Ask HN: Postmates - Free deliveries in San Francisco  - <AUTHOR>

In a nutshell Postmates is like FedEx for local deliveries. We're close to the public release of our app but we would love to test a few features with up to 10 startups in San Francisco first.
Here is what we offer during the trial:
- Free deliveries, pick ups and errands (food, laundry, gifts, documents, furnitures) of any size for 14 days in San Francisco, for everyone who participates
- A discount code for all your employees for 5 free deliveries after the initial trial
Contact us at: firstname.lastname@example.com or 415 939 0318 if you are interested.
Thanks! <comment><USER2> Neat idea. One thought: allow users to "register" for routes they often take. i.e. I drive the same legs (home to downtown and back, home to a northern suburb for an Ultimate game ont the weekends) every week. If someone could make $10-20 doing a drive they already do, it seems like it'd be a big win.

<comment><AUTHOR> We're thinking about that. For now we're enabling already existing couriers to be more efficient. We have over 30 of them on duty in San Francisco during business hours. However, we're looking to launch a crowdsourced feature as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> So is this essentially a crowdsourced courier service? Neat idea.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes and thanks. ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Emailed. I lost contact with you some time ago, but we were always wondering when the service would become publicly available. Glad to hear it's coming soon!

</comment><comment><USER5> How do you differ from another startup, Taskrabbit[1]?

[1] <http://www.taskrabbit.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Daniel, great question. Postmates uses professionals couriers, much more like Uber does with limo drivers. Our primary focus are also merchants and business that need to offer and exceptional deliver service to their clients. Our aim is to provide a delivery infrastructure within a city. Merchants can then use this infrastructure much like an Amazon EC2 instance.

<comment><USER6> You plan to have an SLA? _That_ would be a game changer. In-city delivery API, guaranteed.

Add Lockitron[1] to the mix with secure boxes for pick up and delivery and you got a winner.

[1]: <https://lockitron.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Can I reach you via email?

<comment><USER6> Sure. I'm helder, the domain is on my profile description here on HN.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> very cool idea! when are you coming to NY?

link: <http://www.postmates.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> We're working on it! :)</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is the HN for quantitative finance? - <AUTHOR> Any one knows any good sites / boards for good quantitative finance discussions? <comment><USER2> [https://forum.wilmott.com](https://forum.wilmott.com)

</comment><comment><USER3> [https://www.reddit.com/r/algotrading/](https://www.reddit.com/r/algotrading/)

[https://www.reddit.com/r/quant/](https://www.reddit.com/r/quant/)

<comment><USER4> Both of those subreddits are actually pretty poor mediums for "serious" discussion about quantitative finance. There's been an uptick in cryptocurrencies on each lately, and the subreddits are mostly saturated with early-career, "rate my algo" and "how do I mean reversion" questions from beginners.

I'm exaggerating, but only slightly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Not a news river exactly, but I also learn a lot from the Stack Overflow sites:

[https://quant.stackexchange.com/](https://quant.stackexchange.com/)

[https://stats.stackexchange.com/](https://stats.stackexchange.com/)

The NYC FinTech Meetup is also usually a good place to network:

[https://www.meetup.com/NY-FinTech/](https://www.meetup.com/NY-FinTech/)

</comment><comment><USER6> For obvious reasons, there really isn't anything great out there for non- beginner stuff. [http://www.nuclearphynance.com/default.aspx](http://www.nuclearphynance.com/default.aspx) is probably the best out there but not very active. Very deep archives though.

</comment><comment><USER7> Quantocracy

</comment><comment><USER8> LTCM

<comment><USER9> LOL.</comment></comment>


Rob Pike – Simplicity is Complicated [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFejpH_tAHM <comment><USER2> Go's simplicity really is its most complicated part.

Here's a brainteaser:

If you want to put a type alias on a UUID [1] to differentiate it from other uses of UUIDs (e.g. different tables' primary keys), how would you best do it? The answer may surprise you :)

[1] [https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/google/uuid?tab=doc](https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/google/uuid?tab=doc)</comment>


Top security & crypto papers from the last 5 years - <AUTHOR> http://saweis.net/posts/top-security-papers-2008-2012.html

<comment><USER2> Layman question: why homomorphic encryption got so much attention?</comment>


Ask HN: Front end framework to learn as back end developer? - <AUTHOR> Hi,
I'm a seasoned backend developer and I want to learn UI development to create some pet projects apps. I want to learn a UI framework that I can later apply to large apps as well.
One of the areas that I want to address is UI layouts, so that the apps looks decent and are responsive.
Can someone who has done the similar guide me please ? What do you guys suggest and why?
Thanks a lot in advance. <comment><USER2> If you're seasoned enough in Javascript, I'd strongly recommend sveltejs [svelte.dev]

Its very easy to get started and can help you accomplish pretty much everything. And yes, its very fast too.

<comment><AUTHOR> I do have good experience with nodejs as such. What would you suggest for learning layouts and css. Thanks.</comment></comment>


Apple releasing ARKit for iOS - <AUTHOR> https://www.macrumors.com/2017/06/05/apple-releasing-arkit-for-ios/ <comment><USER2> Watching those demos I got the feeling that what we are seeing here is a "last-minute" salvage from something quite a lot more ambitious. (Like AR glasses hardware.)</comment>


The great Medieval water myth (2013) - <AUTHOR> http://leslefts.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-great-medieval-water-myth.html <comment><USER2> Former Historical Theology Student. If this drives you nuts wait till you read primary sources of many different historical documents and than just heard how people corrupt history all the time.

Example Nicolaus Copernicus, was persecuted by the Catholic Church for writing his sun centered book and arrested. The book in fact was dedicated to the Pope. It wasn't till 73 years after the book was written that anyone said anything against the theory. It wasn't even a theological attack but was a difference in philosophical thought which was from Aristotle and his opposition to mathematical physics (AKA numbers does not equal reality).

<comment><USER3> I've read a few books pertaining to the Galileo affair. It seems to be conventional wisdom that Copernicus had permission to publish his book, and that he was not attacked by the Church in his day.

I've also read that Galileo received favorable treatment from the Pope at first, then things went downhill for him later.

A weird tidbit, that I can't confirm, is that Martin Luther denounced Copernicus.

<comment><USER4> There's a record of Luther dismissing Copernicus, or at least geocentrism, though it's from four years before _On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres_ was published:

"So it goes now. Whoever wants to be clever must agree with nothing that others esteem. He must do something of his own. This is what that fellow does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down."

But that's pretty mild for Luther. If he wasn't using scatalogical references, his heart wasn't really in it. We only know about it because many of Luther's casual conversations were recorded; he was literally complaining about it at the dinner table.

<comment><USER5> _" So it goes now. Whoever wants to be clever must agree with nothing that others esteem. He must do something of his own. This is what that fellow does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down."_

Fortunately, things are completely different in the modern world.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Did this myth, at least partly, originate in the 1854 cholera outbreak in London?

"There was one significant anomaly - none of the monks in the adjacent monastery contracted cholera. Investigation showed that this was not an anomaly, but further evidence, for they drank only beer, which they brewed themselves. Residents near or in the brewery on Broad Street were also not affected as a result of the fermentation of the contaminated water. The beer was safer to drink than the dirty water from the Broad Street Pump."

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1854_Broad_Street_cholera_outbr...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1854_Broad_Street_cholera_outbreak)

</comment><comment><USER7> Another old reference to drinking water over wine, Daniel 1:11-16

So Daniel said to the steward whom the chief of the eunuchs had set over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, "Please test your servants for ten days, and let them give us vegetables to eat and water to drink. "Then let our appearance be examined before you, and the appearance of the young men who eat the portion of the king's delicacies; and as you see fit, so deal with your servants." So he consented with them in this matter, and tested them ten days. And at the end of ten days their features appeared better and fatter in flesh than all the young men who ate the portion of the king's delicacies. Thus the steward took away their portion of delicacies and the wine that they were to drink, and gave them vegetables.

</comment><comment><USER8> Is it just me or all the examples given in the article do, in fact, describe drinking water instead of beer or wine as a thing that was done but was (a) something unusual, (b) a sign of religious self-limitation ("so abstemious that he ... drank water instead of wine") or (c) as a punishment (diet of bread and water).

So it only supports the thesis that people in medieval times did generally avoid drinking water to the best of their ability; it does say that the reasons for doing so aren't so simple to avoid 'bad water'.

<comment><USER9> The myth is not clearly defined at the start, but it goes that people avoided water because alcoholic drinks were _safer_ to drink than water. What you're hinting at is that people often prefer to drink something else for flavor/variety/intoxication, which is just as true today. The article does seem to debunk the myth that they were avoiding it for health reasons however.

I think this is adequately addressed in the article as well:

>Did people in the time prefer alcoholic drinks? Probably, and for the same reason most people today drink liquids other than water: variety and flavor. A young man in a tenth century Saxon colloquy is asked what he drinks and answers: "Beer if I have it or water if I have no beer." This is a clear expression of both being comfortable with water and preferring beer.

