The Remote Manifesto - <AUTHOR> https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/all-remote/ <comment><USER2> > For example, onboarding can be more difficult when you're remote, because it > involves more self-learning and you're not physically with your new > coworkers and fellow new hires. This can cause the first month in a remote > role to feel lonely, especially if you're transitioning from a traditional > office setting.

As someone whose primary experience from going between jobs in IT is that almost the singularly most important factor is the social life of interacting with your colleagues, it strikes me as odd that this "Disadvantages" section is so brief. My experience is that a horrible job is bearable when your colleagues are great, and an extremely interesting and challenging job is horrible when your colleagues aren't a match.

You're asking someone to sell a large part of their life to you as labor, and there are no disadvantages beyond "a more independent onboarding"? It's almost insulting that this is even spun as an advantage: "Onboarding may be less stressful socially". First of all, onboarding is probably one of the most important things about a position period, but beyond that it feels like there are so many issues with not being accountable for your employees social well- being that it's hard to know where to start.

I would expect that a significant portion of the money that a corporation saves by having a "remote only" policy would go into alleviating the social issues caused by that same policy. I'm not seeing any of that here, which indicates to me a company that does not prioritize the well-being of their employees.

<comment><USER3> > _but beyond that it feels like there are so many issues with not being > accountable for your employees social well-being that it 's hard to know > where to start._

People looking for remote work - which today does require you to go out of your way to find it - are people who quite voluntarily and explicitly _don 't want_ the employer to provide social life for them. If colleagues and office banter is what one seeks, one looks for jobs on-site.

EDIT: Different people have different needs at different stages of their lives. Personally, I went from on-site to remote, but I do envision going back to on-site in a couple of years - mainly because nothing interesting (to me, c.f. my profile) seems to happen on remote jobs, unless you're an entrepreneur making your own interesting thing.

<comment><USER4> The thing is though with audio or video chat you can visit with your colleagues and office banter all that you (both) want even though you are remote.

Or you can do text chat in Slack about work or whatever interests you. Or interact in a 3D or VR office space. Or play video games if you want. Or meet up at a real life coffee shop.

You just have to get the other people to do it deliberately rather than everyone being automatically forced to do it by constant required physical proximity.

<comment><USER3> > _The thing is though with audio or video chat you can visit with your > colleagues and office banter all that you (both) want even though you are > remote._

Technically yes, though in practice I haven't heard of it happening. There's something... different about it, more distracting. It takes screen space and the noises carry differently - including various grunts and burps that the person over the next desk in RL would not hear, but your Skype buddy will.

The kind of unstructured, background interaction between co-workers that naturally exists in offices is something very hard to replicate in remote setting.

> _Or interact in a 3D or VR office space._

This I want to try _so hard_. I actually upgraded my PC recently with the intent of getting VR gear in the future, and a big motivation here is to explore the experience of shared VR workspaces.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I could never go back to a regular 8 to 4:30, with a timed lunch break and all that inflexibility.

I actually recoil in horror at the thought. Just the time wasted in traffic and associated costs is too much to bear.

However, hardly anyone at "the office" is looking to create a relationship with a 50-something senior dev anyway. Without a doubt we are the invisible workers at tech companies, if we ever even get the job in the first place, so that's actually another plus for remote.

However, I've never been the type to mix work life with a social circle, so I'm probably just buried in cognitive biases here.

</comment><comment><USER6> While this is all about remote, and talks mostly about remote, I found the initial bullet list very interesting. In my opinion, only the very first bullet point (omitted here) is tied to remote working, and the rest are probably ideas you should take a good look at if you could stand to improve your own processes and workflow (whether or not you are or will become remote).

> Flexible working hours over set working hours.

> Writing down and recording knowledge over verbal explanations.

> Written down processes over on-the-job training.

> Public sharing of information over need-to-know access.

> Opening up every document for editing by anyone over top-down control of > documents.

> Asynchronous communication over synchronous communication.

> The results of work over the hours put in.

> Formal communication channels over informal communication channels.

<comment><USER7> >> Work clothes not required

<comment><USER8> > Work clothes discouraged.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I've been working remotely (for companies that are not all 100% remote) for some time now and other than the occasional communication problems, there is simply no downside to it (for me). I am much more focused, I do better work, in a better health mentally and physically (I can exercise since I can organize my time), I don't waste time on commute.

The people I work with are interested in results and that's what I deliver. Other than that, they are not demanding that I organize my time in a certain way, or that I change the hours when I work, or anything like that. Of course, when I need to work together with my colleagues on a certain problem, I make sure that I adapt to their timetable.

They just care about results. And I think that makes the most sense. If one day I run a company, that's what I would care about: can this guy deliver? Yes or no?

Of course, one should be a decent human being - that goes without saying.

The whole "friends from work" thing doesn't make sense to me. I go to work to _work_ , not find friends there. That seems to be unpopular opinion, but seriously, why do we mix those things up?

<comment><USER10> The whole "golf friends" thing doesn't make sense to me. I go to play golf to play golf, not find friends there. That seems to be unpopular opinion, but seriously, why do we mix those things up?

My point being, why do we do bother to do anything with friends? If you're going to do something, whether it be work or play golf, isn't it better with friends than with strangers?

<comment><USER11> You choose to play golf, you _have_ to work. It seems imposing to those of us with outside social lives that our co-workers are looking to us to fulfill a non-work role in their lives.

A lot of the conversations in this thread are also very IC centric. If you're a manager, really being open and social with people in your company is more of a liability than something you want to do. Your reports shouldn't be your friends.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> My observation is that there are 2 schools of thought about remote salaries. One side will pay SF-based competitive salaries no matter where you are, are the other side will have a "cost of living" adjusted salary. Gitlab is in the latter group.

I recently thought about it, and was wondering if this could create some bias / unfair preferential treatment when interviewing and competing with other candidates. If candidate A is in SF, and another candidate, B, is in another cheaper area, and Gitlab is trying to decide between the 2 candidates, won't they be leaning toward hiring candidate B because of lower salary? All else being equal. I wonder if there can be some legal things into this.

<comment><USER13> That bias already exists, if 2 candidates with the same skill apply and one is asking for a lower pay then they are likely to be picked over the other. Why pay more for the same skill? If you want to have higher chances of being accepted then lowering your costs so you can lower your required pay is a good strategy.

I'm fairly sure the gitlab ceo commented before that they don't want to pay people way way over the local average because it could cause them to have people who don't want to be working there staying because they could never find a new job thats competitive where they are.

<comment><USER14> _Why pay more for the same skill?_

Because people aren't stupid and _when_ they realise they're being paid less than they're worth they'll leave, and then you'll have to go through the pain of recruiting someone else.

<comment><USER15> > Because people aren't stupid and when they realise they're being paid less > than they're worth they'll leave, and then you'll have to go through the > pain of recruiting someone else.

I just took a 20% pay-cut to go work somewhere I thought I might like. There is more to a position than the compensation package.

<comment><USER16> Sure, in those rare cases where you can find a company that really does interesting work (this is doubly difficult if you are limited to companies that allow remote work). For boring company A vs boring company B you are going to follow the money, I think (unless you actually work for The Boring Company).

<comment><USER15> There are a non-trivial number of factors that go into picking a job such that I sincerely doubt I would ever find myself going "Well, that one is offering 10K more per year." Off-hand:

\- Size of company, size of department, size of team

\- Future prospects, both in terms of company's market and my own growth

\- Type of work, e.g. maintenance vs. active development, "rescue" mission vs. greenfield vs. boring brownfield.

\- Composition of team, leadership, etc.

\- Industry, e.g. do I find it reprehensible vs. tolerable vs. interesting

Perhaps I'm the odd man out here, but I've never been in a position where salary was the material factor in picking one job over another.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I feel like that whole Remote issue has become too binary. Either people advocate for complete remote option OR employers mostly don't provide any flexibility when it comes to work location or schedules.

I personally believe that human interaction is a key to our well being since humans are not designed to stay in a remote room/office somewhere by themselves. I am not quite on the 100% remote thing to be honest and of course I hate employers who provide absolutely no flexibility.

Why not offer the best of both ? I don't have a job and run my own company where we are remote (multiple locations) but I try my best to have people in office as well and ensure that we are not going crazy sitting in some room/hotel/beach/co-working space by ourselves without any interaction with other team members in person. If employers start offering flexibility with work schedules, most people won't care if the job is fully remote or not. We just want flexibility. Most employers don't get this. It is always a binary game. Let's go fully remote OR let's not go anywhere.Why is it like that ?

<comment><USER12> I think the main issue is that if the company is not 100% committed to remote work, the extra effort it takes to have everything documented and written will probably not happen, and the remote part will not be successful. So it seems like it's just easier to make remote successful if everyone is remote. Kind of like quitting smoking cold turkey vs saying "I'll start by smoking less".

I've been remote on a non-remote team, and I definitely felt all the cons of remote much more than on a full remote team, because well, that's when you actually end up isolated. Everybody is having face to face communication, building stronger relationship, meanwhile you kind of get forgotten because you are not present.

If everyone is remote, then everyone is in the same situation and there is a better balance.

