Extraterrestrial organic matter preserved in 3.33 Ga sediments from Barberton - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016703719302662 <comment><USER2> The article uses the word "organic" in a highly technical manner, meaning chemical compounds that contain carbon, and of course we already know that space is filled with that sort of thing. It does NOT mean "organic" in the casual sense of originating from something alive.

<comment><USER3> As a layman I guessed as much, but wasn't positive. Clickbaity title.

<comment><USER4> Not really - makes a ton of sense if you're an organic chemist.

<comment><USER5> I'm not an organic chemist or a chemist of any sorts, and the headline didn't phase me at all or stick out as clickbait. I knew exactly what it meant though to be fair "o chem" was a common course among my friends majoring in things like bio-*.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is there any organic chemical that can only be produced by life? Not even sure that'd be possible.

<comment><USER7> Depends on your personal tolerance for the complexity indicated by the word "chemical". The presence of "deoxyribonucleic acid" on its own does not prove life, as that term covers simple cases of it that could conceivably naturally occur. However, if you've got a multi-million base pair chain of the stuff, wrapped up in chromatin, and bespeckled with all manner of useful-looking biochemical doohickeys attached to it, I'm willing to say that's definitely indicative of life. Is that a "chemical"? I'd certainly call that a "molecule" that could only be produced by life.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Some analysis: [https://www.sciencealert.com/traces-of-extraterrestrial- orga...](https://www.sciencealert.com/traces-of-extraterrestrial-organic- matter-discovered-in-south-african-mountains)

<comment><USER9> Still scanning but I think one must keep in mind the distinction between "organic matter" and "biological matter", organic is a broad category that involving a complex array of chemicals that aren't necessarily generated by living things. Biological material or similar terms refer to stuff that definitely is or was once alive.

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

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

<comment><USER10> I _think_ the paper stated that the organic matter was similar to those found in some Archaean fossils in the area and other parts of the world, so it seems to be an interesting find

Of course it's all too easy for a layman such as myself to read too deeply into things and draw unfounded conclusions about the origins of life. And if I recall, the rock is newer than the oldest known fossils, so I'll keep a little distance on that conclusion for now

But it was pleasant to read about the earliest known fossils, so that'll be my current takeaway on this

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Just more evidence that life on earth may have been helped along by all this carbon containing/organic matter deposited via meteorites.

<comment><USER12> That's meaningless. The Earth coalesced from supernova remnants, which included organic compounds, but that doesn't imply living organisms.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to become a renaissance man? - <AUTHOR> I'm 21 years old, about to finish college. And I've decided to spend my 20s becoming a renaissance man. What does that mean? I'd like to spend the bulk of my time becoming a well-rounded person - learning (foreign) languages, drawing, painting, musical instruments, mathematics, physical fitness and so on. Specialization is for insects, etc.
I like the idea of making things more than just acquiring knowledge. There's just too much information out there for any one person to know; but, I do think it's possible to be good at creating various things.
<comment>--
So, my questions for you are:
- What subjects would you try to learn?
- How would you go about learning these various subjects? </comment><comment><USER4> I like your enthusiasm! I was at the same point a while back. Here's some of the things I did to broaden my horizons and expand my knowlege:

In my teens I moved to argentina and got a job there which forced me to learn spanish well ( still stuck with el accento porteno ). In my opinion there's nothing better for opening up your mind like moving to another country, experiencing other world views, literatures, culture, etc.

Make a choice to learn something and stick with it until you master it (but make sure its something you enjoy). The toughest for me was sticking with Mathematics, because apart from trig, relational algebra, and discreet maths I hardly ever have a chance to apply the rest. So I just set apart some time daily and worked from the bottom up, its constantly more fascinating and I really miss it when I can't spend my daily time with my mathbook (currently 'pattern calculus' by barry jay - highly recommend.

I'd say delve into diverse subjects but don't try to be a master of all. Its one thing to know who decartes was, how he arrived at cogito ergo sum, and yea the cartesian plane, but you'll never be able to know it all and a lot of its completely useless. For me, after a year long period where I read into philosophy in depth I pretty much decided the whole field was pointless (for me), and decided to concentrate on disciplines that were more applicable and enjoyable for me such as physics and political history.