<comment><USER10> The article debunks the idea that there was some sort of blanket fear of water. It makes it pretty clear that when clean water was available and recognized as clean, that people had no problem drinking it.

But I've never heard the myth that people avoided drinking even seemingly clean water. I've always heard that many people _didn 't_ have regular access to clean drinking water (particularly in non-Roman cities) would drink alcohol as a safe substitute.

<comment><USER11> That might possibly be the case. But then, where is any of the academic evidence? In general or even for particular settlements? There seems to be plenty of evidence saying that people were fine drinking water, there seems to be a distinct lack of evidence for the "people were afraid of the water" theory.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I'm very grateful someone finally wrote an article like this, it's so annoying having to constantly readjust people's misconceptions on something so basic.

More so, the very idea almost refutes itself. "Nobody drank water back then because everyone got sick all the time from drinking water" has an almost Yogi Berra quality to it.

<comment><USER13> That's really not contradictory unless you take it incredibly literally.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> As someone mentioned in the comments (and the post author dismisses), a reasonable version of this myth might be constrained to sailing.

I found an okay discussion on it here: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-2008...](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-200849.html)

There's a reference to "Purser's Instructions", where apparently it is mentioned that the Royal Navy sailors were allotted 1 gallon of beer per day. I tried finding it online, but couldn't find the text. Kind of blows my mind that in 2015 I can't just easily read any book that is more than 250 years old.

</comment><comment><USER14> I think history is a lot more interesting and makes a lot more sense when you finally realize that people in the past were just as aware and smart as us, as opposed to the bumbling idiots we often assume them to be.

<comment><USER15> If by "aware" you mean "ignorant of the most basic facts that we take for granted", then yeah.

It's very hard to get our heads around the pre-scientific mindset. These people were not stupid (if intelligence is even a little bit heritable and provides any selective advantage they were in smarter than us, as there has been zero selection for anything in the past 200 years, so we are the dumbest generation of humans ever to live). But they, like Jon Snow, knew _nothing_.

They filled that vast void of ignorance with beliefs that make modern anti- science people like opponents of vaccinations, GMOs and nuclear power look like caricatures of the most rigidly limited kind of reductive materialism.

The thought that anyone might publicly test an idea that "just made sense" using systematic observation, controlled experiment or Bayesian inference (which people used long before Bayes, of course) as a matter of routine was simply unknown. Arguments were settled via disputations over imagination, putting one form of plausible bullshit against another and seeing which advocate could sway the crowd of ignorant scholars.

So the world was full of causes no one could see, whose existence "just made sense" so no one bothered to test. "Humours" and their "balance" caused health and sickness. Saints and demons influenced all chance events. Thinking made it so. God's plan was manifest by signs and portents. No major decision was taken without prayer.

People (some people) laughed at George W Bush when he talked about doing God's will, but a few hundred years ago everyone talked, and thought that way. They took it for granted and they meant it with a depth and unquestioning sincerity that today can be found only amongst Islamists and a few others.

They were capable technologists (there is an argument that technological capability led the sciences in important ways) but they way technologists thought about their materials and structures was completely alien to us. Much of it was raw empiricism ("do this, that happens") wrapped in a tattered clock of sympathetic magic and tortured religious/hermetic metaphor.

Imagine a world organized _in all walks of life_ around the ideas and mode of thinking practiced by Jenny McCarthy, Food Babe, and Deepak Chopra and you'll get a sense of it, absurd as it sounds.

<comment><USER14> You just confused 8000 years of post-agricultural society and culture, with medieval western Europe.

Yes, people are much more educated now, because technology lets them get better access to information, but I think it's inaccurate to say there were no educated societies in the past. Think about Roman engineering. Arabic and Indian mathematics. Baghdad with its libraries. On and on. Modern people didn't invent most of the knowledge we now take for granted... we inherited it from the past, where people found it out through trial and error. Just like we discover new things now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I've never heard it expressed as though people did not (as in ever) drink water, but that beer and wine were far more popular as casual, everyday drinks than they are now for purposes of sanitation.

Which makes some sense when you consider that the items mentioned - rainfall, melted snow, etc. - are not readily available all times of the year in all locales.

If anyone had said "they didn't drink water in the Medieval ages" I think that, like stagnant water, it wouldn't pass anyone's sniff test.

<comment><USER17> The reason you gave is exactly what he argues against. The author is saying that a) people DID drink lots of water, just as much as now, but thats uninteresting and nobody would record that, and b) nobody in the past drank because of sanitation reasons. They drank because it tasted good and we like to get drunk, with the pleasant side effect of slightly improved sanitation, but nobody at the time would have realized it.

<comment><USER18> Whether they realized or not may be immaterial to whether or not the benefit explains the prominence of the behavior -- a socially transmitted behavior (meme) that gives those engaging in it a slight survival advantage can easily be reinforced over time even without conscious recognition of the benefit of the meme.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Would beer and wine actually have significantly less contamination than water?

My understanding is that you need to refrigerate any opened alcohol of less than 15 or 20% because it will spoil. A quick reading of Wikipedia says that it is the hops, not the alcohol, which prevent spoilage, and hops were not mastered until the 13th century.

<comment><USER20> It's not really that the alcohol is a factor, rather it's that the wort is boiled and the process of boiling kills the pathogens. As long as the beer isn't contaminated after boiling it's fine to drink.

<comment><USER8> The difference between beer and boiled water is that beer will generally stay uncontaminated due to the alcohol content, while boiled water is clean only for a limited time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> This just in: Humans almost certainly drink water, and have for at least the past two millennium.

haha, but in all seriousness, I always thought when people said "medieval people didn't drink water" that they really meant "medieval people didn't drink as much water, or drank dirty water".

There was a lecture I watched from someone who explained the Medieval period as "everyone drinking beer because the water was so filthy" and the Enlightenment as "everyone drinking tea because the beer was so intoxicating" and the Industrial Revolution as "everyone drinking coffee because tea wasn't strong enough".

I laughed at that and considered the whole idea of Medieval peoples drinking beer instead of water as mostly hyperbole.

<comment><USER22> I thought it was true as well, about ancient greece as well as midieval times.

People talk about how children used to drink beer until fairly recently -- I'm not sure if _that's_ really true either, but it is usually explained that the reason for this is that the water couldn't be trusted and nobody drank water, and that part apparently isn't.

<comment><USER23> There were "small beers" which had very little alcohol content. The yeast is fairly nutritious.

<comment><USER22> yeah, I understood that... but misunderstood the reason they drank such beers was cause they couldn't drink the water, I guess?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Not to attempt to reinforce the "common knowledge" that this article is challenging, but the author includes numerous references to Greeks and Romans drinking water. I thought the common assumption was that people in the _Dark Ages_ avoided water in favor of wine due to poor sanitation practices. The Romans bathed frequently and had dedicated holes in their roofs with a bowl in the middle of their house to catch rainwater; I've never doubted that they could attain clean drinking water.

<comment><USER25> ^This. When you say 'medieval' and start talking about Galen, you have lost me (even if you point about the medieval period is correct).

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> The "Clean" episode [1] of PBS's "How We got to now" explored how in one particular case drinking beer was preferred over drinking water. If I recall correctly (the video is no longer available for streaming) drinking water became contaminated and it was observed that regulars to a bar fared better health-wise, leading to the assumption that beer/alcohol was safer.

Whether that story fed the myth discussed in the above article or not, I don't know, but maybe it wasn't entirely baseless as it suggests.

[1] [http://video.pbs.org/video/2365323193/](http://video.pbs.org/video/2365323193/)

</comment><comment><USER27> I don't see the revelation here. The reality always had to be much more nuanced than a simple "they always drank short beer, never water." That's silly. Of course people would be able to recognize clean water, and would not hesitate to drink water they felt was clean. It was, after all, probably the second liquid every human ever born became familiar with. However, sources of clean water were much harder to come by in historical times than they are now. A short beer, with alcohol content low enough not to cause inebriation, but high enough to make bad bugs uncomfortable, was a reliable alternative.

</comment><comment><USER28> I was taught this in my college history classes in reference to cholera outbreaks in the USA in the 1800s. We were taught people use "half beer" which was 50/50 mixed with water, as a safety measure.

I have no idea if it is real. It was just what the book and professor said.

</comment><comment><USER29> I'm not sure how "great" this myth is, considering that I learned about it just from this article. Could be a cultural thing, of course, since I grew up and was educated in Russia/USSR. We had our share of myths I'm sure.

</comment><comment><USER30> I'm not so sure about this, I have done some research on the topic for a book I am working on and it appears that in some cities at certain times, safe water was hard to come by and for that and other reasons people consumed beer/wine as their primary beverage and with nearly every meal. I have studied this in the context of the effects on society of coffee and coffee houses that came with displacing beer and taverns as the main beverages and gathering points of society in 17th and 18th century England.