<comment><USER13> Exactly, from what I have seen gitlab seems to have this figured out very well. From what I remember they have slack groups and video calls where employees can have casual talk about non work things so they can get to know each other better. I can't see this happening at my company if one person went remote. The most I can see happening is someone doing remote once a week so they catch up on the rest of the days and spend one day focused alone.

<comment><USER18> That's right. GitLab has Group Conversations [1] every day at the time when West Coast and Europe overlap. The most-wanted hours in the company to organize meetings are dedicated to talking about different areas of the company and learning how they're performing. We also do a Company Call [2] every day, which comprises about five minutes of announcements and 25 minutes of people chatting.

Our Coffee Break Calls encourage team members to spend several hours a week socializing and building a relationship that's separate from work. Since working remotely can also lead to team members never meeting in person, we have a visiting grant [3] to cover transportation costs, and every nine months, the entire team gets together for the GitLab Contribute (ex Summit) [4]. The next Contribute happens in less than a 10 days and I can't wait for it!

[1] - [https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/people-operations/group- co...](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/people-operations/group- conversations/)

[2] - [https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/communication/#company- cal...](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/communication/#company-call)

[3] - [https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/incentives/#visiting- grant](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/incentives/#visiting-grant)

[4] - [https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/contribute/](https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/contribute/)

I am sorry for the long list of links, just wanted to share as much as possible so people are aware of what the regular week at GitLab looks like :)

(I am working for GitLab btw)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> However much I like Gitlab, the "disadvantages" section is a joke. Working alone with only video, chat and email is a huge fundamental change in how work is done and I'm pretty sure we as a society don't really know yet what impact it has on social development, interpersonal skills, empathy, sympathy etc. they should at least acknowledge that.

<comment><USER20> There are plenty of existing jobs where people have to spend many hours by themselves. Think about truck drivers, they may spend weeks alone with nothing more than a few minutes chat to a fellow trucker they see at a truck stop.

<comment><USER21> That's not true. Truckers have radios (at least in Europe) and they they are interacting with other truckers in radius of ~10 miles. I had radio in my car and and it was even entertaining sometimes. I could ask advice, ask for fuel when I was empty, ask for police checkpoints. On private channel one can have virtually private conversation.

<comment><USER22> We should invent something like that, 'radio', thing for computers

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I wonder how some of the all remote companies handle the legal side of things when it comes to paying salaries and contracts.

I've been working as a (partly remote depending on customer) freelancer/contractor for 5 years with my own legal entity setup in Europe to do invoicing and handle my finances. I'm not willing to give that up yet but the thought of working for an all remote company for a longer period than the typical 3 to 6 month contract sounds interesting.

Are these full remote companies flexible in regards to this? Are they open to me keeping my own business entity and invoicing them while still being regarded as a full member of the team?

edit: For example on the Gitlab jobs page and salary calculator they clearly state that for my home country they expect me to be an employee of their Gitlab BV entity which is a no-go for me.

<comment><USER24> Depending on which country you and your employing entity are in, this could end up netting you all of the disadvantages of self-employment with none of the benefits.

E.g. in the UK, HMRC will determine your tax status based on, amongst other things, how much control your 'not employer' has over the work you do. So if GitLab were to treat you as just another member of the team, you'd run a big risk of ending up treated as an employee for tax purposes, but without any of the rights accorded to employees.

TLDR - talk to a tax professional who understands the regulations in both your and your "not employer's" jurisdictions.

<comment><USER25> I agree with this comment.

I'm wholly in the US, so maybe my experience is unique to me. Bit I was freelancing for quite a while and then one of my clients ended up buying all my time.

IMO, there weren't any benefits from remaining a contractor once I was working full time. We ended up cutting my pay a bit to account for a shift in taxes and that worked out better for both me and my employer.

<comment><USER26> If you were individual 1099, then no there is no advantage really. And you have to pay self-employment tax. If you were B2B 1099, there are ENORMOUS advantages. My average effective federal tax rate on ~$250k/yr is right around 1.8-2.2% because I'm 1099 B2B and have a great tax attorney and accountant. Obviously on paper I make like $30k a year or something stupid like that, I don't know. My attorney adjust things monthly or quarterly as necessary, starts new LLCs or whatever is required.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I work 100% remotely, or has been working like that for the last couple of years until recently where I work 80% remotely.

One thing I've noticed is that going into the office that one day is incredible enjoyable. I think I've been a bit too isolated since I don't have that many friends either and work on side projects as well.

But, working 1-2 days in the office per week feels like the optimal experience. You get the social part with meetings and you get the work alone part where you may concentrate on tasks.

I really enjoy working remotely though, it has reduced my stress levels, increased my spare time and made it available to live in a cheaper place far away from the city centre.

Things like this I enjoy, even if you're not an remote advocate the option should exist for people who want to work remotely like me. Unfortunately, too few companies allows remote work to the degree I've been lucky to get. Maybe it's time to move some repos to Gitlab!

<comment><USER20> I've been working remotely on and off for the past 6 years, and I agree that having a peer group where you can casually chat about "tech stuff" is one thing you definitely miss out on by isolating yourself at home.

A couple of my remote-peers work from co-working spaces which seems like a good way to avoid home distractions (my first-born is on the way shortly) and still have this connection to like minded people, so I plan to start doing that too.

</comment></comment><comment> jl-gitlab These are personal anecdotes, but here at GitLab we recently started recording our personal stories about how remote working changed our lives. If you're interested in remote work you may also find this interesting: [https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/all- remote/stories/](https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/all-remote/stories/)

</comment><comment><USER28> Working remotely has been the greatest thing for me. I'm more productive, less stressed, and generally happier. I can't see going back to an office even for way more money. It's just not worth it. I agree with all these points although I don't think video is necessary or should be used unless there's something to see other than people's faces.

I do wonder how they manage payroll and taxes in fifty countries though. Also how they set salaries. Is there a link to that I may have missed?

<comment><USER13> >Also how they set salaries.

At the bottom of each job type on the handbook they have a formula and a calculator so you can see how much you would be paid and how they calculate it. Its a combination of the job title, your skill level, and your location.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> > Remote is not a challenge to overcome. It's a clear business advantage.

It's an advantage if and only if you overcome the inherent challenges, and despite this tagline they list disadvantages in the article. However, you structure the whole organization and its operations around dispersed, remote workers (as they seem to), especially emphasizing asynchronous communication, then I can see how this can avoid the traditional pitfalls of remote workers in a synchronized, co-located environment.

Speaking of async communication, it is ironic that many traditional organizations with standard work hours and co-located offices also rely so much on email, an asynchronous communication method that is incredibly painful in an office environment, yet it seems like such a clear benefit in a remote setting. That is, it's like the two long-existing constructs - email and the combination of colocating and synchronizing work hours - are in direct conflict.

</comment><comment><USER30> _" Opening up every document for editing by anyone over top-down control of documents."_

Does anyone want to comment on this? I don't feel qualified to judge, but isn't this throwing the baby out with the water? Can't privileged access be managed remotely by some network authority, i.e. access granted, revoked and logged?

<comment><USER31> Depends on your area of business certainly, but for us (all remote social) it's a huge time saver. There's version control and a culture of editing in "suggestion mode" to save us if something goes wrong. But having to wait x hours for someone to get into the office because they're in another time zone so you can edit what you need can be a real time waster.

At the least you often lose the train of thought or edit is never made, which can be even worse than losing the time.

HR and other sensitive docs excluded of course.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Interesting, I know the variation of this from [https://www.remoteonly.org](https://www.remoteonly.org) and didn't realise it was associated with gitlab

<comment><USER33> I started working for GitLab back in October 2018, and was inspired to start looking into remote work because of [https://www.remoteonly.org](https://www.remoteonly.org). It wasn't until your comment that I learned that GitLab maintains that project [1]. Thanks for pointing that out!

[1] [https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-remoteonly- org](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-remoteonly-org)

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> The advantages are discussed more, while the disadvantages are just a paragraph. I think with this article it's a case of 'reason is slave to the passions'.

I genuinely want to know the arguments against.

</comment><comment><USER35> The manifesto mentions:

> Evolution of speech-to-text conversion software - more accurate and faster > than typing

Last time I tried I wasn't convinced. Anyone here is really using that to program, write emails or write Markdown?

<comment><USER36> I only use it for quick slack or instant messages with my team when I am otherwise occupied. Maybe I'll make a run at it later today when I have to do some documentation.

My experience has been that they're not great and every sentence requires manual editing. Though, on Android, at least, it has improved noticeably over the last couple of updates.

<comment><USER35> This matches my own experience. Never thought of using speech-to-text for chat. Will try it :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> > Despite all of its advantages, all-remote work isn't for everyone.

Yup. I remember the horrors of applying some "remote-friendly" positions. Such organizations are somehow even lacking basic organization skills to arrange an interview.</comment>


Show HN: What is the best Pokemon Type? - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@bcollazo2010/what-is-the-best-pokemon-type-6b735f0afa7 <comment><USER2> As someone who plays pokemon a lot, this reads false. While it's true Electric is a good type because of the only one weakness (Ground attacks) and Ice is cool because it has 4 super advantages (Fly, Dragon, Grass and Ground), it's a terrible type because it also has 4 weaknesses (Fight, Rock, Steel, and Fire).

