Which Smalltalk? - <AUTHOR> http://smalltalkzen.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/which-smalltalk/ <comment><USER2> Pharo. The latest stable version runs in the Cog VM (a fast JIT VM), and runs Seaside 3.0 great.

However, choose your persistence carefully. The open-source Smalltalk landscape is littered with abandon-ware databases.

If you want an OODB, you can just save the image itself, use Magma (an open- source OODB, but its not very wel documented) or use Gemstone (through GLASS), which is commercial but well documented.

SQL support is weak if you want a nice ORM (like Rails' Active Record), and I've had success using CouchDB (a JSON document pretty much just maps straight to an object: keys -> values = instVars -> values).

<comment><USER3> I give bonus points to CouchDB because there is no driver needed, just HTTP.

<comment><USER2> Yeah, the one library I'm using is pretty lightweight. It just does JSON parsing of responses over a socket connection and handles a few HTTP details.

I've been really happy with it, and its been reasonably fast in the Cog VM. I haven't explored using CouchDB's list views yet, but I'm considering that for just loading pre-built HTML for larger document lists.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have an application that started being developed and deployed in squeak. I then moved to Pharo when it started. I had almost nothing to do, just a few changes to the way I was dealing with character encodings. Slightly over a year ago, I moved deployment to Gemstone, that involved quite a few changes, the hardest ones were because of ill placed "." as the compiler on Gemstone seems to be a little bit more sensible.

I still develop in Pharo and deploy in Gemstone and I believe that scenario is not uncommon at all. It means my deployment is different from the one described in the post, I don't "clean-up" my image for deployment; I save my code changes to a monticello package, transfer it to the server through scp and load the package into Gemstone. Most of the time, I was able to just let the tools perform an auto-migrate on all existing instances.

</comment><comment><USER5> Could anyone here give me some insite as to _why_ to use smalltalk? I've been toying with objective C which is about the extent of my experience with anything remotely like it. This article mentions ease of debugging- what is easy about it? What sort of problems does this language solve eloquently?

<comment><USER6> You don't have distinction between runtime and development time. Which means you can debug live. It's a bit like being logged in an IRB session on your rails application. Except that you have better tools than a plain command line.

Ruby feels closer to Smalltalk than Obj-C to me.

If you're familiar with Cocoa/Obj-C, you can have a look at <http://www.fscript.org/>

<comment><USER5> thanks for this- this looks very helpful indeed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> What does the Smalltalk scalability story look like? Could you build something like Twitter or a Farmville backend on Smalltalk with similar scaling strategies used in Python and Ruby?

<comment><USER8> With Smalltalk? Sure. With Seaside? No, that's not what it was designed for.

I haven't yet convinced Twitter to do a rewrite in Smalltalk ;). But it would be a step up from Ruby, even if only to get a better garbage collector.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Do serious Smalltalk projects use version control? If so, which one?

How do they solve the apparent mismatch between Smalltalk philosophy of having everything in one image and the usual "files in directories" expected by version control?

Last time I used Smalltalk (a small project) I just kept the sources in files outside the image and reloaded from there but it felt clunky.

<comment><USER10> You're correct that most Smalltalks have a changes file that keeps a log of everything you've done, but that's now how you do version control or share changes. The changes file in practice is more of a kind of local version control, or unlimited undo buffer. For actually sharing changes, there are two systems that I'm familiar with:

Pharo and Squeak Smalltalk have a DVCS client named Monticello that they use. It works similarly to Git/Mercurial/Bazaar/what-have-you, except that it versions classes and methods semantically instead of the actual changes file. This ends up working fine, and even has some major benefits (you can kiss whole swaths of problems goodbye when you're doing a semantic merge),but it does mean that your Smalltalk code requires its own version control. You can see a quick tutorial of how Monticello handles merging at <http://www.lukas- renggli.ch/blog/monticello-merging> , and there's what amounts to a command- line interface called Gofer you can read about at <http://www.lukas- renggli.ch/blog/gofer> . Most people I've seen just use the graphical interface though, which is documented (somewhat) at <http://wiresong.ca/monticello/v1/docs/> .

VisualWorks Smalltalk has its own version control system, also semantic, but not distributed, called StORE. I haven't worked with it much, but the general idea is the same: version classes and methods rather than the changes file. I know it can at least import Monticello repositories as well, and possibly work with them natively, but I've never done that, so you'd have to do some more research.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> BTW Smalltalk Zen has started a series on deploying a Smalltalk (Pharo) server to a cloud hosted service - [http://smalltalkzen.wordpress.com/2010/12/22/a-remote- server...](http://smalltalkzen.wordpress.com/2010/12/22/a-remote-server- deployed-hello-world-with-squeakpharo-seaside-and-ubuntu-linux/) .

</comment><comment><USER12> Good article.

One small quibble: Pharo and Squeak's licensing are identical, so "clearer licensing" isn't a reason to choose one over the other. That said, Pharo is clearly a better choice for Seaside projects, since Pharo is the reference platform for Seaside.

<comment><USER13> I think the Squeak license changed with version 4.0...originally it was not the MIT one.

Edit: In looking into the history, it seems the license has changed several times.

<comment><USER12> That's right. It took a major effort to track down all the contributors (including Apple and Disney!) and get them to sign a relicensing agreement. Both Pharo and Squeak include relicensed code, and both Pharo and Squeak require that all new contributions be made under the MIT license. Claiming that Squeak has "unclear licensing" is just FUD.

<comment><USER14> Or, since Squeak 4.0 is the newest version according to their download page, maybe, just maybe, it was a simple mistake, rather than FUD. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Pharo - There are people interested in supporting it for commericial users. They're trying to get everything MIT licensed or compatible, and Eilot Miranda is working on a fast JIT VM for Pharo and Squeak.

</comment><comment><USER16> this month I asked the same question on stackoverflow => [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4441368/is-there-any- good...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4441368/is-there-any-good-open- source-smalltalk-implementations)

</comment><comment><USER17> I think I just found a project for my Christmas vacation.</comment>


Team-based hiring and contracts are real - <AUTHOR> http://blog.goelevator.com/ <comment></comment>


How Intelligent Vehicles Will Increase the Capacity of Our Roads - <AUTHOR> http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/24571/ <comment><USER2> This, along with electric power, is the real future of transportation in lower-density areas. People want to be able to go where they want, when they want, without the delays and inconvenience of public transit. So we need to find ways of making individual transportation cleaner and safer.

</comment><comment><USER3> Nitpick: it's not increasing capacity, it's utilizing the existing capacity better.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I'm wondering if this will make traffic waves travel at the speed of light?</comment>


Ask HN: What is your favorite podcast? - <AUTHOR> Inspired by https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/5esn1c/what_is_your_favourite_podcast_whywhats_it_about <comment><USER2> \- [https://gimletmedia.com/show/startup/](https://gimletmedia.com/show/startup/) Especially seasons 1 and 2. (startups)

\- [http://frontendhappyhour.com/](http://frontendhappyhour.com/) (frontend)

\- [http://shoptalkshow.com/](http://shoptalkshow.com/) (web dev)

</comment><comment><USER3> Our Fair City

Full List: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12543963](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12543963)

</comment><comment><USER4> This has been asked multiple times (LMGTFY):

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9836023](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9836023)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9207360](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9207360)

</comment><comment><USER5> At the moment it's [http://www.smartpassiveincome.com/podcasts/](http://www.smartpassiveincome.com/podcasts/)

</comment><comment><USER6> Flip the table - a podcast about obscure, weird and bad board games:

[http://tableflipsyou.blogspot.com](http://tableflipsyou.blogspot.com)</comment>


Venmo Is Killing Their Cash Cow - <AUTHOR> Venmo has gone completely out of their mind with their ban hammer and they certainly are severely overestimating network effects.
Today I was a victim because of a tertiary transaction where I withdrew funds that bounced from the person who paid the person who paid me. Venmo literally applied the transitive property of math to financial transactions... and this is supposed to be a Bank/large laundry.
I am not the only one, in fact thousands of users have found themselves banned for little apparent cause in the last few months. When I attempted to seek resolution or even an explanation I could have sworn I heard the same guy who told my 12-year-old self he would be keeping my life savings for 6 months because I figured out you could buy and sell things to yourself using PayPal coupons for  20% off and there was no limit.
Either way, Venmo must be executing a page out of Paypals old textbook by failing to realize the network effects high users have on such fragile ecosystem surrouned by Apple, Google, Snapchat, and Facebook who would all love to eath their lunch.
Now I know the people at venmo are aware of the so-called "awkward acquaintance" every friend has, but how am I supposed to know if the money is valid when checks take time to fully bounce. It seems the path they are on is almost assured suicide especially since I am finding it very easy to get people to switch to apple pay (if avail).
Literally, the only thing venmo had going for them over any other monotonous bank site was the transaction feed and they are ruining it. I'm sure the IRS wants to stick their noes in venmo's books over money laundering worries but that's not how the government works. Venmo needs to sack up and do some real work because banning your user base isn't a good idea when the kinder ones (aka the ones more likely to spend money on consumer goods and gifts) decide to leave. <comment><USER2> I've heard of that happening to people too. Venmo thinks they're a king without a crown (for long). MySpace is in their future</comment>


Ways Researchers Test Bird Intelligence - <AUTHOR> https://www.audubon.org/news/bird-iq-tests-8-ways-researchers-test-bird-intelligence <comment><USER2> Also related and provides an interesting view of creativity is this two part video: part1- [https://youtu.be/QKSvu3mj-14](https://youtu.be/QKSvu3mj-14) part2 - [https://youtu.be/erhmslcHvaw](https://youtu.be/erhmslcHvaw)

</comment><comment><USER3> I hope researchers doesn't measure looking times after confusing them with concepts they are lacking, like "psycologists" do with babies?)</comment>


Keep your identity small (2009) - <AUTHOR> http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html <comment><USER3> I don't think it's so much about identity as it is about (in)security.

