How to Combine GZip + CDN for Fastest Page Loads - <AUTHOR> http://www.alfajango.com/blog/how-to-combine-gzip-plus-cdn-for-fastest-page-loads/ <comment><USER2> Amazon Cloudfront does support gzip, just not dynamically. So it requires uploading two versions of every CDN file, one uncompressed and a second that is compressed, being careful to set content-encoging and content-type headers correctly. Then all the pages on your site (assuming they're all dynamically generated of course) need decide whether the client can handle gzip or not and the link to the appropriate gzip/non-gzip version in the Amazon CDN.

The real "fun" begins when you have CSS or javascript files that reference other files in the CDN. You have to fix them to link to the correct gzip/non- gzip version of the files.

With some perl, trial-and-error it can be made to work. There are some Amazon S3 modules in CPAN, which is a big help.

The big win for Amazon CDN is the low cost to experiment: Pay as you go. Our bill for the first 3 months of playing around with S3 and the CDN (this is just for internal testing mind you) was less than a dollar. Looking at SimpleCDN, they want a minimum of $500 for a month of service before you can even access the full dashboard.

All the other CDNs I've looked at require a phone call to a sales and marketing droid to setup an account. When all I really want is a trial account and some API docs.

<comment><AUTHOR> Amazon cloudfront supports _serving_ gzipped files, it does not support reading the incoming request to see if it _accepts_ gzipped files. If you read the first part of the original article, it explains why that doesn't work. It only works when you dynamically generate the page on EVERY request, which makes caching impossible. Hence, it's never been a viable option for us, which is what lead to this article.

<comment><USER2> No, I understand. I implemented the first suggested "fix" in your article that you say "won't work."

You seem to think caching two copies of a file is unreasonable (it all depends on how big your site is I guess), but in our case all pages are dynamic and uncachable so this requirement doesn't apply to us.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, yes, if your site is uncachable anyway, then that really is the way to go. Caching two copies isn't unreasonable I guess, but in the context of Rails (which is the unstated context of this solution), it's more of a pain in the ass than it's worth.

[Edit: I updated the post to be clear that this solution does work if your page is uncachable anyway.]

<comment><USER3> This is a big win when you use ESI, so your actual page content is cached separately from your header information. You can even push the decision about which asset links to use out to the edge. Goooooo Varnish!

<comment><USER4> /agree

"I won't go into detail about how to actually accomplish this, because the truth is, this won't work either. " => the truth is.. you fail ;)

But yeah, nice loading graph and +1 for the mathematical/logical alternative solution.

Good article

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Will someone please correct me if I'm wrong. But why is everyone worrying? Which browsers DON'T actually support gzip compression?

<http://schroepl.net/projekte/mod_gzip/browser.htm> This seems to suggest that all modern browsers support it.

<comment><USER6> IE. _From your own link._

<comment><USER5> IE 5.5 and 6.0. Neither of which are modern browsers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> slightly ironic: that site is loading terribly slow.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes I apologize, the reason the site is so slow is simple: I haven't implemented any of this on _that_ site yet. I'll be sure to do that before the next article though. If you'd like to see the effect of this actually implemented, check out <http://www.ratemystudentrental.com>

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I haven't used their service, but SimpleCDN advertises their support for gzip right on the front page, in big letters. That might be a good alternate option to consider, if you have a bunch of text files that need CDN hosting.

<comment><AUTHOR> Awesome, thanks! I actually meant to link to a couple CDNs that support it, but completely forgot to add those links to the article.

The problem with most of the CDNs that support gzipping are that they are much more expensive than Amazon CloudFront, and usually not pay-as-you-go. For instance, according to SimpleCDN's pricing page, the lowest tier for HotCache (their service that supports gzipping) is $500/mo. It's cheaper than cloudfront at the large scales it's meant for, but for most people it's overkill and too expensive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I would think that any CDN would support gzipping, assuming you can set the content headers explicitly.

<comment><USER10> Amazon Cloudfront doesn't, but there are workarounds like this: [http://blog.kenweiner.com/2009/08/serving-gzipped- javascript...](http://blog.kenweiner.com/2009/08/serving-gzipped-javascript- files-from.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> I explained why this doesn't work well in the part of the OP article entitled "solutions that don't work".

<comment><USER10> You discussed server-side rewriting, but this is client-side. If the user's browser supports gzip, then the gzipped javascript file gets read properly and sets the flag, and further requests get directed to the gzipped versions. This doesn't defeat the speed improvement of the CDN, and doesn't add much complexity to the filesystem or code.

This is quite different from reading the request encoding in PHP, Python, etc, on the server side that you mention.

<comment><AUTHOR> No, that solution requires that the client be able to accept gzip encoding. The problem is, the server needs to be able to read the incoming HTTP request to see if "gzip" is contained in the HTTP:Accept-encoding header and only serve the gzipped version if the answer is YES (and otherwise serve the non- gzipped version). Apache and most other servers do this easily. Amazon S3 and CloudFront do not.

That article ignores this fact, and just always serves the gzipped version with the gzip header encoding, whether the client accepts it or not. This works for probably 90-95% of the time (or more), but for anyone with a non- trivial app, that's not good enough.

<comment><USER10> _the server needs to be able to read the incoming HTTP request to see if "gzip" is contained in the HTTP:Accept-encoding header and only serve the gzipped version if the answer is YES_

You're wrong...this can be accomplished on the client side with Javascript, without ever involving server-side code:

I upload a gzipped test file to S3/Cloudfront containing a single line that sets a flag (e.g. supportsGzip = true).

I then include that script at the top of my HTML page. If the browser supports gzip, then that file gets read correctly, and the supportsGzip variable gets properly set to true. If the browser does not support gzip, the file is gibberish, and the flag does not get set.

Throughout the rest of the file, I use that supportsGzip variable to determine which versions of other static files to load (e.g. if(supportsGzip) {document.write(script tag src = gzip path)})

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, I actually mis-read the article. Sorry, I'm wrong, you're right, that would work ;-)

I guess the only situation this wouldn't work would be if the user's browser supports gzipping, but doesn't have javascript enabled, but then it'll just serve everything unzipped by default, so not a big deal at all.

Also, it seems kind of a pain to have to do that if-statement throughout all of your javascripts, html, and stylesheets. But I'm sure you could probably create a javascript 1-liner that runs _after_ everything else that just goes through and changes all the sources for you, so it might end up being even easier than our method.

<comment><USER10> I'd be willing to bet that Amazon starts offering on the fly gzip within a year's time

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> What I don't get is why anyone who wanted "fastest page loads" would touch CloudFront with a ten foot pole. Check the testing; they're by far the slowest.

</comment><comment><USER12> This would be _so_ much more helpful if it detailed more common CDNs like Akamai.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not sure I understand. What do you mean _detailed more common CDNs_? If a given CDN does not support gzipping, just read the article inserting your CDN in place of "Amazon CloudFront". If the CDN _does_ support gzipping, then this solution is unneeded, as you can just use that CDN normally.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Or, just use the www.instacdn.com api instead. It takes care of all the messy stuff.</comment>


Ask HN: Where is Google's response to Mocality's Allegations? - <AUTHOR>

Given the speed with which the story is spreading, why no response? <comment><USER2> Google HQ is in UTC-0800, right? They've probably not been aware of it for very long, and are probably scrambling to find out Google Kenya's side of the story.</comment>


Xbox One: Details on Connectivity, Licensing and Privacy Features - <AUTHOR> http://news.xbox.com/2013/06/main

<comment><AUTHOR> Bullet points:

* "Because every Xbox One owner has a broadband connection." _I don't know who cleared this line, but that's silly_

* You can play any one of your games from any Xbox One w/o a disc.

* Digital downloads are available the day of release.

* You have to connect at least once every 24 hours or you can no longer play games (or one hour if you are logged in somewhere else).

* It appears families have linked accounts tied to a home Xbox One that up to ten people can access, giving them the ability to use any of your games anywhere they sign in. _I have no idea how they are going to deal with abuse of this feature, or really how it'll work in practice._

* Publishers have the say as to whether you can trade-in games. Trade-in retailers have to be part of the approved system. Microsoft charges no fees.

* You can give games to friends if they have been on your friends list for 30 days. Games can only be given once. _Not clear if giving once means that the recipient cannot then send it on, or just if you can only give one person a copy of it._

* There are no rentals or loans right now, but Microsoft is looking into potentially adding the feature.

* The Kinect can be turned off at will, when the power is off it is only listening for the "Xbox On" command, and you can make it so that it never listens for that. Some games do require it to be on.</comment>


Wanted: Quirky Individuals to join a fast growing startup to build a new future - <AUTHOR> "Properly defined, a startup is the largest group of people you can convince of a plan to build a different future." - Peter Thiel
WANTED:
Quirky Individual(s) to join a fast growing startup to build the future, as we want it to be.
ARE YOU:

  Curious?
  Exceptionally clever?
  Addicted to technology?
  Willing to venture into the unknown?
  Willing to adapt fast?
  Willing to join an already weird team that wants to teach+learn more?
  Passionate about a hobby that you'd love to share with others?
  Wanting to change the present to make the future better?
 DO YOU:

  Like solving problems?
  Like finding new ways of more efficiently doing things?
  Like spending time on a spreadsheet to help you make better decisions?
  Love breaking things just to put them back together?
  Think that grit is all it takes to get something done?
  Think that you'd be a good match for the team?
  Think that every job posting should be like this?
  Want to know more?
 Are you brilliant? We're hiring. Explore the Warehouse.
TO APPLY: Please send us a message or
  email to: firstname.lastname@example.com
  with the following information:

  -Background information
  -Resume
  -Answers to the following 6 questions:

  -What important truth do very few people agree with you on?
  -What is a great company that no one has started yet?
  -What are some of your favorite websites?
  -What are some of your favorite books?
  -What would you do if you knew that you only had 24 hours left on Earth?
  -What do you really believe in?
 Thank you for taking the time to read this. We wish you well in your search for a new future. <comment><AUTHOR> We hope that everyone has a happy Memorial Day with their families.

