm look for feedback on my enhanced chatroom web app.
http://www.rapportapp.com
u = hacker p = news
Or create an account:
http://www.rapportapp.com/code/hackernews
Has anyone seen Durarara? Well, I'm trying to start a group using this web app I made. The idea is that it's private and invitation-only. I'm looking for tips on design, interface, functionality, and how/where to find more people to join.
Thanks in advance! <comment><USER2> Clickable: <http://www.rapportapp.com></comment>


Data munging with SQL and R (video) - <AUTHOR> http://www.vcasmo.com/video/drewconway/7210

<comment><USER2> This is a great introduction to R for people that already understand SQL well.</comment>


NanoTritium 20-Year Betavoltaic Battery - <AUTHOR> https://citylabs.net/products/ <comment><USER2> I'm not an electronics person, but as I understand it this amount of energy is typically harvestable from ambient rf in populated areas.

See the first few paragraphs of this paper for a bunch of references: [https://www.ntu.edu.sg/home/nprivault/papers/ambient_harvest...](https://www.ntu.edu.sg/home/nprivault/papers/ambient_harvesting.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER3> I think these are awesome ... I've got an application for a very low duty- cycle device (operates for seconds each hour) and, paired with a suitable capacitor (or super-capacitor), I can completely pot the entire system in epoxy, mount that in foam in a tennis ball and still have about a decade long service life!

EDIT: No, it's not a dog toy

<comment><USER4> If it's inside a tennis ball, it only stays not a dog toy as long as you keep it away from the dog.

<comment><USER5> And given my dog, it'd stay a dog toy for a very short half life after me got to it.

Nothing less than Kong toys in his world, everything else is a snack.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I just want a sealed, finned RTG I can drop in the deep end of my pool and forget about.

<comment><USER7> Doable with Americium. Start hoarding old fire detectors.

<comment><USER8> Those things are only around 30 nanowatts each.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BRW/images#/media/File%...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BRW/images#/media/File%3AAmericium-241.jpg)

[https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=5.4+MeV+*+33000%2Fs+in...](https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=5.4+MeV+*+33000%2Fs+in+nanowatts)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> What is the point of a 40-pin connector when the spec sheet only indicates that two of them are used (exactly as one would expect for a battery)?

<comment><USER10> Mounting? You solder all 40 pins to hold the device onto the board even if you only need 2 pins. Presumably the pins are repeated across all sides so you can pick any pin that makes routing more convenient.

<comment><USER9> That would make sense, but according to the spec sheets the pins are not repeated--only two of them are functional, the rest are dead.

<comment><USER10> Seems like an oversight that can be easily fixed.

<comment><USER11> Saves them money on packaging costs. Wire bonding isn't free.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is cool stuff but I'm not sure what application this is targeted at. Primary lithium cells have a 15 to 20 years operating life, and contrary to those batteries you can draw more power on demand when you need it and stay asleep at low current the rest of the time. Energy density seems higher but not that much.

<comment><USER2> 15 to 20 years operating life on a single charge? Or 15 to 20 years operating life if you recharge them occasionally?

<comment><USER13> "primary lithium cell" means a non-rechargeable lithium battery.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Lithium batteries already beat this on every metric and aren't exotic. [http://www.tadiranbat.com/long-life-xol.html](http://www.tadiranbat.com/long- life-xol.html)

<comment><USER15> I'm pretty sure Lithium batteries don't produce continuous power for 20 years...

<comment><USER16> Non rechargeable cells can have that lifetime.

<comment><USER17> I doubt at -40C to 80C.

<comment><USER16> Then you doubt for no reason these ones form Energizer are -40 to +60c..

[https://data.energizer.com/PDFs/lithiuml91l92_appman.pdf](https://data.energizer.com/PDFs/lithiuml91l92_appman.pdf)

And quick googling shows batteries with a wider positive range.

<comment><USER17> If you scroll through that PDF you'll notice the temperature capacity chart. At -40°C you're going to have to limit your power drain a lot to get rated capacity. At low temperature the chemical reactions get too slow to take advantage of the full capacity of the battery, that's simply a reality you can't get around.

A "betavoltaic" would deliver full rated capacity at any temperature, regardless of changes or duration.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Are these actually being sold now? I first saw these advertised by citylabs years ago with vague wording on availability and maybe-pricing in the $3k range.

<comment><USER19> My understanding is there have been betavoltaic cells for a long time, and with improvements in semiconductor manufacturing technology, they've been able to move towards less radioactive materials such as the tritium used by citylabs. These things exist, but of course, tritium is not cheap.

<comment><USER20> Strontium 90 seems like a good candidate. It and what it decomposes into are both pure beta emitters. Beryllium 10 also looks good, though very low power.

Someone recently used nickel 63 too.

<comment><USER19> > Someone recently used nickel 63 too.

Yeah the Russians, right? ([https://newatlas.com/nickel-nuclear-battery- design/54884](https://newatlas.com/nickel-nuclear-battery-design/54884))

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> If these are going on IoT/Sensor network devices, doesn't this add to the e-waste issue? A lot of these sensor devices are never recovered. Now we have radioactive e-waste.

<comment><USER22> It adds to the e-waste issue if the device is ground up or burnt.

Some, but not all, of the properties of tritium are somewhat friendly. The half-life is comparatively short at 12.5 years, so it isn't left for future generations. It is a beta-emitter, so shielding is straightforward. The daughter, helium-3, is quite benign. It can be readily encapsulated (see tritiated key fobs).

If it does get loose from encapsulation, it goes everywhere that hydrogen goes, which is largely everywhere. On the plus-side, gaseous tritium mixes and dilutes quickly in the atmosphere. The key is not to ingest concentrated quantities of it. The decay energy is very low, which makes assaying for tritium contamination quite challenging.

If you're looking for e-waste of radiological concern, americium smoke detectors might matter more. I'm not sure.

<comment><USER21> Maybe someone throws a handful of these into a grinder to harvest prescious metals or something. Grinder cracks the encapsulation of like 10-20 of these in sequence with an operator standing nearby. Now is it an issue?

<comment><USER23> Hydrogen diffuses very quickly. I would imagine no issue. There could be an issue if it were to burn, then the inhaled water could linger in your system for a while (although water is constantly excreted too). But then the dosage is so small, and it's alpha radiation (readily absorbed by nearby water molecules). Sure you would get a better estimate by running some calculations, but I suspect the dosage even of a handful of those totally inhaled as water vapor would be sub-background.

Compare it to mercury (which some years back was still in batteries), which evaporates easily when heated, stays in your body for very long times (and is cumulative), and has clear neurological impact.

I wouldn't worry about even a large number of those breaking.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> For context: 50 microwatts * 20 years = 9 watt-hours, comparable to an 18650 cell.

</comment><comment><USER25> So 1000 of these and I can power a 1W LED. But after 20 years it will only be 0.3W. This is comparable to RF power harvesting. What are the use cases for such minuscule amounts of power? Remote sensors?

<comment><USER26> Pacemakers and remote senors are some of the big ones I know of. Though I don't know if modern pacemakers use them still.

<comment><USER27> "In the past, small "plutonium cells" (very small 238Pu-powered RTGs) were used in implanted heart pacemakers to ensure a very long "battery life". As of 2004, about ninety were still in use. By the end of 2007, the number was reported to be down to just nine. The Mound Laboratory Cardiac Pacemaker program began on 1 June 1966, in conjunction with NUMEC. When it was recognized that the heat source would not remain intact during cremation, the program was cancelled in 1972 because there was no way to completely ensure that the units would not be cremated with their users' bodies."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> There are quite a few videos on youtube (nerdrage ? forgot) where people use light radioactive material to energize photovoltaic cells.

<comment><USER29> Poor man's RTG. Love it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> This seems infinitely more plausible that this, which was doing the rounds last week:

[https://ndb.technology/](https://ndb.technology/)

"Releasing 3600 _whole_ electrons! Or even 14400!!!"

(That's about a billionth of a 1 pico farad capacitor discharging. I suspect you need some reasonably exotic laboratory equipment to even detect 14400 electrons...)

<comment><USER31> God that website is terrible. It is so incredibly redundant about the value of infinite power, as if anyone would need an explanation as to why infinite energy would be useful, but gives so little detail or explanation about what the device actually is.

<comment><USER32> Absolutely screams investor scam to me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> What kind of battery/capacitor could you make with lithography/chip making techniques? Genuine question. I know there was an announcement about this recently. I know it would be far more expensive than the roll of tape that current lithium batteries use, but I have to imagine that Apple is working on this for the iPhone/etc

<comment><USER34> Is this the recent announcement you were thinking of? [https://xnrgi.com](https://xnrgi.com)

<comment><USER33> Maybe. I thought I saw something from IEEE; it may have been this company.

edit: Looks like yes: [https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-smarter-grid/the- return...](https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/the-smarter-grid/the-return-of- the-lithiummetal-battery)

edit again: also this from 2017 [https://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/design/how-to- build...](https://spectrum.ieee.org/semiconductors/design/how-to-build-a- safer-more-energydense-lithiumion-battery)

<comment><USER34> It's the only one I know of applying standard semiconductor wafer techniques.