This analysis just _feels_ wrong. In pure type advantages, sure it's correct. But Pokemon can learn other types of attack besides it's 2 typings! (Infernape, for example, has the typing Fight/Fire. It's weak to Psychic, Water, Flying and Ground. But it has access to moves to get around those weaknesses, meaning that it's typing isn't as bad as this analysis would suggest it is.)

I guess you can say, hmm, that's interesting, but in terms of game play, strategy, and how good a pokemon can be, the typing is usually one of the lesser concerns.

<comment><USER3> Also, no mention of potential types like Ghost/Normal that have no weakness, or Ghost/Fighting that have complete coverage with their STAB moves. I haven't played in ages, but surely there's more type combinations that are exceedingly OP.

<comment><USER2> Ghost/Normal does have a weakness. Dark. There is no combination that doesn't have a weakness, anymore. (It used to be Dark/Ghost, but then GameFreak came out with Fairy type, which is super-effective against Dark.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is comparing type advantage against _all_ other Pokemon, which isn't representative of actual strength, because most other Pokemon are not viable competitively. What actually matters is type advantage against only the Pokemon with good stats and abilities.

Here's some recent usage stats of top ranking players using the strongest available Pokemon (although lightly restricted by rules designed to prevent excessively boring or luck-dependent matches): [https://www.smogon.com/stats/2018-02/gen7ubers-1760.txt](https://www.smogon.com/stats/2018-02/gen7ubers-1760.txt)

Ice and electric are very poorly represented. It would be interesting to re- run the algorithm on only the top n from this ranking.

</comment><comment><USER5> Good to see this on HN. I'm waiting for an explanation that uses category theory to arrive at a conclusion.

<comment><USER6> You see, Pokémon are like a burrito...

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> You'd be right if you're only worrying about STAB attacks and pure defense, sure. Admittedly, Bug has a lot of weaknesses and is a lower-tier element in general, realistically what you want to do is have something resistant to Water with a good selection of moves.</comment>


Chipotle Scarecrow is the future of advergaming on mobile - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2013/09/30/chipotle-scarecrow-is-the-future-of-advergaming-on-mobile/ <comment><USER2> This is a good writeup about an extremely interesting subject, and the beginning of what is sure to be a major trend. But the author kind of lost me here:

 _" Chipotle Scarecrow will, without a doubt, go down as one of the most successful marketing campaigns in history."_

Really? On what metrics? It seems extremely successful as far as reach is concerned, sure. It probably drove a good deal of positive brand sentiment, which is great. But how did this campaign drive sales of burritos? How did it drive gains in share against competitors? What was the actual ROI?

It always bugs me when people talk about "marketing" as though it's purely about reaching eyeballs. That's a big part of _advertising_ , which is a subset of marketing. But it's not how a successful marketing campaign is solely measured. Especially when we're talking about marketing for a restaurant chain. Distributing a very engaging mobile game is a wonderful and rare accomplishment, but Chipotle is in the food business. It needs to demonstrate that Mobile Success A led to Business Success B.

This campaign was extremely clever, creative and innovative. It was a huge hit on mobile devices, and it garnered a great deal of attention. All of those things are to be commended. But unless the ROI was positive, unless this campaign really moved the needle in a major way on sales, we can't speak about how "successful" it actually was -- let alone speak in hyperbolic terms about how it was one of "the most successful marketing campaigns in history."

In time it may well prove to be a huge success. Perhaps even an enormous success. But the jury is still out.

<comment><USER3> Attribution modeling is an incredibly difficult problem, yes. Anyone who can come up with a really good way to measure this kind of stuff is going to make bank.

I agree that from a lot of perspectives the way people talk about branding campaigns looks real.... iffy, for lack of a better term. Everyone knows that it somehow works, but nobody's exactly sure how yet. Nobody can really measure the impact yet even.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I haven't tried the game at hand, but I'll say that the Chipotle ordering app is by far one of the most revolutionary day to day uses of the iPhone, in my admittedly not exciting life. Build a burrito, save the order for future purchases...at any time, just send the order to the nearest Chipotle, and when you get there, you skip the line to pick up your order. Few other consumer apps so impact such a traditional and frequent workflow

<comment><USER5> Quite puzzling why they still haven't brought that app to Android.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I downloaded and played the game one morning as fast as I could to get the free burrito and never touched it again. I didn't watch the video, I didn't read any of the crap on there...I basically just did the bare minimum and got my free burrito.

I have a feeling that's most people who downloaded that game. I can't imagine it brought back in a ton of revenue.

But, I could be completely wrong! Maybe most people aren't heartless bastards who just want a free burrito!

<comment><USER7> _" Maybe most people aren't heartless bastards who just want a free burrito!"_

No, most people got a free burrito and ordered a soda and/or chips with it.

And that, my friends, is Step 3: Profit!

<comment><USER8> A burrito at Chipotle is something upwards of $6 (exact price varies depending on the kind of meat, etc). The drink and chips do not begin to cover it. You only get profit in this scenario is they become repeat customers.

<comment><USER7> Or if you bring your family, friends, or co-workers with you.

<comment><USER8> Fyi, fineprint:

 _EARN 1 STAR ON EVERY LEVEL TO SCORE A BUY-ONE /GET-ONE FREE CARD FOR A BURRITO, BOWL, SALAD, OR ORDER OF TACOS AT CHIPOTLE. REWARDS ARE LIMITED. NO PURCHASE NECESSARY TO ENTER; VOID WHERE PROHIBITED._

Which is not the impression I had with "win a free burrito."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The review breakdown for this app is all over the place: [https://sensortower.com/ios/us/chipotle-mexican- grill/app/ch...](https://sensortower.com/ios/us/chipotle-mexican- grill/app/chipotle-scarecrow/689470205)

Getting the users was indeed a concentrated marketing effort that took quite a bit of advertising, too.

</comment><comment><USER10> Maybe when they say "optimized for iPhone 4S or newer" it's just that performance is bad, because it downloads fine for me on an iPhone 4.

[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/chipotle- scarecrow/id6894702...](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/chipotle- scarecrow/id689470205?mt=8)

<comment><USER11> That's exactly what they mean. Apple doesn't let developers release software that discriminates on hardware models, just OS versions and some hardware features.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This kind of thing kind of scares me to be honest. It's almost a peek into a horrific dystopian future where piracy is so rampant that games, music videos, and perhaps even movies are only made as a marketing effort and are filled with advertising, branding, and product placement.

<comment><USER13> Your fear is misplaced.

1) The game exclusively on IOS, where piracy is minuscule. It couldn't have been the motivator.

2) People are willing to pay for good quality and convenience instead of pirating (e.g., Steam, Netflix, game consoles).

<comment><USER14> Piracy is actually very high on iOS, especially when it comes to paid apps: "when Wind-up Knight for iOS was a paid app, the piracy rate reportedly went 80%" ([http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/07/piracy-rates-are-higher- on-...](http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/07/piracy-rates-are-higher-on-ios-than- on-android-developer-says/))

This is one reason why so many games are going freemium and sever backed. (Even iAP is frequently hacked unless the purchases are stored or at least verified on a server).

<comment><USER15> That linked article is over a year old. Each iOS device and OS release since then has gotten harder and harder to jailbreak and 6.1.4 didn't even receive a jailbreak till a few days ago.

I'd bet that Android piracy is far higher than iOS is at the moment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Reminds me of Chex Quest:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chex_Quest](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chex_Quest)</comment>


LUSTagency - <AUTHOR> Concept description -
LUST -https://lust.agency/ -  is a decentralized sex marketplace with a goal to enable all human beings on earth to find their perfect sexual partner anonymously. We want to build a free community where members can experience the innate pleasure of the world without worrying about censorship by religious or governmental authorities or third party involvements. With absolute anonymity and user satisfaction as our primary beliefs, we aim to eradicate the undesirable effects for all parties involved in the sex industry. Cause everybody needs sex, we created this vital tool to provide unstoppable reasonable services to anyone and anywhere in this world. https://t.me/joinchat/FiB3R0Hi7Eb6-mTirf3vRQ Join now - fun later:) <comment><USER2> Adding Ethereum to an illegal thing doesn't make that thing less illegal.</comment>


What single quality predicts a good doctor? Curiousity. - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/unofficial-prognosis/2012/03/08/what-single-quality-predicts-a-good-doctor/

<comment><USER2> I think it's also likely that curiosity correlates with being a good hacker:

\- Is there a better way to do this: Another language? Another algorithm?

\- What's the real cause of this bug?

\- Has someone already solved this problem?

\- What problems are my co-workers working on?

\- What does that unfamiliar bit of syntax do?</comment>


An 'athletic body' doesn't always look the same. - <AUTHOR> http://ninamatsumoto.wordpress.com/2010/12/18/athletic-body-diversity-reference-for-artists/ <comment><USER2> Most sports magazines promote very unhealthy body shapes. And often they don't report on important athletes because they don't look good. That's why I cancelled my Runner's World subscription decades ago. Once in a while I get a glimpse of their new covers and they seem to be getting worse. Like that cover "the raise of the skirts." It's more about fashion than sports.