Lastly, to quickly answer your question about which subjects to learn I'd say the following a good for getting an overall understanding (and will keep you more than busy for quite a while :)

1\. The world of the abstract - <USER2>

2\. Understanding the universe and our relationship to it - <USER3>

3\. Life and living organisms - Biology and evolutionary theory (Dawkins, Dennett )

4\. Humans and our cultures - History in tandem with at least near native fluency in one foreign language (and accompaning culture, literature, films)

5\. The Mind and brain how we think and are - Cognitive Science - Gödel, Escher, Bach (GEB)

Best of luck its a very fun path learning things and then applying what you've learned!

</comment><comment><USER5> What do you think college was for? You are unlikely to ever again have nearly as easy access to such a broad range of experts all willing to teach / train you in thier subjects.

Also unless you have a trust fund you should be spending a good part of the next nine years figuring out how you are going to support yourself for the following fifty.

</comment><comment><USER6> What are you interested in? Start there and constrain yourself to a few topics. Just be sure you're doing it for the right reasons - that is, you truly love what you're studying.

But, more to answer your question: I'd choose a maximum of 3 (and even that is pushing it), then immerse yourself deeply in them. If you're wanting to make things, then practice it as much as you can, regardless of the quality. It took me many years to not feel ashamed of my guitar playing, but it has finally started to take hold.

Art demands a lot from you emotionally, but it's not any fun otherwise. :)

</comment><comment><USER7> Cool! That's how I spent the past 20 years...

Try to take classes, but just launch full speed into new goals. For example, to learn photography I bought a nice camera and darkroom and $1000 worth of film. To learn car repair, I bought a cheap Italian convertible and rebuilt it as a member of an online community (engine modifications, transmission swap, etc.)

You can speed up learning by setting daily structure, ex: Pick 7 things to work on each week (based on your weaknesses) and devote one per day of the week. Perhaps set month goals such as reading a book per month, competing in an event, etc. Set year goals, etc.

World study (travel, language study, history) Physique (martial art, endurance sport, yoga) Music (history, instrument, theory, singing, etc.) Art (photography, architecture, graphic design, painting, drawing, creativity, etc.) Mechanical (get a cool old car and learn to rebuild it, 4 wheeling, convertible, welding) Construction (improve a house, wood working, furniture, etc.) Acting (role in a play, improv, standup jokes) Psychology/Religion (explore meditation, church service, personal development.) Mathematics (history, chess, classic texts)

Business? Computer Engineering?

</comment><comment><USER8> These are a tactical tips, but I have found them useful in acquiring a broad range of knowledge.

1\. Stop watching broadcast/cable TV. Only watch a few really good shows via iTunes so you don't waste time on commercials.

2\. Listen to non-fiction audiobooks when getting ready in the morning or driving/commuting. You can gain a broad range of knowledge with what is typically down time. The knowledge is valuable on its own, but really becomes useful when you start creating your own material.

3\. Cut your news reading down to a few broad weekly/monthly publications like The Atlantic and The Economist.

4\. Watch Charlie Rose. You would be amazed at the breadth of guests he has on.

5\. When you meet others, ask them about what they do and really talk to them about it. Small talk is a waste of time. Ask detailed questions about different fields and you will find you learn quite a bit in the process.

6\. Always ask "Why?" when you encounter new concepts.

<comment><USER9> Yes, #1 for sure. Once you get over it, you will find you have way more free time (plus no $100/month cable bill) to pursue more important stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> "The bulk of [your] time"? Unless you have an independent income, this may be the bulk of your free time.

Off the top of my head:

a. Live where you can get by mostly walking or riding a bike. That will help with fitness. b. Take some classes. If you already know a musical instrument or two, I suppose you can learn another easily. From a given level of mathematical maturity, you can learn more math on your own. But foreign languages, drawing, and painting seem like skills you can use some help with. Community colleges, university extension programs, organizations such as the Academie Francaise and the Goethe Institute offer things that can help you. c. On your own, you can read plenty of history. d. Philosophy is worth reading, but requires some context.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER11> Going for knowledge just because it sounds cool isn't going to be a motivator strong enough for success. Find stuff you're interested in and dive into those. The way to become a well-rounded person is to become obsessive in many things (possibly not simultaneously) that are unusual in some way. In fact, learning anything will feel like specialization, and in fact being a serial specialist is probably the most viable way to become a "Renaissance man" today.