If it works out, I think this one ([https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/environment/a-gl...](https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/environment/a-glass- battery-that-keeps-getting-better)) is a more promising battery technology in the long run due to lifespan. It appears to be far more preliminary at this point however.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Tritium's beta decay process emits electrons with 5.7 keV energy. I wonder why these devices output such low voltages as 2.4 V. A beta decay electron should be able to jump to a cathode at nearly -5700 volts.

<comment><USER36> Very likely they have some integrated voltage downstepping.

Doing 5.7kV circuits is not your typical power engineering 101

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> So who's gonna be the first to order, like, 400 of the 100 micro watt ones, to power a RaspberryPi web server for 30 years? (Which will, of course, have trashed it's flash memory by Xmas...)

<comment><USER37> if by 400 you mean 40000

<comment><USER30> Ahh yeah. _Almost_ within an order of magnitude... (Good enough for government work, right?)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I mean this question at face value because I don't want to be _that guy_ \-- what are the applications?

This seems like a very small amount of power with very specific and unusual benefits over other power sources.

<comment><USER39> One use is in military/aviation radios to keep encryption keys in sram. The power can be disconnected and the key wiped in the event of a crash or impending enemy capture. If the key was in flash it might be recovered.

<comment><USER36> How do you know that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Pricing?

</comment><comment><USER40> I keep hearing conflicting information on the legality of importing tritium into the US. Is it controlled? Is it legal to import?

<comment><USER41> I have tritium keychains from china. Probably not legal but aliexpress or wish. For the gun sights trijicon is the only game in town to get tritium installed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Cool, but if you use Carbon-14 you get more microwatts and thousands of years.

</comment><comment><USER43> So what are some actual uses for these at such low power?

<comment><USER44> Besides what's in the article, some Bluetooth low energy SoCs can operate on a power budget of less than 50 µA. Also keep in mind that with components like super capacitors, power can be "charged up" (very roughly like filling a large bucket with a small water hose so you can get one big toss of water) in order to get a larger pulse of power.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> ... medical implants...

Powered by radioactive battery?

<comment><USER46> Sure. Tritium releases very low energy beta particles; even a thin casing will render this safe.

<comment><USER47> I could swear that, as a kid near Chicago in the early 1980s, I had a tritium- backlit Timex or Casio digital watch.

That said, I can't find it online...and gave it away decades ago.

<comment><USER27> I could be wrong but tritium on watches usually wasn't typically used on the face itself, but in gas tubes or vials on the hands and hours markers. Ball, Marathon and Luminox are three popular watch brands that use them currently.

Evidently radium stopped being used for lume in 1970, and while tritium faces may have been a replacement around that time, tritium as used only has a lifespan between 12-24 years.

<comment><USER48> Tritium was commonly used in luminescent paint on mainstream watches (Rolex, Omega, et al) until the late 90's/early 2000's.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Coronavirus stats bot on Matrix, IRC, WhatsApp and Telegram - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/pwr22/covbot <comment><USER2> I get that this is a clever way to put data together and make it available to people easily over certain channels.

However, aside from being a learning experiment, I don't find something like this to be a good thing for people to implement because focusing on something like this is only going to cause mental fatigue and a decrease in overall mental health.

[https://time.com/5125894/is-reading-news-bad-for- you/](https://time.com/5125894/is-reading-news-bad-for-you/)

Just my humble opinion.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah this can certainly be the case for sure. I personally find the data useful and that's why I made it :).</comment></comment>


Kindle for Android Is Coming  - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/external/readwriteweb/2010/05/18/18readwriteweb-kindle-for-android-is-coming-24445.html

<comment><USER2> It is, in some ways, a small things, but I'm really looking forward to the integrated Kindle book store in the android app. As far as I understand, Apple wants a 30% cut of in-app purchases, which caused Amazon to not add an integrated book store in the iPhone Kindle app. I think little things like this can add up to a lot of convenience over time and over many apps.

<comment><USER3> Couldn't Amazon have built an integrated book store linked to the Amazon account, rather than to the iTunes account? Or is that kind of think also forbidden on iPhones? So basically all e-commerce apps would be out?

<comment><USER2> I'm not an expert on this, but I believe that Apple's App Store agreement mandates that in-app purchases go through Apple.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This has been pretty obviously coming for a while, since Amazon has been talking about their upcoming Android tablet and its Kindle support. Still, it's great to see that this is a) still coming and b) not going to be restricted arbitrarily to a single tablet.

This, combined with the Notion Ink Adam whatever tablet (due sometime this lifetime) will definitely push me to drop the "real" Kindle.

*Edit: I was thinking of the Dell Mini 5 (aka Streak) tablet with the Amazon partnership, actually. So not an official Amazon tablet, but effectively the same as far as content apps.

<comment><USER5> Are you saying Amazon has announced an Android-based tablet computer? That would be pretty huge and I've never heard about it. Got any links? I tried to Google it and got lots of android tablets for sale at Amazon, plus stories about the Kindle app on Android.

<comment><USER4> Ok, I had to look back and see if I could substantiate that claim. It's not quite like I remembered it - my apologies for being a bit misleading. Here's one link to details:

[http://androidandme.com/2010/03/phones/hands-on-as-new- dell-...](http://androidandme.com/2010/03/phones/hands-on-as-new-dell- mini-5-details-leak-amazon-deal-new-colors-new-name/)

So it's the Dell Mini 5, not Amazon's. But the content deal with Amazon is big news.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I wonder, does Kindle for non-Kindles also run Kindle apps? I just tried to search for Kindle Apps on Amazon, which was a bit difficult (as some books also have "games" in their title). It seems apps are just mingled with the books - maybe apps basically are books? So they should work?

</comment><comment><USER6> Finally!</comment>


HN: Feedback on my laptop recovery service - <AUTHOR> http://www.melezi.com/ Think "lojack for laptops." Sign up, download/install client, and if you mark it as stolen you can recover files, delete files, see the IP, take pics, etc. <comment><USER2> You have zero implementation details on the website, so based on this fact alone I am going to assume that client-side beacon is something simple, like a system service or daemon running under the OS control.

If that's true, then it is quite lame compared, for example, to <http://absolute.com/products-computrace-products.asp>. These guys went into a trouble of standardizing _boot-level_ beacons, entering partership agreements with HD manufacturers, etc. and that's why their beacons survive all but the low-level HD formatting.

That's pretty much what you have to do for the tracking service to have any value. If the beacon can be wiped out with a simple OS reinstall, your phone- home-after-the-incident rate is going to be close to zero.

In other words, there is very sophisticated and mature competition, and your service doesn't appear to live up to it at the moment. That's assuming I am right about the implementation approach.

</comment><comment><USER3> It looks good. I would charge for it though. It almost seems strange/shady if you don't charge for it, especially if the recovery data is hosted by you. I suggest not using what a lot of other companies use, which is charging per month. For some reason, I really hate that. Maybe per year, like $20. You should do some sleuthing, see what people might pay. (I understand if you're not charging because you want people to check it out).

Also, on the marketing side, I want to know more about how it works and what it does. Some people might not be as literate. I assume it doesn't "phone home" if the thief never turns it on or connects it to the internet, or immediately formats the drive. You should explain that somewhere. Also, what files can you retrieve and where? If the thief is using it at the time you're trying to retrieve files, does the thief have any indication something is happening? You don't need all this on the home page, but maybe under a "learn more" button.

Using the term beacon implies that you can tell your customer where their laptop is located (i.e. a physical address). Also, what help would you give to someone once they get the IP address. What do I do once I know the thief's IP address? Honestly, what would you do?

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks much for the input.

I was planning on charging like $15 a year or so to recoup server costs once I'm sure it works and such. If a free product doesn't work people get mad, but if a pay product has problems they get really mad and so does their credit card provider.

About the IP address, I would probably find out the ISP and then email the ISP. Realistically, I think that's the best you can do in many cases. The police have better things to do than track down the odd stolen laptop.

<comment><USER4> > About the IP address, I would probably find out the ISP and then email the > ISP. Realistically, I think that's the best you can do in many cases. The > police have better things to do than track down the odd stolen laptop.

You don't seem fairly motivated to recover the laptop (nor even have a real plan), that's not a good quality for such a service. There are plenty of other competitors in the space and they are very enthusiastic about working with the police. A few great success stories are priceless in marketing value.

In general, you should be very very specific about what your software does and what you'll be able to do in case of a reported stolen laptop. It's essentially spyware, so you need to be very up front.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Also have a look at Adeona (<http://adeona.cs.washington.edu/>)

Its a similar free product that goes to great lengths to anonymise the tracking data from the laptop and de-centralise the storage - mostly by leveraging OpenDHT (<http://www.opendht.org/>)

I also agree with the other commenters about people being wary of centralised control, and the security risks that a compromise of your server could potentially cause (downloading of arbitrary files on all your users laptops by an attacker!)

Your added value here is file recovery, which I haven't really seen done before - perhaps you could expand the Adeona concept with that - and while you're at it wrap Adeona with something more friendly to install and understand.

huhtenberg has a valid point with the beacon survival, but callings yours 'quite lame' was a bit harsh!