<comment><USER3> You couldn't be more correct especially regarding so called 'health' magazines. I cancelled Men's Health because it turned into a Maxim.

<comment><USER4> I've always found Men's Health to have pretty ideal male physical forms on the cover. They've had Obama on the cover, Beckham, and sometimes the cover man isn't even shirtless. In fact, when I'm at the gym talking about goals, I'll sometimes say "more like Men's Health, not MuscleMag".

<comment><USER5> Consider the comparision. Maxim isn't known for its skewed portrayal of _men_. It's known for only featuring "babes" and other species of "hot chicks".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Health and performance are so much more important than subscribing to some utterly imaginary idea of what you should look like as a person.

</comment><comment><USER7> I've met some fellow cyclists on the local circuit who looked borderline anorexic, because they took the "lose all possible weight" theme as far as they could. Even some pro cyclists look unhealthy, to me. What I'm getting at is that sometimes a sport's own internal pressures may cause issues.

</comment><comment><USER8> So, what sport creates the "best" looking athlete based on our society's standard? IMO, it would be soccer..?

<comment><USER9> For the "current" standards of good looking and for skill levels attainable by people having a life (and/or job) it would be probably something like that (roughly in descending order):

* Basketball (for women tied with Volleyball)

* Decathlon (men)

* Sprint (men - women equivalent would be long and high jump)

* Boxing (all variants but only for lower to "normal" weight classes)

* Judo/Wrestling/BJJ/Gymnastics (lower to "normal" weight classes... maybe to sinew for women)

* Rowing/Kanu

* Olympic Weightlifting (lower to "normal" weight classes)

* Powerlifting (again lower to "normal" weight classes, additionally not at elite level)

* Swimming (men... women a probably higher in this chart)

If you allow "newcomers", I would add to above list CrossFit in the upper third for men (lower third for women) and Kettlebell (lower to "normal" weightlcasses) in the lower third.

Swimming would have been higher in the past, but for today's "standards" it allows a to "high" level of body fat compared to the other sports.

Football (aka. "Soccer") players only start to look "good" at a pretty high level (if they're not doing anything else), the same probably holds true for Baseball.

Additionally some positions in American Football (e.g. Receiver) and some Skiing variants would be ranked quite well.

<comment><USER10> Kanu? If you mean kayak, I disagree. Kayaking is good for upper body strength, but (exaggerating) atrophies the legs.

Also, I think there is a difference between 'good on average', and 'good for those who manage to do a lot of it without getting injured'. For example decathlon training is good for overall 'athlete look', but the risk of dropping out with some injury is fairly high.

For that reason, I would rank the impact-free sports such as swimming, cross- country skiing and rowing a bit higher.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I've tried really hard and failed to find even a remote correlation between hacking and/or news.

<comment><USER12> The correlation, however tenuous, that I arrived at is the abiding interest in the hacker community to find a fitness regimen that interferes the least with the 16-hour workday.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Rulon Gardner (1st image) is on this season's Biggest Loser. He had ballooned up to 460lbs.

</comment><comment><USER14> My hobby is olympic weightlifting. I am 6'3 and weigh approximately 300lbs, in imperial terms (190cm / 137kg), placing me well inside the superheavyweight division.

According to the BMI I am morbidly obese. According to my doctor I am in excellent health.

<comment><USER15> Actually feet, inches and pounds are imperial terms. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_units>

Metre (cm) and gram (kg) are SI-units (International System of Units)

<comment><USER14> You've mis-parsed my sentence. The part "in imperial terms" was meant to refer to the imperial measurements. The SI measurements were in parentheses for people who, like me, live outside of Liberia, Myanmar and the USA.

<comment><USER15> Ah, yes. Sorry :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> While they may not look like fashion models, fitness models, porn stars or greek gods, there's one notable difference between all these people and the typical person: they all have significantly more muscle.

(Edit: a few exceptions: the long distance runners, the table tennis guy, the rhythmic gymnastic woman, and the fencing guy.)

</comment><comment><USER17> The body needs to be fit for its tasks, not just please the snobbish beholder.

This reminded me of Nike's "Go ahead, tell me I'm not an athlete!" campaign. To open minded people, this makes perfect sense.</comment>


Scientists Implant False Memories in Birds to Teach Songs They've Never Heard - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-implant-false-memories-in-birds-to-teach-them-songs-they-ve-never-heard <comment><USER2> See recent discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21164686](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21164686)</comment>


Vote for Net Neutrality - <AUTHOR> https://votefornetneutrality.com/ <comment><USER2> "When telecom corporations begin to throttle content between fast or slow lanes, at their discretion, they begin to control exactly what we see and hear."

This is actually good for corporations. Instead of having a less-expensive plan and a more-expensive plan, they now are forced to only have the expensive one. Not so good if you want lower prices.

"This is no more a plan to regulate the Internet than the First Amendment is a plan to regulate free speech. They both stand for the same concepts: openness, expression, and an absence of gatekeepers telling people what they can do, where they can go, and what they can think."

We also should be more concerned with popular websites and mainstream news sites allowing equality of political opinion. Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube all censor dissenting political opinions.</comment>


FBI 'Can Neither Confirm nor Deny' That It Monitors Your Social Media Posts - <AUTHOR> https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/internet-speech/fbi-can-neither-confirm-nor-deny-it-monitors-your-social-media <comment><USER2> Why wouldn't they? The publicly exposed data is publicly exposed. Is there any reasonable sense to privacy at that point? The more interesting question is how much data do they get that is "private" without a warrant.

The following are a few examples of how the private data may be being gathered by the FBI, under existing legal structures.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/nsa-gets- more...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/nsa-gets-more- latitude-to-share-intercepted-communications.html)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A)

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

There is also the possibility of voluntary cooperation by corporations, or even corporations selling commercial access to their data (Facebook, Cellular Carriers).

<comment><USER3> > Is there any reasonable sense to privacy at that point?

Yes there is. This data is mined without reasonable suspicion, and shared with all parties, including contractors (commercial companies).

Surveillance without suspicion, storing such data indefinately, is chilling to free speech, opposed to protections against unreasonable searches, makes it more difficult to associate and practice one's religion.

People with no intention to commit crimes are in jail or have a record, because they decided to joke among friends, and had just a bit too big exposure, and just too little context. In the Netherlands you may get a house visit from the police if you tweet critical of the town mayor or tweet about protests (of course, they label it "threats" and "inciting civil unrest")

<comment><USER4> > This data is mined without reasonable suspicion

Uh, no. If you post a billboard on the side of the road or hang a letter on a public bulletin board, anyone can freely quote it, take a picture of it, or read it and tell others about it. If you post something on a public internet website, anyone can freely quote it, take a picture of it (err, screenshot), or read it and tell others about it. There's no difference. Public is public is public.

<comment><USER5> I think the parent comment is pointing out that the _government_ is supposed to be prohibited from collecting information unless it needs to (e.g. reasonable suspicion), no matter if it's public or not.

Specifically, in the U.S., the Supreme Court confirmed that public data can still be protected by a warrant if used to compose a "mosaic" of something within a person's reasonable expectation of privacy.

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

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

So, could a private company follow you around and read every tweet you post publicly? Yes. Could a government do the same without a warrant (or even ask the company to give the information to them)? No.

The restriction is on the government, not the data. I guess in Europe, now with the GDPR, this restriction also falls on companies, too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Consider this angle the next time there is a mass shooting, and the attack is foreshadowed by troubling social media posts by the perpetrator. In those circumstances, there are often cries of "why was nothing done to prevent this?"

I'm not advocating a specific side here, only pointing out that the two positions are fundamentally at odds with each other.

<comment><USER7> I disagree those two positions are at odds.

You can be vehemently against social media monitoring by government agencies and warrantless wiretaps and still point out the many times law enforcement and others in a position to help ignore signs of distress.

Moreover, there isn't proof that this type of monitoring actively stops mass shootings or other attacks. Sometimes it does — for sure (though mostly when communication is happening through email and not social posts) — but we've seen plenty of anecdotes where concerning public postings were pointed out to authorities and nothing was done.

<comment><USER6> > vehemently against social media monitoring by government agencies and > warrantless wiretaps

Does reading publicly published information constitute wiretapping?

> we've seen plenty of anecdotes where concerning public postings were pointed > out to authorities and nothing was done

This is what I'm getting at-- responding to obviously-troubling social media posts seems entirely reasonable after the fact. Perhaps it is? But at the same time it carries an implication of law enforcement pre-emptively acting based on the content of public speech, which has its own worrying implications, as evidenced by the examples in the article.

Earnest question: What's the legal boundary in other circumstances? Can/should law enforcement take action if a person uses a megaphone in the town square to announce they're going to use their AR-15 to kill all the $x people? If they published an op-ed in the local newspaper to the same effect? (If yes, how is facebook/twitter different from a town square / op-ed column?)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Of course they do, it's called OSINT and many agencies around the world collect & monitor social media for archival and profiling purposes...

</comment><comment><USER9> In United States law, the term Glomar response, also known as Glomarization or Glomar denial, refers to a response to a request for information that will "neither confirm nor deny" (NCND) the existence of the information sought [0].