Our team/startup is proud to currently call Las Vegas, Nevada our home.

Flexibility between Full Time, Part Time, and Remote Positions are available and this offer is open to anyone, from any country around the world. We would love to hear from you, so please reach out to us to at least say hello.

We're interested in building a very large, diverse team of talented individuals to help us build a better future.

What can we do to improve? Please feel free to send us questions and/or comments. Thank you again.

<comment><USER2> This is intriguing, but you're asking for lots of very personal info about us without even telling us your name, your company's name, or your industry.

Would it completely sabotage this unique recruiting strategy to tell us at least something about yourselves?

<comment><USER3> His HN profile: "i come from the future and want to see it built the way that it should be. please feel free to contact me to learn more."

What more do you need?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I have no idea if your company is interesting, but the questions are.

-What important truth do very few people agree with you on?

That the first duty of a society is to ensure that everyone is housed, healthy, fed and educated.

-What is a great company that no one has started yet?

I'm not much of a consumer. The only things that come to mind are more like non-profits and foundations dedicated to things like cheap and widely available pharmaceuticals, and other social improvement.

-What are some of your favorite websites?

HN, NYT, fuckinghomepage.com, python.org, stackoverflow, google news, google images, google translate.

-What are some of your favorite books?

Effective Computation in Physics, Python for Data Analysis, The Ringworld Series, Gone With the Wind, Adventures of Frog and Toad, Unix Power Tools, Catch 22, Working by Studs Terkel, A Canticle for Liebowitz, Travels With Charlie, Cannery Row, East of Eden, The Beautiful and the Damned, Time Enough for Love.

-What would you do if you knew that you only had 24 hours left on Earth?

Go outside.

-What do you really believe in?

I marvel at the unfathomable size and age of the universe, and the effectively zero chance that I could ever exist. I believe that when I look out at the universe, in at myself, and around at my world and fellow beings, that it's an instance of the universe observing and knowing itself. I also believe that we humans are wasting our world and our civilization, that this could be a true paradise of love, respect and potential, and I'm skeptically optimistic that that could come to pass.</comment>


Kurrently - a real time search engine for Facebook and Twitter - <AUTHOR> http://www.kurrently.com

<comment><USER2> I kept getting the same results each time I hit "more." I got excited when I read the title. I thought it might actually be obtaining data from those sources in real-time. A quick glance at the status bar showed otherwise.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> the 'see more' link on search results with a single response repeats the result. So if i search X and Y comes up when I click 'see more' it shows a list of Y, Y. I assume this is just a small bug.

<comment><AUTHOR> Fixed.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I'd love to hear from you guys on how I can improve the site.

<comment><USER4> Nicely done! Suggested searches is a good touch.

It'd be nice to have a tiny icon beside each of the search results to tell me what service the search result is coming from.

The search result page is a bit... long. Not sure that it's bad, but it is unexpected.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're not alone in wanting to know which services the results come from. I love the idea of putting a small icon. Thanks!</comment></comment></comment>


Missouri court finds using thumbnail pictures a violation of fair use - <AUTHOR> http://www.scribd.com/doc/34464858/Teter-v-Glass-Onion-W-D-Mo-July-12-2010 <comment><AUTHOR> Relevant bits:

The Court applies these factors and considers the circumstances of this case in the context of the broader aim of copyright law. Use of a work may be fair use where its purpose is transformative or supercedes the function of the original work. GOI's images are not transformative, as they do not alter the original work "with new expression, meaning, or message." Campbell , 510 U.S. at 579. Unlike the scenario where a general internet search engine "transforms the [thumbnail] image into a pointer directing a user to a source of information," GOI's use of the images is limited to an informative and promotional function on the Gallery's website- to show customers the Teter works available at the Gallery. See Perfect 10 , 508 F.3d at 1165. The images advertise Teter's works, which is a basic commercial purpose and suggests against a finding of fair use.</comment>


Things not to do when anonymous - <AUTHOR> https://www.whonix.org/wiki/DoNot <comment><USER2> When you use a VPN can your OS update request be used to de anonymize you? I would think that Microsoft or Apple would get a request saying "the OS running on this machine with activation token 0xfe875c56a788d0 is checking for an OS update" regularly, so that the government could subpoena for the activation token held by the device that had IP 220.127.116.11 at 7pm on March 25, and then for all other IPs that this token has ever requested OS updates from.

</comment><comment><USER3> Do Not Use BitTorrent should be numero uno.

<comment><USER4> Why? I don't think BitTorrent is actually a privacy threat, for the most part, it would just put undue load on the Tor network if everyone were doing it.

<comment><USER3> Because of the protocol your real IP is likely to be leaked.

<comment><USER4> Interesting - it seems that the more measured (privacy) advice should be: "don't use BitTorrent unless you _know_ that your client implements the protocol in a privacy-protecting way". It seems that the protocol itself is not to blame, but the way it is implemented in many (most? all?) clients leaks significant identifying information. See here: [https://blog.torproject.org/blog/bittorrent-over-tor-isnt- go...](https://blog.torproject.org/blog/bittorrent-over-tor-isnt-good-idea)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Do not spend bitcoin you bought in the clearnet when purchasing non legal materials from the darknet</comment>


Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/business/westinghouse-toshiba-nuclear-bankruptcy.html <comment><USER2> The real concern here is making sure the existing nuclear plants have a clear glide slope toward end-of-life. Nuclear power is an extremely tight community. On the nuclear carrier I was on (powered by Westinghouse plants), there was a valve (a valve!) malfunctioning and the tech rep flown out from the company took one look at it and said "This bit's in backward". "How do you know?" "I designed it". Which means the same guy had been working on that system for 30 years.

The people working for this company are a matter of national security. I sure hope Secretary Mattis understands that.

This, also, by the way, is a great illustration of Elon Musk's contention that these technologies don't just keep working. Brilliant, competent engineers and scientists have to invest themselves in making them work.

<comment><USER3> > "This bit's in backward"

This is why I'm against nuclear power. As safe as the technology _could_ be, it still run by humans who make errors.

If you think a bit being put in backwards isn't a big deal, check out the history of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.

> The San Onofre station had technical problems over the years. In July 1982, > Time wrote, "The firm Bechtel was ... embarrassed in 1977, when it installed > a 420-ton nuclear-reactor vessel backwards" at San Onofre.

Backwards. The reactor was installed backwards.

It goes on.

> In 2008, the San Onofre plant received multiple citations over issues such > as failed emergency generators, improperly wired batteries and falsified > fire safety data. In its annual review of 2011, the Nuclear Regulatory > Commission (NRC) identified improvements but noted that in the area of human > performance, "corrective actions to date have not resulted in sustained and > measurable improvement".

Source: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Onofre_Nuclear_Generating_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Onofre_Nuclear_Generating_Station)

<comment><USER4> Being against nuclear for trivial reasons like these is why we have the alternative: coal plants. Those kill an estimated 300,000 thousand people per year[1].

It's only recently that renewables have become a realistic alternative in some (but not all) cases, but for decades we've had people dropping like flies due to coal, entirely because the public is too science illiterate to understand that nuclear isn't anywhere as big of a deal by comparison.

1\. [https://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/...](https://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/pollution- deaths-from-fossil-fuel-based-power-plants)

<comment><USER3> > the public is too science illiterate to understand that nuclear isn't > anywhere as big of a deal by comparison.

Science illiteracy has nothing to do with it. The industry has a history of non-trivial reasons for mistrust.

Regarding coal plant deaths, I'm not in favor of coal either. The sooner we can move away from fossil the better.

<comment><USER4> Yes it is science illiteracy. It's being blind to a much larger diffuse harm in the face of some concentrated but much smaller harm.

It's arguably the most harmful kind of science illiteracy because it has the biggest impact on public policy. Everything from people opposing mandatory seat belt laws, to being overly concerned about e.g. genetically modified food or cell phone tower radiation.

I'm sure you mean well, but really, people who hold exactly the opinion you hold are in the aggregate _the_ reason for literally millions of deaths that didn't need to happen worldwide since WWII.

We had all the data to indicate that burning fossil fuels was causing massive diffuse harm, nuclear was realistically the only alternative in most cases, but people didn't go for it because they were afraid, even though all the science showed that there was little to worry about in comparison to what we were already doing.

Sure someone installed a reactor backwards, but how are minor incidents like these at all relevant compared to literally tens to hundreds of thousands of deaths per year because we keep using the alternative?

<comment><USER5> And you're not even counting the lives saved from increased wealth due to cheaper electricity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I find the headline weird, "a blow to nuclear power". I feel like nuclear power is possibly the most attacked form of energy that exists, and that includes coal and petroleum, both of which are still heavily used despite any public outcry. Westinghouse has made some bad deals, sure, but the real "blow to nuclear power" has been the massive refusal by both citizens and governments to build new plants, and the few notable failures by plant operators to maintain safe operation.

Of course the company that builds nuclear plants can't succeed if new plants aren't being built. Westinghouse going under isn't going to destroy nuclear power, nuclear power was already dead.

<comment><USER7> After reading years and years of discussions like this, it seems like the citizen opposition and (somewhat unfair) demonisation of nuclear power is endlessly repeated as the reason we don't have nukes anymore, despite them being a great source of clean(ish) energy.

However it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics. They're just too damn expensive to build and run, and the expected returns on investment take an extremely long time to materialise(20+ years) Noone wants to put up the enormous capital, with the very real risk that they'll never see returns as the alternative energy markets(gas, solar, etc) are evolving and dropping in price so quickly. I know I'd be pretty hesitant taking a half billion dollar 30 year bet against technology.