Here is an excerpt from James Howell in 1660:

"Tis found already, that this coffee drink hath caused a greater sobriety among the Nations. Whereas formerly Apprentices and clerks with others used to take a morning draught of Ale, Beer or Wine, which, by the dizziness they cause in the Brain, made many unfit for business, they use now to play the Good-fellows in this wakeful and civil drink"

And another from the historian Michelet:

...For at length the tavern has been dethroned, the detestable tavern where, half a century ago, our young folks rioted among wine-tubs and harlots. Fewer drunken songs o' night time, fewer nobles lying in the gutter... Coffee the sobering beverage, a mighty nutriment of the brain, unlike spirituous liquors, increases purity and clarify; coffee, which clears the imagination of fogs and heavy vapours, which illumines the reality of things with the white light of truth; anti-erotic coffee, which at length substitutes stimulation of the mind for stimulation of the sexual faculties!"

[1] [https://books.google.com/books?id=Gbmhwpxe9usC&pg=PA10&lpg=P...](https://books.google.com/books?id=Gbmhwpxe9usC&pg=PA10&lpg=PA10&dq=hath+caused+a+greater+sobriety+among+the+Nations.+Whereas+formerly+Apprentices+and+clerks+with+others+used+to+take+a+morning+draught+of+Ale,+Beer+or+Wine,+which,+by+the+dizziness+they+cause+in+the+Brain,+made+many+unfit+for+business,+they+use+now+to+play+the+Good- fellows+in+this+wakeful+and+civil+drink&source=bl&ots=rPgKd9fknG&sig=mVVqFbrC4KEv71lLqstfnag- BKg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nfXbVKjCMY_ooASQqYKYCQ&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=hath%20caused%20a%20greater%20sobriety%20among%20the%20Nations.%20Whereas%20formerly%20Apprentices%20and%20clerks%20with%20others%20used%20to%20take%20a%20morning%20draught%20of%20Ale%2C%20Beer%20or%20Wine%2C%20which%2C%20by%20the%20dizziness%20they%20cause%20in%20the%20Brain%2C%20made%20many%20unfit%20for%20business%2C%20they%20use%20now%20to%20play%20the%20Good- fellows%20in%20this%20wakeful%20and%20civil%20drink&f=false)

</comment><comment><USER31> Interesting to see that people in medieval times seem to have had actually more environmental problems than we have now.

<comment><USER32> Really? Is this a genuine comment? That a medieval world population of (optimistically) 500 million would produce more hazardous materials and waste than an industrialised world population of 6 billion?

<comment><USER33> Likely in reference to their inability to deal with the conditions they faced, either created directly or indirectly by themselves to say nothing of what nature could do.

I am quite sure we all acknowledge modern man is very capable of wrecking the environment, we are however able to prevent much of it and even correct it. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of dangerous materials we work with everyday that never impact the environment

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> "Unfortunately, long-standing myths are not displaced by anything so flimsy as documentation."

I like this guy.

</comment><comment><USER35> I was literally actually thinking of this just the other day. Alcohol now gives me intestinal liquidity, possibly a result of too many years of 3-4 beer a night. And I couldn't figure out how an entire populace raised on the stuff wouldn't have had larger issues with beer than with water. I was thinking there had to be something I was missing about what I was taught (and I was taught it in college).

<comment><USER24> It's worth noting that beer hasn't exactly had a uniform makeup throughout history. The kind originally made in Mesopotamia and given as rations to soldiers was much more nutritious than the kind we drink recreationally now.</comment></comment>


OpenSSH 6.5 Released - <AUTHOR> http://www.openssh.org/txt/release-6.5 <comment><USER2> The following two things are highlights for me:

      * ssh(1): Add a ssh_config(5) "Match" keyword that allows
       conditional configuration to be applied by matching on hostname,
       user and result of arbitrary commands.

     * ssh(1): Add support for client-side hostname canonicalisation
       using a set of DNS suffixes and rules in ssh_config(5). This
       allows unqualified names to be canonicalised to fully-qualified
       domain names to eliminate ambiguity when looking up keys in
       known_hosts or checking host certificate names.

<comment><USER3> I would still like to see an easy way to switch between a gateway ssh host and going direct depending on location/IP.

If I'm home, I want to be able to ssh to the gateway machine automatically and when I'm at work, go direct.

Obviously, this can be fixed with a shell script but it's hacky.

<comment><USER4> The Match keyword does allow you to configure based on your local address, so on first glance it would seem like it would allow you to do this, but for some reason ProxyCommand is not on the list of whitelisted keywords acceptable in a Match block. :/ That's really a shame.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Bold move, defaulting to Curve25519 ECDH.

I'm not saying DH/DLP is broken, but the NSA declines to include non-EC DH (or RSA, for that matter) in their Suite B of algorithms approved for internal applications. It's nice to have the option of ECDH for day to day use.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_Suite_B_Cryptography](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_Suite_B_Cryptography)

<comment><USER6> Aside from any security implications for EC, there's also a lot of practical benefits around the reduced sizes necessary.

We made a Suite B implementation for TPM's (where smaller key sizes are very very important).

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> * Add a new private key format that uses a bcrypt KDF to better protect keys at rest.

This is pretty important to me: Keys are much less of a hazard if taken off a stolen laptop/disk.

<comment><USER8> Shouldn't your laptop/disks be fully encrypted anyways? It's good to have a strong KDF, but the stolen laptop threat should be already covered, I'd hope.

<comment><USER7> True, but what if it's stolen while the laptop is turned on and the disk keys are in memory? I rarely shut my laptop off, and while I may be a little overly paranoid, it is certainly possible for a local attacker to gain memory bus access and read out disk encryption keys.

Multiple layers of security are always good!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> OpenSSH-HPN's patchset really needs to be merged into the mainline. There's no excuse for not at least incorporating dynamic window scaling into the core protocol since it's such a ridiculous omission at this point.

<comment><USER2> [http://www.psc.edu/index.php/hpn-ssh](http://www.psc.edu/index.php/hpn-ssh) (for the uninitiated)

<comment><USER10> Is there a patch for 6.4p1/6.5p1 or does 6.1p1 work?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wonderful to see them using a modern, time-hard KDF finally.

One wonders where the kickstarter to get a proper time- and memory- hard KDF patched into GnuPG is? It's not even really that much of a compatibility issue, either (unless you are sharing private key files between many machines)...

You'd really think the tinfoil-hat paranoids that (until Snowden) comprise(d) the bulk of the pgp userbase would care about the keys used to keep their log- term keys on disk private. I was flabbergasted to see the (relatively) tiny number of iterations in use in the GnuPG kdf.

<comment><USER11> I forgot my PGP passphrase and can no longer sign Java packages in the Sonatype maven repository. This is not a big deal for me but I did try to recover my passphrase.

I got an extension to John the Ripper that supports Gnu PGP keys and built a dictionary of permutations of words that I think I could have used in the passphrase.

I got nowhere. In this case, a passphrase > 20 characters was unbreakable to someone with modest computing power and an appropriate dictionary.

Edit: I did not save a revoke certificate because the Sonatype instructions did not include this step.

<comment><USER12> How far you get as a private effort is not really characterizing the threat; the threat is a determined attacker with AMD GPUs by the dozen. And while it is easy to discount state-sized efforts as being uninterested in signing your Java packages, the real threat are the hobbyists and criminally minded pros who really do have rigs and really do brag about how they do go attack the long lists of hashed passwords that often turn up after website breaches.

Please use bcrypt on your new key, the one you will be writing down the password to ;)

<comment><USER13> Even those who don't have such rigs can just rent them from, for example, Moxie Marlinspike's Cloud Cracker: [https://www.cloudcracker.com/](https://www.cloudcracker.com/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> More than a few people requested Github and Bitbucket to support more than RSA keys but they've both ignored the request for ECDSA for the last few years. The changes in 6.5 should inspire them to skip ECDSA and add Ed25519 as an option. Please Github and Bitbucket do everyone a favor and support modern keys. Next step is to save cpu cycles by using Curve25519 when available in the client. It's illogical not to.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm very happy to see djb's crypto work being supported in openssh!

Does anyone know offhand why ChaCha was chosen instead of XSalsa20, which is used in NaCl?

<comment><USER16> ChaCha is a little faster and apparently a little more secure. Dig through [http://www.ietf.org/mail- archive/web/tls/current/msg10843.ht...](http://www.ietf.org/mail- archive/web/tls/current/msg10843.html) for reference.

EDIT found a better one: [http://www.ietf.org/mail- archive/web/tls/current/msg10630.ht...](http://www.ietf.org/mail- archive/web/tls/current/msg10630.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Brew formula for mac

[https://gist.github.com/8266138](https://gist.github.com/8266138)

<comment><USER18> Awesome! Any chance the keychain patches can be applied against this?

<comment><USER17> Ported care of Debian patches and apple open source:

[https://github.com/steakknife/openssh/tree/apple-osx- openssh...](https://github.com/steakknife/openssh/tree/apple-osx-openssh- portable)

Update: it doesn't build yet, minor patch issue will fix tomrw.

Update 2: Fixed building, no warranty.

I'll refactor into patches, will be much simpler to validate.

<comment><USER17> As an update, I've started with clean patches from sources so it's all in a git repo instead of spread out in brew files and gists.

[http://github.com/steakknife/openssh](http://github.com/steakknife/openssh)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> it also has:

* sshd(8): Add support for pre-authentication sandboxing using the Capsicum API introduced in FreeBSD 10.