Regarding politics, I completely follow his argument: I don't identify with any party and like to think I'm evaluating each policy on its on merits and according to my personal beliefs. Which leads me to the other one.

I happen to be Catholic and strongly believe in the mental and societal framework put forth by that theology. However, I'm more than happy to discuss objectively with fellows of other faiths (including atheism) and will happily point out the common threads in seemingly opposite belief systems. Yet if others make arguments that I'm not in position to counter, I'm happy to let it go. My identity is deeply rooted as a Catholic, yet my security is not in being right.

There is a temptation on my part to put forth the argument that some religions foster greater amounts of insecurity, but I don't think that is fair to say. Pretty much every belief system has a version of the Golden Rule.

To take Paul Graham's argument just a little further, I would say that religion and politics can be misused as convenient mental shortcuts behind which to hide one's insecurities.

<comment><USER4> Just a nitpick but atheism is not a faith, it's the absence of faith.

<comment><USER5> Disagree. Atheists believe there is no god (without any conclusive evidence).

<comment><USER6> What is the name for people that believe there is no: santa clause, easter bunny, flying spaghetti monster, ... (without any conclusive proof)?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > any mention of religion on an online forum degenerates into a religious > argument. Why? Why does this happen with religion and not with Javascript

Then later

> the question of the relative merits of programming languages often > degenerates into a religious war, because so many programmers identify as X > programmers or Y programmers.

Also as another poster said, this works because he's been able to go his entire life choosing what to put in and take out of his identity because he is of the privileged class in his society. If someone perpetrated violence on him because of something he _couldn't_ choose, say, his skin color, I have a feeling he'd be less likely to conclude that "The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you."

The people to whom this "labeling" is most important are those who were labeled. Not those who label themselves.

<comment><USER8> If I attack you because your identity conflicts with my identity, say over differing skin color, then it demonstrates his original point: the label I've given myself is making me behave dumb/stupid/evil.

My action creates no obligation on your part to adopt the identity I've assigned to you. Your station in life has no impact on whether you will accept the label; you are a human capable of reason and you have free will - <USER2> choice is yours.

In literature, Tom of Uncle Tom's Cabin is a solid example of this. Tom, a heroic black slave, rejects the labels and associated moral principals others (both black and white) wish to assign to him. He acts in accordance with his self-selected moral convictions. And when confronted with an ultimate evil that demands the surrender of not only his body but also his reasoning mind - demands he accept an unchosen identity - he refuses.

<comment><USER9> I had a friend once who would insult people and then when they got angry or hurt he would say: I don't control your feelings, you control your feelings. Technically true, perhaps, depending on certain philosophically assumptions. But practically absurd. And certainly a terrible mental model about how humans work in situ.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > Politics, like religion, is a topic where there's no threshold of expertise > for expressing an opinion. All you need is strong convictions.

What I don't get is who/what determines a threshold?

A university degree? 10 years of experience?

As others have rightly pointed out, perhaps there is no such thing as a "threshold of expertise". Any programmer could have 10 years of experience repeatedly cookie-cutting their beginner-level code and never going beyond that. Does that give them the right to be called/known as JavaScript-Ninjas?

Perhaps Grahams identity leans towards anti-establishment/anti- religion/hacker-think, which by proxy of his argument, makes him partisan towards those opinions about religion and politics (see how the snake eats its own tail here?).

<comment><USER11> People determine the threshold themselves. Most people won't join in conversations about science or math topics unless they feel like they have a solid grasp of what is being discussed (relative to those around them). However, almost everyone feels like they have valid points to make on religious and political topics regardless of how well educated they are on those topics.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> One of the biggest invisible biases is thinking you've managed to free yourself of invisible biases.

<comment><USER13> I'm reminded of the inevitable "I'm not biased, but I'm going to complain about this because I think it's an attack on me" that comes up whenever anyone on the internet mentions that institutional racism exists.

<comment><USER14> You do understand the other side's situation right? You are, albeit impersonally, being accused of participating in something monstrous, the institutional subjugation and prejudicial treatment of an entire class of people, and there is literally nothing you can say or do which will demonstrate otherwise since your racist acts are unconscious and unknowable to you.

It's like trying to convince someone that you're not crazy when they already think you are. It doesn't mater, anything you say or do just reinforces their belief.

We all hold biases and prejudices for just about everything from concepts, ideas, products, institutions, and especially one another based on their history, race, creed, social status, clothing, voice, stature, hometown, manner of speaking, educational background, career field, job title, wealth, attractiveness, political beliefs, the list goes could go on for pages. But trying to equate these kinds of biases to being *-ist in any meaningful sense is missing the forest for the trees.

<comment><USER15> If you don't believe in widespread racism, what is your explanation for why people of color, as a group, keep having a bad time?

It can't be some property of them, because believing that would be racist, right? If it's not them and it's not us (I'm white) then what is it?

<comment><USER16> You've clearly made up your mind and preemptively called everybody who disagrees racist. That's not exactly conductive for an insightful conversation.

But I'll bite anyway: _historical_ racism clearly still plays a significant role. Whatever the level of present-day racism, I'm sure we can agree that it's orders of magnitude lower than it was historical. The plight of people of colour today can be attributed to historical widespread institutional racism independently of whether any such racism exists today. Also, your model fails to account for the possibility that racism can exist and be harmful without being widespread, and that people of colour can make bad decisions without that being a "property" of their colour (shaming people for "acting white" strikes me as particular counterproductive).

That's not saying that's the whole explanation (or even that it is the explanation), just that your model ("it's not them and it's not us") is a false dichotomy and generally too limited to be likely to yield a satisfactory answer.

<comment><USER15> I haven't made up my mind, actually. I just asked you questions, didn't I?

I think your argument is sound. Axiom: there's actually not that much racism. Theorem: the remaining racism is confined to a small number of people.

I just disagree with your axiom.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> > Why does this happen with religion and not with Javascript or baking or > other topics people talk about on forums?

He must not spend a lot of time on Slashdot, or Hacker News, for that matter.

<comment><USER18> Hacker friends who have started new hobbies are often posting their bewilderment about how it follows everywhere. Beekeeping being the most surprising example.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've realized there are things I can change and there are things I cannot change. I try not to feel too strongly on the things I cannot change, because it distracts me from the things I can change.

For politics, I try not to feel too strongly about Trump and the electoral process. I would still vote, but I know it would have a minimal impact, no matter how strongly I feel.

Instead, I focus my energy on my business, which I can change.

<comment><USER13> The Serenity Prayer may resonate with you.

> God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,

> Courage to change the things I can,

> And wisdom to know the difference.

<comment><USER20> Better (and not tainted by association with AA...)

I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

<comment><USER21> Better ?

The first is shorter, less abstract and easier to remember.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> This is the weakest pg essay I've come across. I can think of so many counter- examples. "Stand for nothing and you'll fall for anything." It's very convenient to have a small identity with few convictions because convictions are costly. Sophie Scholl identified with anti-Nazi politics and it cost her her life. We have a word for people like her: hero.

<comment><USER23> Paul didn't say "have no convictions", he said "keep your identity small"... save your convictions for things that really matter, not stupid shit like sports teams, programming languages, favorite <games/movies/books/TV>.

I don't feel like you grasped the article clearly.

<comment><USER22> His main examples of identity were politics and religion.

<comment><USER24> I think it is possible/fairly safe to cheer for the Denver Bronco's or the New York Yankees, or Crystal Palace football club or Team SoloMid or whatever without making that one's identity.

Edit: Just now, someone showed me a video which claimed drinking apple cider vinegar helped prevent cancer. I tried to say that this is billshit because nobody can really say drinking something prevents cancer without a long-term study that I doubt this YouTube celebrity had done.

I don't claim I don't have a bias. But I don't think we should be sin free to cast the first stone on ideas.

<comment><USER25> Regarding sports teams and identity, I suspect the guy who says "wow good game" after their home team loses and the guy who feels crummy for a week is the extent that they identify with the team. I had a brief stint with that in college with my college football team. The wins felt like giant ego rushes and the losses felt like I had lost a million bucks.

Now I can pretend to cheer but I don't really care as much.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> "I think what religion and politics have in common is that they become part of people's identity"

You might also say that people have identity and religion and politics use those to advantage. But is it wrong to have identity? I'd argue it as a basic human requirement.

Religion can be considered a technology of group identity which was refined over millennium to be most effective at generating a unified form. Like all technology it was disrupted by something better and more efficient at transmitting shared consciousness.

That definition also fits the web which is the most powerful method of transmission yet invented, and is the fruit of the science religion.

<comment><USER27> Wow, you just out-generalized Paul Graham. nice.

<comment><USER26> can you give me specific examples of how tho?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Sometimes identity has a way of finding you, even if you try your hardest to keep it out. People define you, and depending on who or where you are, those definitions can have profound impact on your life.