Note that the first thing that came to my mind when I read your post was: "To be a true Renaissance man, you need to have been dead for 400 years". I won't write it here :)

</comment><comment><USER12> What are your goals? A high level "renaissance man" is a good start, but how about breaking these down into tangible 'deliverables'. E.g. what languages do you specifically want to learn? Do you want to spend time in a country applying those language skills in a natural context...

The reason I suggest this is without clear goals and a practical application for those goals, you may not get the outcome you desire.

</comment><comment><USER13> Start reading a physical encyclopedia from cover to cover. Start reading things you don't understand to make you open-minded and tolerant and hopefully humble. (specialization is not for insects) Start gardening, insects are found here. Only rarely downvote on HN, as that's the modus operandi of the Renaissance Man - positive choices and preferences, not caught up in condemnation.

</comment><comment><USER14> Personally I just do what I'm passionate about, and that's it. I don't categorize my passions and expect my passions to be more than 5 or 10.

Simply find what you love doing.

Things in life change and 10 years from now you'll have different interests. Cultivate the things your interested in now and don't over stress yourself with having to learn all those disciplines - things will come with time.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the feedback everyone. I'm not wealthy by any means, so income is definitely going to be an issue. But I don't have very many expenses or responsibilities (yet), so it's not too difficult to live cheaply on 20-30k a year.

</comment><comment><USER15> Good physical health is your first step. Seriously.

</comment><comment><USER16> Forget learning, find yourself. The true renaissance man knows himself. The other stuff is easy.</comment>


Show HN: Transform insecure passwords to secure passwords - <AUTHOR> http://unlimited-labs.com/tools/ <comment><USER2> No one is going to touch this unless you provide some source code.

<comment><AUTHOR> I guess that makes sense. Is there anything else i can do because i wouldn't like to disclose the source for the reason of it not getting copied or something similar.

<comment><USER2> You're offering a Windows installer for an application that appears to add complexity to simple passwords - probably hashing it with a seed - but without source code, there's no way for anyone to validate the effectiveness of that process, that it doesn't make passwords easier to guess, or even that the app isn't sending everyone's passwords directly to you. You're not even offering a signed binary.

Some people will probably use it and it might work perfectly well but I think most, especially here, are going to be suspicious.

<comment><AUTHOR> I understand what you are saying and thank you for offering your thoughts.

The app doesn't do any type of hashing. The app just intercepts your keystrokes as you type and replaces what you type with a random character. I would of thought the validation would be through giving it a try and using it.

In regards to signing the binary, i didn't want to buy a code signing cert until I had some positive feedback and it was worth getting.

Again i understand your concerns and thank you for the feedback.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


When operating "at web scale", users often simply don't have "real names" - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/116098411511850876544/posts/4t8sFLLK4hK <comment><USER2> This title is 5 words longer than it could be, because people don't have real names.

Apologies in advance for the self-citation:

[http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods- programmers-b...](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2010/06/17/falsehoods-programmers- believe-about-names/)

My name+ is confusing gibberish where I live. It is highly likely likely that when I have children, they will go through life having multiple sets of gibberish so that they can pick the non-gibberish option when asked "What is your _real_ name?"

Does your startup really want to get into the is-that-gibberish-gibberish-or- am-I-just-ignorant-of-the-way-they-do-things-in-weird-places-like-the-United- States adjudication business? If so, try validating names. You will have _loads_ of fun.

\+ : Well, a name I go by, at any rate. There's _at least_ eight different ways to write my "real name" _correctly_ , not even counting nicknames, online handles, or the like.

<comment><USER3> Well, I know people who IRL insist on being called by made-up names, mostly goths, you know, something like Darkraven Bloodmisery. Whatever they called themselves in Livejournal. Very few of them follow through tho' and fill in a deed poll form! For me that's the acid test: whatever it says on your passport is your real name. And government IT - the least efficient kind! - has managed to solve this. Why can't the mighty Google?

<comment><USER4> I know a couple of LJ'ing goths who now have Google+. Thus I can see people with stated first names like "Persephone", "Ariadne" etc. The rule of thumb is that if someone says that's their name, that's what you call them. There are also some clearly pseudonymous accounts, e.g. last names like "jumpycat", "Purple" etc.

It's impolite to ask what their "real name" is. I've seen someone (call her X) get upset because someone pressed the point of finding out what X's mother used to call her (if that's a a "real name" in any meaningful sense). And it was pointless too, what could you do with that information?