Capsicum is a nice way to drop privs that shipped in FreeBSD 10 and is also being worked on for Linux.

</comment><comment><USER3> Given that Ubuntu 14.04 is not released yet, it would be great to see this in a LTS release...</comment>


Hackers access 16 million email accounts - <AUTHOR> http://www.thelocal.de/20140121/agency-warns-of-16-million-email-accounts-hacked-bsi-germany

<comment><USER2> [https://www.bsi.bund.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/Presse2...](https://www.bsi.bund.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/Presse2014/Mailtest_21012014.html)

This is the official press release. Still they don't give a source for those 16 million credentials...

</comment><comment><USER3> There is no evidence for anything in the news reports. It looks like the BSI is just phishing for active mail accounts. Looks like the german goverment will never understand that security == transparency.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd disagree that security == transparency. You can not have security without transparency, but you can certainly have transparency without security.

As for the idea that they are "phishing for active mail accounts", I find that pretty far-fetched to be honest. What use would a vast list of email addresses of normal people be of use to them? To spam them?

<comment><USER4> You can have transparency without security, but at least you then know you don't have security, and can act accordingly.</comment></comment></comment>


What happened to those GM spider goats with the silky milk? (2019) - <AUTHOR> https://agfundernews.com/what-happened-to-those-gm-spider-goats-with-the-silky-milk.html <comment><USER2> There should be more follow-up articles like this. You could probably do a biannual roll-up for battery tech, to say nothing of more overtly political topics.

<comment><USER3> Blockchain + version control for news?

<comment><USER4> I suspect your downvotes are due to HN being tired of people proposing blockchain for problems it wouldn't solve.

Assuming your comment was sincere, I'll engage with your content instead of downvoting:

1\. You don't need a distributed, P2P database to archive news. Archive.org already does it, for example. So do some libraries.

2\. Saving things in immutable, distributed databases does not require a blockchain. BitTorrent has been mostly successful at this for decades, for example.

3\. It's common for stories like this to be covered in thousands of reputable and unreputable publications. The reputable ones already have policies against changing old stories, though none seem to do routinely change stories in practice. Either way, to update a story like this, you only need one example of the coverage.

<comment><USER3> Thanks! I was wondering.

Didn't have a clear idea of what the implementation details would have to be so I just named the two closest concepts that came to mind.

<comment><USER2> > so I just named the two closest concepts that came to mind.

To be quite blunt, this is a recipe for downvotable comments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This fizzled because bulk producing the protein is pointless when it still needs to be spun. I remember being amazed at their bizarre hubris in expecting that just pressing the goop through a small hole would create a silk strand

<comment><USER6> The photo in the article has the caption "These reels contain "synthetic" spider silk fibers spun from the spider silk proteins produced by Saanen goats. Photo © Lewis Lab at Utah State University.". What is the difficulty with spinning?

<comment><USER5> Looking into it a bit, they have a spinning machine and my best guess is they use that to spin (in the crude, wool sense not the molecular-level spinneret sense) some of, I guess their extruded goop, into a thread. You can assume from the vague wording, obtuseness in every article and lack of mention of any mechanical properties, that this thread doesn't have anywhere near the strength of spider-spun spider silk.

<comment><USER7> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinneret](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinneret) [https://web.archive.org/web/20161220082737/http://www.astrog...](https://web.archive.org/web/20161220082737/http://www.astrographics.com/GalleryPrintsIndex/GP2017.html)

At least I didn't know that spiders do molecular operations not only when generating the silk substance but assembling it to strand.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> No matter how much I admire it technically, from an ethical point of view things look a bit different and one might wonder if going forward with this and introducing yet another large scale industry abusing animals is really the best thing to do at this point.

<comment><USER9> I wonder why they didn't use yeast instead?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Need a random algorithm to chose stories from 10 years ago on HN and see comments then and where it is now.

<comment><USER11> Like a new sub reddit : Futureology+3 just re releasing the 3 year old press releases for people to crawl over and reddit. It is a good idea.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> My friend was actually one of the grad students working on this project. I've wondered what progress had been done, glad for the follow up

</comment><comment><USER9> This was kind of hard to follow. I'm still not sure what the answer is. Is the milk viable? How much silk can they get? Is it useful?

<comment><USER13> Agree. My reading was _" They are still researching, but nothing happened yet."_

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Read a story years ago, about post-apocalypse medicine women who kept pigs. They were pre-war and expressed drugs in their milk.

</comment><comment><USER14> I like how the FUD over GM is complemented by the potential for biodegradable fabrics (spider-silk woven in). What will the conspiracy theorist think!

</comment><comment><USER15> why goats?

why not silkworms?

<comment><USER16> "Clearly for quantity the silkworms will always win but for material properties, we are very close or superior in most cases," Dr Lewis writes.

<comment><USER17> That is in fairness a pretty weak response. Being "very close" in quality to another solution which can produce in greater bulk isn't useful, unless you anticipate outdoing it in the future. In what proportion of usecases are they actually superior, I wonder?</comment></comment></comment>


How PCs were advertised in the 1990s - <AUTHOR> https://medium.freecodecamp.com/how-pcs-were-advertised-in-the-1990s-cdaee59f2555#.dzsji3md9 <comment><USER2> I remember almost every one of these ads.

That thing that I remember most is that the ads were aimed at "nerds" and not consumers, so the specs were always front and center. Everyone was really excited when the 486 first came out or the _Pentium_. Or that there was more RAM or a bigger disk.

Nowadays I'm not even sure which Intel chip is the newest or fastest, nor do I care all that much.</comment>


AdWords finally prohibits free software "download site" parasites - <AUTHOR>

Dear AdWords Advertiser,
We're writing to let you know about a change to Google's advertising
policies that might affect your AdWords account.
In late April, the Google AdWords Unsupported Content policy was changed to
include additional requirements related to free desktop software downloads.
If you don't promote free desktop software, this change shouldn't impact
you.
You won't be allowed to promote free desktop software, unless the ad
explicitly names the software promoted and leads to the designated primary
distribution source for the software.
What you can do: If you advertise free desktop software, please ensure that your ads and
landing pages meet the following standards: 	- The ad includes the promoted software's name 	- The ad directs to a landing page on the site designated as the
software's primary distribution source
Google will be providing software developers an opportunity to designate
their primary distribution source for use with these ads.
You can find more details at https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/6023676#uc
Sincerely, The Google AdWords Team
You've received this mandatory email service announcement to update you
about important changes to your AdWords account.
(c) 2015 Google Inc. 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043 <comment><USER2> Good. They should also get rid of the fake USPS mail forwarding ads.</comment>


Ask HN: programming environment for a student who has outgrown toy environment? - <AUTHOR>

My middle-school child has been learning to program for a couple of years now. He's worked his way up through Scratch (MIT's drag-and-drop sprite environment) and CodeHS (a minimal JavaScript editor coupled with a simple graphics toolkit and a good introductory curriculum). He's ready for something more substantial, but I'm not sure where to turn.
CodeHS is nice for beginners, but it lacks basic IDE functionality, and is fixed to a small (400 x 400) canvas. In decreasing order of importance, my criteria for his next tool:
1. Basic IDE functionality, such as autocomplete, static error checking, multiple files, and a debugger.
2. Allow creating both graphical applications (e.g. games) and simple console-type programs.
3. Support publishing games and other simple applications as a web page, so he can show his work to friends and family.
4. Runtime environment is simple and lightweight (e.g. don't have to learn a complex UI toolkit).
5. IDE is lightweight and easy to learn.
6. Live in the cloud, so he can work from any computer.
7. Use a mainstream language.
Any recommendations? <comment><USER2> Maybe not 'lightweight', but I'll throw it out there: how about the MS Express editions (all free)?

[http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/eng/products/visual- st...](http://www.microsoft.com/visualstudio/eng/products/visual-studio- express-products)

More details here: <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/beginner/bb308754.aspx> and <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/beginner/default.aspx>

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a possibility, but can you use it to build programs that can be posted on a web page? I really wish there was something that felt like writing C# in Visual Studio Express, but produced JavaScript apps.

(He has a Mac, so we'd more likely wind up with Eclipse... not as polished, but similar idea.)

<comment><USER3> How about Aptana Studio? <http://www.aptana.com/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks -- I'll check it out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> You could consider Codea: [http://twolivesleft.com/Codea](http://twolivesleft.com/Codea)</comment>


Internet Explorer Must Die - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/16/internet-explorer-must-die/

<comment><USER2> Only problem is the recommendation at the end. He wants "everyone who understands the issues to start boycotting all versions of IE and begin explaining to their less geeky friends and family why they to should use any browser other than Internet Explorer". Well great, only that strategy has already been in effect for years. "Less geeky friends and family" are _not_ the people keeping IE alive right now.

The reason for IE's continued existence is the enterprise. A few years back, a bunch of companies paid way, way, way too much money to have "web" (read: Windows-only, IE-only) apps developed. Rather than admit this was a poor investment and have the apps redone, companies have just been mandating the use of IE until the end of time. And now that virtual machines are feasible there isn't even the risk of hardware failure to make them change!