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

<comment><USER10> AKA: We can't legally lie, but we also won't tell the truth to avoid damaging our reputation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Law enforcement are allowed to collect any _public_ data without a warrant.

<comment><USER3> But it would be better if they had to show reasonable suspicion.

> Effective law enforcement often requires undercover work, information > gathering and surveillance of suspected criminals. Such surveillance should > be based on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity – and ended when that > suspicion is dispelled.

> However, when conducted without suspicion of criminal activity, especially > when targeted at unpopular political groups, or when intended to profile > religious, ethnic or racial minorities, it violates the right to be free of > unwarranted government intrusion and to exercise free speech, association, > and practice one's religion. The harm to those under surveillance without > suspicion is made worse when the information collected about them and their > activities is shared by local, state and federal law enforcement, military > and security agencies and stored in multiple databases, just in case it > might ever become useful.

> In addition to chilling speech, surveillance without suspicion actually > makes law enforcement less effective. When authorities are swamped with > mountains of irrelevant and inaccurate information, their ability to > properly analyze data is compromised. Ultimately, these practices make us > less safe.

[https://www.aclu-wa.org/pages/surveillance-without- suspicion](https://www.aclu-wa.org/pages/surveillance-without-suspicion)

Right now, your social media might be mined to classify you as an "anarchist", after which you may be pulled over and arrested when you are driving close to an anti-war protest. To me, that does not sound just at all.

<comment><USER11> > Right now, your social media might be mined to classify you as an > "anarchist"

If police want to classify you as that, that's fine. It's meaningless.

> after which you may be pulled over and arrested when you are driving close > to an anti-war protest

Arrested for what? Police would only be able to arrest if they have a reason, and being an anarchist / going to a protest is not a reason (in the US, at least).

Please don't spread fear and misinformation.

<comment><USER3> Please don't accuse me of spreading misinformation. The case was linked on the page I cited.

[https://www.aclu-wa.org/docs/chinn-v-blankenship-complaint](https://www.aclu- wa.org/docs/chinn-v-blankenship-complaint)

> If police want to classify you as that, that's fine. It's meaningless.

No it is not meaningless. Police see anarchists and alt-right activists as "harboring ideas that are subversive to state control", meaning, you get on their shit list.

> Arrested for what?

The police stopped the car after it was identified as carrying 3 anarchists (stop & search under false pre-text) close to an anti-war protest. A police officer then arrested the driver for seemingly being under the influence of weed, without any evidence or probably cause, and had him locked up at the police station.

So while you are correct that being an anarchist going to a protest is not a valid reason, if the police wants you off the streets (because they classified you as being shit), they will use another reason (such as: "He looked under the influence of weed" or another popular one: "contempt of cop", which rarely carry any penalties for the cops and kind of act like Joker cards so they can go with a gut feeling over solid proof or cause)

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Laying aside the issue of the monitoring of U.S. Citizens versus the monitoring of Europeans, it would seem to me that they'd need something a little more nefarious than a simple data parsing and analytics toolset to access non-public posts, yeah?

I don't Facebook, so I'm not sure if the default settings for Facebook are "Public" or "Friends Only" but I'd imagine that the bulk of what they'd principally be interested in is the "Friends Only" stuff, yeah?

<comment><USER3> Yes, they are interested in private Facebook data. And no, you can't trust Facebook to not facilitate them if the wallets get opened, or if the police gets creative and starts sending you friend requests.

[https://theintercept.com/2018/03/26/facebook-data-ice- immigr...](https://theintercept.com/2018/03/26/facebook-data-ice-immigration/)

[https://bgr.com/2018/09/25/facebook-police-fake- profiles/](https://bgr.com/2018/09/25/facebook-police-fake-profiles/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> If you pay attention to enough tech talks, " _open source intel_ " is wonk parlance for " _we are watching every move for everyone ever, all over the internet, especially in the places where people feel like they can speak freely._ "

That term, " _open source intel_ " is dropped with a wink, by every security goon, in at least one slide at every security conference.

</comment><comment><USER14> Well sure. Doesn't anyone remember what Snowden was known for revealing? Why would anyone think Twitter and Facebook would be exempt from monitoring?

</comment><comment><USER15> Good. I hope to have a reason to do business with them someday, would probably be very interesting.

(This comment has not at all been informed by the possibility suggested in the title of the submission...)</comment>


Brains Cling to Old Habits When Learning New Tricks - <AUTHOR> https://www.quantamagazine.org/brain-computer-interfaces-show-that-neural-networks-learn-by-recycling-20180327/ <comment><USER2> The designers must have put that in as a way to avoid "catastrophic forgetting"[0].

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

<comment><USER3> Who would have thought that a little bit of close-mindedness might be good for something?

Imagine trying to convince an AI of the future to give up deeply held, almost religious beliefs because the designers wanted to mitigate this problem. Sounds like the premise of a sci-fi plot. It might even exist already.

<comment><USER4> It reminds me of the adage, "Keep an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out."

Though I like the more eloquent 1886 speech by Sir Edward Clarke in the U.K. House of Commons:

But what did that speech amount to? It came to this ingenuous confession of an open mind. The mind was indeed so open that it had nothing in it at all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Degree of (and physio mechanisms regulating) plasticity are brain-region specific.

Motor cortex is using a plasticity framework that supports 'procedural' memory formation. This type of learning is relatively slow and relies on small incremental changes (for ML people, maybe this is similar to having your nn regularization parameter cranked way up).

Other areas of cortex can support 'declarative' memory formation. For example you can learn things like the definition of a new word (lang), features of a novel object (vis), where you parked your car outside your new apartment (spatial/episodic), within just a few seconds.

For the control of prosthetic limbs, there is perhaps no better brain-computer interface than motor cortex. Despite its relatively laborious procedural-type learning framework, limb movement is precisely what PMC has been optimized for. Since we've been digging around PMC for a while and have managed to make these electronic prosthetics work well, it's only natural to see what other tasks we can perform with those PMC-embedded electrodes. We should however keep in mind, though, the human brain has a wondrous variety of subregions optimized via evolution to perform all manner of computations, to support some subtype of behavior or mental capacity, with varying degrees of task- specificity. All I'm really saying is that... we will likely find out that a PMC-computer interface is garbage at doing some of the things we imagine should be possible, like typing words into a text box using thoughts. While it's likely possible (motor cortex could think about moving virtual fingers typing on a keyboard, and the computer interface could pick up on these signal patterns), there is another set of brain regions better suited for this task that could be tapped-into. But yes, " _Some_ Brain _Regions_ Cling to Old Habits When Learning New Tricks".

<comment><USER6> So essentially, the holy grail of a purely "abstraction of an abstraction of an abstraction ad infinitum" AI is mostly a pipe dream? Everyone loves to hope that everything that matters can be built from [insert object here]. Physicists want strings. Programmers want s-expressions or combinators or [choose your poison]. And AI researchers want the post-TLU artificial neuron model to learn it all..

I have always thought that machine learning is the less likely path to artificial human-level intelligence. It makes more sense to create a universe. I know your laughing now - but please hear me out. A digital universe can be merely a bunch of cells on a grid with specified rules for state-space updates. Cellular automata are the most well known example ie. Game of Life.

If we look at the requirements for evolution and the requirements for information stability and movement, we can then proceed to create a 2d universe, tinker enough until we get life. Information stability and movement is mostly just the entities of matter and energy, and their conversion and total conservation. The life may not be all that remarkable at first but we run the universe more cycles, throw more compute at it, and we can push the clock forward quite a large amount. The trick of course, is not to try to make OUR universe. Too much information. Too much compute power required. Too much space...likely without life -- so wasted resources for our goal. And lastly, too many layers - even going from bosons and fermions we have: Protons/Neutrons/Electrons/Atoms/Molecules/Amino Acids/Proteins/RNA/DNA/Single Cells/Multicellular Life Forms/Mammals/Primates/Humans. The last 3 could be considered as evolution - so not all have to be present at the same time. However, all the other abstractions are a real dimensionality crusher. Are they totally necessary for an intelligent being? I doubt it.

Once we find the local cluster of life we are interested in, in our digital universe, we could even do procedural generation instead of full state-space updates. So we can speed up the evolution of our target even quicker.

There's nothing I haven't said here but here's my blog post about this idea if you're interested in reading more: [https://scrollto.com/life-a-universe- simulation/](https://scrollto.com/life-a-universe-simulation/)

<comment><USER7> Maybe AGI is just a problem of computation power and complexity.

Can infinite monkeys write a brain?

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

<comment><USER6> It almost certainly is. But we can at least say that our universe is a solution. Still isn't guaranteed to help remove the infinite though since we don't know if our universe is just one flavor of an infinite class of parameters - some which may be unobservable in full precision.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This might also explain why learning a 2nd language is usually harder than the 1st, and why getting rid of, or changing, an accent is so hard. All that time invested in those old neural circuits, better make use of those first.

<comment><USER9> I'm still not convinced learning a 2 language is harder, even as an adult. I now know 3 and if you put some effort and time (or even better get immersed) you will learn it. Children have YEARS of amazing immersion, adult patience and care. Who wouldn't learn a language in such fertiile conditions.