<comment><USER8> > it seems the real reason, as in all things, is economics

The economics might be different if we paid for the real cost of carbon-based energy, instead of imposing that cost on the world as an externality.

<comment><USER9> The total cost for storing and securing shit for 100.000 years is also 'externalized.'

Both costs are more or less impossible to establish upfront.

<comment><USER10> Right now waste can and should be recycled which would reduce the amount of waste. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_waste](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_waste)

Soon it will be possible to use most of the waste as fuel:

"...Fast reactors can "burn" long lasting nuclear transuranic waste (TRU) waste components (actinides: reactor-grade plutonium and minor actinides), turning liabilities into assets. Another major waste component, fission products (FP), would stabilize at a lower level of radioactivity than the original natural uranium ore it was attained from in two to four centuries, rather than tens of thousands of years"

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

How does coal waste compare to that?

"Coal ash – the waste material left after coal is burned – contains arsenic, mercury, lead, and over a dozen other heavy metals, many of them toxic."

[http://www.psr.org/environment-and-health/code-black/coal- as...](http://www.psr.org/environment-and-health/code-black/coal-ash-toxic- and-leaking.html)

"The study found that levels of radioactivity in the ash were up to five times higher than in normal soil,"

[https://phys.org/news/2015-09-radioactive-contaminants- coal-...](https://phys.org/news/2015-09-radioactive-contaminants-coal- ash.html)

How much coal waste is produced per year?

"According to the American Coal Ash Association's Coal Combustion Product Production & Use Survey Report, nearly 130 million tons of coal ash was generated in 2014."

[https://www.epa.gov/coalash/coal-ash- basics#03](https://www.epa.gov/coalash/coal-ash-basics#03)

<comment><USER11> The remnants of decommissioned reactors can't be recycled though.

There will be literal mountains of moderately to highly dangerous rubble.

<comment><USER10> No, anything that has residual radiation will be entombed in clay/rock/etc. The total amount of material and radiation from this will be trivial compared to coal waste.

"...Nearly every major river in the Southeast has one or more unlined, leaking pits on its banks filled with water and holding coal ash from power plants. Containing millions of tons of toxin-laden waste, these pits are unlined and have leaked arsenic, mercury, thallium, selenium, and other contaminants into the rivers and the underlying groundwater for decades. "

[https://www.southernenvironment.org/cases-and- projects/coal-...](https://www.southernenvironment.org/cases-and- projects/coal-waste)

<comment><USER11> > No, anything that has residual radiation will be entombed in clay/rock/etc

Fine, it'll be an underground mountain :-)

> [...]compared to coal waste[...]Containing millions of tons of toxin-laden > waste[...]

Holy shit, I had never even considered ash. It just never crossed my mind somehow. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

It doesn't make me any less opposed to nuclear energy, but you've given me one more reason to be against coal plants (as if there weren't enough already).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> There was massive financial fraud at Westinghouse. Even though the nuclear industry is in a downturn, the troubles at Westinghouse are self inflicted - Toshiba bought them, but found out almost all of the unit's profits are misreported, leading to them spending money on "nothing" basically. The unit earned no money and was threatening to sink Toshiba the entire keiretsu. This is Toshiba trying to save itself by closing down the tide of red.

The source of the troubles was Westinghouse's purchase of CB&I Stone & Webster, and it spun out of control.

<comment><USER13> I just don't think Japanese companies have a process on dealing with foreign M&As and fraud mitigation. When Hitachi acquired the spanish manufacturing company AnsaldoBreda, there were similar fraud accusations.

<comment><USER14> Sony's acquisition of Columbia/TriStar hasn't gone particularly well either...

<comment><USER13> I don't know if that's fraud as much as they just aren't using that business right. Sony is weird, having an entertainment division they keep writing off when their only profitable consumer products division is PlayStation.

<comment><USER14> It may not have been _fraud_ fraud, but they paid $4.8B and wrote off $2.7B of that within five years. Somebody didn't know exactly what he was buying...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> As a Nikola Tesla fan, just a honorary mention, Westinghouse corporation is (one of) the (main) reason why we have AC. When nobody believed in Tesla, George did, even after the bullying by the Edison camp, the smear campaigns. I have read that per watt of AC current, Nikola Tesla was supposed to get some $2.3, but Westinghouse told Tesla that he would be bankrupt if Tesla was to be given that Royalty, the legend has it that Telsa tore the contract saying something like this, "You believed in me when the world didn't, I don't want the money", even if he didn't say something fancy during this time, but the act in itself, if it really happened, is touching. I nearly cried when I read it in a book a long long time ago.

It is sad to see that a energy giant is going bankrupt. End of an era for a Tesla fan, the company who believed in Tesla is going bankrupt.

</comment><comment><USER16> This is terrible news. Nuclear power, while not perfect, is one of the best alternatives we have to carbon-emitting power plants. If there are no companies left to build them, the already impossible task of fighting climate change will get that much harder.

<comment><USER17> I'd much rather deal with fossil fuels than the catastrophic risks uniquely posed by nuclear power generation.

The excuse for incidents like Fukushima are "Well, they made these mistakes...". Personally, I'd rather not risk zero-notice forced evacuations, permanent quarantine zones, and making significant portions of populated land uninhabitable for centuries on some people not making mistakes.

For those who write this off, there are some very tragic photo essays from Pripyat and Fukushima that can make this impact feel very real. Do you want to risk that happening to your area?

<comment><USER18> >Do you want to risk that happening to your area?

Already do. 55% of my state's power comes from Nuclear.

Coal releases 100x more radiation and 68x more CO2 than nuclear for equal energy production. [http://science.sciencemag.org/content/202/4372/1045](http://science.sciencemag.org/content/202/4372/1045)

And it isn't like coal is immune from having zero-notice forced evacuation, and making land uninhabitable. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly_ash_slurry_spill)

<comment><USER19> That comparison is based on _properly functioning_ nuclear power plants and coal. I daresay when you throw in the Chernobyl and Fukushima disasters, the balance shifts dramatically in the opposite direction. Also, the radiation from nuclear disasters is highly concentrated, while that from coal is distributed at far lower concentrations.

<comment><USER10> No, even including Chernobyl (an inherently dangerous design that would have been illegal to build anywhere except the Soviet Union) nuclear has been far, far safer than coal. As mikeash pointed out in another comment, "Put another way: coal kills about as many people each year as nuclear has in its entire history if you include the bombs dropped on Japan."

>...Also, the radiation from nuclear disasters is highly concentrated, while that from coal is distributed at far lower concentrations.

The radiation emissions from a properly working coal plant are high enough that the plant would be shut down if the NRC regulated coal plants. But the real danger from coal plants is the massive amounts of CO2 that they emit which is one of the biggest contributors to climate change that might end up destroying our future. It is pretty obvious which power source is more dangerous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> A difficulty I've always had with nuclear power is the problem of clean-up. I'm not scaremongering and saying it's impossible, but it is inarguably expensive. Having a large amount of costs after all the revenue has gone away is a huge regulatory red flag: it's simpler to just structure things so that you won't have to pay.

This problem applies to mining as well, but very little mining has to occur near residential areas.

<comment><USER21> Do you have data that backs that cleanup is inarguably expensive? This article, which more concrete, suggests 5% of revenue is required to be saved.

[http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear- fue...](http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel- cycle/nuclear-wastes/radioactive-waste-management.aspx#ECSArticleLink8)

<comment><USER22> Whatever estimates the nuclear power industry made in Germany, they're argued to be insufficient, so they're capping the upper liability limit for these companies. The government's own stress testing suggests there will be a shortfall that'll ultimately be picked up by taxpayers. [https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-utilities-buy- ou...](https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-utilities-buy-out-nuclear- waste-liability-236-bln-euros)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Chapter 11 bankruptcy might be a the best thing for a critical company like Westinghouse. Unlike Chapter 7 the operations continue but the entity gets debt relief.

"In Chapter 11, in most instances the debtor remains in control of its business operations as a debtor in possession, and is subject to the oversight and jurisdiction of the court." [1]

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapter_11,_Title_11,_United_S...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapter_11,_Title_11,_United_States_Code)

<comment><USER24> I'm sure you read the article, which indicated that Chapter 11 is what's being used. In the US, companies always go for Chapter 11 if it looks like it's going to work, i.e. that there's a viable business in there somewhere. In Westinghouse's case, the viable business is everything other than their civilian reactor construction business.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Westinghouse had severe technical problems with AP1000 and it's not alone. French nuclear reactor builder Areva was restructured after they could not get their new EPR reactors ready on time. Their flagship project Olkiluoto 3 is nine years late and several billions of euros over budget.

Chinese are building reactors as fast as they can. They are buying reactors designs from all main manufacturers. There are 21 reactors under construction and they are three years late on average because manufacturers can't get these next generation reactors ready.

Nuclear reactors being constantly late and exceeding their budgets is not new. This was true in 60's and 70's and it's true now.

<comment><USER26> Calder Hall in the UK was only three weeks late, opening in 1956. I wonder why we find it more difficult now, is it more thorough standards perhaps?

<comment><USER25> First Magnox reactors had very low efficiency < 20% and their electricity production was not competitive. Their main use was to produce plutonium for weapons.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> The nuclear industry was already having big issues, so I do not see this bankruptcy changing things much. The decline of nuclear wasn't even related to safety concerns, which I believe are largely exaggerated. Currently operating nuclear plants are losing money and needed to be bailed out in Illinois and New York because they cannot produce power for a low enough price. With that in mind, who wants to spend >$1B to build a new nuclear plant that will likely take >10 years to get permitted and built? For the industry to grow, there needs to be a big change in technology to decrease the capital costs needed to build plants and to decrease plant operating costs. If you cost more than a natural gas plant, you are not going to have much luck in today's market.