So I give IE at least 10 more years, if not 15. I wouldn't be surprised if it takes the _retirement_ of certain key managers at all these companies before anything can change.</comment>


Ask HN: Facebook doesn't react on terrorists recruiting post, what to do? - <AUTHOR>

The biggest facebook page in Russian openly recruiting terrorist, but moderators don't respond to reports. I submitted several reports, but no reaction. I assume they simply don't understand what is the problem. Post includes detailed instruction how to join terrorist organisation "army of novorossiya", which is responsible of downing MH17 and many more crimes. There is link. https://www.facebook.com/The.Russian.Federation/photos/a.10150574453068539.389556.12795478538/10153968018728539/?type=1 <comment><USER2> > which is responsible of downing MH17 and many more crimes

{{Citation Needed}}

I googled it and all I see is that the Ukrainian government pointed the finger in their direction. However the Germans are blaming the Russian government's military forces in the region.

Seems like an organisation of Ukrainians and Russians, likely financed by Russia, fighting in the occupied/contested region of Ukraine.

Have to say if they did or did not down MH17, nobody can be too sure either way. However realistically it is hard to believe a rag tag group of "terrorists" could operate a modern anti-aircraft system such as the Buk missile system.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I remember that day when MH17 was downed, with my friends we collected photos from different sources and they all showed the same "Buk" around the that time (ground-air missile) in the Torez city which was under control of "army of novorossiya". "Buk" came from Russia, there are also few videos and photos, and with very high probability crew was also from Russia. Germans came to the same conclusion

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> [https://www.gov.uk/terrorism-national-emergency/reporting- su...](https://www.gov.uk/terrorism-national-emergency/reporting-suspected- terrorism)

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool, submitted report

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Facebook bots? I wish I could read Russian, the memes are probably worth reading.

You could probably hire a facebook bot 'like' network to 'report' a photo. You'd have to message the right people.

Wrote an article about how I tried fighting ISIS using twitter bots:[https://medium.com/@datarade/my-failed-attempt-at- fighting-i...](https://medium.com/@datarade/my-failed-attempt-at-fighting- isis-with-twitter-bots-25c6dab5bd72)

<comment><AUTHOR> No, it's actually one of the biggest page in Russia on Facebook, with 400k followers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> > The biggest facebook page in Russian openly recruiting terrorist, but > moderators don't respond to reports. I submitted several reports, but no > reaction.

I suppose you could complain to, e.g., the US FBI about Facebook knowingly providing material support to terrorists.

<comment><AUTHOR> I thought about it, but it will probably take month or so

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Who are you calling terrorists? A bus in the rebel stronghold Donetsk just got blown up and 13 civilians died. Do you think the rebels bombed themselves?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yep, they are terrorist. And, yes, they did. Read the piece in Guardian or elsewhere, location where bus was blown up is more than 15 kilometres away from the closest Ukrainian forces location. Max distance of mortar - 10km.

<comment><USER6> There's a military base in use by rebels just 500m from the site of the attack. It looks like the Ukrainian military or the volunteer battalions missed their target. But I'm not here to convince you of anything, seeing as you've already made up your mind.

<comment><AUTHOR> I repeat. If it would "Grad" or "Uragan" it would left much more destruction. So it was mortar, which max shooting distance is 10km. If you measure on Google Maps or elsewhere distance from Ukrainian forces position to the blast site it would be around 15 km. I would listen if you provide real argument, not just russian-zombie-tv-shit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Just report it as a hoax; I hear Facebook is cracking down on those.

<comment><AUTHOR> Their moderation process is a huge mess, that's for sure.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What advice would you give.. yourself? - <AUTHOR>

If you were able to to write a letter to yourself at a particular important time in the past (be it before a big decision you took, or a time milestone such as when you were 18 or 21), what advice would you give.. well, yourself? <comment><USER2> Instead of buying that shiny new iMac in 1997, and iPod and iBook in 2002, put all that money directly into AAPL. You'll thank me in 10 years.</comment>


Ask HN: Big Logo Argument, Edinburgh Startup Weekend - <AUTHOR>

We are a group of 9 idiots taking part in the Edinburgh Startup Weekend and we are about to break apart at the seams because we cannot agree on our logo!
This is the home page which at the time of writing, has both logos up:
http://www.ZebRez.com
... and we'll keep both viewable here on a more permanent basis:
http://www.ZebRez.com/logo
Half of us believe that the top is clearly better, half of us are convinced that the bottom one is obviously the better choice.
Even worse, of the 60 or so other participants and passersby that we managed to grab and interrogate, the decision was more-or-less 50/50 too ... and always with strong feelings on both sides.
Just to put it all into perspective, this is just for an online reservations Web service, based upon Stripe Connect, which we think is going to turn out to be surprisingly useful ... but ... we are still at each other's throats over this damn logo argument, I'm up at 2AM writing this plea ... and the final pitches are at 5PM on tomorrow night!
So, we figured, why not get this argument settled, for once and for all, by the folks at Hacker News: should we go with the top one or the bottom one?
Thank you from all the argumentative idiots on the ZebRez team. <comment><USER2> I prefer the bottom one, though I don't like the lettering much, it might be better with another font.

edit: Some 2 minute ideas: <http://i.imgur.com/yQnLt.png>

</comment><comment><USER3> Personally I don't like either but if I had to choose between them I'd go with the bottom one.

If I were you I'd just make the black "Zeb" text into black and white stripey text and ditch the zebra.

</comment><comment><USER4> I like the calendar icon from the top and don't like the lettering on the bottom one but favor the more traditional style of the bottom one otherwise.

</comment><comment><USER5> It's just Startup Weekend. None of the judges are going to care about the logo. Shake hands and flip a coin.

</comment><comment><USER6> The bottom one.

</comment><comment><USER7> Bottom</comment>


Ask HN: Did you #cutthecord  - <AUTHOR> http://joday.com/home/earlyaccess

<comment><USER2> The number of Americans who pay for TV through cable, satellite or fiber services fell by more than a quarter of a million in 2013, the first full-year decline, according to research firm SNL Kagan.

Source: [http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-19/u-s-pay-tv- subscrip...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-19/u-s-pay-tv- subscriptions-fall-for-first-time-as-streaming-gains.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> Pandora of Youtube Videos.</comment>


Info about the Google Play Music sunset - <AUTHOR> https://support.google.com/googleplaymusic/answer/9973710?p=gpm_sunset&visit_id=637334760286966762-3801689274 <comment><USER2> Two years from now: "Info about the YouTube Music sunset"...</comment>


The Alphabets at Risk of Extinction - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200121-the-alphabets-at-risk-of-extinction <comment><USER2> "Today, Kaoru Akagawa uses Kana, a mostly forgotten script traditionally used by Japanese women, in her art"

"Yet as the centuries passed, and the authorities began culling what they saw as superfluous letters, over 90% of Kana characters were lost. When Akagawa started investigating the script, she remembers, "no one had heard" of Kana."

Kana is alive and well in the Japanese language, as it refers to the Japanese syllabaries, Hiragana and Katakana. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kana)

What I think the article means is "Hentaigana", Hiragana variations that fell out of favor during the Meiji era. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hentaigana](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hentaigana)

As all Hiragana, they are based on the cursive Kanji (Chinese Characters). One can easilly find books about cursive forms of Kanji and Kana-only caligraphy books even here in Brazil. So I found the "no one had heard of Kana" part a bit off, even if refering to actually Hentaigana/old Kana. Whole Kana-only books where printed in the Edo era, often with the same connected style of Kaoru Akagawa, with Hentaigana and all: [https://pulverer.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/essay_lar...](https://pulverer.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/essay_large/public/image_assets/Fig9_FSC- GR-780.634.2_007.jpg?itok=uZnr4VPu) [https://pulverer.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/essay_lar...](https://pulverer.si.edu/sites/default/files/styles/essay_large/public/image_assets/Fig2_FSC- GR-780.469.3_012.jpg?itok=ArkD2Oit)

So anyone with some knowledge of Japanese History would have heard of them, specially in Japan. The wikipedia article even points out they are still used in signs for an archaic feel. Reading and writting them would indeed be relativelly rare, as cursive Kanji is, but the "no one had heard of Kana" (sic) part sounds very unlikely to me.</comment>


eBook containing 59 summaries of scientific articles published in March 2019 - <AUTHOR> https://bullets.tech/ebook <comment><USER2> I'll add it to the ever growing list in my "To Read" folder :)</comment>


Russian satellite lost after being set to launch from wrong spaceport - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/28/russian-satellite-lost-wrong-spaceport-meteor-m <comment><AUTHOR> Certainly puts my world of ecommerce-related deployments into perspective.</comment>


In Almost Every European Country, Bikes Are Outselling New Cars - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/10/24/240493422/in-most-every-european-country-bikes-are-outselling-cars <comment><USER3> I'm not sure that this is of much significance.

In 2009, in the US, there were 14.9 million bicycles purchased [1] vs. just over 13 million passenger vehicles[2].