</comment><comment><USER6> A small design annoyance: the icons on the left are transparent GIF's, and they're resized in the browser using the image tags.

Resize the images themselves so that they are the same size as they appear on the page, this will get rid of the jaggedy non-anti-aliased resized look. Also, make them JPGs with the blue background color. If you absolutely must make them transparent GIFs, use Photoshop to set the matte background to the blue color so they don't have a white halo around them. This is a small thing, but it'll go a long way towards looking professional, I promise.</comment>


Ask HN: Are you with me? Leaving Facebook.  - <AUTHOR> I'll be deactivating my Facebook account (tainting what I need to) and removing as much information there as possible within the week.
I'm not a hardcore privacy advocate, but I joined Facebook with the understanding that some of what data placed there would stay private. That is what we agreed to.
Facebook has repeatedly violated that trust. <comment><USER2> Nope. I'm not.

Yes, privacy is important. However, the only information that I've ever put on Facebook is information that I'd want everyone else to know. That's why I have a Facebook; to give people who don't know me an idea of who I am and what I'm like, and get a little bit of personal branding out there. For instance, there's at least one little portion of my life that I don't want to be broadcast out to everyone, so it's conspicuously missing.

I don't feel that Facebook told anyone that their data would be private. Maybe I'm just naïve, or a little bit of an exhibitionist.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree with a lot of what you're saying, and I'll miss Facebook for the very reason you like it, too.

But I'm often more worried about what my _friends_ do that can effect the amount of information out there, about me. Facebook makes it easy to inadvertently share information about your friends. That, I don't like.

I'd love a replacement Facebook, one that is a little bit like Facebook used to be: relatively simple, unintrusive and benign. I want fine-grained control over what I can share, and not to have to worry about what will be given away. Or at least know upfront what will be. Opting IN to things is great.

Basically, Facebook has treated me (and those who feel similarly) like crap.

<comment><USER2> Even with the way Facebook used to be (I signed up in 2004), people could have still shared information about you. One wall post is all it takes.

For that matter, this could happen anywhere on the Internet. Someone could write a blog post about you, or tweet about you, or any number of ways to publish information about others. The web is increasingly becoming read/write, and Facebook privacy settings aren't going to change that.

<comment><USER3> Writing a wall post or tweet takes active action on behalf of the friend. Hmm, this is on Jarek's Facebook profile -- let's paste it somewhere where others can see it too.

With the recent app privacy changes, all they have to do is use an app. The programmer can take care of the rest. Different level altogether.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> No, I'm really happy with the service that they provide. If there's something that's actually private, I'm not going to be posting it on the Internet in the first place.

<comment><USER5> Hear hear to that! I'm always puzzled by all these privacy nuts that go on and on about privacy problems with social media sites like Facebook. If something is absolutely private and you do not want to share it outside of one or two people, DO NOT put it on a social media site! Period.

In fact, I would go as far as to say never put any critically sensitive information on the web.

<comment><USER6> well sometimes its your friends.. that will put pictures up of you without knowing, or will tag you in and can't remove it yourself

<comment><USER7> Not having a Facebook account will not prevent people from posting pictures of you on their own, and even including your name in the picture description (thereby "tagging" you in every way except the notification.)

<comment><USER8> Not having Facebook will not prevent people from posting pictures of you on the web. The horse is pretty far out of the barn on that one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I never went in - i still don't understand the point of FB or others of their ilk.

If i really want to keep in touch with far-flung family, friends - i pick up the phone or drop an email. If they are important to me i will make the effort. I also don't find the need to advertise on a daily/hourly basis what i am doing or tell people about the cool car/bike/tv/ipod etc. i bought. May be its just not for people like me.

<comment><USER10> Facebook is highly efficient for communicating with a large number of "fringe" acquaintances.

Things you suggest - picking up the phone, dropping an email - require 1-on-1 contact. I am limited in the amount of time I can devote to 1-on-1 contact.

But I can post on Facebook and people that know me but aren't necessarily people I want to devote a lot of 1-on-1 time to - more distant relatives, old friends, etc. - can see what I want to share. And I can skim my feed and see what they want to share.

The level of time and contact is proportional to the relationship. They're not my inner circle, they're outer circle. Facebook is the single best improvement to my "outer circle" relationships ever invented. For low effort, I get to have some contact instead of no contact.

For some people, Facebook is all about the time wasting activities, but that's not the core of the experience unless you make it so.

<comment><USER9> I can see your point but my take is - that's what New Year, Christmas, ${Special_Occasion} are for, keeping in touch with fringe acquaintances. Send an email on those days.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I left and advised everyone I know to do the same. Privacy was never an issue for me, but Facebook keeps changing the rules. I can't keep up.

<http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/facebook-timeline/> [http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/facebook-further- reduce...](http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/04/facebook-further-reduces- control-over-personal-information)

</comment><comment><USER12> I've stopped using mine, removed all apps, unfollowed (er, unliked?) all pages.

I'd guess the market is ripe for a fb-type site that, for lack of a better phrase, isn't evil. And doesn't have a horrible ux.

<comment><USER13> What features should it have? (Or not have?)

<comment><USER14> 1: I want ACLs meet Web. I want to publish personal stuff to close friends & family, professional stuff to colleagues, and random miscellany to the world, all via the same tool. I want to be able to customize the layout of my content depending on the audience.

2: I want this without my friends and family having to learn about OpenID or having to sign up for a new account somewhere. (I don't know how to do this, I am just saying what I want. Posterous got this part right.)

3: I want to know that the investment I'm making in generating content will last. This means I need to trust that the host of my content is not going to disappear, or get bought and change its behavior radically. Alternatively, it means that I am given the ability to migrate my content to a well-behaved, API-implementing host elsewhere (including, possibly, on my own server).

Nothing I know of addresses this set of wants elegantly. Maybe because monetizing the social graph requires as much transparency from the participants as possible, at least according to current thinking. But I feel that eventually, what 'sharing on the web' means will inevitably evolve to accommodate this set of wants.

If Facebook decided to be less evil they could do ACLs-meet-web pretty easily, since they already have such a huge installed user base. In fact, they may have already done this a long time ago for all I know; back when I canceled my account, they did not have this capability.

<comment><USER15> You are describing the Internet. Self-run web sites, blogs, and instant messaging systems:

1\. allow you to fine-tune who sees what, 2\. do not require extra accounts (save comment systems, etc.), 3\. are not tied to any one provider or company and thus will last for a long time.

<comment><USER14> How do you see the internet providing built-in ACLs? <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access_control_list>

Even if it did, your assertion is like equating assembly to a high level language. Just because you theoretically can do anything in assembly that you can in a high level language doesn't mean you would _want_ to. I am trying to specify a set of attributes for a non-existent tool that would let me more fluidly publish what I write and create.

\----

edit: if anybody reading this would care to explain why I am getting downvoted & the parent is getting upvoted so much, I would appreciate it.

<comment><USER16> The internet provides something like ACLs using something similar to a password capability model: I post stuff as "tbrownaw" or "Timothy Brownawell" and anyone can know it's me, but I also have logins to various message boards under pseudonyms, which you can only tie back to me if I tell you.

<comment><USER14> Thanks. That is indeed an inverted form of what I was wishing for, and I didn't get the idea from the initial response to my post.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> If you share something with your 300+ friends on Facebook, I think it's obvious it's no longer private. I have always considered Facebook a tool for _finding_ interesting stuff intead of _hiding_ it.

A more open, non-evil alternative would be cool, of course. But good luck rebuilding the whole social graph there. Almost anybody who has tried that has failed.

(I view this as somebody who follows the Facebook News Feed all the time, posts several times a day, and often participates in long discussion threads about news, politics etc. with my friends.)

</comment><comment><USER18> We need a decentralized social graph. I should host and own my data not facebook or any other organization. Maybe browsers should innovate and solve this problem.

<comment><USER2> You'd probably like OpenLike: <http://openlike.org/>

or OpenSocial: <http://www.opensocial.org/>

Not that OpenSocial took off or anything. And I'm not that confident in OpenLike, either.

<comment><USER19> opensocial isn't doing too bad. It is supported by Yahoo, Google, MySpace, LinkedIn, and many more networks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I honestly don't care. People shouldn't have private conversations or implicating pictures on Facebook, period.

If you don't do either of those two things, you'll be fine. No need to dramatically or publicly terminate your account.

<comment><USER21> Devil's advocate: If you have a facebook account you really can't stop people from tagging you in "implicating pictures" and the like. You can un-tag yourself after the face or delete things on your wall but there's no guarantee you'll get to that before someone else sees it.

<comment><USER22> I thought it was possible to not allow tagging to your Wall in Settings?

<comment><USER23> It is. If you set the 'photos and videos of you' privacy option to just yourself, when you're tagged in a photo it appears on your Wall but only for you. Your friends looking at your wall don't see it. That said, I don't think you can block the actual tagging, which is a shame, although you can manually untag yourself, and once untagged you can't be re-tagged.