This piece reads like a person who has never had to deal with that, or at least never had to think about it.

</comment><comment><USER29> See also [http://rationality.org/2015/03/02/keep-your-identity- fluid/](http://rationality.org/2015/03/02/keep-your-identity-fluid/)

<comment><USER30> Is "identity fluid" the same as "precious bodily fluids" [1] ?

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Philip Tetlock has done a lot of research on objective measures of political expertise, specifically the ability to make objective predictions about future outcomes and likelihoods. He wrote a pretty famous book on it. The basic conclusion is nobody is really that good, but some people are objectively better than others. If you are really interested in this he has as website called "good judgement project" where you can test your ability to predict against other people on the site over time.

[http://www.amazon.com/Expert-Political-Judgment-Good- Know/dp...](http://www.amazon.com/Expert-Political-Judgment-Good- Know/dp/0691128715)

[https://www.gjopen.com/](https://www.gjopen.com/)

</comment><comment><USER32> Remind's me of Paul Buchheit's [I am nothing][1] and Jiddu Krishnamurti's [The observer is the observed][2].

An application by Buchheit (and others!) that improved my life: Gmail.

Two books by Krishnamurti that improved my life: Think on These Things and The First and Last Freedom.

[1]: [http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2011/08/i-am- nothing.html](http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2011/08/i-am-nothing.html)

[2]: [http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamurti-teachings/view- dai...](http://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamurti-teachings/view-daily- quote/20140305.php?t=The%20observer%20and%20the%20observed)

</comment><comment><USER33> Isn't it just more succinct to say we have tribal instincts because of our evolutionary origins? I see heated debates in politics, religion, even sports, because people identify from a certain "tribe". And I agree with Paul there, from what I have noticed, tribalism does seem to give you a certain blindspot to opposing arguments

</comment><comment><USER34> Not particularly well articulated but the core point is one of the most valuable lesson I had learned.

It not just applies to religion and politics but many other things in life. We might be wasting too much of time on certain thing with very little impact. It is hard to not to fall in that trap but trying surely saved a lot of time.

</comment><comment><USER35> People who don't have an identity... I _hate_ those people.

</comment><comment><USER36> It's usually inappropriate to draw in politics and religion when they are off topic, but sometimes they are involved. Ethics are involved frequently with technology, so politics and religion are not that far off.

Though really, It's pretty shallow to draw like for like comparisons between religion/politics and JS discussions. JS is trivial. Most tech discussions are trivial the day after they've been had.

</comment><comment><USER37> >the more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you

You could keep going, stripping yourself of all labels via the discovery that labels are neither good nor bad in a qualitative sense. But this begs the question "what is good?" And then you might conclude that you know what is good, and then form your labels as such.

Having labels isn't dumb; not being mindful of your labels is dumb.

</comment><comment><USER38> Labels might make you "dumber", but there's a huge tradeoff: you can arrive at a conclusion a lot faster. Of course in a _discussion_ you wouldn't just jump to the conclusion, which is why labels fail in the situations Graham described.

</comment><comment><USER39> Great advice. Don't believe in anything, and you won't have to stand up for what you believe. Ever. And others won't be disappointed if you don't. Win- win.

</comment><comment><USER40> The story about the person who kept his identity small, during WW2 ( [https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392](https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007392) ) :

"""

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out — Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.

TLDR: paul graham is sofa philosopher.

<comment><USER41> Um. Are _you_ missing the entire point of the quote, or am _I_?

I understand the quote as meaning that we should speak out even when groups we do not identify with are being oppressed.

But you seem to understand the quote as meaning that we should identify with as many groups as possible.

I very much doubt the author of the quote meant it the way you do, and even if they did it just sounds very wrong. It's expected and accepted to not care about any other group than the ones you identify with then? I do not identify as LGBT or as a woman, so I should not speak out for LGBT and women's rights? What about groups that will remain small because you can't just decide one day to identify with them, they're screwed?

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> not only graham is right on the spot but even more than that. how often we tend to joke about the programming languages we love and do our jobs with. case in point every developer likes the following: [https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat](https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat)

</comment><comment><USER43> Not the first Paul to think like this, 1 Corinthians 9, 20-22: [...] I am made all things to all men [...]

</comment><comment><USER44> Any thread about C versus C++ degenerates pretty fast too.

</comment><comment><USER45> I would added sports.

</comment><comment><USER46> Aw c'mon! Don't attach to (identify with) things is, like, Spirituality 101.

</comment><comment><USER47> " Why? Why does this happen with religion and not with Javascript or baking or other topics people talk about on forums?"

I do not believe this author had much experience discussing JS on forums.

<comment><AUTHOR> I thought of commenting on that as one thing in this article that didn't really stand the test of time. As a sibling comment points out, the JS world was very different in 2009, and we didn't have the same kind of flamewars that we do now.

I think that's actually a point in favor of the article. In 2009, virtually nobody considered themselves a "Javascript programmer". Rather, Javascript was a _skill_ that you used to build webapps, which itself was a skill you used as part of a larger software system. It was pointless to get emotionally invested in Javascript arguments on the Internet, because whether you won or lost, you still needed Rails/Django on the server, and SQL or C++/Java on the backend.

Sometime between 2009 and 2015, Javascript became a tribe, where you could invest enough of your life in it that discussions about it became a matter of identity. And its growth became threatening enough to other programming "tribes" (eg. Windows programmers, Rails programmers) that you could suddenly have very heated discussions about it on the Internet.

<comment><USER48> _> In 2009, virtually nobody considered themselves a "Javascript programmer"._

I'm guessing the "Javascript is my identity" era began with Nodejs. Before 2009, Javascript was something that was "tolerated" because it just came with all the browsers. Back then, having any point of pride in being a "Javascript programmer" would be a little weird as if a homeowner proclaimed he was a "Panasonic keypad microwave programmer instead of a Samsung microwave programmer". Nobody cares what buttons you press to pop your popcorn. Likewise, the "Javascript" stuff was just something you had to do for interactive webpages.

However, for someone to have the audacity of duplicating the Javascript environment _on the server side_... that means subsequent programmers get to make an invested choice, which means... flame wars.

<comment><USER49> 2007

[http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rhino-on-rails.html](http://steve- yegge.blogspot.com/2007/06/rhino-on-rails.html)

<comment><USER48> I don't consider Rhino nor other Javascript environments like Adobe Actionscript and Microsoft JScript as contributing to the "Javascript identity." It really seems like the Javascript apologia/evangelism was kicked off by Nodejs' popularity.

As a consequence, we see many "I'm leaving Nodejs for Go" and virtually zero "I'm leaving Rhino for Python".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> keep your identity to yourself ..until you're rich enough to be shielded from the consequences

<comment><USER51> Or at least until "rich" becomes your identity, then you defend your position.

[http://paulgraham.com/ineq.html](http://paulgraham.com/ineq.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> This essay only works because Paul Graham is a white man in America, whose 'identity' is the presumed default in the society he lives in. Anything he makes a part of his identity, he gets to choose. If he chooses nothing, he has the luxury of being 'just normal' and gets to go through life thinking of himself as perfectly rational.

Sometimes you get to choose what you identify with. Other times, people choose for you. For instance, you don't get to wake up one morning and decide not to be black, or gay, or a woman. You don't get to simply shed those categories and avoid the increased violence that comes your way apropos of nothing.

I know, you're already thinking, "but this essay is about religion and politics!", but the thing is, for a lot of people, politics are not abstract.

I'm also a straight white cis guy living in America, and so I have the luxury of choosing or choosing not to support gay rights, or feminism, or racial justice. I can choose or choose not to make those things a part of my identity. In fact there's incentive for me to choose not to, because if the balance of power were re-arranged in society, and poverty and violence were more evenly distributed, my life might not be so easy.

But for a lot of people, making "politics" a part of their "identity" is a necessary defense mechanism, because the society we live in implicitly sanctions violence against anybody who shares characteristics of their identity they can't do anything about.

"Politics" is not some separate sphere you can disconnect yourself from. Politics are embedded in everything. Choosing not to "identify" with any political orientation is implicitly choosing society's defaults, and those defaults implicitly condone a specific power structure and make acceptable a certain amount of violence against certain people.

<comment><USER53> Couldn't you simply believe that for yourself, your biggest contribution to humanity is not politics? Plenty of people are plainly worried about it and discussing it in great detail. Why should everyone be bound to the same goals when their marginal contribution is just that.

This is not to say that you shouldn't participate if you feel compelled to, but unless you have an issue, isn't it mostly just a waste of time? What if you want to enjoy life and not feel angry all the time? If you have options, does that mean you should never ever exercise them in solidarity with those who have fewer?

Does not PG's advice apply to people without the ability to choose some aspects of their identity given that they have a universe of other traits they do have control over? Sure, one may be a dominant problem, but you can help yourself out by not adding more problems to your problems.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_politics)

</comment><comment><USER55> _As a rule, any mention of religion on an online forum degenerates into a religious argument. Why? Why does this happen with religion and not with Javascript or baking or other topics people talk about on forums?_

Um, Graham is more than a little off here.

Like, by a country mile.

<comment><USER56> Let's discuss text editors. Anyone?

<comment><USER57> lol @ Vim users that have to write configuration files, memorize complicated keyboard shortcuts, and install 20 plugins just to be able to copy and paste text between files. It's 2016, try using a real editor like Atom.