[1]: [http://nbda.com/articles/industry- overview-2012-pg34.htm](http://nbda.com/articles/industry- overview-2012-pg34.htm)

[2]: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_Unite...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_United_States#Sales)

<comment><USER4> Unfortunately a huge number of those bikes are gathering dust in a garage. Europeans bike 188 km/yr vs 40 km/yr for the US [1]. It would be really interesting to see the rate of change.

[1] [http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/jpah08.pdf](http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/jpah08.pdf)

<comment><USER5> Lets raise the gas prices to EU levels and see what happens.

<comment><USER6> It would have little effect on bicycle use. Raising gas taxes is going to cost people who have longer commutes substantially more than people who live within reasonable biking distance. The average U.S. commute is around 32 miles round- trip, which would take close to 2 hours without traffic or traffic controls.

The response to higher gas taxes would have nothing to do with bikes. We'd buy cars with better fuel efficiency, explore alternative engines with lower costs-per-mile, and continue to pay the tax. Until the efficiency gains match the costs of the tax, the rest of the economy would suffer as most people would have less discretionary spending.

You HAVE to get to work, so you're going to eat the tax. And it's regressive, to boot.

Urban people in the U.S. complain a lot about the suburban nature of most of the country, but there is little that can be reasonably done eliminate the suburbs. Most people in this country simply prefer it, and will pay more for their transportation costs to get it. Raising taxes on these people is not going to change their behavior in any meaningful way. A few extra cents, or even an extra half dollar is gas taxes is going to be a lower cost to them than uprooting their life and moving within biking distance.

<comment><USER7> There's also public transportation, I've lived in Portland and LA and on average it takes 2x-10x longer to get to where you want. I've always wondered, especially on light rail, why can't they just go faster?

<comment><USER8> because of stopping. It takes more force to stop. Plus you would throw everyone and their stuff on the train around the process (they have no breaks for their forward acceleration).

You already feel a mild version of this in rush-hour on NYC subways. Your body will move slightly as the train breaks, often causing people to lose balance (particularly if they never experienced this previously)

<comment><USER9> Thus leading to the well-known sport of Subway Surfing.

<comment><USER10> Hah! I thought I was the only one who did that. So much fun.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Something that you can buy for 300 Euro outsells something else that costs 30,000 Euro. The two things can be roughly used for the same purpose.

I would not be surprised to hear that more paper and pens are sold in Europe than computers.

<comment><USER12> In Europe there are many cars for less than 500 euros. Even new ones are something around 6k euros. Those of course aren't sedans like but they're still cars.

In Barcelona we're suffering a process of making the whole city available for bikes and its one of the most wonderful things you can see. Almost everyone uses bikes to go work. It's healthy, it's confortable, and you don't need to pay taxes or insurance. I think it's a brainless option.

BTW: I forgot to mention my city runs a public bycicle program since 8 years and it's a total success. For 40€/year you get full access to a bicycle to move around the city without restrictions. I think it was the smartest move the city did.

<comment><USER13> I don't think you can pass a technical inspection with a 500€ car. At least not in Germany. Here the only cars you get for that price are obviously broken cars (accident, missing major parts, etc.) or cars that did not pass the inspection.

<comment><USER12> A Ford Fiesta 92 is around 500 euros in Spain. I don't know how is it in Germany, but here at Spain you even can get cars for 1000 wich are pretty decent and pass the inspection.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is only tangentially related to the article, but I'd like to say one of the reasons why bikes aren't more popular in many American cities is because the road systems give no thought to bikes at all. I vacationed to the bay area recently, where bikes seem comparatively more popular, and noted the difference in roads between there and where I live. It wasn't so much that the bay area was _good_ for bikes, but just kept them in mind. When there wasn't a bike path, there was a paved shoulder. When there wasn't a paved shoulder, there were signs and markings to help bikes and cars share the road.

Where I live, it approaches dangerous to bike on the road. When a road has a speed limit of 45 mph, turns, and no shoulder at all, it's difficult to bike. This is not in a rural area.

<comment><USER15> The evidence clearly indicates that bike ridership follows continuous bike infrastructure. When a city builds more and better bike lanes - <USER2> protected cycle tracks and neighbourhood greenways - the rate of cycling shoots up.

<comment><USER16> I'd imagine it also has a lot to do with climate. Where I live is too hot and humid to bike most months out of the year without having to take a shower when I get where I was going. Not really practical.

EDIT:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Houston](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Houston)

Keep in mind that I have a 15 mile ride to work, and no, moving is not an option.

<comment><USER17> I don't buy that at all. I think you are making excuses. Life was feasible before air conditioned automobiles.

If you shower before you ride then you have twelve hours or so head start on bacteria - it takes them that long to multiply, excrete and cause a stink. So even if you are glistening with sweat at work then you can change your clothes, wash your hands and face, sit at desk, work, no smell needed. If you do stink then maybe it is because you lack fitness and basic hygiene, which is nothing to do with there not being a shower at work.

When was the last time anyone washed a seat in a car? Never! A car seat is one of the most disgusting places to sit. Would you not change the sheets on your bed for years? No. Yet sit in the same seat in a car, year after year, with a greenhouse around it, sucking in carbon monoxide from the tailpipe in front - no idea why people think that is hygienic.

You need to get practical!

<comment><USER16> Hah, right. I'll gloss over the number of assumptions about me that you make and we'll just address the real crux of the issue.

Biking 15 miles to work is not practical in 100+ degree weather with humidity averaging between 60 and 90 percent. Moving to be within biking distance of work is not practical when jobs change every few years and there are two of us living in the house which is fairly central to both workplaces.

And I wash the interior of my car yearly - your phobia about 'dirty car seats' is fairly silly.

<comment><USER18> I'm curious. Isn't the breeze you get when biking enough to cool you down? I live in Denmark and we don't often have that kind of weather, but the breeze that you get when riding your bicycle can be really nice in the summer.

<comment><USER14> I've only experienced Dallas summer heat, but no the breeze doesn't help. I would leave work and it would be ~105 F (40.56 C). I'd get in my car and roll down the windows until the A/C started working. The air that came in while driving would feel like the same temperature as the air in the car, like a hair dryer or something. It was like an omnipresent inescapable oven. Imagining THAT with 80% humidity sounds unbearable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The article notes a slump in car sales, but doesn't chart historical bike sales (it only notes that in America bike sales are "solid") It could be coincidence: European bike might have risen, might have stayed the same.

>We decided to delve a little deeper into the figures and see which of these countries had the highest rates of bicycle-to-car ownership.

I'm more interested in historical bike sales, historical car sales, and the correlations and causations we could find, than which countries had the highest rates of bike-to-car ownership.

</comment><comment><USER20> Here's the problem in the States: The automobile lobbyists dominate all transportation legislation.

So what kind of laws does that get us? In most cities electric bikes are illegal. Sidewalks and bike lanes, more often then not, only cover partial lengths of road. It's actually illegal to ride a bike on the sidewalk, but the bike lanes in the States are so unbelievably dangerous that no one in their right mind would choose the bike lane over the sidewalk. You can't ride a bike along an interstate highway --that's illegal too. Oh, some rich cities have nice new bike paths, but they go almost no where useful and it is illegal to ride on those at night.

And to top it all off there's a cultural stigma that if you ride a bike for more than exercise or a leisurely peddle around the block then you are a worthless bum.

<comment><USER21> I guess Boston is one of those rich cities. There are swarms of business people commuting through the city each morning and night. I was not aware of anyone calling them bums. All of the people that ride the bike paths at night were unaware that it was illegal. The dedicated 10mi long bikeways like the Minuteman Commuter Bikeway are especially useful. 5000 lumen bike lamps help too.

Also, why would you want to bike on the shoulder of an interstate? The whole definition of a limited access highway is that only highspeed cars, going the same direction are on it, for safety.

<comment><USER22> Laws vary significantly by state. I'm pretty sure it's legal to ride on bike paths at night. In Washington you're required to have a forward-facing light and a rear reflector. It's also legal to ride on the sidewalk, unless you're in Everett.

As for biking on the shoulder of an interstate, there are areas where the only paved road going between two points is an interstate highway.

And of course there are very common borderline cases where I want to get from point A to point B, and the path on the interstate is 50 miles, while the path avoiding the interstate is 150 miles. So a trip that I ordinarily need to allot one day for becomes a 2-3 day trip unless I'm willing to pedal at top speed or for more than 8 hours. I don't want to bicycle on the interstate, but most infrastructure assumes your bike is a purely recreational vehicle.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Erm, just because you buy a new bike doesn't mean you stop owning and driving a car.

When I was living in Vienna we had 2 cars and 3 bikes for the family.

Bikes were replaced more often, I needed to buy a bike twice in 5 years due to the original ones being stolen. Kept my car the whole time.

Not exactly sure what this article is trying to show. Bad statistics?

<comment><USER24> Exactly. I live in Denmark and sure many of us use our bikes from transportation, but I guess that a large portion of the newly purchased bikes are for exercise.

Most of us can't afford a car that we drive just for fun, but most can afford even a $4000 - $5000 bike that's just for fun. Included in these statistics are mountain bikes and racing bikes that people ride only in the weekends.