</comment><comment><USER28> When I was a kid, my most favorite plastic model kit was the Westinghouse Atomic Power Plant. It was awesome!

[http://www.oldmodelkits.com/index.php?detail=15662](http://www.oldmodelkits.com/index.php?detail=15662)

You can even buy one today for the low price of $1250:

[http://www.ebay.com/itm/262902080871](http://www.ebay.com/itm/262902080871)

</comment><comment><USER29> Bankruptcy doesn't mean closure. Someone will bring them out of bankruptcy, but a lot of their existing creditors (and their existing owner) will get stiffed along the way. Most airlines that went backrupt didn't disappear, but their owners took a haircut.

</comment><comment><USER30> Without getting into mismanagement or environmental concerns, nuclear's economics continue to worsen.

1\. The supply of nuclear expertise and trained professionals is shrinking. Thus, nuclear EPC + O&M goes up. This article cites this factor at least 3x in different paragraphs. Though, that's great news for current nukes!

2\. LCOE (EPC + O&M) forecasts show nuclear on par with substitutes. I'm not taking on the ESG risks of nuclear to achieve price parity.

</comment><comment><USER31> Here's the declaration by Lisa J. Donahue, Managing Director and the Leader of the Global Turnaround and Restructuring Group at AlixPartners LLC, describing the circumstances leading up to the bankruptcy [1].

[1] [https://pdf.inforuptcy.com/pacer/nysbke/273388/dockets/4/1-C...](https://pdf.inforuptcy.com/pacer/nysbke/273388/dockets/4/1-C72B395A-148B-11E7-8158-F0759EBC7B2E)

</comment><comment><USER32> West badly needs not surrendering Gen IV development & commercialisation to Russia and China, for geopolitics reasons and Pu stockpile re-use. Westinghouse is a chip here, a prestigious one for sure, and Gov should step in. Time to drop the energy free-market drivel and act as a superpower in a world that is dangerously going towards aggressive local superpowers. Risk! game scenarios again.

</comment><comment><USER33> @Dang (HN "meta" Q&A)

Has HN ever looked into clustering news using Google News to do it?

Reason I ask is how HN's de-dup filter works is puzzling to me and related stories would likely be useful to pool comments/de-dup/etc on a single news event.

Example of dups, clusters, themes on HN on this event: [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=westinghouse&sort=byDate&prefi...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=westinghouse&sort=byDate&prefix=false&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

Google News cluster: [https://news.google.com/news/m/more?ncl=dGww1eRZGqsOScMMCg3U...](https://news.google.com/news/m/more?ncl=dGww1eRZGqsOScMMCg3U3tq_4ODEM&authuser=0&ned=us&topic=b)

<comment><USER34> The de-dupe filter is based on how much discussion went on in past posts. But that actually doesn't affect the current case we're looking at here, as there are no duplicates of this link: [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=https:%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=https:%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2017%2F03%2F29%2Fbusiness%2Fwestinghouse- toshiba-nuclear- bankruptcy.html&sort=byDate&prefix=false&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

Now, in a sense, there _was_ a duplicate, but because the URL didn't match, it didn't count. [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=https:%2F%2F*.nytimes.com%2F20...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=https:%2F%2F*.nytimes.com%2F2017%2F03%2F29%2Fbusiness%2Fwestinghouse- toshiba-nuclear- bankruptcy.html&sort=byDate&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story) The de- dupe filter would've turned new submissions of your post into votes for your post, if it had caught the duplicate.

That being said, I don't think HN is designed to pool discussion over time, preferring to archive discussion of each story. At this point, you can't even upvote older posts; they can only be added to your favorites.

<comment><USER33> Yes the URL is different, but the canonical URL is the same.

 __Not concerned about the votes, just curious if the topic of canonical URLs, clusters, etc. had come up.

<comment><USER34> You raise an interesting point. I'd recommend shooting the HN team an email about making use of canonical URLs for de-duping. mailto:email@example.com

<comment><USER33> Thanks. I'm aware of the HN support email, not interested in private dialogs; whole topic of being open, accessible, referenable, etc. is a different topic, and not something I'm looking to cover in the thread unless it's requested.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> The two new Westinghouse Vogtle pants are too expensive, at $14 billion for 2.5GW of power. If you purchased $14 billion of Tesla powerpacks, you could get 35GWh of storage--enough storage to supply 2.5GW of power for 14 hours....

<comment><USER36> The latest estimates are over $21 billion when you include financing costs. They go out of their way to hide these numbers since $10k/KW is just insanely, idiotically expensive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Keep in mind this financial debacle occurred in spite of at least one state's electricity customers paying for nuclear plant construction in advance:

[http://www.ajc.com/business/psc-approves-georgia-power- rate-...](http://www.ajc.com/business/psc-approves-georgia-power-rate- increase/nTuA6IAdHMNWnca6hgkPKN/)

"January 2013: $1.05, third part of the three-tiered rate increase; 31-cent increase for energy-efficiency programs; 85-cent increase for Plant Vogtle

Note: Figures are amounts added or reduced on a typical monthly bill based on usage of 1,000 kilowatt hours"

</comment><comment><USER38> There is a fantastic documentary on the namesake of Westinghouse and the company itself. I found it incredibly interesting! They go into topics such as his relationship with other inventors at the time and his perhaps philanthropic relationship with his workers, the different cycles of the company and it's various product pivots.

[https://youtube.com/watch?v=8BUpF__h- IY](https://youtube.com/watch?v=8BUpF__h-IY)

</comment><comment><USER39> July 7th, 1888: Tesla Sells A.C. Patents

Tesla sells patents for A.C. Polyphase System to George Westinghouse for $25,000 in cash, $50,000 in notes and a royalty of $2.50 per horsepower for each motor.

[https://teslauniverse.com/nikola- tesla/timeline/1888-tesla-s...](https://teslauniverse.com/nikola- tesla/timeline/1888-tesla-sells-ac-patents)

Some tangential history regarding Westinghouse for fun.

</comment><comment><USER40> Does this mean the AP-1000 reactor is dead? Several of those are under construction.

<comment><USER23> No, it just means Westinghouse is going to get its debt restructured. They'll still keep operating under supervision of a bankruptcy judge.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> I honestly have nothing to add - most of the points I want to bring up are already discussed in the comments.

But to those are actively working in a US Reactor Complex - you're working the dream I hope to achieve one day. Good job.

</comment><comment><USER42> Apropos of nuke subs and carriers, the thing that always blew my mind was learning later in life that they're only fueled once for their working life time...

</comment><comment><USER43> Was/Is Westinghouse doing anything with smaller scale reactor technologies (Thorium,etc). If not, does this potentially open a door for those technologies?

<comment><USER35> Westinghouse is likely too large a company to experiment--probably a smaller company will be first. Perhaps Terrestrial Energy in Canada will get their molten salt reactor to work. In Russia, the Akademik Lomonosov, a nuclear barge, will replace the power plant in Bilibino Nuclear Power plant in a couple years. This qualifies as a small reactor.

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> Is this the same Westinghouse that produces microwaves?

<comment><USER45> The appliance division of Westinghouse was sold off in the 70's and is now managed by Electrolux. This division of Westinghouse was spun off in the late 90's and is now owned by Toshiba. The history and scope of Westinghouse is super interesting/confusing you can read the full details here. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_Electric_Corporat...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_Electric_Corporation)

Its current incarnation is now CBS corporation which licenses out the Westinghouse name to other corporations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> My dad worked for Westinghouse in the late 70s at Hanford. This really feels like an end of an era.

<comment><USER47> I'm sure it does, but doesn't Westinghouse go way back, to the start of the electric era? Didn't they built it, or lease most of it?

<comment><USER46> Yes, but somehow the name today only survives for their nuclear operation:

> Westinghouse purchased CBS in 1995 and became CBS Corporation in 1997. In > 1998, CBS established a brand licensing subsidiary Westinghouse Licensing > Corporation (Westinghouse Electric Corporation). In 1997/1998 the Power > Generation Business Unit, headquartered in Orlando, FL, was sold to Siemens > AG, of Germany. A year later, CBS sold all of its nuclear power businesses > to British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL). Soon after, BNFL gained license > rights on the Westinghouse trademarks and they used those to reorganize > their acquired assets as Westinghouse Electric Company. That company was > sold to Toshiba in 2007.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_Electric_Corporat...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westinghouse_Electric_Corporation#Timeline_of_company_evolution)

My dad was always in nuclear though (well, after a brief stint at Tektronix).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> My grandpa worked for Westinghouse as an electrical engineer. This news really bums me out.

</comment><comment><USER49> I believe the nuclear power industry largely started out as a way to justify world's largest nuclear warhead stockpile. I believe it was on a show from Netflix that discussed the history of nuclear power. It worked remarkably well.

<comment><USER14> Yeah the marketing worked so well you can still read it on HN from well- informed nuke fans, even those who would deny being militarists.

<comment><USER50> I'm definitely a nuclear power proponent, and not a militarist, and I think that the militaristic-ly driven decision to prefer the uranium fuel "cycle" exclusively is the reason we're stuck with these shitty BWR's and PWR's, to the exclusion of anything else. Nuclear as it exists today definitely doesn't live up to the hype, and that's because the nuclear power industry is essentially frozen on 1960's designs, with incremental improvements tacked on. If the auto industry were as slow as the nuclear industry, we'd all be looking forward to next year's new Ford Model C.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> I have no industry wide view, but...

All existing nuclear powerplants are shitty Fukushima-style pressurized light water reactors in the US, are they not?

I'd have to think this company is an incumbent blocking entry of modern designs. Is this really a bad thing?