As for the accent which i have, i don't know yet. I will try to correct it and see how it goes.

<comment><USER10> The step from one language to two is much, much larger than the step from two to three or beyond. I did this seriously for the first time when I was 21/22, and it was initially difficult to get used to the concept of thinking not in terms of the temporal order in which words are introduced (i.e. the syntax of the language in which you are speaking) or at least shifting your process to generate sentences on the fly in a new order. In my experience (native English, learned German) I had a relatively smooth transition but even so it was difficult not to construct sentences as I spoke in the typical English construction. Once you get comfortable with shutting off that reflex to formulate thoughts according to the syntax and vocabulary of your own language, learning language becomes a lot smoother. This reflex is of course more strongly burned-in the older one gets due to the decrease in neuroplasticity as we age.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I know very little about learning, but it sounds sorta like multi armed bandit. Put a lot of emphasis on past success, rather than exploring. I would guess a really good tennis player would have a hard time getting good at squash, as opposed to a rank beginner. There is nothing to unlearn for the beginner.

<comment><USER12> Indeed this is a well-known phenomenon: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_transfer_(memory)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_transfer_\(memory\))

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Skills should be leaned on when needed but we should always approach new things, and revisit things you know, with a _beginners mind_ zen.

I believe a large part of being an engineer or problem solver is to take complex things and make them simple as can be but no simpler as Einstein stated, that way others can also come into that with a _beginners mind_.

Basically be Feynman and learn how things really work and when you find out, explain them as basic/simple as possible for understanding [1]. If you can't explain something in simple terms, you don't understand it.

[1] [https://kottke.org/17/06/if-you-cant-explain-something-in- si...](https://kottke.org/17/06/if-you-cant-explain-something-in-simple-terms- you-dont-understand-it)

</comment><comment><USER14> The most interesting thing I read recently about brain plasticity is that, the brain recycles connections formed in earlier memories when you learn something new. So you will lose the ability to easily recall old memories if tasked to learn new tricks.

</comment><comment><USER15> So neurons don't disassemble their current patterns to find the optimal pattern for the latest training goal? That sounds like a good neural algorithm because how do you know that the old should be fully replaced with the new? If I were God, my creatures' brains would adapt older patterns so they could do double duty, especially in the short term. Because there is still a high Bayesian likelihood that the older behaviors might need to be recalled. This neural model creates creatures that can adapt to an expanding set of training goals.

</comment><comment><USER16> If you are learning something that requires high level control and conscious decision making and correction, what is typical rate of full feedback loop? Maybe 1-2 times per second?

If you train nonstop for an hour, that's just 3600 - 7200 times. That's relatively small batch size to learn something. Even 10 or 100 hours of training is not that much. It's not surprise if brains reuses old stuff as much as possible.

</comment><comment><USER17> """Yu [...] also noted that their experiments only tracked the brain's activity for one or two hours. The researchers can't yet rule out the possibility that reassociation is a fast interim way for the brain to learn new tasks; over a longer time period, realignment or rescaling might still show up."""

I know that for musical instrument practice the common advice I've read is that it is better to practice 30 minutes every day rather than a 3½-hour session at the weekend in part because what you learn actually sinks in when you are resting. Maybe the realignment or rescaling happened when the monkeys slept?

</comment><comment><USER18> Probably the cause of the "Einstellung Effect" [0]

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

</comment><comment><USER19> No wonder, its hard to teach async programming to old time programmers :)

<comment><USER20> Is it? Or perhaps it's hard to teach to stubborn programmers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> A defense for ageism?</comment>


No need to cut down red and processed meat, study says - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/09/190930215122.htm <comment><USER2> Please still consider reducing your meat intake for the planet: [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092181811...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921818117301480) If you want to help save Amazonia, this is definitely the easiest course of action.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Actual paper:

[https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2752326/effect-lower- vers...](https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2752326/effect-lower-versus- higher-red-meat-intake-cardiometabolic-cancer-outcomes)</comment>


Maintain your resume in Markdown and on GitHub Pages - <AUTHOR> http://pseudoweb.net/2010/10/25/developing-your-resume/ <comment><USER2> The main point of creating his resume with Markdown seems to be the ability to store it in version control, and hold the whole thing in a plain text file. While a resume done in Markdown seems like an interesting idea (and I may end up writing one up just to have a web version of it online), I'd also consider writing one in LaTeX. It's easily storable in version control, and the base file you use to generate the PDF is a plaintext document, which is exactly what he's looking for, and the system is a lot more flexible than Markdown.

As an example, my resume can be found at [https://github.com/mdwrigh2/resume/raw/master/mwright- resume...](https://github.com/mdwrigh2/resume/raw/master/mwright-resume.pdf) and the source for it can be found at [https://github.com/mdwrigh2/resume/blob/master/mwright- resum...](https://github.com/mdwrigh2/resume/blob/master/mwright-resume.tex)

<comment><USER3> LaTeX makes beautiful printed documents, but my experience is that it's more difficult to generate nice HTML. The ideal system would probably do a good job of that as well: how many more people will look at an HTML version rather than a PDF?

<comment><USER4> Pandoc [1] does a pretty good job. The issue with HTML is of course that by design it doesn't deal with presentation: that's the job of the presentation layer (i.e. CSS) and the user agent (usually a web browser). PDFs, by contrast, state just how they're meant to look.

[1] <http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I do my resume in good old HTML with microformats incase anyone in the world is parsing those. I really love being able to do a billion hyperlinks incase people are interested in specific things, or need some context.

<http://paultarjan.com/resume>

I use git on the server.

<comment><USER6> "Created a window manager on top of DOS, written entirely in C, using a Linear Frame Buffer. Responsible for creating all the interrupt handlers (mouse, microphone, timer)."

My hat is off to you, good sir.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I know this article isn't about the content of your resume, but is your experience as a BSA camp counselor relevant programming or design work?

Very few employers will understand that being Nature Director likely meant you were an Environmental Science counselor and that that badge was one of the more difficult interesting ones likely offered at the camp. Are there benefits to signaling that you are part of a large organization like Scouting or a similar (generally) well regarded national organization like this? is it worth mentioning on the off chance your employer was also a Boy Scout?

What do other people think, is there a good general rule for where to stop including older work experience?

If you're putting one resume online and you can't tailor it to one job you're applying for, do you tailor it for the job you wish you had? What do you do differently for your general resume?

<comment><AUTHOR> So funny enough, at my last two interviews, both of my interviewers were ex- Boy Scouts. It's a job I can talk a lot about and since I did it for four years, really affected the kind of worker I am.

<comment><USER8> I suppose that's one way it might go. Another is running into someone who is informed about the BSA's legal discrimination against atheists and gays. So some may see it and think of your character being "Christian bigot". Unlikely, I think. It may have no effect, but I think it's worth consideration.

I screen lots of resumes in hiring game programmers. Personally, it wouldn't bother me. Then again, it wouldn't help you either, because I need to know about your skills and experience. I'll figure out if you're an a-hole or a nice guy / team player on the phone, and finally in-person.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> One of the most frequent experiences I have with potential employers is writing my resume in HTML or LaTeX, only to have their HR accept only .doc documents.

How do you guys get around this?

<comment><USER10> don't apply to places that require .doc.

<comment><USER11> I agree. If HR won't even accept PDFs that's a very bad sign!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've had resumes in a variety of formats, but even in 2010 companies and recruitment agencies will often only accept them in Microsoft Word format.

Using version control seems quite logical though, so if you want to produce a resume which emphasises a particular skill that could be a separate branch, and so on.

In my opinion the ultimate format for a resume is xml with css styling, such that the presentation can be altered as desired or conform to some standardised layout, but it seems that the job market is just not ready for that degree of sophistication yet. Is there a standard xml document type for resumes? If there isn't someone should invent one.

<comment><USER13> There are a number of xml formats for resume. You can find few of them at <http://microformats.org/wiki/resume-formats> .

Having xml, markdown, textile or xhtml with microformat extesions format as a base is not stopping you from sending hr companies doc or pdf generated document. There are some tools and libraries for this task.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> here is a free site to host your resume - hirednext.com. you can change the resume design on the fly and update it as easily.

... and at the same time you can be included in every employer search every time and receive job offers.</comment>


A Go Aws Clone for Development Written in Go - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/p4tin/GoAws <comment><USER2> May the title should clarify it's about AWS SQS/SNS systems only.</comment>


Show HN: Fork – a fast and friendly Git client for Mac and Windows - <AUTHOR> https://git-fork.com <comment><USER2> This seems interesting for day-to-day operations, as a replacement for Tower or SourceTree! However an app I've found really helps with arcane Git incantations (anything that rewrites history) is GitUp for macOS. I've always found it underappreciated.

[http://gitup.co](http://gitup.co)

<comment><USER3> Git fork actually has more features than gitup and runs with lower ram. You can try it out to see what I mean

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Single best feature: It's not an Electron app.

<comment><USER5> How does this "feature" make your life better?

<comment><USER6> I'd guess better performance, more responsiveness, less wasted resources (RAM, disk space, etc) and longer battery life and less fan noise for laptops.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I switched to Fork a few months ago from GitKraken. Fork is faster and it's using much less memory, it's nice to see developers who still care about usability and performance rather than about development speed.