(Am I doing it right?)

<comment><USER58> I use vim w/o plugins and with the stock configuration.

I frequently have two files open side-by-side.

If I want to copy the current line in the left file to the right file, the keystrokes are:

        yy<Ctrl+w>lp

It's really not that hard to copy between files in Vim. :P

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> This doesn't help when you aren't in your right mind.

<comment><USER59> Downvote away, but I speak from personal experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> Whats funny is this theory pushes us to be more like computers. Less passion and more logic. Not to mention people on the Internet say and talk about options in forums reinforcing maybe a small part of ones identity. while in the real world you might get punched in the face. I still favor this theory but I would say spend less time on Internet interactions, so you don't have your personal held beliefs blossom into something more toxic for rational communication and real human connection. Being at the computer is a suit of idealogical armor and you can disengage from conversations like I am about to do.

<comment><USER61> > Less passion and more logic.

You can be more passionate and have more logic.</comment></comment>


The major incidents on the Internet in 2010 - <AUTHOR> http://royal.pingdom.com/2010/12/21/the-major-incidents-on-the-internet-in-2010/

<comment><USER2> There were some great examples of open, honest communication from technical teams during these outages. I think it is a good trend. Etsy wasn't mentioned in the article, but they had an excellent letter to customers after an outage in mid-September. I forwarded it to my team because I thought it articulated perfectly the way I feel when our service goes down:

[http://codeascraft.etsy.com/2010/09/17/frank-talk-about- site...](http://codeascraft.etsy.com/2010/09/17/frank-talk-about-site- outages/)</comment>


The colossal problem with universal basic income [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m25YLByFVRw <comment><USER2> UBI fails to take into account human nature. 1) Crime and social unrest is directly correlated to perception of relative wealth inequality. Past a certain point, relative wealth has a dominant effect on life expectancy! [b]

2) Given the above point, the solution would seem to be a progressive tax on the wealthy. Unfortunately, this is very hard to make workable, as the wealthy have control of most of the wealth and power, and failing that, are the most mobile.

[http://www.sfindicatorproject.org/indicators/view/146](http://www.sfindicatorproject.org/indicators/view/146)

([b] Ichiro Kawachi, 2000. Income Inequality and Health. In Social Epidemiology. Eds. Lisa Berkman and Ichiro Kawachi. New York: Oxford University Press. Pp. 76-94.)

<comment><USER3> The primary cause of crime and social unrest is stressful jobs and inability to pay the bills. Get rid of that and see the general happiness explode.

<comment><USER4> The bills for what though? A car, iphone, internet, Netflix, attending movies? 100+ years ago people were happy without that. The reason we wouldn't be today is our relatively poor way of life without them compared to those who have. I think the parent (grandparent) poster is correct.

<comment><USER5> Wow, check your privilege.

[https://flowingdata.com/2018/02/08/how-different-income- grou...](https://flowingdata.com/2018/02/08/how-different-income-groups-spend- money/)

Housing, health care, food, and transportation make up close to 75% of of all household spending. And it's an even higher percentage the lower your income level. _And_ on average people in our lowest income brackets spend more money than make - so really it's like they spend 100% of their income on necessities and then borrow for things like the Internet, travel to their uncle's funeral, repairing their broken heater, and so on.

These are basic life functions, forget about an iPhone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> A talk by the Throwing Rocks as the Google Bus author. A little muddled but I think his argument is the problem UBI is "it's just a way of perpetuating our roles as consumers at the bottom of the pyramid not as owners" while I guess the 0.1% still own everything.

Which I guess could be an issue although as we don't have UBI who knows how it'd play out.

<comment><USER7> That's obviously how it would play out. The way it works right now is that corporations for the work that you do for them give you money which you use to buy goods from them. UBI makes it so that the government taxes corporations and gives money to consumers to buy things from them. How much money is entirely political but you can be assured that there will always be more need for growth and that consumers will always be told to tighten their belts. You will also never have enough money left over to invest or save a nest egg. So over time more income share will go to the top.

<comment><USER6> The other main way for it to play out would be to vote in some left wing style wealth redistribution. That kind of thing does happen. Maybe not just now but if Google and Amazon's AGI robots were taking over everything I could see a vote in that direction.

<comment><USER6> Looking that up I don't think redistributive tax has to be left wing. Top income tax rates were 90%+ under Winston Churchill (Cons) and Eisenhower (Rep).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> 2:45 : "we faked lower employment through ... unsustainable business practices"

What sustainability is can be up for debate. But i've never seen of a version that would put more people back in jobs than automation will take away.

3:55 : 'We will get the government to print more money, to give it to workers'.

Either this is some very small thinking for 'Big Think' or you they are skipping over a lot of assumptions that should be stated explicitly.

\---

One 'Universal Basic Asset' idea i like is giving every person a yearly carbon credit that companies have to buy, instead of gifting it to the largest polluters.

</comment><comment><USER9> I had a thought, wondering if it could work. For anyone who has the means, you can set up a basic income for your children by contributing about 350/month from the time they are born, then assuming 7% growth there will be over 250K sitting in the trust fund. This is enough for $10,000 per year (4% drawdown rate), which will provide them a basic income just as they are getting out of college, and trying to find their way in the world.

The major problems I see with this, is inflation (adjust the monthly contributions to keep up with inflation), and for multiple kids $350/month will not be achievable for people of lower income.

<comment><USER10> _> assuming 7% growth_

That's a _big_ assumption, and doesn't take into account the reduced spending power (cost inflation) during that time.

<comment><USER11> 7% is in line with historical growth rate (below it, actually)

Cost inflation is assumed to be 3%, which is why the withdrawal rate is 4% (4% + 3% = 7%)

Anyway a 4% withdrawal rate is fine for 30 years (the duration of the trinity study) but a lower withdrawal rate (say, 3.25%) is needed for longer timespans like the 65-ish years of life expected of someone just graduating college, see this: [https://earlyretirementnow.com/2016/12/07/the-ultimate- guide...](https://earlyretirementnow.com/2016/12/07/the-ultimate-guide-to- safe-withdrawal-rates-part-1-intro/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> To me, part of the problem is that nobody can simply "live" anymore. While there are homesteaders who can effectively "live off the land", people can no longer actually do that.

Instead of UBI, why not create a system where people can actually "live" without needing to create a whole system where the government ends up requiring people to pay into the system?

From the video: "We can't just give these people houses because they don't have jobs".

Yeah, because they don't just get "the house" they also have to pay property taxes, and for the utilities, and for everything else that is required, you know, actually live in the house.

Maybe this is overly simplistic, but it seems like you can do one of two things: prop "the system" up by continuing to require things like property taxes and the like, or find a way for people to be able to actually, you know, OWN their property and do whatever they want with it so that they could be completely self-sufficient.

EDIT: Actually, that seems to be something along the lines of what he is saying: "UBI perputates people as consumers but not as owners" (my paraphrase)

<comment><USER13> Very few people would want to live this "self-sufficient" lifestyle. I dont think people are opposed to efficiencies of scale or the advancements that can come from multinational corporations. I think that its not just simplistic reasoning is completely wrongheaded.

<comment><USER14> Even fewer comprehend the difficulties and sacrifice it would entail.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> UBI seems like a interesting idea but I don't think it's more than a small part of a bigger solution.

It could possibly help people from having 3-4 part time jobs just to make ends meet, but other problematic areas still exist.

Affordable housing, get people off the street / living in their cars.

Public medical care that doesn't require insurance or bankrupt you.

Higher education system that doesn't leave you with a life long debt.

</comment><comment><USER16> I've never heard UBI discussed in terms of its benefits to innovation, which is its most important characteristic. There is exactly one _reliable_ way to innovate: Be able to spend a huge amount of time doing unpaid work.

Right now there are essentially three groups that can afford to innovate: Students, the wealthy, and the people the wealthy give money to (via VC money). (Note that I'm using "wealthy" broadly here, if you can not have income for 1-5 years, you're wealthy by these standards).

UBI is basically having faith in human race is natural innovators, funding for the creativity of the _entire_ human race, instead of just a tiny subset of the population.

To address the straw man upfront: Capitalism of course incentivizes innovation as well, and just as important as UBI. These approaches can, and must co- exist, and in fact form the two sides of the innovation coin: Incentivize (capitalism) and enabled (UBI).

The counterarguments to this model are ridiculous, because they assume you have to throw out capitalism to get UBI. Where are you going to get that goop for the 3D printer? You pay people to mine it! Why in the world would you think that wouldn't work? If you give every human $100,000 a year (for example), you think no one is going to be willing to work to earn more money? Which human race have you been watching when you formed those beliefs? All those rich people who earned their first million and then stopped?

<comment><USER17> I agree with that entirely. In fact, you can take it one step further and say that it is essential for freedom. One of the huge hurdles for many people leaving their jobs is health insurance. The other is money. If people don't need to worry about their health, and have enough for food and shelter, now companies need to directly compete on job quality, because workers don't feel compelled to work SOMEWHERE.

And while I see his point that it's funneling more money to the top, I think that's also missing the point that someone needs to pay for all this universal basic income...and that's probably the people at the top...