Incidentally, you can stop your friends posting to your wall, or commenting on any of your items, or even just block specific friends from commenting or posting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I don't know why I would. I decided early on that I wouldn't use any of their apps, play any of their games, and actually introduce disinformation into the medium from time to time. (I went to the "Barnum and Bailey Clown College", "The School of Hard Knocks" and "How High". No really! I did!)

I view FaceBook as being purely frivolous, for casual interaction w friends & acquaintances, and treat it thus. There are other "social networking" sites (for instance, LinkedIn) for other types of (real/purposeful) networking.

</comment><comment><USER25> I recently deleted mine.

I had it for a long time, and I just felt like it was keeping the most brain dead relationships barely alive. I was constantly seeing people in real life and saying, "oh yeah, I read that on facebook." I didn't like that, and the privacy concerns were just the last straw.

So yeah, I'm with you.

<comment><USER26> I'm graduating from university next week at a school with twelve thousand kids and this happens all the time to everyone I know. It's so mundane to learn some new social goings-on around campus that it's cliche to mention you found out on the site. I hate it for the same reason. On graduation day, leaving facebook will signify a new phase of life.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> One thing to keep in mind: there are no signs I know of yet that the 'unwashed masses' are going to quit using Facebook: they love it and don't seem to care about the privacy thing overall. So by leaving, you're missing out on a significant perspective of what users (read: customers) experience everyday. It's like refusing to use Windows during the 90s. Not saying you shouldn't, but just that it's a cost to keep in mind.

Also: how confident are you that Facebook won't still be HUGE 10 years from now? Many smart people think FB will only expand in its importance on the web. Again, not saying it will be or that people shouldn't quit if it offends their sense of propriety, but I'd hate to reopen my account 5 years from now after publicly committing a principled FB suicide.

</comment><comment><USER28> I am torn when it comes to this. In principal I want to. But my friends and family are spread around the world and in many cases FB is the only way I have of keeping in touch with them. My privacy settings are already as high as I can make them but I can't readily leave the silo.

</comment><comment><USER29> Reminds me of this: [http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly- mention...](http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mentioning- he-doesnt-own-a-tel,429/)

If you want to give up Facebook, just fucking do it... but realize that nobody else cares.

(For the record, I haven't updated facebook in about 5 years, because it bores me. But I don't go on and on about it...)

</comment><comment><USER30> I did that, except I deleted, not deactivated. I'm not a hardcore privacy guy either, but they got to be a little too much after f8

</comment><comment><USER31> I think the 'don't put anything you want kept private on the internet' is, generally, a good argument. I will say though, that I do think Facebook encouraged a reasonable expectation that certain data would be 'private,' and that's since changed.

<comment><USER32> I honestly hate I can be tagged in photographs and cannot turn this off.

<comment><USER31> Yeah. The same is true of certain actions like '[name] commented on [otherName]'s photo' - you used to be able to control those kinds of feed stories but no longer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Facebook made the decision for me yesterday. I declined to link all my profile data to business Pages, so everything I'd bothered to maintain was wiped out. It was clear I'm no longer part of their intended user base.

It's fine. I have no interest in participating in an ad network, so I wiped out the rest (friends, photos, etc) and publicized alternate contact info. Gotta keep the account for some of my clients' Pages.

Facebook was great for me ca. 2004-5. Now its goals and policies are very different. Maybe more people will get shocked away when tagging + image recognition start imposing on their family photos.

</comment><comment><USER34> Nope, like many others here, I use Facebook as a public communication medium, which means I don't post private things there. It is not a tool for intimacy; it's a resume that I am handing out to perfect strangers.

Perhaps, over time, had they not compromised their privacy standings, I would have treated it more as a tool for intimate conversations with friends and family. I certainly will not do so now, or ever again. I will treat them forever like a public billboard.

</comment><comment><USER35> I deleted my FaceBook account yesterday. For me, their absurd privacy policies are unethical, but the real reason is, I find it a complete waste of my good time.

</comment><comment><USER36> I'm with you. Although my personal problem wasn't with how they managed privacy but with how they used social links between friends and exploited it for marketing purposes. Plus, on facebook everyone is a fan of something and that's all they are and the people that claim their facebook page gives others a sense of what they are like in real life are delusional.

</comment><comment><USER37> Facebook has certainly gone from being pretty straightforward about privacy to deceptive about it, but the real people who need to worry aren't tech savvy HN denizens, but parents of those types and kids who don't have the first clue or don't know what to check, etc. That said, there are some fairly easy ways to ensure that you're not "exploited" digitally using Facebook. You can't scrub it entirely of your presence, but you can at least ensure that people can't access anything about you publicly without being a friend of yours.

That's fairly reasonable. Now the stuff like making wall posts show up on news feeds and such are somewhere between annoying and intrusive, but that's where we can just choose to ignore it, pair down the number of friends we maintain or other tactics.

For better or worse, the site works.

</comment><comment><USER38> This is about as interesting as the old "Microsoft sucks" circle jerks that would occur on Slashdot. I deleted my FB account six months ago and it wasn't a big deal. There are plenty of people who will continue to use FB and not care about most of these implications.

</comment><comment><USER39> I am not only with you, I am ahead of you. I deleted my account(with some effort and patience)when I read that Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, had declared that"Privacy is Dead". Well he may think so but a of lot of people, including myself think otherwise.

</comment><comment><USER40> I've never been under any illusions about Facebook's business model or intent, but the expansion of their boundaries and Zuckerberg's stance on privacy mean I feel I have to take an ideological stand. Professionally, I argue for strong access controls, user control over data and the ethics of privacy in web applications, and that's incompatible with my continued presence on Facebook.

It's not just hackers and Internet professionals who are worried by this. So I reckon it's up to all of us to create an easy-to-use, secure, friendly web- based framework for us to share and collaborate with our friends.

</comment><comment><USER41> I'm a pretty big advocate of privacy, but in order to protect mine, I take certain steps in order to avoid letting people use any of my personal information.

For starters, any social media I use, I use one of my many nicknames. I never use my real name, birthdate, and none of the information I use in any of these sites is accurate. My address, my age, my DOB - NOTHING is real in my profile. Even the picture I use isn't me.

This way, I control who gets my information and what they use it for. If Facebook is using my information, it certainly doesn't represent me in anyway.

If you really want to control the information, you can.

</comment><comment><USER42> Stop placing your trust in other people.

I considered committing Facebook suicide but decided against it for the primary reason that many casual friends I'm able to keep in touch with/share media with that would normally be quite difficult.

I have my privacy settings locked down, all 3rd party apps removed, and I _never...ever_ say anything on Facebook that I would encrypt/sign in email.

I'm sure people had a similar upset over the postal service when it was first suggested! It has more to do with being _mindful_ of your mouth and being aware of the options you have as an _individual_ for privacy (GnuPG).

</comment><comment><USER43> 97 comments from 8 days ago:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1289997>

Ask HN: Anybody else quitting Facebook over privacy concerns?

<comment><USER44> I'm not quitting, I've just pared my data and I don't use it much, it's boring. To me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Sort of, never joined so I guess I'm effectively joining you.

</comment><comment><USER46> Already done that, but for an entirely different reason. I realized that most "social media" websites are meticulously designed to get people hooked. The "Like" button, for instance, was not added to FB on a whim. It makes sure people keep posting new status messages and keep logging in every day (or _shudder_ every few minutes) to see if someone liked them.

My hosts file currently blocks Facebook, Twitter and Reddit, among other websites.

</comment><comment><USER47> How about changing your name and birthday a bit

Winston Jonathan Smith -> W.J. Smith

01/03/1980 -> 01/01/1950 (this doesn't even have to be visible)

and not posting any sensitive information on there?

</comment><comment><USER48> Nope, I'm not leaving.

But what I have done is sanitize my profile info and remove all of my 'likes'. I joined FB to communicate with friends, not to be a cog in another marketing machine. I'll still use it to keep up with friends and share pics, but that's the limit of it.

Their recent announcement that they are going to be sharing their databases with 3rd parties is what pushed me to take these steps.

</comment><comment><USER49> As soon as tell me how to delete my data for real. Maybe they will let us into the datacenter to help them do it.

</comment><comment><USER50> I'm already gone. They annoyed me after forcing me to link to pages in my profile.

</comment><comment><USER51> No. YOU ARE with me. I deleted my FB sometimes back and lived happily ever after.

</comment><comment><USER52> I've never really used it for much, so I don't see much gain in deleting it.

</comment><comment><USER53> Relax. Just grow some crops on Farmville and don't worry so much.

</comment><comment><USER54> I like Facebook, I also like the new features they are adding. I never posted anything under the assumption that the world couldn't see it. So no, I won't be joining you.

</comment><comment><USER55> I just deleted my 0 karma Plurk account a month ago. I deleted my Friendster account (I'm from the Philippines) last week. I "MIGHT" delete Facebook next.

</comment><comment><USER56> I will if there is a better place to go. Or even a place that isn't better yet but could be made better by the early adopters.

</comment><comment><USER57> I haven't had a Facebook account for years. My leaving had nothing to do with privacy.

</comment><comment><USER58> I've been purging my data every week for 2 years on facebook. It keeps things fresh.