</comment><comment><USER52> Why should we be worried? Nuclear power is a no go for civilized world. It is not insurable. It has well-developed, clean alternatives. Apart from carriers and subs, it has no good applications (it would be also be great to get back to nuclear missile cruisers and ideally even destroyers, but outside of the military, i can't see any use for it at all).</comment>


In Madrid, Google Glass isn't called Google Glass - <AUTHOR> http://www.sophiathroughglass.com

<comment><USER2> "and seems to actually cut a modern appeal within a society known to look more to the past than the future."

Spain look more to the past? Really?

<comment><USER3> I'm spaniard I don't have these impression. Man I see people that are around 50-60 years old using a modern smarthphone to play games or using Whatsap, in the train.

But the funny fact is that here have some tendency to call some products/marks/films by the original English name as look more exotic or modern. For example "Star Trek" (not Camino a las Estrellas), "smartphone", "open source", etc... But with google glass is just the opposite.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Just to think - there are people in some parts of the world who do not speak English - is there an app for that?

<comment><AUTHOR> VerbalizeIt. But seriously, Google is branding Google Glass as "Glass" and not as "glasses"</comment></comment>


What made you realize that math is beautiful? - <AUTHOR> http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/323334/what-was-the-first-bit-of-mathematics-that-made-you-realize-that-math-is-beautif

<comment><USER2> Same article, same title, same link, 3 hours ago:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5342334></comment>


Requiem For A Roommate - <AUTHOR> http://steveblank.com/2010/10/18/requiem-for-a-roommate/ <comment><USER2> This is a great reminder about how changing the world for the better doesn't always have to involve making a living too:

"It took me a long time, but as I got older I realized that life was more than just about work, technical innovation and business. Michael and others worked to preserve and protect the values that made life worth living. And while we were making things, they were the ones who were who changing our society into a more just place to live."

</comment><comment><USER3> It would be really, really great -- amazing, even -- if there were support systems for people like Michael.

It is (pardon my language here) hella fucking hard to change the world. Nobody else around you is likely to be interested in what you're doing, unless they can directly benefit somehow without any effort. You can't get assistance with your goal unless you have the money to buy it. How many people start out to improve the world, even in some relatively small way, pour a year, two years, or much more of their life into it, struggling the whole way, and eventually give up?

</comment><comment><USER4> Thank you, Michael.

</comment><comment><USER5> Had to sign up to say thanks. Its, comforting, reassuring and inspiring that people believe enough to fight without having to be incentivized first.

The links to POST and the Coastal commissioner were great too.

</comment><comment><USER6> Very inspiring. However, entrepreneurs lie to themselves thinking they want to make a better world. Money is the incentive. Real vocation needs no financial reasons.

<comment><USER7> > Real vocation needs no financial reasons.

Sure it does. How do you propose a man follow his calling if he isn't going to make a dime off it? At the end of the day we all need to put food on the table.

<comment><USER8> I'm a musician. This is precisely what I do.</comment></comment></comment>


One Man Photoshop: Pixlr Is Slick (2008) - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/2008/08/one-man-photoshoop-pixlr-is-slick/ <comment><USER2> Couldn't agree more. I've used Pixlr in its various versions including as a browser extension for nearly ten years.</comment>


Salary Stream – Software Engineer Offers - <AUTHOR> https://email.levels.fyi/t/v/8fd44f81-e530-474c-af6a-0d999c33c658/d4660a8a-afa7-4989-9718-d6d3cc71f3c0 <comment><AUTHOR> I'm from Levels.fyi, this is the second issue of Salary Stream - A digest of verified salaries sent weekly. Let me know if you have any questions!

You can subscribe at [https://www.levels.fyi/verified/](https://www.levels.fyi/verified/)

<comment><USER2> Your site helped me get a really nice compensation package for my current employer. I recommend it to all my friends and colleagues. Thanks! :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Awesome to hear! Why we do what we do :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> The stock-based comp portion of these are moving around incredibly quickly right now. Probably changes the calculus in lots of cases.

<comment><USER4> FWIW, grants are usually targeted to a specific dollar value, though the stock movement between grant and vest does affect your results. (And if this significant dip is sustained, I would expect many companies to issue additional special grants to compensate.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> It's good information. Leaves me feeling hella bitter though since I'm paid less than half of that FB offer but could theoretically get the same offer. Just wish there was a more straight forward way to getting into these companies that pay so much.

Has anyone had success with mock interviews? (Done by people who actually hire - not random people) I've received endless feedback from recruiters saying it's my technical performance even when I've smashed every problem. (Guessing it's cultural but they can't write that down as I rarely receive a no during a phone interview - just no's during in person)

<comment><USER6> It's quite common for people to think they nailed a question when actually they did poorly, in the eyes of the interviewer. Even if you are getting the "correct solution", the interviewer will usually have some followup discussion designed to make sure you really understand the solution well. Often this catches out people who practice so much they've seen the answer before. This is my guess for what's happening, at least.

<comment><USER7> I walked out of an interview before thinking I nailed one of the big questions. I answered it so well and in such an orderly fashion they asked if I had seen it before, which I hadn't. I received feedback that they would pass and one reason is that I wouldn't admit that I had seen that question before.

I guess I wasn't prepared for having my integrity (literally) questioned.

No loss for me. It was really off putting how suspicious they were of someone who knew the answer better than they did; like it just wasn't possible. Instead of disbelieving me, they should have just moved on to some other questions for confirmation, even if it meant calling me back in.

<comment><USER8> I've found that people are suspicious for a couple of reasons:

1\. They are bad actors and they expect other people to be also.

2\. They've been burned by someone and now they are suspicious of anyone.

When confronted by a person who doesn't trust me, I ask about the 2nd situation i.e. have been burned by a past employee? If they have, I cut them some slack.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't know how great this is to share, although I am curious about the numbers, as I'm sure it will depress some people. A lot of pay is based off personal intelligence and interviewing skills, which cannot be shown with quantitative numbers like years of experience.

</comment><comment><USER10> Salaries are a bit misleading on this page.

Let's take LYFT's example - on landing page - salary is $420k but on inside page - it's $396k. What's the vesting period on those stocks? I'm almost sure it's not 1 year. And, that salary is for the first year. They will not be giving you $200k worth of shares every year or do they?

<comment><USER11> I think it really is what it seems. I got a similar offer from Uber a few months before their IPO - level 5a position, base salary $200k, $710k shares of RSU's vesting over 4 years, and performance based bonus with a target of $25k (it's not guaranteed the bonus target will be the same every year, but this is an annual bonus not signing bonus). So total comp just over $400k.

I'm sure some people are inflating values on levels.fyi and some people are probably mixing up the 4-year vesting amounts of stock with per-year comp.

But this example seems legit. Salaries like this are very real (and very crazy)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Twitch is so low: [https://www.levels.fyi/comp.html?track=Software%20Engineer&s...](https://www.levels.fyi/comp.html?track=Software%20Engineer&search=twitch)

Is that because a lot of people want to work at Twitch, and/or because Amazon doesn't pay that well?

<comment><USER13> It's because the bulk RSU portion of the offer vests in the latter 2 years and the TC value given on the site is based on 1st year compensation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is great. Companies share these numbers with each other, good to see more visibility for employees.

</comment><comment><USER15> Interesting info and interesting website. Do they pay a small fee for each W2? Otherwise I don't see the motivation to go through that whole process

<comment><USER16> For someone making $400k, a whatever fee they have to offer wouldn't be worth 15 minutes of time. And the idea of uploading such a personal document as W-2 seems laughable. The more believable option is the informal offer letter with numbers: that could be shared, indeed.

<comment><USER15> > What is Salary Stream? A digest of verified salaries sent weekly. Users > upload Offer Letters, W2s, etc. We extract the relevant numbers and the > share the anonymous data back with you.

The whole point is that they verify them. In contrast with, say, Glassdoor. Which is why even a singular data point can be treated as meaningful.

> For someone making $400k, a whatever fee they have to offer wouldn't be > worth 15 minutes of time

I mean, sort of. I don't see that as a reason nobody would do it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I feel great, make about half of what these companies offer but I don't have to work at places everyone loves to hate now.

</comment><comment><USER18> Pretty sure I got blacklisted from Triplebyte, it's been months but every time I check it just shows this message:

> We're really sorry but we've had a surge of applications recently and are > temporarily booked out of interview times.

</comment><comment><USER19> How does the stock work here? Wouldn't these vest over 4 years? Or is this how much stock they get per year?

<comment><USER20> Per year. The number of shares are listed for each as well. As you can imagine, the dollar amount is changing rapidly with the market crash.

<comment><USER21> So, are the dollar amounts for stock we see on the website the literal amounts users entered at the time of grant or did they enter number of shares that are being translated to $ in real time?

<comment><AUTHOR> The dollar amount is from time of grant, the total number of shares (when available) is to help you calibrate to current market

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm I the only one who thinks these salary levels are both insane and not- sustainable?

</comment><comment><USER23> Makes me wonder: will they reissue the offer based on how much Lyft stock has dropped?

<comment><USER24> Usually they specify the stock part in dollars, it doesn't turn into a concrete number of shares until after you start.

<comment><USER23> Yes, that's my point. It'll be much more shares than normal, and presuming the share price recovers (which it may not) these people will be much more highly compensated.

<comment><USER24> Ah you're saying they might lower the offer assuming the stock will recover? Unlikely in the extreme I think.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Is this just an ad for triplebyte?

<comment><USER20> Levels.fyi is not part of Triplebyte. They are one of our sponsors.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Those base salaries are really not that strong in those high cost of living areas.

<comment><USER27> It's stronger than any other jobs out there.