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> There are so many issues with this video, I don't even know where to begin. I like this one line: "The US Department of Agriculture burns food every week in order to keep the prices of that food high, even though there's people who are starving and people who need homes." ... OK, let's ignore the fact that the world produces far more food than it needs and people still starve. Obviously the problem is with the USDA, if only they didn't do that everything would be fine /s. Every line in here reads like it's pandering to a specific viewpoint in an attempt to legitimize the UBI message. "I think people shouldn't starve, therefore this person must be right".

To me, "the" colossal big problem with UBI (if there is only one) is the probable hyperinflation and crash that happens as a result of redistributing many trillions of dollars without the creation of commensurate economic value. Guaranteed employment (where at least some economic value is getting created) is a less risky approach to accomplishing the same goal.

</comment><comment><USER19> I don't see UBI in this way at all. Nothing would stop a UBI recipient from investing a portion of that income.

In my mind a UBI allows increased economic freedom. It especially benefits the people currently most in need of it.

That's not a bad thing.

</comment><comment><USER20> Read "Inventing The Future" by Srnicek & Williams.

Please.

<comment><USER21> Can you give a quick synopsis so we know _why_ we should read it? What did you get out of it that you liked, and how does it relate to UBI?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Douglas appears to be saying that UBI is bad because it supports and perpetuates all of the bad stuff about capitalism (wrecking the environment and concentrating wealth in the hands of the wealthy)

It does this because UBI means giving people money, and then they buy the usual crap from the usual wealthy guys.

Have I got that right?

But the alternative, "give everybody a job", does the exact same thing.

So the "colossal problem" with UBI is that it does nothing to cure the evils of capitalism?

Ok. Well it does cure some other big evils.

I think Douglas's point is just hot air. Sorry.

</comment><comment><USER22> Isn't Big Think funded by the Kock family[0]? I'd take this information with a grain of salt, they typically lean hard on conservative perspective.

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

<comment><AUTHOR> Kind of an ad hominem argument. I'm a liberal and I think we probably will need a UBI at some point, but I do see the point he's making, where a lot of big tech proponents seem to side-step the problems they're helping to create (loss of jobs) by calling for universal basic income.

<comment><USER23> Is it side-stepping if UBI actually happens?

<comment><USER24> He gives an argument that the answer is still "yes". If UBI happens and Uber et al still ends up with all the money, then the argument still holds. Using a non-existent UBI as an argument for how they behave today is another level of problem.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I used to be a big proponent of UBI.

After doing a lot of reading and research, I'm not. I think people should be paid for the work they do, whether directly or indirectly.

I'm now much more in favor of things like social dividends: taxing profits of businesses and distributing it equally amongst the population, taxing estates at 90+% and distributing it equally amongst the population, etc.

Another idea I like is the social fund: it buys controlling shares in publicly-traded companies, forces them to issue dividends, then sends 10-20% of the dividends to the citizens, and spends the other 80-90% on buying more shares in other companies, with the net effect of socializing the profits of large companies.

Yes, most of these ideas would fall under some loose definition of "socialism." That said, it ties passive income to overall productivity, something that UBI doesn't do.

</comment><comment><USER25> "Universal Basic Assets"

I agree with this.

</comment><comment><USER26> I think it's useful to look at the basic social contract here. Voters already have a degree of ownership over the state. They are shareholders that get to elect a board to run the state on their behalf. In that sense maybe a dividend is reasonable. Looking at it another way, the relationship between citizen and stats is one of responsibilities on both sides.

Citizens are responsible for the defence of the state, in the most extreme case through conscription into the armed forces, which puts an obligation on the state to protect them. This and the realisation by the government that many citizens were not fit for such service, was one of the impetuses behind the consensus on the creation of the National health Service in the UK. Partly it was quid-pro-quo for the sacrifices ordinary people made, but partly it was just good national security policy to ensure the nation had a healthy labour and fighting force. This isn't socialism, it's just good governance.

So while I see a clear justification for a social dividend for citizens, I don't necessarily see a UBI as a sensible form in which to express it. The form that dividend takes should take into account the form of the obligations of citizens to state and vice-versa. For me health care is an obvious one. The state has a clear interest in a healthy population, ready for work and capable of defending it. I plain don't comprehend how US conservatism doesn't see this, it's been plainly obvious to European conservatives since WW2 or earlier, perhaps because we faced a more existential threat than the US did. Pensions and Medicare or it's equivalent are also just good policy, who wants thousands of destitute old people dying on the streets.

Unemployment benefit and UBI are more arguable. Both are a form of social dividend, but could disincentivize work. I'm not an absolutist about this, I think it's certainly true that people from time to time can find themselves unable to work or find a job and need a helping hand and I think that's fine and reasonable, however people able to work have an obligation to do so. I worry that a lot of discussion about UBI leans towards freeing people from the need to work. I'm sorry, but someone needs to do those jobs. We're a very long way from a Star Trek utopia where AI does all the hard labour.

Employment rates and open positions in the west are both pretty high. The global economy has gobbled up hundreds of thousands of Chinese workers without breaking step and wages in China have until recently been soaring. The current economic risks have nothing to do with AI taking our jobs. It may happen, but it isn't really now and I don't think it's likely to for many decades to come. Automation has been stealing jobs for hundreds of years, yet somehow there's more work than ever.

<comment><USER21> I think a lot of the interest over UBI comes from wealth disparity (rich getting much, much richer, middle class shrinking). On top of this, people are working harder than ever and salaries are mostly stagnant. In other words, wealth is being siphoned away from those creating value into the pockets of people who already have immense wealth.

I'm personally more in favor of real social dividends: a public fund that owns stock in publicly-traded companies and returns some portion as a dividend, and some portion it reinvests into buying more stock. The idea being people are getting a dividend (like UBI) but it's based on overall productivity so there's a connection between working and the payout (obviously, the connection is a few steps removed, but it's there nonetheless).

Regarding democracy/ownership, I think it's somewhat debatable. We're told the government represents us, but how many of your interests are represented by the Democratic party? How many by the Republicans? I can safely say at most 10-15% of my interests are ever really taken into account in a two-party system. I'd say people who are incredibly wealthy have a much greater say in political outcomes than the general population. In essence, we are _told_ we have ownership over the state, but in reality our ownership share is collectively small.

<comment><USER26> I'm a Brit, but I think in both our systems we can see the electorate making actual decisions and politicians adjusting their policies and behaviour to voter sentiment. Whatever we might think about the outcomes, the swing from Obama to Trump in the US and the Brexit vote in the UK were both examples of the electorate making a real choice.

Big companies have much less influence over here though due to our stricter campaign finance laws.</comment></comment></comment>


Starting Forth - After yesterday's Prolog post, another awesome language - <AUTHOR> http://home.iae.nl/users/mhx/sf.html <comment><USER2> For a real mind blowing experience, you should also read _Thinking Forth_ (<http://thinking-forth.sourceforge.net/>) also by the same author. It was one of two books that radically changed how I write programs (the other one being _Writing Solid Code_).

</comment><comment><USER3> Forth is among the languages that every developer should learn, even if they never use it in a production environment. It will definitely make you think a little differently. It's as if lisp and assembly language had a child.

On another note, it is REALLY easy to write completely incomprehensible spaghetti code in Forth. You really have to be disciplined or you'll end up with a lot of "write-once" code.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I thought after yesterday's Prolog post went down quite well I'd try introducing those of HN who haven't experienced it to Forth, a stack-based language that I loved as a child for it's extensibility (given at the time my alternative was BASIC or Z80 ASM I hope you'd understand). Older Mac users might not know this but your Open Boot firmware contains a fairly reasonable Forth interpreter built in.

Anyway, I hope you enjoy Forth as much as I did.

 __EDIT __: Brain fart, wrote stackless when I meant to write stack based, sorry.

<comment><USER4> I always wanted to learn Forth, as there was a Forth compiler available on the Commodore Vic-20. Thanks for the reminder and the link. :-)

<comment><AUTHOR> It wasn't this by any chance? [http://www.zimmers.net/anonftp/pub/cbm/vic20/roms/tools/8k/V...](http://www.zimmers.net/anonftp/pub/cbm/vic20/roms/tools/8k/Vic%20Forth%201.10.prg)

You should be able to load this into VICE (<http://www.viceteam.org/>) and start hacking away. Hope this helps.

<comment><USER4> Honestly, I don't remember. I never used it. I just used to see it in Compute! magazine. But this looks cool. Never had seen VICE before either.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> [http://chargen.matasano.com/chargen/2009/1/10/applicable- les...](http://chargen.matasano.com/chargen/2009/1/10/applicable-lessons-from- the-embedded-world-aka-forth-rules.html)

Some crazy stuff that you could do with Forth. The author shows how you can inject a forth VM in shellcode and build exploits on top of that.

</comment><comment><USER6> Minimal FORTH compiler and tutorial : <http://www.annexia.org/forth> Lambda the Ultimate thread: <http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/2452>

<comment><USER7> Jones Forth is awesome because it isn't just a great way to learn Forth but also a great way to learn assembly programming. A couple years ago I did a rather crude, hurried, and unoptimized port of Jones Forth to the Cell processor's vector units. Initially I intended it to be an April Fool's gag for my group at work but I came away with a much better knowledge of the underlying architecture.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> If Forth intrigues you check out Factor:

<http://factorcode.org/>

<comment><USER9> The only thing factor is missing is a book/tutorial/better example docs.