There's lot's of inaccurate information there anyway, I have two "Jo"s in my friends list. On is male, one female. In both cases "Jo" is a contraction, in one case of a middle name. They also chose to be called "Jo".

I don't really see why Google+ needs to know or care. What people answer to is what people know to look for, so that's what should be shown.

<comment><USER5> _e.g. last names like "jumpycat", "Purple" etc._

I reminded of Catherina Fake, a Flickr co-founder.

<comment><USER4> As far as I know "Fake" is the surname that she was born with.

<comment><USER5> Yes that's my point. You have to be careful about _"clearly pseudonymous accounts"_

<comment><USER4> All right then. I'll give Tallulah von Strumpet-Hausen and Martin Soulstealer the benefit of the doubt ;)

if your point is "you don't actually know" then mine is "you don't need to even care".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Having a Dutch surname like "Spring in 't Veld" (roughly translates to "Jump in th' Field") causes all kinds of problems on form entries and editors that add smart quotes.

\- Many non-sanitized SQL queries fail,

\- buggy URL or HTML parsers create code like:

      /spring-in/
      <meta content='Spring in 't Veld ...

\- Pagetitles like: Spring in /'t Veld

\- Added smart quotes "Spring in 't Veld" from Word or Rich Text Editors cause problems with sorting and identity consolidation.

\- Stripping the quote character trips a 2-letter requirement.

\- etc.

It is unlikely that people will name their son

      Robert';) DROP TABLE Students;--

But you should at least prepare your db queries for a quote. :)

<http://xkcd.com/327/>

<comment><USER7> Your roughly translated HN name is also funny: Blue buttock gargle ;)

But yes. Programmers have a hard time using unicode. It's a shame not all programming languages use unicode.

I also think is has to do with bad research. It isn't hard to check different types of family names and naming order.

There are a lot of countries where they place the family name first followed by there personal name.

I'm still trying to figure the best way to store names. Maybe 2 fields will fit all:

      family_name (Spring in 't Veld)
      name (Robert Spring in 't Veld)

Family name can be used for grouping and sorting. But you need to store the name as the user entered it. Don't try to split it in parts, just leave it as is.

<comment><USER8> You can't (simply) use family names to group Polish names (and I think Slavic in general), because spelling of names often (but not always) depends on gender, e.g wife of Mr. Kowalski is Mrs. Kowalska.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes: Slavic in general (my other example is Russian; wife of Makarov is Makarova).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> One of the stupidest things we've done as a culture in the last generation, is bend our ideas about what is and isn't "well-formed", so that we don't offend computers. Fixing this is a big part of why I am motivated to work on schemaless databases. When your database doesn't ask you do predefine the data structures, it's one less opportunity for an ignorant programmer to blunt the human spirit.

<comment><USER10> The same thing applies to postal addresses. I look forward to the day when I can make my own shipping label when ordering goods online. This just needs to be a free text, multi line field.

The theme you touch on is covered at length in the book 'Computer Power and Human Reason'.

<comment><USER11> Shipping address has to be on the most shoehorned pieces of data in any database in the world. The only thing that seems to have put some structure on it in the US is the 911 implementations.

For most of high school years, our house was listed as "311 Behind the School" or some other variation. There were no actual street names (although I am told the electric company and only the electric company had a map with street names). When 911 service hit the area, we got actual addresses, but they really weren't useful for shipping things. The local UPS guy knew where everyone was and where they worked so he could do his deliveries. His replacement required some training time.

<comment><USER12> May I ask where this was? Crazy to me that there would be a place with UPS service but not E911 service.

<comment><USER13> We have Fedex/UPS/DHL and use directions in Nicaragua and surrounding countries - I live 50 meters south of a doctor's clinic.

<comment><USER11> Its amazing when you get in rural environments how directions like "left after the old Benson house" (never mind Benson has been dead for 40 years) or "first house on the left in the 52 housing" (52 was the year the houses were built.