But yes, you're right even the very very highest of salaries doesn't compensate enough to buy a modest 4 million$ house. You'd have to be in your 20s and rent a room with plans to leave in less than 10 years or just don't have a family.

<comment><USER26> I'm just saying, it isn't hard to make $140k-$160k/yr in Iowa/Missouri as a remote software engineer.

You just don't get your salary again in stock options :P

<comment><USER28> That's a hell of a "just," considering just 5 years of that could be close to enough to live the rest of your life in Iowa/Missouri without working another day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Does it even mean anything. The economic discontinuity that the virus will introduce is likely to alter all of these numbers in ways we can't predict. Most likely push salaries much lower after the layoffs hit on a wide scale.

</comment><comment><USER27> Wow, this is great. It's awesome to make that much money, but it'd be pretty hard to convince yourself to work hard enough for that stock and bonus when your marginal tax rate is over 40%.

<comment><USER30> > Wow, this is great. It's awesome to make that much money, but it'd be pretty > hard to convince yourself to work hard enough for that stock and bonus when > your marginal tax rate is over 40%.

I mean, it's still a lot of money and at a FAANG you'd be working less hard than someone at a startup while making twice as much money. (This is why it's hard for startups to hire people.)</comment></comment>


Anandtech's Sandy Bridge review - <AUTHOR> http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/the-sandy-bridge-review-intel-core-i5-2600k-i5-2500k-and-core-i3-2100-tested

<comment><USER2> Print version: <http://www.anandtech.com/print/4083/>

Also, they have a companion mobile/laptop focused article up: <http://www.anandtech.com/print/4084/></comment>


A Kindergartener's Best Computer Is About to Die - <AUTHOR> https://www.kickscondor.com/2018/08/28/the-death-of-the-ipad-mini/ <comment><USER2> What about plugging a mouse into the Chromebooks? I distinctly remember being in kindergarten and using a mouse as my pointer input. I played Treasure Mountain! and some other educational games.

Kids are pretty capable and adept at picking up new things. We should be pushing forward with tech literacy while they're still young and not afraid of breaking technology. Touch screens are great because they provided a very directed experience, but I believe that has more to do with the software itself being designed more intuitively when you're limiting the user to app- style software. I think software engineers should be focused on making accessible software for these target demographics. I think getting kids used to keyboard/mice/touchpads will get them more comfortable and prepare them for more complicated things down the line, like coding and word processing where keyboards are objectively a the best input.

<comment><USER3> Great for normal users, awful for disabled users. A touchscreen is light-years ahead of mice for individuals who lack or are incapable of fine motor control skills.

<comment><USER4> I assume different school system has different rules, but here in Sweden there are laws that school must adapt based on the need of the child. A disabled child should get the right tools based on their needs, which will depend on the exact circumstances.

For someone with impaired motor control skills I would assume that default software and a touchscreen is far from usable. There is a reason why many touchscreen system has a stylus pen, which would obviously not work in kindergarten for children with impaired motor control skills. A large screen and software designed for it could be one way, but I have also seen massive trackballs that I recall is being used in those situations.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> [Chromebooks are the new fashion in elementary school. They are cheap; they are everywhere. And they are unusable by kids in kindergarten through, in some case, third grade.]

iPad's are consumer devices and will not prepare our kids to be producers. I am surprised every time I see iPad's being used in schools. Chromebooks at least put kids in path of being producers rather than mere consumers of content.

<comment><USER6> Honest question: why should kids in kidnergarten use computer-like devices? What are the benefits? Are there any benefits?

<comment><USER7> This is a mindset that assumes kids are using computers to learn how to use computers.

Kids in kindergarten can actually _use_ tablets, to learn other stuff. Any stuff. They can indulge their own interests, in a way that's nearly impossible in any other medium without assistance of someone older than them.

A tablet is the first cut of the way children use the Holodeck in Star Trek. You can't (usually) just ask for what you want, and get it (kids don't have a mental model of computers that works well enough to cope with how bad computers still are at conversation)—but you sure can _point_ at what you want, and get it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm not totally certain that K-2 spending less time in front of a screen while at school would be a bad thing. I'm sure they get plenty of touchscreen time at home.

<comment><AUTHOR> I cover this a bit in my reply to Eli. [https://www.kickscondor.com/2018/08/28/caution- chromebooks/](https://www.kickscondor.com/2018/08/28/caution-chromebooks/)

I agree that there should be a limit (and have practiced this in my classes) but there are some incredible uses of touchscreens that I can't ignore.

<comment><USER9> What kind of incredible uses? I'm genuinely curious as I've delayed introducing tablets and computers to my kids until they can do something creative with them.

<comment><AUTHOR> I mentioned this example elsewhere in this thread, so I'll just repeat it here:

> Just today we did an activity where all the kids 'drew' a visualization of a > certain math problem and then we passed the tablets around and added on top > off them and then I showed the results on the projector. There was laughter, > story-telling, kids helping each other, moving around the classroom, you > name it.

I do group activities that involve creating things together that explore the topic. (I look at technology not as a 'subject' but as a 'language' or 'medium'.) So, at home, rather than finding an educational app for them, I would recommend giving them a tablet so they can film the things they experience. Things they see in the backyard or things they make. They can record themselves explaining a topic they learned about. Have them make music (the byte.co Music Maker app is a good one for a child who has no experience with it) and have them mess with vector-drawing or 3-D modeling apps. Then talk to them about what they made and help them get to the next level. The tablet is the 'medium' and you are the 'scaffold'. They need you to find out where to go next.

And, yeah, put the tablets away half the time so they can experience things directly. (Sounds like this is perhaps where your concern lies.)

I've also had great success with Twine once they can read.

Thanks for the great question! I hope this helps. It's really cool that you asked.

<comment><USER10> > Just today we did an activity where all the kids 'drew' a visualization of a > certain math problem and then we passed the tablets around and added on top > off them and then I showed the results on the projector. There was laughter, > story-telling, kids helping each other, moving around the classroom, you > name it.

I fail to see how this is something that couldn't be accomplished with paper And using the tablets half the time seems like _wayy_ too much imo.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Are iPads really so unique that losing them is some sort of tragedy to education?

I thought the reason Apple was getting out of the entry-level tablet market, was that it was being commoditized by dirt-cheap Android tablets that—at least for the particular things people want a tablet for—do all the same things an iPad does. (They don't have the same third-party app ecosystem, but if you're just using an iPad to consume content using the web browser/book reader/etc., there's no difference.)

In other words: presuming the educational software _isn 't_ already there either way, and still needs to be built—wouldn't Kindergarteners be served just as well by the iPad dying, the development of such software moving to Android, and the kids ending up with a stack of $50 tablets from AliExpress rather than $299 iPads? (Easier for low-income-area schools to get ahold of, too!)

<comment><USER11> Have you ever used a $50 Android tablet? Those sorts of tablets are almost completely unusable. And I don't mean that in a snobby tech-elitist kind of way. I mean they are _literally_ broken, at least every one I've used or seen reviewed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Since OP seems to be keeping an eye on this thread, I'll ask here: have you considered using other tablets (Samsung etc.)?

In case you did, and it didn't work as well as the iPad: what makes the iPad the ideal device in kindergarten? Construction quality? Software/Apps?

<comment><USER13> This is Apple's marketing so obviously it's biased, but here: [https://www.apple.com/education/products/](https://www.apple.com/education/products/)

How good is augmented reality on generic tablets? ..just as one example.

Many people criticizing iPads haven't used them for education recently or haven't been trained on how to fully leverage the tech effectively. The curriculum assistance, available (quality) apps and overall device versatily are unmatched by competing devices.

For a media consumption device, iPad could be overkill, but for everything else, it's almost perfect.

<comment><USER14> > _Many people criticizing iPads haven't used them for education recently or > haven't been trained on how to fully leverage the tech effectively. The > curriculum assistance, available (quality) apps and overall device versatily > are unmatched by competing devices._

There is nothing on that marketing page that seems to especially improve learning vs. physical materials for anyone under about 10 years old. And frankly most stuff for 10–15 year olds can still (a) probably be done as well if not better using physical materials, and (b) isn't significantly different between an iPad and a laptop or desktop machine, and often could be done on a machine shared by several students working together or taking turns.

I can well imagine that someone trying to learn how to program might want to use some kind of computer, but even then why an iPad instead of a little turtle robot that responds to Logo, or whatever?

Someone trying to learn how to make electronic music or edit video might get a lot of mileage out of computers (iPad or otherwise) but I can't imagine this has become a core part of the school pedagogy.

I can also imagine that for anyone in middle school and up there might be a big benefit to carrying an iPad around instead of a giant backpack stuffed with 5 separate overweight textbooks. Though there are some advantages to the physical books too.

* * *

Instead of telling a bunch of skeptical non-teacher techies that we "haven't been trained on how to fully leverage the tech", maybe you can explain what that training would entail?

What in your experience has the iPad been so powerful for that couldn't be done without computers? What age kids are you working with, and what are they working on?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Those in this thread recommending Chromebooks are missing a big part of the equation. You don't need to be able to read to use an iOS device. Chromebooks are much more reliant on the user knowing the written word to interact with the device (unless their is some elementary school mode that I am unaware of). As long as you can recognize icons, you can interact with an iOS device and switch between apps.

<comment><USER16> What's wrong with knowing how to read before using devices?

<comment><USER17> I'm curious how you're applying that to kindergartners.

I started using computers around age 4. I couldn't read for shit. My parents didn't withhold technology because I couldn't read the manual. I'm thankful for that, as now I'm a software engineer and love it.

What insane gatekeeping.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Tablets aren't going away? Just one product is getting end of lifed and you liked that product and are miffy about it? ok, fine.... but the aritcle seems to try to paint a picture that it was the one and only true device and now kindergarenters are doomed :)

<comment><AUTHOR> This iPad hasn't seen an update since 2015. The standard iPad is now being marketed to schools at the $299 price. No, it's not gone - which is why I thought to write this article, as an attempt to see the usefulness of this specific model and size.