</comment><comment><USER8> Switched to Fork from GitX and couldn't be happier (and I won't miss the hunt for whatever GitX fork is the most up to date when reinstalling)

The interactive rebase is awesome and it even makes a backup tag for you.

Btw Dan I will gladly pay for a licence when/if you decide to make it a paid app.

<comment><USER5> What made you pick gitx today compared to other (free) alternatives?

<comment><USER3> Speed. Simplicity. And RAM usage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> 52-6F-62 Nice job!

I don't usually use a Git client with a UI, but I'm going to be giving this a try on a couple of current projects at work.

You should add a "buy me a coffee/beer" option. I'm sure you'd gain some support

</comment><comment><USER9> This has been my daily driver ever since Github Desktop dumped native in favor of electron. Zero complaints, it's pretty awesome.

</comment><comment><USER10> This looks super cool - would it be possible to have a linux (ubuntu) build as well?

<comment><AUTHOR> Fork is native on both platforms so it will be tricky to implement and maintain a Linux version.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I switched to Fork from SourceTree because it has tabbed interface. My desktop is no longer cluttered with windows! It's been great. One question: How can I commit and push at the same time?

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi. There are two options: 1. Hold `alt` key when press the commit button, 2. Enable 'Automatically push on commits' in Fork preferences.

<comment><USER11> Ah! I thought I searched everywhere, but how did I miss that? Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> When it is out of beta, will it be still free? I think I should try something more lightweight than GitKraken, it hangs up more and more often.

<comment><AUTHOR> I call it beta because I keep adding new features every release.

Fork might become paid but not in the near future.

<comment><USER13> Seems like a mistake to me. Charge a small fee ($5-10) for "beta testers" (aka everyone now) limited to 2000 users. If you don't sell anything - fine. But if you do, it'll encourage and enable you to continue developing and may even generate more interest/publicity (FOMO).

<comment><USER14> I'm sure the reason is sensible but why the limit of users? Is 2000 just to keep it manageable? The app has a lot of features already and is stable.

<comment><USER13> No, the 2000 limit is just for the "beta price" with that assumption that the future price would be more (I'd assume $15-30)

It accomplishes a few things - measures interest, give people that value the product a way to thank the creator, and adds a FOMO factor which can be good for publicity, if he wants it.

When Google Reader shutdown, Feedly offered 5000 lifetime subscriptions for ~$100 (vs $65/year). They sold out in 8 hours. It's not the same case, I understand - but the idea is similar.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This looks great! Just wondering what your long term plans are? Are you eventually going to make a business out of it?

<comment><AUTHOR> I've been working on Fork in my spare time. It would be great if it become something bigger one day. I don't have any particular plans though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> What did you use to develop this, and what did you use for the installer? Windows and Mac

<comment><AUTHOR> I didn't use anything fancy. Cocoa + Dmg for Mac and WPF + Squirrel for Windows.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Looks nice, It doesn't seem to like git protocol v2 in git 2.18.

<comment><AUTHOR> Not yet. Git 2.18 has been released just a week ago :).

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Two questions:

1) Does it have a side-by-side diff?

2) If not, can I plug my own app?

<comment><AUTHOR> There's side-by-side diff (it appears on spacebar press). You can also use external diff tools.

Update: both features are available in Mac version and will appear on Windows platform soon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> does it support auto stash/unstash on branch change? That's whats keeping me on the original GitHub Desktop Client

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, sure.</comment></comment>


Buy, Use, Toss? A Closer Look at the Things We Buy. - <AUTHOR> http://storyofstuff.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> A must watch video there about our consumer economy.

"The Story of Stuff Project was created by Annie Leonard to leverage and extend the film's impact. We amplify public discourse on a series of environmental, social and economic concerns and facilitate the growing Story of Stuff community's involvement in strategic efforts to build a more sustainable and just world. Our on-line community includes over 150,000 activists and we partner with hundreds of environmental and social justice organizations worldwide to create and distribute our films, curricula and other content."</comment>


Ask HN: Why is compiling C/C++ so slow compared to Java? - <AUTHOR> Every big C/C++ project I've seen takes ages to compile. At least regarding build time Java seems to be a lot faster. What is the exact reason? <comment><USER2> One of the reasons is that any reasonably interesting C++ program has lots of classes, and quite frequently, each class is in a separate file. Which actually means two files, one for the .cpp and another for the .h.

One implication of this is that if one of the header files is changed, any cpp file that uses that header file or cpp file that uses a header that uses the changed header is going to need recompilation.

Further, lots more is happening during compile for C++ as compared to Java, where more happens at run-time. Depending on their extent of usage, templates can consume measurable compile time. Extensive optimization can cause measurable increase in compile time.

Also contrast the compile time you get with go, which is ridiculously faster than C++ when measured by the edit-compile-link-run cycle.

I am now of the opinion that the C++ compilation model is broken, or more charitably, has been shown to not have learned from the compilation models of the following languages:

* python * ruby * go * java and other jvm uses such as clojure * and many others

despite what Herb says about how modern c++ is.

<comment><USER3> Every language you listed (except Go, which tries very hard for the fast compilation times) just compiles to bytecode and runs on a virtual machine later. This can be considered a much simpler task than compiling to machine language directly.

When you use a virtual machine, much of the machine code required to execute the resulting program has already been compiled. Some languages/runtimes also use a JIT to compile code at runtime instead of build-time.

<comment><USER4> Why is it necessarily much simpler to generate bytecode than machine code? Aren't they basically the same thing except one is run by a virtual machine and the other by a real machine?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, would be interesting for me as well :) !!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm going to assume you mean that when you update a project, it takes a long time to recompile-- as opposed to the time it takes to compile from scratch (although I would still be surprised if Java is faster on a comparable-sized project).

You may have an include file that gets touched/changed a lot, and that shows up (directly or indirectly) in most of your project files. Have a look at your dependency tree and see if anything jumps out at you. Alternately, you can "touch" a few files at a time manually, re-build, and try to track down a culprit that way.

Also, take a look at John Lakos' "Large-Scale C++ Software Design", which offers metrics and design guides for reducing dependencies among files in a project.

Assuming you have no way to get around each source file including lots of headers, many C/C++ build tools offer some kind of "pre-compiled header" option, that you might look into.

Finally, check to see whether you're doing a very aggressive "release" build, with lots of inter-procedural optimizations enabled. I find IPO at the link stage takes a very long time. So compare your debug build options against your release build options, and think about what the timing differences tell you.

<comment><AUTHOR> > although I would still be surprised if Java is faster on a comparable-sized > project

Presumable I should really do a side by side comparison for a project of the same LOC but I always had the subjective feeling

> You may have an include file that gets touched/changed a lot

I more meant an initial clean&compile step

> "pre-compiled header" option

what do you mean here?

> Finally, check to see whether you're doing a very aggressive "release" > build,

ok, this could be one cause, yes

<comment><USER5> _what do you mean here? ("pre-compiled header")_

I don't know all the details, but consider that the compiler has to read the header file, parse it, make a map of its contents (its declarations and #defines and type definitions and so forth). And it has to do that over and over, for every source file that includes that header.

So if the compiler stashes away a binary representation of the contents of that header, then it can skip the slow bits of reading the text file and figuring out its contents and all. It only has to do that the next time you change the header.

 _edit: See<http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Precompiled-Headers.html> _

Java, I believe, essentially does this already, because it turns each .java file into a .class file (or whatever, it's been a while). And that .class file contains all the information that other java sources need in order to know what's in that java file.

Fortran-90, a language that gets no love on Hacker News, has a nice module facility that also enables this. Module information can get stored in a binary form that other sources can look into without having to re-parse the original text file.

Going back to C/C++, though-- if your root problem is that you have big header files that appear everywhere and slow down the compilation of every module, then you may want to think about reorganizing your code to reduce dependencies. Pre-compiling the headers may remove one of your symptoms, but not the real cause of the problem.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for your explanation!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> My experience is that slow-compiling projects tend to have bloated header files. The C/C++ pre-processor needs to apply #define's and friends before it touches source files. Java compilers don't suffer from this problem because the Java spec doesn't have support for header files.

</comment><comment><USER7> There are a few factors:

* Massive includes. Every compilation unit ends up including many header files. Most of these header files include more header files, often ones already included. If a header file has previously been included, it must be included a second time as C++ allows the meaning of including a file to differ each inclusion. This results in a vast amount of necessary preprocessing.

* Compiling the same code multiple times. Every compilation unit must generate code for every template it uses, even if other compilation units are generating the same code. Only at link time are the multiple instantiations of the same code collapsed. As the STL is a massive blob of templates this is a frequent issue!

</comment><comment><USER8> The problem is simply that C++ is a MUCH more complicated language than Java. Just compare the grammars and look at all the crazy ambiguities of C++.</comment>


Ask HN: Is webgl a good idea that will never quite make it? - <AUTHOR> For a while it seemed that all webgl needed for widespread acceptance was mobile Safari support. That hasn't happened. I'd like to take advantage of the capabilities it offers but the risk of losing any investment made in the technology seems very high at this point.<p>Is webgl a good idea that will never quite make it? <comment><USER3> I kind of like where webgl is right now. I wouldn't say it didn't make it. Every time I see a website using webgl these days it makes sense, but I rarely if ever think - "this could use some webgl".