</comment><comment><USER59> Left it a year ago, but more because it was a time-waster than over privacy.

</comment><comment><USER60> Isn't it easy just to change your name.

</comment><comment> brown9-2 How exactly did they violate it?

</comment><comment><USER61> I really disapprove of what Facebook has done in the past year or two with privacy. It's disgusting.

However, I don't really "use" Facebook. I have an account but I rarely post anything on it, and I don't use any of the apps. I just use it to see what my real life friends are up to, including many that I don't actually see anymore because they have moved away.

So, their new privacy stuff doesn't really affect me, since I really only use Facebook on a passive level. So I am not deleting my account. But I still strongly disapprove of what they are doing.

</comment><comment><USER43> I've got two words concerning Facebook (and feel free to downvote):

Fuck Facebook

and for the more adventurous:

Fuck Apple</comment>


Are you driven by making your investors rich? - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2013/08/05/are-you-driven-by-making-your-investors-rich/

<comment><USER2> Another way to look at the bootstrapping vs fundraising model. A bit light on content and opinion. I prefer this article by Laura Roeder better.

[http://pandodaily.com/2013/05/30/the-amount-of-money-a- start...](http://pandodaily.com/2013/05/30/the-amount-of-money-a-startup- raises-shouldnt-be-the-metric-of-respect/)

</comment><comment><USER3> References this past HN post:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6108092](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6108092)</comment>


Teens in Tech: They're Here, They're Young, Get Used To It - <AUTHOR> http://www.pehub.com/63410/teens-in-tech-they're-here-they're-young-get-used-to-it/

<comment><USER2> When I was a teen I absolutely hated "teen-oriented" events, politicians who talked about involving the "youth", and so on.

Anyone else feel the same way?

<comment><USER3> Agreed, teen-orientated generally meant teen-avoided to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Teens have been in tech for a long time. I'd bet a lot of us here were techy teens half a lifetime ago. Or less. Or maybe some of us still are.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm used to teens in tech, but not used to teens who take Macbook Air payments in exchange for Tech Crunch articles. _cough_ _cough_ , Daniel Brusilovsky.

<comment><USER6> The demand for bribes is one thing... I can get over that. But a teen already using passive-voice apologies, ala "a line was crossed," now that I can't abide!</comment></comment>


World's First Village of Affordable 3D-Printed Homes in Mexico - <AUTHOR> https://www.dwell.com/article/3d-printed-village-icon-new-story-tabasco-mexico-b76d0150 <comment><USER2> I'd like to know how much it would cost to build such homes _at scale._ They didn't reveal how much it cost, which means it's probably too much at small quantities so far.

</comment><comment><USER3> > The first two 3D-printed homes in Tabasco sit side by side on Lavacrete, a > proprietary material developed by ICON.

vendor lock-in spreads to home construction

</comment><comment><USER2> [https://beta.trimread.com/articles/715](https://beta.trimread.com/articles/715)

</comment><comment><USER4> >Innovations in building technology rarely appear in developing countries first.

Maybe there is a reason for that.</comment>


Ask HN: How to learn Design? - <AUTHOR>

Hi, I'm engineer by education but I'm very much passionate about design. By design, I mean visual design. How do I get started? <comment><USER2> Start with "The Non-Designer's Design Book" by Robin Williams <http://amzn.com/0321534042>

You can devour that book in an afternoon.

And since Typography is such an important part of design. You should read this blog post here: [http://www.informationarchitects.jp/en/the-web-is-all- about-...](http://www.informationarchitects.jp/en/the-web-is-all-about- typography-period/)

and:

The Elements of Typographic Style Applied to the Web <http://webtypography.net/>

</comment><comment><USER3> Lesson 1:

Get a big stack of paper, pencils, pens, tracing paper, markers, erasers. Start drawing. Print out stuff you like. Put tracing paper on top and redraw it. Draw every day.

</comment><comment><USER4> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1768358>

</comment><comment><USER5> Forget books, forget tutorials forget everything.

Take a problem in mind. A sheet and pencil. Now solve it there.

Problem can be categorizing different things, making something easier to do. Building something remarkable.

Design is not how it looks, it is how it works with everything.

Rest will come later.

</comment><comment><USER6> Check out searchyc.com

This is a commonly asked question.

<comment><USER7> I was searching yesterday, the results only really offered good stuff for typography learning (which I'm working on now), but overall graphic / web design are left out a bit.

Here are the resources I drilled out of the threads I came across:

Type: [http://www.amazon.com/Logo-Lettering-Bible-Leslie- Cabarga/dp...](http://www.amazon.com/Logo-Lettering-Bible-Leslie- Cabarga/dp/1581804369) [http://www.amazon.com/Graphic-Design-Manual- Principles-Pract...](http://www.amazon.com/Graphic-Design-Manual-Principles- Practice/dp/0442234694) [http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style- Robert-Brin...](http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Typographic-Style-Robert- Bringhurst/dp/0881791326) [http://www.amazon.com/Non-Designers-Design-Book- Typographic-...](http://www.amazon.com/Non-Designers-Design-Book-Typographic- Principles/dp/1566091594)

Usability: [http://www.amazon.com/Think-Common-Sense-Approach- Usability/...](http://www.amazon.com/Think-Common-Sense-Approach- Usability/dp/0789723107)

Design: [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592532616?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592532616?ie=UTF8&tag=blogdesigblog-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1592532616) [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592533485?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592533485?ie=UTF8&tag=blogdesigblog-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1592533485) [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/159253192X?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/159253192X?ie=UTF8&tag=blogdesigblog-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=159253192X) [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592532349?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592532349?ie=UTF8&tag=blogdesigblog-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1592532349)

Web Design: [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0975841963?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0975841963?ie=UTF8&tag=blogdesigblog-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0975841963) [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/032145345X?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/032145345X?ie=UTF8&tag=blogdesigblog-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=032145345X) [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1847192505?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1847192505?ie=UTF8&tag=blogdesigblog-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=1847192505) [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0735712069?ie=UTF8&tag=...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0735712069?ie=UTF8&tag=blogdesigblog-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0735712069)

Sites: <http://dribbble.com/> <http://www.deviantart.com> <http://forrst.com/> <http://lookslikegooddesign.com/> <http://webtypography.net/toc/> <http://ui- patterns.com/></comment></comment>


Show HN: stk8.co, a multiple URL/Text shortener. - <AUTHOR>

I am sorry to submit this again, but I feel it didn't get its share yesterday on HN. So I am giving it one last try.
stk8.co allows you to stack several Links or Text and share them under one shortened url. It embeds a preview of the link for common services like youtube, vimeo, amazon, cnn, scribd, etc... It also has a bookmarklet to easily stack links.
Feedback is appreciated.
Thanks! <comment><AUTHOR> Sample stacks:

<http://stk8.co/sample>

<http://stk8.co/gkbbbc>

</comment><comment><USER2> really like it, looks simple to use and a nice clean design. not too sure on the url if I was going to be picky, ' stackate ' doesn't roll off the tongue (yet) but sure could get used to it! good luck hope people use it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your feedback!

That's the closest we found to stack-it. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Brilliant, simple idea. Great work!</comment>


The Culture War Comes to Linux – Motherboard - <AUTHOR> https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/yw43kj/what-happens-if-linux-developers-remove-their-code <comment><USER2> I thought that this sounded familiar and then I saw it was from Sep 2018 and the confusion abated.

Can we get an update to the title please? :)</comment>


Show HN: Find numbers that should be extracted as constants in your JS - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/pgilad/check-constants

<comment><USER2> Looks useful. Is this better implemented as an option of a linter?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not aware of any linters applying this sort of logic in suggesting to extract numbers to their own declarations. One could also go as far as declaring strings and whatnot...</comment></comment>


The making of Medium - <AUTHOR> http://www.teehanlax.com/story/medium/

<comment><USER2> Love those guys. As a junior designer, their work are very inspiring. I also love medium. I've found great deal of content on startups and building stuff. Didn't know they worked together on Medium. Great find.</comment>


Ask HN: From desktop to webapp - where to begin?  - <AUTHOR>

I've been coding desktop client/server apps for a few years (telnet as the protocol). I've built basic websites in the past. Now I'm in an environment where I work exclusively with rich web applications.
What's my best bet for getting up to speed? Should I learn about web servers and HTTP in depth, focus mainly on the platform I'm using (asp.net/iis), or some other approach?
Thanks! <comment><USER2> JavaScript, CSS, HTML and REST is what you should learn everything else is transferable to any back end language and servers you choose.

Once you start building applications in this manner you can write you REST services in the language of the day and implement it on the server of the day.</comment>


Web Designs from DeviantArt - <AUTHOR> http://spyrestudios.com/25-fun-creative-web-designs-from-deviantart/ How many web designers can say that there are too many places to draw inspiration from? Exactly. None. Inspiration is welcomed from high and low, far and wide. Sure, there are css galleries you can check out, or even other designers portfolios you may be friends with on twitter or other social media websites, but what about Deviant Art? <comment><USER2> These designs all have one thing in common: they look amazingly beautiful at first glance, and if you had to use them every day, they would drive you absolutely crazy.