The current documentation is top notch though and you can learn a lot if you look through the factor blogs (or read a forth book)

Link to factor blogs: <http://planet.factorcode.org/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Here is a simple Forth implementation in Ruby.

<https://github.com/fogus/rforth>

<comment><USER11> Just for those that are interested in lear how to implement a forth compiler or even just a compiler, this [1] is a step by step tutorial on how forth is implemented. The tutorial is a extremely well commented code file that you can run.

[1] <http://www.annexia.org/_file/jonesforth.s.txt>

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> "yesterday's Prolog post"

Link for those of us not following HN 24/7?

<comment><USER13> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1976127>

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I learnt Forth as a kid. (<http://www.worldofspectrum.org/infoseekid.cgi?id=0008967> plus Acorn Forth)

What blew my mind was that - apart from a tiny kernel - Forth was written in Forth. It bootstrapped itself from basic principles. It's kind of the Principia Mathematica of programming languages...

</comment><comment><USER15> For people using windows, an excellent free Forth is win32forth.sourceforge.net. One can even write graphical apps with it.

</comment><comment><USER16> Is anyone still using this in a production environment? I don't think I've ever seen a language like this one before.

<comment><USER17> FreeBSD's boot loader uses a dialect of forth.

Forth makes MUCH more sense in an embedded context, IMHO.

<comment><USER18> >Forth makes MUCH more sense in an embedded context, IMHO.

Forth is just unbeatable in an embedded context. Minimal porting of a few basic words and you're up and running with fully functional environment you can adjust on-the-fly.</comment></comment></comment>


Prevel Framework (JS). Convenience in 5 Kb - <AUTHOR>

This is a lightweight all-purpose JavaScript framework. Its functionality designated on all the aspects of modern developing. Moreover, it's extremely fast (particularly interactions with the DOM).
All the popular methods from popular frameworks (interactions with the DOM, Ajax and so on) also attend in Prevel but without "ballast", because, basically, using heavy frameworks consists of using searching through the DOM and creating Ajax requests.
Including a framework which size is 90 Kb on a page which entire size (without a framework) is 20 Kb is a bad tone. But when writing in pure JavaScript arise a few inconveniences connected with that in JavaScript there are no habitual functions such as "$()" or "$.ajax()" and so on; Prevel called to root this problem as an essence by having a clear API and by rapid speed of work.
Perhaps you will say that 200 Kb is not a problem nowadays, but there are still lots of people who don't use the broadband Internet connection. Furthermore, Prevel is quite faster than newfangled frameworks such as jQuery, Mootools, Prototype, etc. Today, in a milestone of interactivity, speed is incredibly important.
In addition, you can make Prevel smaller; to do this it's necessary just to assemble it from modules independently.
<comment></comment><comment>=====
Examples of usage
Probably you'll like it after watching on a few examples (not all the functionality).
Ajax: Ajax attends almost in every application, Prevel simplifies a process of creating requests. Structure of creating queries is like its in jQuery (object with url, type, ...). More detailed instructions are available in documentation.
pl.ajax({
  url: 'prevelAjaxTest.py',
  type: 'GET',
  success: function(data) {
    alert('Okay.');
  } });
DOM: Function for interacting with the DOM widely respesented in Prevel; it's possible to find more examples in documentation.
Following code makes all the DIVs half-transparent.
pl('div').css({
 opacity: 0.5 });
Common: This methods are available from the `pl` namespace.
Defining the type of an object.
pl.type(Lorem.') === 'str' pl.type([]) === 'arr' pl.type({}) === 'obj' pl.type(new Date()) === 'date' pl.type(/abc/g) === 'regexp'
Defining a browser name. Supported browsers: chrome, opera, firefox, ie, ie6, ie7, ie8, safari, safari_khtml.
pl.browser(); // Name of current browser
If you suddenly liked Prevel Framework, you could read documentation. By the way, it's necessary to emphasise one pleasant particularity: call chains supported (e.g. pl('div').after('...').before('...')).
On GitHub: https://github.com/chernikovalexey/Prevel </comment><comment><USER2> I'd be intereted to hear how it differs from Zepto (<http://zeptojs.com/>)

<comment><AUTHOR> It's oriented on only modern browsers and mobile platform, unfortunately.

And it's better when you have a choice for making decisions on choosing the framework.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> <https://github.com/chernikovalexey/Prevel></comment>


Ask HN: Review my idea - <AUTHOR>

I was thinking of building a website where users can upload a screencast of their workflow / productivity environment and view other user's environments.
For instance, as a web developer, I would send a short screencast of what my typical work environment looks: my Netbeans IDE, my WAMP setup, my web browser with the web developer and firebug addons, etc.
This would be interesting for people looking forward to increase their productivity and see how others in their field are working. In my own experience, I've learned a lot of productivity tips from my co-workers and I think this kind of service could be helpful for home workers who can't take a look at the next cubicle ;)
What does HN think of my idea ? Any suggestion ? <comment><USER2> Why not give it a shot using a simple site/blog and YouTube? You could first make your own screencast and post it up in a blog article. Then recruit a handful of your friends to make their screencasts. If the project still seems fun and you are seeing some user interest, then think about building the site out. MVP ;-)

<comment><AUTHOR> Good idea ;) Lean and clean.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> It'd be sweet if the recordings were of people actually creating something well known. For example, if you could say "here's a screencast of how the Twitter prototype was built".

In a similar vein, I remember an Etherpad recording of PG writing an essay. At the time, it was one of the coolest things I've seen, and would love to see more famous writings composed in such manner.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a good idea but I'm not sure how I would go about getting some famous developers to send a screencast of them at work!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The sharing of environment configuration is very common among high end WoW raid guilds -- we did this on a regular basis and would see significant statistically measurable improvements when people setup their interface for specific encounters.

The process of going through and explaining each step in your workflow and why it is setup that way helps even with limited collaboration. The drawback to this is environment configuration is very specific to the type of project, size of your team, and the development process you follow.

In order for this to succeed as a site you'll need to pick a niche (like any startup should, boiling the ocean is hard) and build an audience around that -- i.e. developers using Netbeans on C++ projects using buildbot for CI in an agile environment. I use this example as you cite Netbeans in your idea and you thus probably know others using it giving you the start of a community.

</comment><comment><USER5> It is a good idea but there is a fundamental problem, I believe. The developers who have a great environment may not have any incentive to share it, and a lot of other who share may lead to spam/not-so-useful screencasts which may be laborious to clean (even if you use the community to rate it). Also how do you think this service will make money?

<comment><AUTHOR> I haven't thought of a revenue model yet: just throwing the idea out to see if that's something people would actually like. Getting developers to share their work environment would indeed be a challenge. Perhaps, a karma system a la StackOverflow/HN could be used as an incentive. Developers on StackOverflow don't mind helping each others out so I don't see why it wouldn't work with my proposed format. I have to admit though that making a screencast is time consuming and the karma incentive might not be enough to balance.

Another option that was mentioned in the comments was to ask "celebrity" developers to share their workspace. Celebrities usually like free publicity so I believe that might be a viable option to start out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I like the idea.

I really like this site which I believe I found via a hackernews comment sometime back:

<http://usesthis.com/>

It performs a similar function, albeit exclusive to their hardware and software setup, and a screencast and more detail would be interesting.

<comment><AUTHOR> Pretty similar indeed. Thanks for sharing the link.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think that's a cool idea. I've always enjoyed Lifehacker's pieces on the Featured Workspace as well as their Featured Desktop articles, because I like seeing fresh ideas for arranging my home/office and desktop. I would definitely enjoy seeing the same for workflow environments.

</comment><comment><USER8> The ability to diff two environments would also be useful, it would allow you to find folks that were close to yours but different (e.g. same tools different settings) vs. different tools.

</comment><comment><USER9> Make doing screencasts with voice easier and then I'll get back to you.

</comment><comment><USER10> it can't be too productive spending your time watching other people be productive..

<comment><AUTHOR> On the short time it isn't but on the long term it can be. I've spent a few hours reading on version control a few years ago and I've been more productive since then ;)</comment></comment>


In the New Data Center, It's Roofs Off and Taxes Down - <AUTHOR> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/17/in-the-new-data-center-its-roofs-off-and-taxes-down/?ref=technology <comment><USER2> Having a minor cluster for my project, I must admit that I am infatuated with the idea of building a cluster in a container and putting it somewhere, perhaps out on the prairie. The attractive thing about containers is that the container itself costs approximately $usd 0. And with the new realization that we don't need to cool things to the goosebump level anymore, the idea is quite attractive.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a good article describing Microsoft's Datacenter design effort. [http://loosebolts.wordpress.com/2008/12/02/our-vision-for- ge...](http://loosebolts.wordpress.com/2008/12/02/our-vision-for- generation-4-modular-data-centers-one-way-of-getting-it-just-right/)</comment>


What are examples of experts who, in the end, are really not experts? - <AUTHOR> http://www.quora.com/Expertise/What-are-examples-of-experts-who-in-the-end-are-really-not-experts

<comment><USER2> I don't know about other fields, but in science, expertise is way overrated, indeed it's frowned upon -- by scientists. The public may still think scientific expertise amounts to something, but scientists as much more skeptical of the term.