I agree that I'm being a bit hyperbolic - but it's not just that I like the product. It works _very_ well for a specific audience - K-2. Thought it was worth mentioning.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> My kids started with the ipod touches and then on to the ipad when it came out. They got the mini a few years ago. They had touch screens since they were infants. I am a bit jaded with the technology. The experience is too removed from the real world and they miss out on interactions with both other humans and the surrounding environment to their detriment. We won't be updating their devices and I would make different choices a second time around. I think chromebooks and PCs are even more useless at that age but being less seductive I would hope kids get bored quickly and instead engage in social play or interacting with physical objects.

</comment><comment><USER20> There are Chromebooks with touchscreens available from several manufacturers.

There are also touchscreen laptops - I use a Lenovo Windows 10 touchscreen laptop every day.

<comment><AUTHOR> I have tested these out in class and they've been pretty good - the 'gorilla arms' thing that's out there doesn't apply to children it seems.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Why the hell does anyone in kindergarten need a computer? They should be out in the playground getting muddy and having fun, riding trikes and soapboxes, climbing trees and building forts.

<comment><USER10> I agree-- partly. There are skills kids can start learning in kindergarten that they can use later. Counting, basic arithmetic, the alphabet, simple reading, general conventions that are followed in school. But there is no reason for kindergarteners to be using computers. And I say this as someone who started using the computer at 5 -- I wasn't doing anything remotely interesting on it until at least 9.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This post doesn't really explain what is so great about iPads for small children, and as far as I can tell doesn't link to much external explanation about it. Maybe the author had some previous posts explaining this that regular blog readers know about as context?

Is there some report [anecdotal, peer-reviewed, whatever] comparing kids' trying to learn using an iPad vs. physical materials? What specific ideas or subjects are effectively learned on the iPad?

Is the iPad being used as a substitute for television? As a way to scale teacher time better when there are many students per teacher? As a tool which a teacher and student will use together? ...

My personal bias would be to generally occupy small children with something tangible (sand toys, climbing equipment, blocks, balls, toy cars, marbles, chalk, scissors and paper, pattern blocks, dice, index cards, yarn, popsicle sticks, pipe cleaners, gears, pulleys, springs, ..., and lots of paper books) until they are a bit older.

If there are many students per teacher and the teacher's attention is limited, students can often entertain themselves while learning a great deal by working/playing in groups using physical materials.

<comment><USER22> I will add another couple of points.

In kindergarten (many decades ago) sometimes we were given individual assignments, such as sticking figures in the right place, coloring things, basic counting... But other times we were _forced_ to interact with our peers and "play together."

As someone who has always struggled to interact with other people, and who had not met any other kids before/except in kindergarten, I think those times were very formative. Hard, but formative.

I still struggle with people as an adult, but I think I would be worse off had I spent that time in front of a screen, whether touch or not, instead of interacting with other kids, including hard times like being excluded from the group with they best toys and stuff like that.

Also, I was using a keyboard (Model M!) as young as 3 years old, and the Microsoft Mouse not much older. I remember watching my dad add the mouse ISA card inside the computer, and learning to use three 5" floppies in the right order: first the DOS one, then the mouse driver one, type MOUSE.COM or something similar, then the Windows 1.0 floppy, and finally I could use Paint or Othello :-)

I think early computers _increased_ my ability for concentration. That's interesting, considering modern devices are said to decrease it.

<comment><AUTHOR> > I still struggle with people as an adult, but I think I would be worse off > had I spent that time in front of a screen.

I will say that one of the things that makes a tablet so great is the potential for group activities. I do a ton of whole-class activities with lots of interaction - and it is possible on a tablet because it is small enough to be easy to look past. This is an issue with desktops (esp. in a lab) and, to some degree, with laptops.

Just today we did an activity where all the kids 'drew' a visualization of a certain math problem and then we passed the tablets around and added on top off them and then I showed the results on the projector. There was laughter, story-telling, kids helping each other, moving around the classroom, you name it.

The fact that you can get up and walk around with a tablet is a point I hadn't mentioned. Thank you for the stimulus!

<comment><USER14> > _activity where all the kids 'drew' a visualization of a certain math > problem_

What was different about their drawings vs. using paper?

<comment><USER23> For me this gets at the crux of the question of the place of technology in the classroom, it almost always seems to replace regular paper and textbooks, without actually adding anything. I had teachers who would handout "transparencies" and we'd draw/right and them and then hand them back and the activity was exactly the same... only with $0.00001 pieces of disposable plastic. I really struggle to understand the benefits of a "smartboard" and any computer in the classroom, it really feels like we're just doing this because we can, without asking, "why?"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I bought a Xiaomi Mipad 4 recently and honestly it's incredibly good [https://www.mi.com/mipad4/](https://www.mi.com/mipad4/)

Snapdragon 660, 6000mAH battery, 3GB RAM, 32GB storage. The display is so-so 1920x1200, not the best but still good. And that was $180 from Aliexpress (The iPad Mini is $399)

<comment><USER25> Android is a deal breaker though for many people. For example, I don't want to worry about whether I have Ice Cream Cookie, Yogurtland, Lolly Pop, etc. I don't want to have to run Norton Antivirus on it. In fact, I don't want to be forced to think about security at all. I want an app store with trusted apps, not hackers.

<comment><USER23> While all the points you mention do bear some credence, I think the biggest argument for iOS tablets over Android is the lack of first party tablet app support on Android. I;m not saying there are no tablet apps, just they're a lot less common vs iPad apps, which often are a lot more than just scaled up iphone apps.

<comment><USER26> Where is the exact problem there? I never came upon an app that would cause a problem on my Android tablet because it's not a "first party tablet app".

Especially nothing that would justify the immense cost of an iPad.

<comment><USER23> I guess it's a question of convenience, if all you're getting is a big phone app, it's not always gonna work very well, I'm not sure what you mean by "would cause a problem" but I've often come upon apps that simply aren't nearly as easy to use on a tablet compared to a phone.

<comment><USER26> Well then maybe we're not understanding each other since I don't have a clue where the convenience problem may even be.

<comment><USER27> For me, it's not a convenience problem, it's a trust problem. After all the bad press I've read, I can never trust my family's data to Android. The premium I pay for Apple products lets me sleep at night.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> What about a cheap chromebook tablet like Acer chromebook tab 10($329)?

</comment><comment><USER25> This is a real shame. Our family has really enjoyed our iPad Minis. They have lasted so long that it makes more sense for the kids to get MacBooks next ( in addition to needing iPhones anyway ). But otherwise I would have happily refreshed them by purchasing the latest model. The form factor is ideal for kids.

</comment><comment><USER17> _Sure, by now children can do some rudimentary typing and mouse flicking. But if you think trackpads are awful for adults, you should observe children using them. Tears, people._

Two days ago a mathematician was explaining a concept to me that involved math I've long forgotten combined with math I've never learned. When I told him I didn't completely follow, he said "It's super easy," and repeated what he had already said - but more slowly.

Now, there were no tears involved, but anyone who is trying to explain or teach something they're an expert in/at to someone (of any age) who is very much not would do well to remember the three sentences I've quoted above. Tears or no, at any age, it's incredibly frustrating.

</comment><comment><USER29> The iPad Mini isn't the only touchscreen tablet in its rough size class; there are plenty that aren't discontinued; Apple isn't the whole tablet world.

Plus, to the extent that touch is a desirable interaction for the target age group, many current Chromebooks are touch devices. (Even the tablet- convertible ones, though are not a convenient size for handheld use by a kindergartner, to be sure.)

</comment><comment><USER30> i find it fascinating someone it's not ashamed to admit they are extremely lazy and just hand out toddlers tablets to get rid of them, that's like laziest thing you can do - give child a tablet or let them sit in front of TV

the kindergarten for my child doesn't even have TV and nobody has problem, the other branch has one TV which they don't really switch on, can't imagine having tablet in kindergarten, that's just pure laziness

i let my child watch TV like max. one hour a week as reward after trimming nails, of course pretty much zero time with mobile/tablet, it would be minutes per week when watching over my shoulder at some of our photos/videos or rarely gifs i watch

i don't see a reason why should child in kindergarten spend any time in front of screen anywhere, i ruined my eyes by staring at screen, that can't be healthy for children eyes and for many other reasons

i would be curious if they use tablets in other European countries or it's just another example of "superior" american education system

</comment><comment><USER31> Wow, that's funny: I distinctly remember never crying over not having an iPad mini in kindergarten. They didn't even exist. And now I feel old.</comment>


Ask HN: What paid applications do you use? - <AUTHOR> In the world filled with free and open-source software - if you're paying for an app - probably it's really good. What's on your top 5 list? It can be a desktop or mobile app. The only rule: useful for a dev. <comment><USER2> \- AI Writer - my preferred MD app, simply beautiful

\- Bartender - removes clutter from macOS icon bar

\- Paper - for doodling and fleshing out ideas on my iPad

\- Brilliant.org - my preferred way to brush up my maths skills

\- TeuxDeux as a simple and timeless todo list

</comment><comment><USER3> Does Fastmail count? Otherwise, none! \o/

The main apps I use every day are: vim, terminator, hexchat, Evolution (with the EWS plugin) and ssh. All running under Cinnamon in either Fedora, Debian or Ubuntu OSes.

</comment><comment><USER4> Office 365.

I used to have Dropbox and evernote, but switched to paper and a fountain pen, and OneDrive.

Also, pinegrow web editor because... frontend is very time consuming for backend people like me.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> My list:

* Bear for taking notes.

* Brain.fm for deep work.

* Headspace for meditation.