The difference is between something designed to impress (like, say, a ceremonial sword) and something that actually does its job efficiently, every day (like a kitchen knife). The biggest, most popular, most _used_ sites in the world all have really simple, get-out-of-the-way designs: Google's UI is almost not there, Facebook's gets simpler with every redesign, Flickr's tries hard to disappear completely.

Now, there are some objects, very rare, that are both beautiful and used every day -- the kitchen knife that's also pretty. I'd put Flickr's UI in this category. But the majority of heavy-traffic designs are ugly but functional: think Craigslist, Amazon, and our own Hacker News.

So no disrespect to these designs: they're amazing. But sheer visual impact is not the only metric for judging web design.

<comment><USER3> "These designs all have one thing in common: "

They look like print magazine spreads.

Which goes hand-in-hand with your observations on their bright-but-short impact.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Startup idea: Get those DeviantArt hippies under one freelancing roof so people can hire them.

On more than one occasion, I found something I liked there and I had a paying client who wanted "something like it"; either the artists weren't answering emails, or they were busy doing term papers, or they just sent me nice step by step instructions on how to do the same in photoshop along with the plugins they used, yet some "added" me as a friend and forgot to reply.

<comment><USER5> DeviantArt is meant to be a social network for artists. The people there aren't posting work looking to be hired. There are other more appropriate websites for that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I absolutely love those designs! But let me ask an honest question. Look at the top sites on the internet, per traffic and revenue. Most(but not all) have nice designs but are visually simpler. Most of the time, if I see a super awesome design its immediately:

A) An edge site(being personal, small community, niche audience)

B) A commercial site trying to get the "hip young crowd".

One of my top concerns when developing sites is the size of graphics. The bigger concern is the size and complication of javascript. Implementing sites like these would be fun, but what kind of overall download are we looking at for our users? How much does this affect our sales or ad click-thrus for our audience?</comment>


Conway's Game of Life in 140 bytes Ruby - <AUTHOR> https://gist.github.com/1761463

<comment><USER2> Off the top of my head, some simple ways to make this shorter:

      * Use 0...s*s instead of 0..s*s-1
      * Use 0..s*s instead of 0...s*s (overrunning g doesn't matter much)
      * Use count{|x|x} instead of compact.count
      * Get rid of ||nil (because count{|x|x} ignores all falsy values)
      * Get rid of the brackets around g[i]&&n==2
      * Use [g[i-s-1,3],g[i-1],g[i+1],g[i+s-1,3]].flatten instead of [[g[i-s-1],g[i-s],g[i-s+1],g[i-1],g[i+1],g[i+s-1],g[i+s],g[i+s+1]]
      * Use -1..s*s instead of 0..s*s and substitute i+1 for i (i.e. g[i+1] instead of g[i], but [g[i-s,3],g[i],g[i+2],g[i+s,3]] instead of [g[i-s-1,3],g[i-1],g[i+1],g[i+s-1,3]])

<comment><USER3> I really should have refreshed the comments page before shortening... seems like we think similarly: <https://gist.github.com/1803557>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> And in APL:

life←{ ↑1 ⍵∨.^3 4=+/,¯1 0 1∘.⊖¯1 0 1∘.⌽⊂⍵ }

</comment><comment><USER5> And in 131 characters of Perl: <https://gist.github.com/1803656>

What do I win?

<comment><USER5> Actually, what I /really/ won was the happy feeling I got from abusing $a and $b even though it runs under strict.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's all ASCII... If you're using octets for each character, you can definitely still squeeze a few bytes out of that.

</comment><comment><USER7> Those interested in this post may like the examples on this page: [http://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/3434/shortest- ga...](http://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/3434/shortest-game-of-life)

</comment><comment><USER8> See also: <http://willbailey.name/conway/docs/conway.html>

</comment><comment><USER9> None of these examples ran with 1.9.3 :\

<comment><AUTHOR> OP here. I'm pretty sure they run in 1.9.3 because I wrote them in it.</comment></comment>


Nazis, the Internet, Policing Content and Free Speech - <AUTHOR> https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170825/01300738081/nazis-internet-policing-content-free-speech.shtml <comment><USER2> We could use an AI model spitting out various assemblages of this general explanation.

I am just flabergasted at how few American adults seem to have thought about this fundamental grade-school level material until 2017; even Google. What gives?</comment>


Pizza Start-Up Created Cryptocurrency That Pays Workers for Company's Success - <AUTHOR> http://www.grubstreet.com/2017/09/pythagoras-pizza-creates-cryptocurrency-that-gives-workers-free-money.html <comment><USER2> The token economy is growing!</comment>


Americans Rank Last in Problem-Solving with Technology - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/articles/americans-rank-last-in-problem-solving-with-technology-1457586060 <comment><USER2> Later, this article makes connection of this decline and presidential politics.</comment>


Hatch, a combination of Tinder/OkCupid and Linkedin - <AUTHOR> http://www.letshat.ch/ <comment><USER2> No more A-holes? Kind of a big claim to make. Combined with the "tell us who you are" line, I'd think there is some degree of manual match-making. Are candidates or companies being screened or vetted in any way? There could be a boatload of students/ amateurs masquerading as experienced professionals, and this could end up hurting the first users looking for help. (Assuming this is part of why dribbble requires invites.)

The difference between Tinder and LinkedInTinder is that Tinder is a very superficial app, and somewhat needs to be. Person A thinks Person B looks good, person B reciprocates, and they meet up for a fling. I'm not so sure that the same can work for jobs as there are a lot more variables - talent, experience, availability, personality, payment terms, etc.

I really like the idea, but I'm not sure about how it will work out. It could be an interesting tool for freelancers and businesses/people to connect, if there are a couple of the right filters (remote vs local, designers vs photographers vs illustrators vs...)

</comment><comment><USER3> "Hatch can match you to local talents who are great to work with - based on your personality (no more A-holes)."

What if my personality matches well with A-holes?

<comment><USER4> You should work on the Linux kernel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The "Powered by QuickMVP" logo in the lower right quickly killed my interest.

<comment><USER6> can you elaborate a little bit for me? why the distaste for QuickMVP?

<comment><USER7> Going on the Quick MVP website you can read: "QuickMVP is the easiest way to test your ideas, without wasting time or money."

Just like SuperKlaus said on the thread: "So if they get enough positive feedback / sign-up they'll build it?".

That killed it for me too. I have nothing against QuickMVP. I just don't want to signup for a product that doesn't exists (also, it so happen that Hatch doesn't interest me, but that's not the point). However, had they (Hatch) been a bit more "honest" and said "We're gathering email to see if there's interest in us building this app" instead of "Request an invite", I'd bet people would be more inclined to sign-up.

<comment> lets-hatch Hi gouggoug, actually we're working on Hatch. We just don't want to launch to crickets. We also want to get beta users and iterate the app from their feedback. I just added some screens on [http://www.letshat.ch](http://www.letshat.ch) so feel free to check it out and let me know what you think :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "Powered by QuickMVP"

So if they get enough positive feedback / sign-up they'll build it?

<comment> lets-hatch Actually we're working on Hatch. We just don't want to launch to crickets. We also want to get beta users and iterate the app from their feedback. I just added some screens on [http://www.letshat.ch](http://www.letshat.ch) so feel free to check it out :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I would simplify your hollywood pitch to "Tinder + Linkedin". Or "Tinder for finding business partners". I found the current one confusing. I thought it was a new dating site inspired by Linkedin. Most people dislike linkedin and mostly see it as a necessary evil.

Without being able to try the product, this is all the feedback I can offer. Having tried other founder matching tools, as a developer, I found it was 95% MBAs/non-technical people and almost no technical ones. Which is what most people are looking for.

<comment><USER10> When I see "Tinder + LinkedIn" I think of a version of tinder that relentlessly spams users, and practically only possible to block with a filter. "Tinder for finding business partners" however sounds great

<comment><USER11> When I see "Tinder + LinkedIn" I think of a tool for having no-strings- attached sex with former colleagues.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Let shat.

<comment><USER13> That's what I saw in the URL also. Might be worth getting a more "traditional" URL, or something that doesn't have "shat" on an obvious break in the URL.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Will it have all the cool questions that OKC has? Will it match us with %? Will it be recommendation driven like LinkedIn? Will I be able to swipe left or right to collab or not?

Lots of wild possibilities - depending on the functionality that you decide.

<comment> lets-hatch Thanks for the feedback. I can tell you for now the app will have some of those features :)

What do you think about the questions on OKC? Would you take time to answer fun personality questions to find collaborators?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Haha. Almost seriously, can I get a service to pay these guys to send me a notification if a person I am interested in joins their service. That way, I can avoid them for being foolish enough to trust not just one, but all of these clouds services at the same time.

Could there be a market for that? I am married but there are few services, that given a potential partner subscribed to, I would want to avoid. Anti- dating services to the rescue!

</comment><comment><USER16> Looking at the title description I was actually thinking about some really weird dating site where you have to dress professionally and... I dunno, maybe post your resume profiles to others?

I think their landing page makes more sense.

</comment><comment><USER17> I like the idea. But I don't think my creative collaborators necessarily need to be geographically close to me.