Here's a now-famous example of an "expert" who wasn't:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sch%C3%B6n_scandal>

</comment><comment><USER3> The biggest irony is that this question is being asked on Quora - Where this phenomenon can be seen very frequently.</comment>


Ask HN: How does a developer get started with usability testing? - <AUTHOR>

I launched a web app a while back that got a good number of sign ups but all of the feedback I got from my users was the same: Usability really needs some work.
I decided to do things right. I did some research on usability and started over with regard to design. I've come up with some mock ups a la balsamiq that I feel makes it really easy for users to do what they need to do on the site.
Being a developer, though, I'd like to test this. How does one do so? I'm looking for more than just "go to a coffee shop and offer to buy them coffee herp derp." There are more facets to it that are question marks in my head like: What questions should I ask? How should I observe them? Should I have a plan going in to it? If so, is there a format I should follow?
If anyone here has some knowledge and/or resources they can share please let me know! <comment><USER2> Step One: Read Steve Krug's _Rocket Surgery Made Easy_ [1]

Step Two: There is no step two

[1]: <http://www.sensible.com/rocketsurgery/index.html></comment>


Ask HN: We just got patent trolled by Kelora Systems. Need Advice - <AUTHOR> I run a mid-size eCommerce business and we just received via certified mail a patent infringement notice from Kelora Systems, LLC regarding US Patent No. 6,275,821 entitled "Method and System for Executing a Guided Parametric Search".
The patent is for a "search method" where instead of a hierarchical approach, the application uses family groupings to narrow products (they call it guided parametric search). A hierarchical approach would be one where in order to get to Small Red Widgets I would have to first go to Widgets, then to Red Widgets, then to Small Red Widgets. If you wanted to get to Small Blue Widgets, I would have to go back to the top of the hierarchical tree and then select Blue and then Small to get my Small Blue Widgets. The issue with this being you may not know how your end user may prioritize those things. They may want to see all the Small Widgets and don't care about the color, but in this hierarchical approach, that isn't possible as its a branch past the color selection.
This is something just about every major eCommerce site does.
Doing some research I see we are not alone - http://www.google.com/search?aq=f&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=kelora+patent+troll
Essentially they have stated that we can either pay a $150,000 licensing fee within 30 days or they will file a formal complaint and pursue 'legal remedies'.  (A copy of the complaint was included)
eBay, Microsoft, Target, Office Max, Shopzilla and lots of other major companies have already been targeted.  - http://www.docstoc.com/docs/60405793/Kelora-v-Target-Officemax-Shopko-Briggs-and-Stratton-et-al
eBay has also counter-sued, however I am not sure how that effects how we can respond to this letter (if at all) - http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/5:2010cv05106/234117/
Some, such as ShopZilla and Footlocker have settled:  http://www.prweb.com/releases/Kelora-Systems/Step-Search/prweb5094424.htm
My gut is that we need to bite the bullet and pony up to get our lawyers involved immediately,  however they are not by any means cheap and would like to be as efficient as possible when dealing with them.
Very curious to any insight or advice that can be offered, particularly from someone who has dealt with this in the past. <comment><USER2> Holy shit faceted search is now attracting patent trolls?

I would do 2 things:

1\. Talk to 4 or 5 different patent laywers (for free). Learn.

2\. Contact other companies that also use faceted search (everyone does) and ask to talk to the person in charge. Perhaps you can work together?

I'm pretty sure there will be prior art to the patent. The first time I saw faceted search on the web was epinions.com (2001-ish), but it's been described in depth in the 70s or earlier in library science (Ranganathan). Good luck!

<comment><USER3> Peter. This patent was filed in 1998. It was reexamined in 2010. You're right that everyone is using it now, and it can be proved that Amazon used it before this patent was filed. However, someone will have to litigate this to bring that prior art into play.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This particular patent was invalidated and thrown out a few years ago. Kelora, through their lawfirm, Manatt, amended it and brought it back from the dead for round 2. So Manatt is the Palo Alto firm behind this. Robert D. Becker is the attorney willing to put his name on it and grab the mom and pops out there by the goanads (they are targeting the smaller sites who don't have the where- with-all to fight the legal threat, whether there are merits or not). Nice. And patents are supposed to encourage innovation, right? Or maybe they exist so that deep pocketed lawfirms can go after every lean-running online store around and shake them down ...

</comment><comment><USER4> Oh, and if you've been targeted by them, reach out to me and let me know. I'm hearing that there _may_ have been some mistakes made by this law firm in their process which _may_ expose them to some legal dangers, themselves. If you've been targeted by them, I'd be happy to share what I know, but won't do it in a public forum. Not yet. I have been asked to help gather info that _may_ prove very useful in a push-back, info which you may have in the letters they sent you. (Things are really heating up behind the scenes!)

<comment><USER5> i'd also like to hear more from people who are in the same boat. my email is firstname.lastname@example.com. I'd like to go with an attorney that represents many of us.

<comment><USER6> how can I contact therealdiego?

<comment><USER7> I would be careful sending any of these posters emails. Suppose they are working for the law firm and trying to get evidence against you. Do not underestimate the vileness of lawyers and their tactics.

<comment><USER8> just got my letter today - August 15 2011. Would like more info - firstname.lastname@example.com

<comment><USER9> please also email me about this issue at email@example.com

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> You can read the Microsoft counter-suit and get a complete factual history of this case. You can read about how Kelora systems was just created a few months ago and was just assigned the patent (presumably so they could appeal the case under a different entity and continue to try and extract settlements while the real case is being decided - speculation on my part based off of the MS countersuit). If you read the history (as detailed in the MS counter-suit), you'll see that the patent was recently invalidated and is now being appealed. I am extremely surprised that a legitimate law firm like Manatt would actually take this case and engage in such tactics. Strange times, indeed. [http://www.docstoc.com/docs/61865036/Microsoft-v- PartsRiver-...](http://www.docstoc.com/docs/61865036/Microsoft-v-PartsRiver- and-Kelora-Systems)

</comment><comment><USER11> This is getting ridiculous, when these patent trolls first started appearing I wasn't sure where I stood on software patents, but enough is enough, software patents need to be abolished.

It reminds me of a mob protection racket, only it's legal!

I wish you the best in fighting these assholes, when was their patent filed? Surely there must be some prior art?

Good luck

</comment><comment><USER12> As always, talk to a lawyer and nothing offered here is legal advice nor should be taken as such.

But......

We got this letter about a year ago. The price then was $35,000 if paid within 2 weeks, $70,000 after that. If you didn't pay, they were "gonna getcha'". A ton got this email. I doubt many paid (we certainly didn't).

New suits by Kelora since they sent that letter over a year ago?

Zero.

I would confer with a lawyer loooooooong before I would pony up to Kelora. They are bleeding money to lawyers trying to make a large sum off of one of the big boys. Its been 3 years since PartsRiver started down this path and 1 year since Kelora picked up the torch with absolutely nothing to show for it.

They need to cover their lawyer fees. They must be getting really low on funds now if they've upped it to $150k....

(also, correct me if I'm wrong, this second group of letters are the threat of suit, not actually suits, correct?)

<comment><USER13> they put in a copy of the actual complaint along with the letter showing that they can simply file it, to appear more intimidating..

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is probably the most interesting case (Microsoft vs PartsRiver) and sheds the most light I think on what is going on:

[http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district- courts/califor...](http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district- courts/california/candce/4:2009cv00811/212919/234/)

"A patent is invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) if the claimed invention is offered for sale more than one year before the filing date of the patent application. Here, the "critical date" is October 14, 1993, which is one year before the filing date of the '821 patent application.

The Court concludes that claims 1 and 2 of the '821 patent are invalid due to the on-sale bar because they were the subject of a commercial offer for sale of an invention that was reduced to practice before October 14, 1993."

This was were the initial patent was ruled invalid due to the OnSale bar. Not being a lawyer, I'm not sure how changes they made to it made the OnSale bar no longer valid. Do the changes somehow effect the patent/conception date?

The original filing date was October 14, 1994 and, according to the above court documents:

"As noted above, Danish, a co-inventor of the '821 patent, and Plaintiff have conceded that claims 1 and 2 were reduced to practice in April, 1992"

It is tough to claim prior-art as early as '92 or '94. But, if the changes to the patent somehow makes the onsale bar no longer valid, does it change or negate those two dates.

Prior-Art could be claimed on a few different things. Faceted search can definitely be found in different things as early as the late 90s:

<http://idl.ils.unc.edu/rave/history.html> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faceted_search>

It might be a stretch but, as others have stated, you could make an argument that faceted search has prior-art as early as the mid 1930s: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colon_classification>

There are a few libraries that use it but it isn't clear when it was instituted.

</comment><comment><USER3> We also received the letter. We have several attorneys working on this right now. One attorney we just learned of is Sid Leach in Phoenix, he specializes in patent law and has spent considerable time dealing with patent trolls. Our attorneys will be contacting him in addition to the work they are already doing. Many, many companies have received this letter. Our current take is that the patent will ultimately be proved invalid, but that is yet to be decided because it has not been litigated on its merit yet.

<comment><USER3> I forgot to say that Sid Leach is already aware of this situation and has consulted with another company that received the letter.

<comment><USER7> I'm sure your attorneys were just giddy when you contacted them, but I wonder if it would have been better just to ignore this.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Faceted search over a network connected was demonstrated in a video education series (some sort of HCI distance education class) hosted by Ben Schneiderman of the university of maryland in the fall of 1992. I don't have a link or more concrete reference to give you nor any idea if that would help in this specific case.