The number of people commuting on their bikes are more interesting, but then the US and a few other countries are screwed because of the distances between the city and suburbs or industrial parks that are inaccessible by anything but a car (European countries have these too).

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I pedal to many meetings these days. It's fun, healthy and social. When a stranger pedaled up to me in the bike lane a few days ago and initiated a conversation, my day was made.

You see and experience more from a bike and it clears the mental cobwebs for me. Maybe my bobble head Yoda on the handlebars helps too :)

Pedaling on in California.

</comment><comment><USER26> We're just too broke and can't afford the cars.

<comment><USER27> You know, recent trends in transportation are pretty weird if you think about them. Classic science fiction always predicted a future with space ships and interstellar travel, yet here we are discussing the most efficient ways to pack everyone together in urban areas in order to make it easier to ride bikes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I finally pushed myself to bike to work this year, and up until this week managed to make my way to work 4-5 times a week using the bike. Living a 10-15 minute bike ride away from work really encouraged me to try this year, and I'm glad I did. I found it considerably more relaxing, even when riding in traffic, when compared to driving. Unfortunately, living in the Great White North, it has gotten too cold in the morning to bike (or at least it has for me). Temperatures are dipping below 0C, and I'm sure we will see snow soon enough. Bike is on standby mode now until next April or May when the snow is finally gone.

<comment><USER29> Its still doable even at those temperatures - here is what I do (though I don't use the bike when its snowing, yet):

1\. Dress well. Its _especially_ important to _fully_ cover your face (except eyes), ears and hands. Winter hat, scarf, gloves are always mandatory.

Legs may also need good (multi-layered) coverage but its not that critical. The number of layers for the rest of the body varies with the temperature

2\. Don't overexert yourself. Avoid getting to a point where you're breathing too quickly or too deeply - this can be painful and can trigger breathing problems. If your breathing starts getting deeper and faster, slow down.

Basically, its _much_ better to overdress and go slower than to under-dress and try to go fast to compensate with body-heat. Most cyclists will claim the contrary, but the contrary only applies after having some experience (or for people who just can't bear to go slow).

3\. Carry extra layers of clothes with you. You never know if the layers you need in the morning will be the same as the layers you need in the afternoon.

<comment><USER28> We have people here that bike year round, even though our temperatures dip _well_ below 0C (we get -25 to -30C on a regular basis, with windchill being -35C to -40C). That is far more effort than I'm willing to put in.

Once it snows, I consider it far too dangerous (though again, there are a few people here that bike in snow w/ studded tires). I only have a bike lane for a short part of my ride, the rest being on 50, 60, and 80kmh roads with no paved shoulder. I don't want to find out what happens if I hit a deep patch of snow, ice, or some cross-winds while a semi is passing me doing 80kmh.

As for your 2nd point, I made that mistake the first time it got close to freezing. By the time I made it to work, I had a tough time breathing.

<comment><USER30> I'm in Edmonton, which sounds pretty similar to your climate. Except for those few -40 days I've found winter biking to be fairly comfortable once you get moving.

In my experience you don't want to be using a bike lane after heavy snow anyhow; they often don't get plowed. If you can take residential roads you're pretty safe (and studded tires really do make a HUGE difference).

But yeah, you don't want to be on the road with cars going 80km/h - I wouldn't be comfortable doing that every day in the summer, either.

<comment><USER28> Ah yeah, I'm in Winnipeg. You guys are getting the nice weather this week, while we get around 0C :(

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> • As a point of reference, the average price of a new car in August was $31,252. (That's a US statistic, but all I found.) The average cost of a bicycle is probably three-figures.

• Ownership of the two is not mutually exclusive.

• Usage habits of the two vary wildly, probably mostly favoring cars, not only because keeping an unused car is far more expensive and complicated than keeping an unused bicycle is, and because people don't tend to buy cars the first week of January to work off those holiday pounds.

I'm not sure why this article matters much.

</comment><comment><USER32> Not just cars, but also locomotives and even boats! It is just pity that socks outsell the bikes.

</comment><comment><USER33> I wish I could use my bike all year long but the truth is that for someone living in Canada (I'm guessing it's similar for some northern states too), it's impossible to bike half the year. Some brave folks do it but it's quite dangerous. For someone who has lived in Amsterdam many years it's a sad realization that my city will never become a bike haven.

</comment><comment><USER34> If you're a family of four, you might have four bikes, and one car. Even 2 cars and you've still bought more bikes than cars.

<comment><USER35> And my kids have owned more bikes between them than I've bought cars in my life. They outgrow them quickly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> In almost every European country, shoes are outselling bikes!

</comment><comment><USER37> Smaller countries / cities with better public transit make it viable to own bike instead of car. Not the case in most of US.

<comment><USER38> Whether roads are designed with bikes in mind impacts it as well. NYC is dense enough for bikes, but much more dangerous to ride one in than most northern European cities.

<comment><USER39> I'm sure the weather has a lot to do with it as well. If it's icy/snowy a significant portion of the year, that makes it from uncomfortable to dangerous to ride during that time.

<comment><USER38> NYC might get more snow than Copenhagen, but there is definitely snow here as well, and it doesn't heavily impact bike commuting. The solution is just to clear the bike lanes of snow, and salt to keep them from icing. They have these little machines with rotating brooms that drive down the lanes regularly: [http://www.copenhagenize.com/2010/12/ultimate-bike-lane- snow...](http://www.copenhagenize.com/2010/12/ultimate-bike-lane-snow- clearance.html)

<comment><USER12> Correct. In Barcelona, Spain, when there's risk of snow they use salt. I think the ice isn't the problem, it's the lack of lines who is it. But people is finding that in the end, there's many at least, in Barcelona, to use and they stop using their cars in favor of bikes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> In Belgium , there are some tax rules that subsidize companies that give employees company cars. So its very common for a white collar worker to have a company car.

I wonder if thats why Belgium is the only country where this isnt true ( well besides luxembourg )

<comment><USER41> It is to be true in Portugal when you reached a certain company level.

Now with the crisis and since I am living abroad for many years, I cannot tell if it still holds.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> More interesting will be to see stats on car purchase rates in Uber and Lyft's top cities over the coming years. In SF, car ownership is becoming a luxury amongst people I know - they either have a sports car, or no car and use Uber/Lyft/Zipcar for transportation everywhere.

A recent David Sacks tweet claiming this got a lot of attention: "Why Uber/Lyft market is so much bigger than people think: it's not a substitute for cabs, it's a substitute for driving." [https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/status/378305832602980353](https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/status/378305832602980353)

</comment><comment><USER43> I once carpooled with a very nice lady from Netherlands. She would not stop talking about how she was amazed to see very little bikes in the US while back home, she grew up with bikes being part of a daily routine.

<comment><USER44> If you've ever been to Amsterdam, it's amazing to see how the people move around that city. Bikes everywhere and they have the right of way. Not cars.

<comment><USER45> In many cases, that is _take_ the right of way. Cars and bikes (mostly?) have equal footing. That sometimes means the car has right of way, sometimes it's reversed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> I wonder how much the 'cycle to work' scheme in the UK has affected our numbers. (It means a lot of middle class white collar workers buy a new high- end bike every year, before income-tax.)

</comment><comment><USER47> What's so surprising? Clearly there's a limit on the growth of auto infrastructure. I like to think that bikes offer a path out of the rat race being that transportation is 2nd in cost of living expenses. (however, a 60+ cyclist I know bikes 15 miles on grueling hills to his low end job, disputes this dream??) And so does the tech world where there are still massive profits to be made on sustaining the auto culture (gps, hybrids, ev's,google navigation, etc.) (And I don't necessarily think that's bad)

</comment><comment><USER48> One thing that also tips this figure is the fact that bikes can be used by any age group, cars cant. How many thousands or millions of bikes for kids are sold every year?

<comment><USER17> Interesting point. Kids typically go through several bikes as they get older, moving between the wheel sizes - 12.5" with stabilisers, then the stabilisers come off and the next bike comes along - 20" wheels, then there is the 24" wheel size and then something with the adult wheel size but still a kids bike.

This is what the bicycle trade want, however, it does not always work out that way. Families will hand bicycles down from big kid to little kid, on to neighbours or sell them on as second hand. That cuts a lot of sales potential out. Also some parents will insist on getting 'value for money' and have the child ride a bike that is too large for them so they can grow into it.

Roads are full of these killing machines called cars, because of this only a minority of kids are allowed bikes. Cycling is more of an adult thing, or adult with small children, whereas it used to be more for older children, giving them freedom and independence. Young adults also want to go by car, so sales could be improved in that demographic.

I would actually argue that kids result in more sales of cars than bicycles. A family will need to go through a few cars, one for him and one for her, to do all those family things like shopping, school drop-offs and whatever else comes along. Come 17 another car will be needed because child will have passed his/her driving test and must therefore drive everywhere from that moment onwards.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> That's what an economic collapse does to your population.

</comment><comment><USER50> Does this include bikes for children as well - if yes, please subtract the number of people below 16 living in each of the countries for a more useful comparison.