* Hemingway for writing.

* Grammarly for grammar correction.

</comment><comment> Pete-Codes \- Sheet2Site: backend from google sheet \- Ghost: blogging \- Zapier: connecting forms and google sheets \- Checkout Page: take payments without code

</comment><comment><USER5> Things 3: note taking

Spectre/Halide: photography

Cardhop: contact management

Carrot: weather

Superhuman: super email

Stardew Valley: mobile game

Headspace: meditation

The Guardian: news

also other subscriptions include: Spotify/Apple Music, Protonmail...

</comment><comment><USER6> For PC: Sublime Text - code/text editing, IntelliJ IDEA- code editing

For smartphone: Prompt 2 - SSH client

</comment><comment><USER7> Standard Notes, its search and tag features have basically replaced the need for OneNote

</comment><comment><USER8> Winrar

</comment><comment><USER9> Simplepush.io would be the only one worth mentioning.</comment>


The age of perception: a $20 trillion dollar per year opportunity - <AUTHOR> http://meanderful.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-age-of-perception-20-trillion.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Really not sure how Oxford put DBA in the likely NOT endangered by automation list.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Perhaps the Luddites were right. Chop wood. Carry water.</comment>


You don't profit in a monopoly, you work harder: A lesson from Apple - <AUTHOR> http://paramaggarwal.com/post/6004326725/you-dont-profit-in-a-monopoly-you-work-harder-a

<comment><USER2> "Every high school pass out knows this equation. To maximize profit, you can either maximize the profit per device sold or you can maximize the number of devices sold. Profit has the tendency to stay constant. If you reduce the profit per device, the number of devices sold will increase."

What? NO! You maximize profit by finding out where supply and demand meet to find the point where profit and units sold turn out the maximum profit.

And the rest of the article has little to do with maximizing profit and every thing to do with gaining market share.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was trying to point out the balancing act between profit and quantity in my article. But your point is perfect. I missed it. Thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Premise: Traditional economics is pricing things low when entering a market, and pricing things high in a captured market (a monopoly).

Argument: Apple does the opposite of this. e.g. Apple entered a new market with the iPhone, but priced high. Apple had a tablet monopoly with the iPad, but priced low.

Conclusion: Worship Steve Jobs as he upsets traditional economics.

Fallacy #1: The iPhone was not an entrance to a new market; PDAs, mp3 players, handheld internet, and cell phones had already began to converge into a single market, and Apple had already forayed in those markets. The iPhone was simply a premium and unique device in that market, and thus able to fetch a high price.

Fallacy #2: The iPad was not a monopoly. It was an entrance to a new market - particularly one that did not exist yet...tablets.

<comment><AUTHOR> Your analysis of my article is brilliant. Thanks a lot. I hadn't realized how flawed my analysis was.

<comment><USER3> Sorry my post was sort of condescending/snarky. Your article was good food for thought.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Bad article. Gets a lot of stuff wrong or omits key facts, such as Apple's almost immediate huge price reduction on the iPhone. Or the subsidy model used on ATT. Without taking these things into effect, you can't do a reasonable analysis of what Apple did.

</comment><comment><USER5> _In 2010, Apple launched the iPad. There was nothing like it in the market. It was an instant success. A monopoly in the true sense of the word._

Translation: not at all a monopoly in any legally meaningful way.

Horrible article.

<comment><AUTHOR> You are right. I got the meaning of monopoly horribly wrong in my article.</comment></comment>


IRS map tracking the migration of Americans and their income across states - <AUTHOR> http://www.howmoneywalks.com/irs-tax-migration/ <comment><USER2> Not familiar with the author's agenda, but:

1) is this just showing retirement patterns? (I.e make lots of money in a state with higher income /cost of living then move somewhere cheaper/warmer once you stop making money? The reverse probably doesn't happen?)

2) Is this just mapping relative state incomes? I think people moving between states randomly would produce this pattern given income differences.

I'm also not sure what the point is from a policy perspective. Even if the pattern is true doesn't necessarily mean that states should change their policies.

<comment><USER3> > is this just showing retirement patterns?

That's certainly a part of it, but there seems to be quite a bit more going on.

For example, look at King County, Washington (Seattle's county). It has the biggest gain from Los Angeles County, CA. No way is that from people in Los Angeles deciding that Seattle is where they want to retire.

The next biggest gain for King Country is from Leon County, FL (the country of Tallahassee). That too seems unlikely to have a significant retirement component.

That's closely followed by Cook County, IL, which may actually be dismal enough climate-wise that someone might retire from there to Seattle.

Rounding out the top 5 for King County are Santa Clara and San Mateo in CA, both which seem unlikely to be due to retirement.

The biggest losses from King County are the four nearest counties that are on Puget Sound (Snohomish, Pierce, Kitsap, and Island), and the southernmost Washington county, Clark, which is on the Oregon border across from Portland. These probably aren't retirements.

I wonder how much of the Clark thing is people who have realized that if they live there they can easily shop in Portland (no sales tax) while living in Washington (no income tax)?

Looking across Puget Sound to Kitsap, we do some some signs of retirement. Of the top 5 Kitsap had losses to, there are three adjacent counties, one that is one away, and Maricopa County, AZ. That last one is probably retirement.

<comment><USER2> Yeah, this is a strange pattern at the metro level. Same seems to hold true for my county (Cook County). I wonder if somehow the web site is counting income generated by commuters from collar counties as income lost by the main city.

EDIT:

No, I'm wrong. The statistics are starting in 1992, so mostly it's just showing the growth of suburbs. It's more obvious if you click on population mode.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm unsure of what this is measuring. Is it wealth? Is it income?

Also, it's unclear it measures what it seeks to measure. Imagine a (poor) rural area and a (rich) urban area. Let's assume there's 0 net migration, but 100 people move in each direction every year. This looks like a migration of wealth given the methodology shown, but it's actually noise.

Thus the point the author seems to be driving "look how bad California is at having pro-wealth policies" may be flawed. Any wealthy area is going to look redder than any poor area (unless there's also a net migration of people too).

Reading the rest of the site it's clear he's just trying to push an agenda, though. He's not asking critical questions, just using words like "unimpeachable".

<comment><USER5> It measures capital flowing from the high tax (CA, NY) to the low tax states (TX, FL, WA).

<comment><USER6> I clicked on California and it gave me a per-county view, and it seems like a bunch of counties (which pay the same California taxes) are green.

I clicked San Francisco county and it seems like it's gaining money from other high tax areas (Santa Clara, New York, Chicago, DC, and Boston, in that order) and it's losing money to other, more suburban Bay Area counties. I don't see any low tax state mentioned in that view.

As I click through on other states I'm familiar with or have lived in, the trend I'm seeing is that populated areas are all red. That makes me think about the comment here about retirements or regional income differences. There is some population-based skewing here.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I can't stand sites like these. A clear agenda, but rather than come out Nd say it, wrap it up in a collection of misleading graphs and stats.

The clear agenda is to push for cutting taxes no matter what. But it takes a relatively intelligent person a few mins to investigate the site to show that it's roughly nothing more than listing high income state in red and low income in green.

If CA is twice as wealthy as AL, and two families swap states, then you'll have net money flowing out.

And it's not accidental the coloring of red and green to implicitly associate one with good and bad. It of course flipped to support his agenda.

He should instead reverse the colors and ask the question, "Which state is growing / producing the most wealthy people? And sharing that wealth throughout the country?"

It's of course, CA/NY/DC/MA/... All those places he wants to try to paint poorly.

</comment><comment><USER8> I mean, all this is a fancy way of saying "I made a map where high income tax counties and states are red and low income tax states and counties are green."

<comment><USER3> Try clicking on states and looking at the information that is then shown on the left. Try the same for counties within a state. That's where you get the interesting information.

<comment><USER8> I did, it just shows a ticker of AGI lost / gained per second.

But that's still just a calculation of how much income tax a particular state / county has...

<comment><USER3> Look below the ticker, where it shows a table of the top 5 states or counties (depending on if you are looking at a state or a county) the current state or county gained from, and the amounts from each, and below that a similar table for losses.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Another informatic with no legend. :|</comment>


Ask HN: Where can one learn about how computers work? - <AUTHOR> A friend of mine wants to understand how computers work. I began explaining how binary works and a (very) basic introduction to how the processor, RAM, and graphics card work, but I am looking for a book or other (online?) resource that I can recommend to him (and possibly even read/watch myself) to get a more thorough understanding.
I would appreciate any references, including but not limited to: logic gates, RAM, units of measurement (MHz, MB, etc.), and input/output.
Thank you in advance. <comment><USER2> _Computer Organization and Architecture_ by Stallings

[http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization-Architecture- Sta...](http://www.amazon.com/Computer-Organization-Architecture-Stallings- Communications/dp/013293633X)

</comment><comment><USER3> After you get past the components, some computer architecture will do you good. See eg [https://www.coursera.org/course/comparch](https://www.coursera.org/course/comparch). There's also the classic Hennessy & Patterson book.

</comment><comment> bra-ket Building a Modern Computer from First Principles: [http://www.amazon.com/The- Elements-Computing-Systems-Princip...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Elements- Computing-Systems-Principles/dp/0262640686)

</comment><comment><USER4> Here's a talk by Richard Feynman where he explains how computers work [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWGGDXe5MA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKWGGDXe5MA)

</comment><comment><USER5> Charles Petzold, "Code".

</comment><comment><USER6> Nand2Tetris, looks quite good but I havn't read it myself

</comment><comment><USER7> I always recommend _Code_ by Microsoft Press--good introduction to the fundamentals of computer engineering.

<comment><USER8> After _Code_ , I recently discovered Brian Kernighan's _D is for Digital_ , published in 2011, which gives a much more concrete description of how modern computing works.</comment></comment>