<comment> lets-hatch That's a good suggestion. Have you had any virtual collaborators that you met and worked with online?

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Amusing name, given that Tinder came out of Hatch Labs, an incubator that IAC owns. IAC also owns OkCupid.

<comment> lets-hatch I learned about Hatch Labs a few hours after coming up with the name Hatch. It's a very cool word after all.

Who knows, we may change the name later :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Sounds very similar to [http://meeet.co/](http://meeet.co/)

<comment> lets-hatch Not quite. There are some major differences: we go mobile-first and the idea is to match collaborators, not projects.

Have you tried meeet.co?

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Quick typo: In the image, the girl is saying 'I'm open to new idea'

cool idea.

</comment><comment><USER21> >Tinder/OkCupid + Linkedin

Wait, so I meet people in suits, and then fuck them?

<comment><USER22> I'm looking for something more along the lines of Grindr/Chatroulette + elance.com. Surely someone can help me out here.</comment></comment>


Brainfuck Optimization Strategies - <AUTHOR> http://calmerthanyouare.org/2015/01/07/optimizing-brainfuck.html <comment><USER2> There's of course also a optimized brainfuck compiler written in sed: [https://github.com/stedolan/bf.sed](https://github.com/stedolan/bf.sed)

<comment><USER3> Ugh

<comment><USER4> Is that the sound of your chin hitting the floor or air escaping as you tense up, trying to decipher the code? :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I while ago I wrote a simple Brainfuck interpreter, JIT and compiler ([https://github.com/brianquinlan/brainfuck- jit](https://github.com/brianquinlan/brainfuck-jit)).

The compiler implements the "Operation offsets" optimization as described in the article. It is actually pretty straightforward. This function converts a map of offset => delta to x86-64 instructions: [https://github.com/brianquinlan/brainfuck- jit/blob/master/bf...](https://github.com/brianquinlan/brainfuck- jit/blob/master/bf_compile_and_go.cpp#L175)

and the function following it generates that table.

<comment><USER6> A silly Brainfuck interpreter I wrote one evening converts BF to JavaScript and runs eval() on it. The result was that I got for free all of the compiler optimizations and JIT capabilities in the Javascript engines for a trivial amount of effort. I found the resulting execution faster than the various hand rolled C interpreters I found online. The best part was that I spent probably less than an hour implementing and testing my "interpreter".

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have a (at the initial release, and possibly still) "state-of-the-art" Brainfuck compiler to C [1], which can compile a "Hello, world" program into a single `puts` call.

Some ProTip(tm): JITing Brainfuck doesn't fare a lot; for example, resetting the cell is an O(n) operation in BF, so JIT alone doesn't reduce this into O(1). Some kind of scalar evolution has to be implemented to reduce this O(n) factor. More sophiscated liveness and range analysis might be required to go further (esotope-bfc didn't get there, anyway).

[1] [https://bitbucket.org/lifthrasiir/esotope- bfc](https://bitbucket.org/lifthrasiir/esotope-bfc)

</comment><comment><USER8> [http://calmerthanyouare.org/2014/09/30/brainfuck- java.html](http://calmerthanyouare.org/2014/09/30/brainfuck-java.html) some of the issues encountered when writing a brainfuck-to-java compiler in brainfuck

Yo dawg, etc

<comment><USER8> It gets better

[http://awib.googlecode.com/svn/builds/awib-0.4.b](http://awib.googlecode.com/svn/builds/awib-0.4.b)

Awib is a brainfuck compiler written in brainfuck. It is also polyglot in bash, Tcl and C

For instance, using gcc, the following will build an executable file called awib from awib-0.2.b.

        $ cp awib-0.2.b awib-0.2.c
        $ gcc awib-0.2.c -o awib.tmp
        $ ./awib.tmp < awib-0.2.b > awib-0.2.c
        $ gcc -O2 awib-0.2.c -o awib

Using bash works fine, but is very very very slow:

        $ (echo "@386_linux"; cat awib.b) | bash awib.b > awib
        $ chmod +x awib

And tcl:

        $ (echo "@386_linux"; cat awib.b) | tclsh awib.b > awib
        $ chmod +x awib

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> As a comparison, what does it look like if you enable GCC optimization?

<comment><USER10> Here's the no-vs-all optimizations graph for gcc with -O3: [http://imgur.com/Q6yycrT](http://imgur.com/Q6yycrT)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Brainfuck is a really beautiful language. It was the first language I wrote a parser for, and it's incredibly beautiful in its simplicity.

<comment><USER12> What always strikes me (I also wrote a bf parser a while back) is the pay-off in how simple it is to implement vs how hard it is to write in it. This seems a very obvious and simple thing to notice: the less tokens/rules your language uses the easier it is to write a parser for it, but the harder it is to write a program in that language.

The implications seem more subtle and are more interesting. The very simple phenomenon implies that application development time later can be saved by compiler development time now. If so then what is the most optimal language/compiler? What is the best distribution of time? Is it perhaps so that there exists a language that is trivial to implement, yet also super powerful and expressive to program in (don't say lisp here, though it does almost satisfy the second constraint imo).

<comment><USER13> >Is it perhaps so that there exists a language that is trivial to implement, yet also super powerful and expressive to program in (don't say lisp here, though it does almost satisfy the second constraint imo).

Lisp. Satisfies both constraints.

But seriously, Forth is another interesting language that strikes a good balance between ease of implementation vs ease of use and expressive power. But even more than Lisp, it takes some serious getting used to.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Is there an implementation of this that converts any BF code into C/C# code? Might make a handy web-based tool.

It would be interesting to apply this to AI generated programs ([http://www.primaryobjects.com/CMS/Article163](http://www.primaryobjects.com/CMS/Article163))

<comment><USER10> Implementations are available in the repository linked to from the article. Not quite "ready for production", but hopefully a useful starting point. [https://github.com/matslina/bfoptimization](https://github.com/matslina/bfoptimization)

<comment><USER14> Thanks, I see it. The translation code is inside ir.py. So you can call ir_to_c(bf_to_ir("+++.")) to do the conversion.

Here is the code to convert BF to C, in case anyone else is interested [https://gist.github.com/primaryobjects/0ba06f1f6f0d3e984d89](https://gist.github.com/primaryobjects/0ba06f1f6f0d3e984d89)

Here it is running the converted C code [https://ideone.com/z16KPJ](https://ideone.com/z16KPJ)

Very cool.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Though rather juvenile I appreciated this interpreter that maps instructions to offensive four letter words.

NSFW text. ff/feckfeck/f* ckf* ck.

[http://web.archive.org/web/20050318095341/http://www.chilliw...](http://web.archive.org/web/20050318095341/http://www.chilliwilli.co.uk/ff/)

[http://web.archive.org/web/20050311055852/http://www.chilliw...](http://web.archive.org/web/20050311055852/http://www.chilliwilli.co.uk/ff/hwcommented.ff)

</comment><comment><USER16> I'm working on implementing the JVM in Brainfuck

</comment><comment><USER17> Now peg it against [http://mazonka.com/brainf/](http://mazonka.com/brainf/), the bff4lnr version :)

<comment><USER10> Since bff4lnr is an interpreter, this really becomes apples and oranges. But for fun, dbfi.b on bff4lnr (at -O3) vs all at -O0 and -O3: [http://imgur.com/uEEgVr0](http://imgur.com/uEEgVr0) Conclusion: if you want speed then compile.

<comment><USER17> Ah, my bad. I didn't realize yours was a compiler.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This sounds cool, but I was not sure till halfway through the post if it's like an Onion article or not.

</comment><comment><USER19> How long until someone makes a homoiconic version of brainfuck?

</comment><comment><USER20> Who is hiring brainfuck developers these days?

<comment><USER21> I always keep it on my CV, hopefully one day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Beautiful insanity.

</comment><comment><USER23> Kudos, I guess...</comment>


Content mods would solve an urgent problem, if anyone were willing to pay them - <AUTHOR> https://theoutline.com/post/4273/schrodinger-s-content-moderator?zd=2&zi=cbghtujy <comment><USER2> Part of me wonders why everyone's so adament this needs to be a paid job when 99% of communities worked fine with volunteer moderators. That's what Reddit and internet forums do after all, and it usually works out pretty well for them.

I'm sure quite a few would sign up if sites like Facebook and Twitter offered a moderator program.</comment>


Electronic circuit simulator that runs in the browser - <AUTHOR> http://www.falstad.com/circuit/

<comment><AUTHOR> Full-screen version: [http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html](http://www.falstad.com/circuit/circuitjs.html)

Index of circuit examples: [http://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-index.html](http://www.falstad.com/circuit/e-index.html)</comment>


The Relativity of Wrong (1989) - <AUTHOR> https://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm <comment><USER2> Wrong implies truth, and there are a number of relaated discussions:

Mental models:

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

"Not even wrong", attributed to Wolgabg Pauli;

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

[https://web.archive.org/web/20110810231612/http://www.scient...](https://web.archive.org/web/20110810231612/http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=wronger- than-wrong)

Philosophical theories, models, and discussion of truth: [https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth/](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth/)

<comment><USER2> Erm, _Wolfgang_ Pauli. Damned soft keyboards.</comment></comment>


At least 1 woman to be interviewed for every IT job opening - <AUTHOR> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/030612-women-it-257009.html Anita Borg Institute report says this would spur more diverse hiring <comment><USER2> Women are making there mark in every field now-a-days.They have taken this much time to reach there goals because they have always been discriminated from men.Whether it is IT,POLICE,DEFENCE,MEDICAL or any other field they are on there way to stand along-side men. 18 % is stated as of 2009, but women recruitment in IT field has increased in last couple of years.</comment>


'The Shawshank Redemption': A Simple But Powerful Message - <AUTHOR> http://statspotting.com/a-lesson-from-the-shawshank-redemption/

<comment><USER3> This really seems like reaching.