<comment><USER51> Why 16?

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_minimum_dr...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_minimum_driving_age#Europe)

<comment><USER52> Children younger than 16 usually need new bikes quite often.

<comment><USER53> Why 16?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_minimum_d...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_minimum_driving_age#Europe)

<comment><USER54> They stop growing so fast.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> I wish US roads would become more bicycles friendly.

</comment><comment><USER56> This past summer I biked about 10 kilometers a day over 45 days. This is around 450 kilometers and I know I biked even more, but did not count how much after those first 45 days as biking was not daily routine anymore. Last Friday I put my bike into storage as it is so damn cold here in Finland already. Next summer I will probably try to get 1,000 kilometers.

</comment><comment><USER57> Please remember that for a serious recreational cyclist, the correct answer to "how many bikes should I own" is:

$num_bikes_owned++

From my experience in the local road racing scene, a majority of the 200 or so cyclists that participate in the weekly training racing have at least four different bikes. I suspect that the percentage that only owns one bike is very, very small.

<comment><USER58> From my experience away from the local road racing scene, I'd venture that serious recreational cyclists represent up to .1% of cyclists.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> I'd so wish this caught on in my country, not just because of costs, I happen to find biking really enjoyful and relaxing. Unfortunately, what you end up with is being made fun of for choosing such a method of transport or even harassed, especially if you end up being a young professional or not a burly male.

</comment><comment><USER60> In the netherlands there are almost too many bikes. Look at the roads for bikes: [http://www.politiekdelft.nl/oostsingel_000_fietspad_2010_04_...](http://www.politiekdelft.nl/oostsingel_000_fietspad_2010_04_13_15_49_a.jpg)

<comment><USER61> There are 1.11 bikes per person in The Netherlands, but I don't see why that's too many. I've lived in Amsterdam and it's an absolute joy to move around.

Anecdotally, I've been told that people that live in a different town than where they live have:

* a bike to go to the train station * a bike to go from the train station to work * a nice bike for weekends

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> Could there be a climate connection here as well? A cursory inspection of some weather stations scattered across europe[1] indicate a slight warm trend over the past two winters, especially 2011 (disregarding 2013 data as its not yet complete).

[1]: weatherspark.com

</comment><comment><USER63> Is this new bikes or all bikes? Headline, charts, and article all seem unclear. Obviously, if used bike sales are included and used car sales are not this observation is completely meaningless, instead of just not terribly significant...

</comment><comment><USER64> So what? Everyone in a family has a bike (even the kids), but there are usually one one or two cars. Also bikes are cheaper and usually have a shorter lifetime. If cars would outsell bikes, THAT would be a headline.

</comment><comment><USER65> Ridiculous comparison.

This is not a displacement market. Few people chose bike OR car. It's more like car AND a few bikes. A family of four can do with one car yet needs four bikes.

As others pointed out, the case is the same in the US.

</comment><comment><USER66> Why is this a surprise? Most families have 1-2 cars, if a family of 4 wants to go on a bike ride together, they're going to need 4 bikes...

Furthermore, bikes are easier to break, get stolen, and are much cheaper...

</comment><comment><USER67> Looks like this could maybe be an influencing factor to Tesla's success there, after a German magazine doubts its potential in Europe ([http://finance.yahoo.com/news/german-magazines-story- teslas-...](http://finance.yahoo.com/news/german-magazines-story-teslas- prospects-163225464.html)).

Teslas are the ultimate commuter car - great for short distance, back and forth, stop and go. If Europeans are already doing these sorts of commutes on bicycles, what is the point of a Tesla? If what they really need cars for in Europe is long-distance travel, a Tesla probably isn't the right match.

</comment><comment><USER68> You mean, $100-200 items (of which most kids have one or three during their childhood) are outselling $10,000 items (though more like $30,000 in Europe)?

</comment><comment><USER69> I'm car free in Portland Oregon. So far so good. Ask me how I'm feeling about it in January. :)

</comment><comment><USER70> Being of the same price?)

In Almost Every European Country, Apples Are Outselling Oranges

</comment><comment><USER71> "In Europe, pads of paper are outselling iPads"

</comment><comment><USER72> How many of them come with training wheels and ribbons?

</comment><comment><USER73> And, in other news, cars are out-selling airplanes.

</comment><comment><USER74> I could bet a whole lot of money that shoes are outselling both bikes _and_ cars in every European country.

</comment><comment><USER75> Slow news day at NPR.

</comment><comment><USER76> Wasn't that Alan Gore who started this drama with CO2 emissions so his company makes big $$$ trading CO2 "packages" or however they're called while he is enjoying a few of his mansion houses while telling the rest of us to cut on electricity and ride on bikes?

Dear Westerners suffering from Stockholm Syndrome: Stalin called people like you "useful idiots".

<comment><USER77> Let me guess: you also think global warming is a hoax, evolution is fake, and vaccines are a scam.

<comment><USER76> Let me guess: you still think that we all are going to die of skin cancer because of the whole in the ozone layer?

What happened to that thing? Got old? I'll tell you what. New taxes were imposed world-wide and the problem disappeared over night.

Coldest winters in living memory and these clowns still push "global warming" propaganda. Why don't you turn off the TV and open the eyes, huh?

<comment><USER77> > _Let me guess: you still think that we all are going to die of skin cancer > because of the whole in the ozone layer? What happened to that thing? Got > old? I 'll tell you what. New taxes were imposed world-wide and the problem > disappeared over night._

"One time my toaster caught fire, and I poured a bucket of water over it and put it out. Therefore I conclude that putting out fires is easy, and I don't see why people keep moaning about forest fires."

> _Coldest winters in living memory_

Where? It's been balmy as hell here in Kentucky these past two or three winters. Fleas and ticks are getting really bad without a long, hard freeze to kill them all off.

The world's pretty big, you know. Just 'cause it was cold in your neck of the woods doesn't mean the planet's not getting hotter. You can find the global average numbers as well as I can; they speak for themselves.

<comment><USER78> Sidenote: Might be a bad idea to pour water over a toaster.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Gccgo language contribution accepted - <AUTHOR> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gcc.devel/111603

<comment><USER2> Acceptance is likely due to Ian Taylor being a long term GCC developer who is easy to work with, which mean that 1) the front end obeys the often unwritten conventions for good behavior, and 2) they know Ian Taylor will be around to (and capable of) fixing the various unavoidable problems that will show up. Thus, the new front end should only put a minimal burden on the other maintainers.

The merit of Go itself has likely been less of a concern.

</comment><comment><USER3> What does this mean for go exactly? Sorry for my ignorance. Does this mean that go will be distributed with GCC going forward (once the merge date is determined that is)?

<comment><USER4> I think that's right. But as they stated, they're not sure when the merge will take place.

This makes me wonder a little bit if LLVM won't (maybe?) do something similar. Not that it's a 'huge' deal, but for parity?

<comment><USER5> Apple's investment is in ObjC; I don't see them doing any work on Go.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Ex-entrepreneurs, what career path did you pursue after your start up? - <AUTHOR> Over the past couple years, I've been running a company in a non-tech field that has been growing very rapidly, investing heavily in technology to operate much more efficiently than our competition. It has been great, and it something I truly love, however due to personal circumstances I may need to step away from the company for a few years and pursue something that can provide a higher level of stability, along with security, for my family.
Like many entrepreneurs, I've worn many, many hats over the past few years - product development, QA, finance, accounting, sales, marketing, etc. I love being able to contribute ideas and suggestions in each of these areas getting started, until we have found someone who is truly an expert in that business area to take the reins and ownership of that aspect of the team.
As I start exploring opportunities in the marketplace, I see many, many postings asking for functional expertise, but next to nothing asking for broad experience putting pieces together for a venture with many unknowns (figuring out and reducing the risk associated with those unknowns in the process).
So I am curious, those of you here who have previously ran or started a company, but returned to the labor market, what opportunities did you pursue? Where were you happiest after leaving your entrepreneurial venture? What was your background before taking the entrepreneurial leap, and did you return to that field after you left your company? <comment><USER2> Web development. I did online marketing (mainly seo) before founding a cleaning as a service startup. I had basic wordpress, html and css knowledge before so I had to take time out to intensely learn computer science fundamentals and then web development specifically. It was definitely the right choice to do development. Much more interesting and challenging and it is a skill with a much greater leverage for doing future projects.

</comment><comment><USER3> Wish I could tell you. Struggling, really struggling with this now. My business is dead and I need to find something else. But I have no worthy ideas and nobody wants to hire someone with "general" experience - everything is about highly specialized skills and experience.</comment>


Airtel wants Google, Facebook and Yahoo to pay for network usage - <AUTHOR> http://www.indiadigitalreview.com/news/airtel-asks-trai-impose-interconnection-charges-internet-companies

<comment><USER2> I can see their viewpoint, however I don't agree. If I were to rent a computer to do my work on, should the rental company seek a portion of any profit I make using that machine?

A bigger issue would be where would you stop the charges. They would be quite happy to charge the big names such as google and facebook for when people connect to them, but what about small websites? Where would the distinction lie?</comment>