So it really depends on what you mean by "will never quite make it". What exactly did you expect to happen after Safari? I'm quite happy webgl isn't everywhere like flash was ("I need a menu with mouseover effect - I know, flash!")

<comment><AUTHOR> "will never quite make it" expresses my concerns that native apps have made high performance graphics in web apps a secondary concern. Basically if you want high performance graphics then you should develop a native app.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> WebGL is being utilized in Google Maps which has massive adoption. There are even whole browser based game engines like PlayCanvas - <USER2> [https://playcanvas.com](https://playcanvas.com) \- that rely on WebGL. You have to remember, WebGL only gained full cross-device support a year ago. You're only going to see more and more uses of the API in the coming months and years.

</comment><comment><USER5> It made it--just a lot of sites don't use it ( [http://caniuse.com/#search=webgl](http://caniuse.com/#search=webgl) ).

It's not a good idea (for certain reasons isomorphic to what makes OpenGL not a good idea), but it works just fine.</comment>


Linux as a Real-Time OS the real caveat - <AUTHOR> There is one reason that Linux can't be a hard real-time OS on standard platforms... The hardware platform itself is allowed to take away resources. This means that NO other RT kernel can make those guarantees either on the same hardware. For example many modern devices (including the BIOS firmware itself) make use of internal micro controllers which can generated NMIs (non maskable interrupts) during which control of the system is taken away in order to handling anything from overheating events to completion of a DMA read/write from an I/O or network device into a shared memory buffer to TLB access or CPU cache flushes. Since there are no guarantees from the platform the OS can't guarantee it either regardless of what those people who provide support for micro-kernel hosts would have you believe. RT-Linux itself uses a mechanism that provides a real-time scheduler though its timing guarantees are slower because of overhead they are just as "hard" as the micro kernel solutions on a given hardware platform.<p>If you need true RT support you basically are limited to hardware which allows the guarantees to be made, and the RT Linux solution is good enough for the vast majority of solutions. If you need better performance and hard real time support you need to forget about general purpose hardware and general purpose OSes. <comment><USER2> Surely it depends on your real time needs, real time doesn't mean fast, or even necessarily regular, just that your processing need is serviced in a "timely" manner.

If that meant I need something checked at least once every 5 minutes then statistically the chances of not being serviced must approach 1/infinity?

In Functional Safety the concept is know as "Process Safety Time"and is the time the controller and associated sensors and equipment has to sense and act to avert an unwanted event.

In practice for industrial plant this ranges from maybe 3 seconds to half an hour, though extremes outside this exist either side, but anything that involves a valve or a contactor does not get much faster.

So what kind of "real time" are you talking about?

</comment><comment><USER3> In general, I agree with you because you have to make your decision based on the limitations of the hardware.

That said, I would expect that these service controllers actually run a real- time os themselves. Arbitrary delaying the system would probably break all kinds of time-critical drivers in non-linux environments.</comment>


MITx: Can Higher Learning Be Made Habit Forming? - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2012/01/03/mitx-can-higher-learning-be-made-habit-forming/ <comment><USER2> Once we have a well-indexed high quality video and course material archive (not fully there yet), there is a lot of potential for learning centers where students can go for immersion into a study environment. These centers can offer services like meeting places for study groups to meet up, tutoring from people who have already mastered the course, and advice on what to study. Software can be used to coordinate the learning needs with expertise. The software will probably be independent of the learning center, so that students can move to different places and still continue their existing learning tracks.

These centers could provide the environment that this article talks about - essentially, many of the services that a university used to, but in cheaper and more flexible ways. Many constraints in traditional systems would become artificial in the new environment. Students could be of different ages, learn at their own pace and fit things into their own schedule. New courses could be designed based on local expertise and interest.

<comment><USER3> I'd love to see these learning centers have certificate programs so that you can get the piece of paper that we still need these days.

<comment><USER2> Yes, a place to take exams could be one of the important services the center provides. There could be an independent exam standards organization, which would check that the exams at center are fairly conducted.

Interestingly, since a distributed model is now possible, the _content_ of the exams and grading procedures could be decided by the course designer. The center and exam standards body would just administer it. And the course designer could be anybody just as anybody can write a book. The only constraints would be students should be willing to take the course, which in turn could depend on the ability for the course to count as credit in a virtual major(apart from other factors like student intrinsic interest and usefulness of the course). There would probably be different organizations with different criterion for including a course in a major. A single course could be in many such major programs. So course design, physical infrastructure, exam/grading standards and formal accumulation of course into a virtual degree could all be handled independently, though I guess, in practice, some of them will be handled by one organization. Some of this has already happened.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I hope once the platforms offered by Stanford and MIT have been around for a while they publish data on how often people continue using the platforms after completing at least one course.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm convinced that the delivery systems just need to improve. I was lukewarm on audiobooks and podcasts when I needed to manage syncing them in iTunes - with Audible's excellent app and a solid podcast app (Instacast), I've been consuming both voraciously.

iTunes U is awkward, buried in that monstrosity of a program that most of us avoid using when possible. "iTunes" is even slow and convoluted on the iPhone - you need to download the course (and, no, you're not notified when new courses come out) and play the video in a separate app.

Something simple along the lines of the better podcasting apps (maybe with some means of attaching/tracking homework?) would make this much more addictive. They don't need gimmicks, they need to stop sucking.

</comment><comment><USER6> This is why you should not read or work while lying down in bed. now that I think about it. The most productive years of my life were done in dedicated work areas where I encoded "focused agile work time" into a specific monitor and keyboard and room. I was able to focus for 10 hours at a time there without caffeine or stimulant.</comment>


The Evolution of China's Metro Systems - <AUTHOR> http://pdovak.com/chinese-metro-evolution <comment><USER2> I spent the weekend in Shanghai a couple of months ago and used the Metro to get around. It was modern, clean, on time, easy, and cheap - around €10 for an unlimited 72 hour pass. I was astonished by its sprawl, some lines over 50km and one close to 100km. It felt like it dwarfs London's tube.

Criticisms? It was clearly at or near capacity, which I guess explains the rapid growth. There was a mass of security theatre, X-ray machines at the entrances to some (most?) lines but lots of people were just ignoring the attendants and walking quickly passed the machines without having their bags checked. It seemed difficult (impossible?) to pay with anything but cash, at least at the stations I visited all machines were cash only (I guess not so modern after all).

<comment><USER3> > It seemed difficult (impossible?) to pay with anything but cash

That's true and it is not convenient for visitors. Local people usually just use public transportation card (magnetic/contact-less smart card) everyday and don't have to pay with cash (you can charge the card with credit card or Alipay). Some station gates also support paying with NFC smartphones (eg. Xiaomi), and I think that's modern :-)

<comment><USER4> It's not too hard, with a bit of diligence (and a phrasebook), to get a contactless card as a foreigner. Although it is still easiest to add value with cash through one of the station attendant booths.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It will be interesting to see how long China's frenetic metro expansion lasts. Japan went through a very similar phase after the war, but this slowed down markedly after the Bubble burst. With population growth now strongly negative, there's no business case for building more and Japan completed what's likely its last line a few years ago.

[https://gyrovague.com/2015/12/18/the-last-subway-line-in- jap...](https://gyrovague.com/2015/12/18/the-last-subway-line-in-japan/) (Disclaimer: my blog)

China, too, faces an upcoming and likely even more severe population crunch. India, on the other hand, is only just getting started and is now building metros with a similar pace as China in the 1990s.

<comment><USER6> Just the increase of the urbanization degree from the current 56% to 70% in 10 to 15 years, as currently planned by the government, will increase the city population by almost 200 million.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I stayed in Shanghai, Tokyo, and Taipei over the summer last year. Taipei's metro is the best overall; certainly not as crowded as the other two. Convenience is about the same, i.e. payable by cash-loading debit cards. Tokyo's metro have gotten old. I honestly think, a couple of Tokyo's underground lines need to be replaced. Just remember, no food allowed in transit.

<comment> MachinShinn- Don't expect much replacement in Tokyo. Japan is in maintenance mode as its population ages and shrinks over the next century.

<comment><USER8> Same will be true for China and Taiwan as well, very shortly. I hope for their sake they're paying close attention to how Japan has dealt with a shrinking population - Japan really has been the "pioneer" in a process that all countries will have to inevitably go through.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> A little misleading in regard to, at least, Tokyo, as it shows only two lines, Tokyo Metro and Toei. The transportation system is much, much vaster than only those two lines.

</comment><comment><USER10> China is making a big bet. This is a great step towards increasing the quality of life in those cities.</comment>


Yahoo bidding for ex YC company Xobni. - <AUTHOR> http://allthingsd.com/20130606/yahoo-mulling-buy-of-address-book-appmaker-xobni/?mod=atd_homepage_carousel Yahoo is trying to buy ex YC company Xobni. <comment><AUTHOR> It will make good addition to Yahoo's mobile application collection. I wonder which company has bought most YC graduates.</comment>