Or maybe it seems so universally true of protagonists in pretty much any story that it's basically meaningless.

"Startups are hard. They are filled with uncertainty. Just like when Nemo gets lost in the ocean and his father searches far and wide, not knowing if he'll ever see his son again."

</comment><comment><USER4> There is one huge difference between prison and startup - alternatives you have.

When you are in prison all you can have, if you don't try to escape is a miserable life till the end of your days. On the other hand - after ten years of hard work you can get free. It gives you really big motivation - <USER2> motivation is usually greater than positive.

With startup you have choice between pretty good life (if you are a programmer you can find really nice job) and great success. Motivation is rather small comparing to prison situation.

Having said all this - author still is right - you need to have fun from journey, not only from target.

</comment><comment><USER5> What a great way to trivialize a classic film. "It's like 'Shawshank Redemption', except at the end people can reserve a table at a restaurant without calling ahead."

<comment><USER6> Apparently running a startup is just like being imprisoned for life in an institution with rampant routine prisoner rape, abusive and sometimes murderous guards, and a terribly corrupt warden. And here I thought that startup entrepreneurs were fairly well off and had decent lives.

<comment><USER7> Andy was also falsely accused and wrongly convicted. So he ends up in prison without any recourse. This is the same as starting or joining a startup voluntarily?

Also, don't forget what he had to swim through to reach freedom.

<comment><USER6> Imagine how nice prison would be if at any moment you could just say "fuck it" and go get a six-figure job with Google or Facebook or whatever.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "If you fail, all your efforts add up to nothing. "

Disagree with this. Even if you fail, you have learnt a lot and you will get another chance to try it. In case of Andy, he probably would not have got another chance. Big difference.

</comment><comment><USER9> I like The Shawshank Redemption.

But, startups are like digging an escape tunnel for wrongful imprisonment so you can live the life you deserved in the first place, or be placed in solitary confinement if you fail?

No, thanks -- I'll go with another analogy :)

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm not a huge fan of the lessons drawn here, it feels forced. I think the two key takeaways from Shawshank are 1) "Get busy living, or get busy dying." and 2) "Hope is a dangerous thing, hope can drive a man insane." I see these as complementary, one should simultaneously relentlessly persue one's dreams, startup or otherwise (get busy living) but be aware that those dreams can be dangerous, they can "drive a man insane."

</comment><comment><USER11> This is a tedious link. I'm sure you could similarly formulate one based on Batman or Predator, if you wanted.

</comment><comment><USER12> Shawshank's message is "Enjoy the journey"? Andy's "journey" includes rape, beatings, and solitary confinement. I don't see how you can find that message in the movie.

</comment><comment><USER13> Thank you. I have struggled for years to explain what is so magical about building anything creative. Most people cannot understand. But, your connection to the movie Shawshank is brilliant. This is a movie people get so well. I will probably use this metaphor for years. Thank you!

<comment><AUTHOR> I am glad you liked the post, and the connection to the movie !

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Good points, but I really don't agree with the analogy of Andy's predicament and a startup...

 _You have no idea how deep the wall is._

Then find out. Google "lean startup", "Eric Ries", "Steve Blank", or "Rob Walling". There is a strong active movement for avoiding exactly this problem. Anyone starting a business should embrace it.

 _You have nothing but a rock hammer._

Then get more tools. This includes technology, methodology, money, and, of course, people. "Lack of resources" is no longer an acceptable excuse for failing.

 _You have no idea when you will be caught._

Then find out. Talk to people. Embrace the lean startup approach mentioned above.

 _But what you do have, is the journey. Enjoy the journey._

Ahh, yes. agreed! You nailed that one.

<comment><USER15> These counterpoints sound swell for trivial activities like developing mobile apps that remind me to walk my dog. What about the guy developing fusion, or rockets to the moon? Or pursuing the minesweeper that is step-by-step scientific discovery. Should we forgo all activities that require serious investment and only take baby-steps to attain the goals we calculate to be the surest and easiest to reach?

<comment><USER16> Am I the only one who believes that the lean startup movement is a positive for early stage investors at the expense of true innovation and causes founders who would otherwise try tough challenges to try somewhat trivial business ideas?

It seems that the framework is designed to reduce the need for computer engineers to use business thinking and to allow for a few examples of lucky groups to float to the top, raise capital while leaving the vast majority of those who try it with nothing to show for their work.

With the strength of the movement, how many people out there are currently trying "lean startups" only to fail? What do we think the percentage of businesses that get started using this methodology would actually make a profit large enough to support/grow the business at some point in the future?

It seems that the lean startup method serves a purpose in that it helps people try stuff, but it probably is not the right approach for any real challenge.

<comment><USER17> No. Any significant breakthrough usually represents many man-years of effort spanning years in real-time. Loosely, it's a very applied set of phd research, driven towards a goal which can not be demonstrated true until it is proven true.

I'm sure 'lean startup' is fine for a relatively trivial problem space, and there are many of those bringing much added benefit. I'm equally sure that significant lab equipment for bio/chem/materials firms can't be just 'iterated' through without heavy capital and a long-term plan. :-)

<comment><USER15> I think we're all in agreement here. Early stage investors benefit from trivial successes by passing along the hot potato down the pyramid.

<comment><USER17> Sorry! I should have quoted this line:

> Am I the only one who believes that the lean startup movement is a positive > for early stage investors at the expense of true innovation and causes > founders who would otherwise try tough challenges to try somewhat trivial > business ideas?

"No, you're not the only one".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I don't really agree with this analogy. Unless your life is terrible and you have no other employment prospects, you're creating a startup out of ambition, not a strong desire to escape a terrible situation. Presumably you could do fairly well working at another company, unlike Andy, who is doomed to a miserable life unless he risks embarking on this escape plan.

</comment><comment><USER19> > You can fail at any point in time – in the beginning, in the middle, or at > the end – literally on any given day until you are done – and if you fail, > all your efforts up to that point add up to nothing

Not necessarily true, we all learn from our mistakes and get experience as we do stuff. But I agree with the spirit of this post.

</comment><comment><USER20> The analogy is an, obviously, false one. Working at a startup is not binary. There are many benefits and "rewards" earned along the way; pay, experience, contacts to name a few.

Edit: But, yeah, duh, Enjoy the journey. Don't people already know that? I don't see how anyone (in USA) past about 16yr old, unless they are supremely stubborn, could not have learned that from all the fables, parables, koan's, after-school specials, etc. that drive that message home.

</comment><comment><USER21> The quote in the header[1] is probably misattributed. It likely originated with a sociologist named William Bruce Cameron in the '50s, not with Einstein.[2]

[1] "Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."

[2] [http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/26/everything-counts- ei...](http://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/26/everything-counts-einstein/)

</comment><comment><USER22> Comparing carving through a concrete wall to freedom for 20 years and building a startup in a 4 or 5 months is very humorous and is like comparing apples and oranges. You'd never feel like you completely failed if your startup failed. The new things learned along the way makes it way more rewarding than getting caught with a chisel in hand.

</comment><comment><USER23> I'd agree, apart from that the "end result is binary".

When you aim to do something big, it's very hard to fail completely.

<comment><USER24> I concur--it's a flawed analogy on a couple levels (but still a good conversation stimulator) but I believe one of the hardest things to manage in a start-up is that your success isn't binary.

Yes, there are a great many start-ups that fail to get out of the gate and a small, small number that take off so quickly that success is almost a guarantee. But if you're in the muddy middle the decision to grind it out or try a new approach has to be a difficult one, and is usually a low-data decision. And platitudes are little help here with "it takes three years to create an overnight success" on one side and "fail fast" on the other.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I don't think this is on point. Get busy livin or get busy dyin. THAT, is a powerful message from the movie and is highly relevant. we must not fear failure. Get moving because you won't reach your goals just waiting around

</comment><comment><USER26> this only makes sense if you're an alien abducted by humans unfairly and now in captive on this crappy earth. And you are devising a scheme to escape from this jail planet by working on your startup.

</comment><comment><USER27> I don't think there is much to enjoy digging a tunnel with a spoon for 20 years ;)

</comment><comment><USER28> Get busy livin', or get busy dyin'.

Seems strangely appropriate for a startup.

</comment><comment><USER29> A fine movie that deserves a spoiler alert when revealing the key plot twist.

</comment><comment><USER30> You're trying too hard, bro.</comment>