// never mind the "Easter Egg housing" and how they got their name - cheap*$$ government and their "bright" paints

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> <tinfoil hat> Remember, Google is getting into the Social scene because it's a rich data set that they don't currently have access to, and Google likes data. Google wants your "real" name so they can tie all your information back together. The good news is, they'll probably ease the restrictions once they figure out how to normalize identities even with non-normalized names.</hat>

As a side note, I'm in a similar boat to Patrick with respect to my real name: at least 6 variations have been used on legal forms alone, due to length and special character restrictions, and excessive use of spaces. Fortunately it's only my middle name that gives problems so it can often be ignored, but I really like it so it's still annoying when I have to distort it.

<comment><USER15> If that was the reason, they could just have asked for your real name without requiring that it be your public name.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> As much as I understand the privacy concerns etc., am I the only one who REALLY hates being on Facebook and seeing a fake name with all sorts of odd punctuation and random capitalization in a list that consists otherwise of clean "Firstname Lastname"s? Even seeing "Equality" as someone's middle name bothers me to an extent.

Maybe I have OCD, but I'm personally glad I don't have to see this on Google+ for now (but I wouldn't be surprised if they changed their policy on this within a week or two given how fast they acted in response to the "gender must be public" feedback).

<comment><USER17> I totally agree. I can't stand people who put random crap in their Facebook names (and actually tend to unfriend them.)

Similarly, I religiously give everybody on my IM buddy list their real name. I would go crazy if everyday I only saw pseudonyms and had no idea who was who.

<comment><USER18> Clearly you never used IRC. When I got started with computers, BBSes, etc., using your real name was considered a monumentally bad idea.

<comment><USER19> I still don't understand why the fetish for the names from government ID originated. Was it because of Facebook's policy? I'd like to see this trend reversed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I guess google+ won't like Filipinos then: [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspon...](http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/9435751.stm)

</comment><comment><USER21> I am disappointed by how software developers continuously reinvent the wheel _badly_. There have been comprehensive data models for human names available for years. For example see the HL7 V3 EntityName data type. [http://www.hl7.org/v3ballot/html/infrastructure/datatypes_r2...](http://www.hl7.org/v3ballot/html/infrastructure/datatypes_r2/datatypes_r2.html#dt- EN) Any Entity can have multiple names, each of which is tagged with zero or more use codes such as "official", "pseudonym", "maiden", "tribal", etc. Each EntityName has one or more ordered parts which can optionally be tagged with a type: prefix, suffix, family name, given name. This data model isn't fully complete since it's missing some naming concepts such as patronymics but at least it's a better start than the mess that Google came up with.

<comment><USER22> Though what would be better and easier to fill out: (a) multiple text boxes with one for each important kind of name, (b) multiple text boxes together with some sort of code selection for each text box, or (c) a single text box that just says Name.

<comment><USER21> The usual solution is to provide users with a choice. Default to showing a simplified field or set of fields that suit the common case for that locale. And provide an "advanced mode" with more fields and options to handle unusual cases.

<comment><USER22> Well you could do that, but only if you must collect such information for governmental purposes, otherwise I would stick with just the single text box and allow them to put in whatever name they wanted.

I would especially do that for any sort of web startup for both simplicity of the interface and ease of implementation.

<comment><USER21> It's not just for government purposes. If your hypothetical web startup has to integrate with any third-party systems (like anything in healthcare or financial services in the US) then you need the name broken into parts.

<comment><USER22> Well I would consider that to be for government (mandated) purposes, since the service you're contacting with has a government mandated schema for the name it must use, and hence you must also use.

Of course you can always have different fields for billing information.

<comment><USER21> In most cases those requirements for name format are not goverment mandated at all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I still think that the most bothersome thing is that there are lots of people, especially in my generation, who grew up with the Internet and with identities tied to ancient AOL e-mail addresses, screen names, Usenet handles or MUD characters that are sometimes both more cherished and more important than their actual name.

What's odd is that my rule for social networks is that if you know my name online, I might want to connect with you. If you know my real name exclusively, I probably wish I didn't even know you.

</comment><comment><USER24> I was kicked off Quora yesterday because they didn't like my 'Real Name' (which is actually my completely innofensive real name)

</comment><comment><USER25> Everybody get over it, preventing anonominity and privacy (as each individual personally feels it), is a fools game. In the long run there will be no (as in absolute zero) acceptance of corporate need to determine appropriate levels of privacy. This is because people are not fools. Facebook is going down because they misunderstood how people feel about privacy, and a poor replacement (privacy wise) will meet the same fate. As the saying goes, you can fool some of the people some of the time yada-yada.... The shame is just in how much they leave on the table by trying to take to much, but nothing new, and on we go.