We were using faceted search on the IBM Corporate web site in the 1998-1999 timeframe, I believe in the IBM PC "shop" site, however I no longer have any of the relevant information/documentation (IBM might).

<comment><USER14> I think what I was thinking of was "Dynamic Queries: database searching by direct manipulation" which is linked off here: <http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/pubs/video92.shtml>. That may not be as applicable as I thought it was.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> We got the same letter from Kelora. It's more than just you and me too. I just sent you an email to the contact info in your bio. Give me a call.

<comment><USER4> oh, there are likely hundreds, if not thousands. At least, when they first tried this, last year, there appeared to have been a ton of them ...

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Is there no way to get out of the "Guided Parametric Search" realm? Maybe you could add something to your search capabilities or rethink a part of it such that you are no longer a reasonable target for this company. This is probably what I would do. This approach wouldn't require a lawyer and would only cost a few days of development.

<comment><AUTHOR> Unfortunately no, guided search / faceted navigation is core to our customer experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> We also got the same letter/threat from Kelora Systems. Like the original poster here and countless others I've found online, we're not quite sure what to do and what our legal exposure is likely be. Curious to speak to therealdiego about what he knows behind the scenes...

</comment><comment><USER17> "eBay has also counter-sued, however I am not sure how that effects how we can respond"

Contact eBay.

</comment><comment><USER18> we're in the same boat. we have disabled the search mechanism on the site. if we are not interested in licensing the search, what other steps need to be taken at this point? it seems like the only options given by them are to license or they will litigate. hopefully people can keep us updated on what actions they are taking.

also, they provided an incorrect value of our estimated annual revenues, almost double over our actual amount. would this have any relevance? i am wondering where they obtained this information from, probably those questionnaires you have to fill out to get a free magazine.

<comment><USER7> Do you ever send out mass marketing through the mail? Or have you ever received spam? They tell you not to click on any links in a spam email because it could expose you to harm. In the same way, I expect that replying to this threat would do more harm than good. CLEARLY, they don't have 10,000 lawyers working for them, and yet they've probably sent out that many notifications. So, clearly they cannot actually make good on all of those threats. I could be wrong, I suppose.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> We received the same letter last week. How many of you have responded? The first attorney we contacted wants to get in touch with them. Depending on the situation, that may or may not be the right thing to do.

</comment><comment><USER20> I just got the same letter...going to contact a patent lawyer and see where that gets me. This is crazy...please email me at firstname.lastname@example.com with any extra info that you may have...I will do the same.

</comment><comment><USER21> Many lawyers offer free consultations. You may want to talk to a patent lawyer and find out what your options are. Discussing it with them might help you better understand what the different options might cost.

</comment><comment><USER22> Talk to an attorney, and one who does nothing but patent law. If you go through your regular business lawyer that's what they will do anyway.

</comment><comment><USER13> there is now a usergroup up dedicated to this issue so whoever gets this letter, signup to this group to increase collaborative efforts: <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Us6275821/>

</comment><comment><USER23> At this point you have two options, pay 150K or contact your lawyer.

<comment><USER24> At 150k, they should probably consult with their lawyer for a bit anyways.

<comment><USER10> you make a good point. if you are paying $150,000, you should at least talk to a laywer to make sure you are getting the "license" they claim to be offering. You really have 1 viable option at this point - talk to a very good patent attorney.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "on-sale bar in 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) rendered the patent invalid."

<comment><USER13> "(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States, or"

[http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/appxl_35...](http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/appxl_35_U_S_C_102.htm)

<comment><USER13> its being held up because they're appealing the judgement made with microsoft,etc... so they're trying to suck the most blood they can while they can.. even though its bullsh!t, its a headache, and another isnt needed. it's a last strike for them.

even though many may feel the appeal will be withdrawn, its still a headache.. Options i feel are..

a) pay an attorney to try and delay it until the appeal is decided. b) take out the search until the appeal is decided. c) pay they're $150,000 (f'n nutz) if it will grow ur sales by the time the decision of the appeal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Fucking parasites.</comment>


Show HN: Check out our new 'Open Company' page - <AUTHOR> https://www.balancedpayments.com/open.html

<comment><USER2> This page is beautiful, but disorienting. A few issues:

1\. The content-free™ pages (single word) are dangerous... I nearly left thinking there was nothing to see. They could instead be bullets on a single page, or an animation. I know you were going for the single-word slide effect, but the user has to actually scroll through 3 entire pages with their hand.

2\. The parallax stuff breaks your mental model of a scroll. I have always found this disorienting, despite the fad. Use parallax to animate content slightly (like Apple does), not to emulate a 'wipe' from cinematography, which has no physical interpretation.

3\. When you finally get to the bullets with the content, they are very small and feel almost like small type that you're supposed to ignore. I would either present the content front and center as it is or balance it out with the full- page parallax stuff.

4\. I just barely noticed the "try the dashboard" link. No doubt many will miss it, or not make it that far. How about hovering it to the right? Or presenting it right away? Or placing the button in multiple locations?

Otherwise, well-executed and very visually pleasing. Good job on that. Likewise, the actual dashboard is pretty, if not a bit trendy.

Sometimes I wonder if designers, like developers who create baroque systems only they understand, make trendy designs so that they will need to be changed in 1-2 years. For a counterexample, think of the OS X GUI introduced in 10.4. Closest to timeless that I can think of.

<comment><USER3> thanks for the feedback, @msutherl. passed this along to our designer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Beautiful.

Sidebar: IMO Balanced are doing everything right, and people are noticing more and more. All the open stuff Balanced does is accumulating incredible good will, and we all know that helps with incredible passive customer acquisition, n.b. Twilio. I think we'll look back in a year or two and see that Balanced wrote a new chapter in the book on growth.

Very bullish on these folks.

<comment><USER5> what he said.

<comment><USER3> Really appreciate the support!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> One of my favorite things about Balanced is that all their communication re: APIs, possible new features, the dashboard... everything is on GitHub.

I've dialogued with each of the founders in one way or another through GH. It's been a completely unique experience and I'm thankful for Balanced and their commitment to building an open company.

<comment><USER3> Thanks, Taylor. This is for you: [http://blog.balancedpayments.com/benefits- open-company-balan...](http://blog.balancedpayments.com/benefits-open-company- balanced/)

Thanks for helping make Balanced better

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The biggest benefit in my opinion as that every person who implements balanced can "own" a piece of the company. You don't like something, change it. You want to propose a new feature, do it. Being able to directly impact a product you have implemented is a rarity in today's marketplace and it should be encouraged.

<comment><USER3> Zach, exactly! We think of Balanced as payments _by_ developers. For example: we've got a guy named victor in Taiwan that's completely taken over work on the recurring billing/payouts engine we're building called Billy. Since Billy is completely open-source (just another Balanced API client), he can work on it as he likes. Check it out: [https://twitter.com/balancedbilly](https://twitter.com/balancedbilly)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's a great trend going forward to see companies becoming more open about the code they write, it helps get a third party perspective on what you're building. Balanced has done a good job at documenting and keeping their code clean enough that the barrier to contribution is as low as you can ask for on GH.

</comment><comment><USER9> Gorgeous, the page and the philosophy. The world needs more of this.</comment>


S.Korea shelled by N. When do you think matters will escalate if not tomorrow? - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/southkorea/8153000/North-Korea-bombs-South-Korean-island.html

<comment><USER2> If not tomorrow, the next time some faction decides it needs to do something to make an internal point.

It has been said that the last time the DPRK attacked civilians was in 1987 (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Flight_858>), which was during the transition between the Great Leader and Dear Leader. This time, the transition is messy, Dear Leader appears to have suffered a stroke before anyone anticipated, the transition has been foreshortened and his anointed son newly introduced (I've read that a "Gang of Four" including an uncle are positioned to be the new leadership), etc. etc.

Basically just about anything could happen for opaque internal factional reasons. When the military and secret police aren't getting enough food to eat....

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> [http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/23/nkorea.skore...](http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/23/nkorea.skorea.military.fire/index.html?hpt=T1&iref=BN1)

This link has a video</comment>


Datazenit 1.0 released - <AUTHOR> https://datazenit.com/blog/2016/03/1/datazenit-official-release/?fromhn <comment><USER2> Please do not delete and resubmit. This is the 3rd time I've seen this submission today.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry for any inconvenience, I was just testing different titles and will keep this in mind.</comment></comment>


The Economics of Pricelessness - <AUTHOR> http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2014/08/12/the-economics-of-pricelessness/

<comment><USER2> > This gives us four types of transaction [...]

Is there a fifth? I'm reminded of a saying (attributed to the Inuit): "Gifts make slaves, just as whips make dogs." (IIRC I saw it in _Debt: The First 5000 years_ )

Where does that fit? At first blush, it looks like it's a pure-"trader" view of things (rejecting the idea of gifts) but I think it's actually assigning a "priceless" value to a shared idea... The idea that every member of the community is self-sufficient enough that gifts aren't necessary.

> The transaction is also a cousin of what Clifford Geertz called deep play > with reference to betting patterns in Balinese cockfighting.

Oh, wow, I'm having flashbacks to a writing class in college where we had to critique that Balinese Cockfighting thing. Maybe it was just bad curriculum/prompts, but I've always carried around a "WTF was that shit" chip on my shoulder against that paper.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is awesome.</comment>