</comment><comment><USER26> Requiring real names. Acquiring a facial recognition company. Profits entirely driven by advertising.

Well, hello Minority Report ads!

</comment><comment><USER27> Let's call it for what it is: facebook's process/technology to determine real people is many many notches above google's.

This is as much tech failure as it is a policy failure.

</comment><comment><USER28> As other posters have noted, many Chinese have the Chinese-lettered name eg "strong army", the pinyin version and if they move to a Western country they pick their own English name like "John" or something. In writing, Choi/Choy (and I think Chua and Chow) are the same. I will skip the philosophical discussion of what reality is to the viewer.

I don't understand the linking to a real name. Give everyone a private number, and then the user links whatever names they're known by to that number. When a searcher finds the name Skud and adds Skud, they will forever see Skud and whatever other names Skud has chosen to have visible to that circle. The link is the number, and the name is just a display. I wonder how they would deal with a woman who changed her last name when she was married, and reverted to her old name after the divorce. And she's also an author writing under a pen name (like Stephen King/Richard Bachman/John Swithen). It seems obvious to me but nobody's done it so there must be some unique flaw. Can any commenters enlighten me on why the unique private number idea is a bad one?

<comment><USER29> Why make it a unique number?

As Google+ has realized with circles, we have different associations we make in life.

Some of those are widely separate identities.

I see _no_ reason why any identity I have on one site should be associated with one I have on another, if I deem that it not be.

For some purposes (voting, financial transactions, long-lived financial accounts such as SSI or a life insurance policy), you'd want to tie one identity to another. Beyond that, it's simply a control and surveillance front.

Even in the cases I've mentioned, weak authentication has long been the rule. Strong authentication in voting is often tied to poll taxes and other means of restricting the electorate. Public corporations (literally "anonymous societies" in French) are highly psuedonymous. Cash (and digital equivalents) are untraceable. And numbered bank accounts are the stuff of legend in both finance and noir literature.

Identity is a very, very deep, and frought, question. Curiously, G+ is turning into quite the discussion of it, from circles to gender to names to multiple identities.

One of the most classic instances of pseudonymity is among revolutionaries. It played a large role in the American Revolution, particularly among pamphleteers (the 18th century analog of bloggers): [http://www.magic-city- news.com/Editor_s_Desk_34/A_Climate_of...](http://www.magic-city- news.com/Editor_s_Desk_34/A_Climate_of_Fear_34683468.shtml)

What of Mark Twain, Lewis Carroll, George Eliot, George Sand, Ellery Queen, Frank Dixon, and Carolyn Keene?

A particular usage is among revolutionaries: Lenin, Stalin, Golda Neir, Moshe Dayan, Subcomandante Marcos, Carlos the Jackal.

Or stage names: Madonna, Lady Gaga, Huey Louis, John Wayne, Marilyn Monroe, Bono, Cat Stevens, Yusuf Islam.

You're making an extraordinary proposal. Support your position.

<comment><USER28> Oh sorry, I'm wasn't intentionally arguing against being pseudonymous. I was thinking of ways to manage the mutability, multi-mapped and non-uniqueness of common names behind the scenes. If circles can be kept separate, you could have a single login containing different circles for your pseudonyms. As an aside, I hate how current FB and G+ policy turns us non-celebrities into second class citizens. Disgusting.

Thanks to nradov above for info on HL7. Surely these major international orgs should already have been aware of it?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> "I am not a profile, I am a free man!"

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zalndXdxriI&NR=1#t=41s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zalndXdxriI&NR=1#t=41s)

</comment><comment><USER31> What does this have to do with "web scale"? I don't see this phrase in either the article or the reference in the article.

<comment><USER32> The title is a reference to the fact that G+'s identity system fails to cope with names considered normal in their respective cultural contexts. In fact, it couldn't be more to do with "web scale" since it refers to how literally everyone in the world reveals their (sometimes multiple) identities through Google's world wide social network.

<comment><USER31> It might be a poorly defined term, but I believe "web scale" refers to the performance and availability, not features, of web applications. To say "They messed up feature X for population Y" doesn't speak to their ability to scale.

No matter how much effort Google put into supporting "real names", they would still disappoint somebody. Does Facebook do this any better? I believe they also require users to provide their "real name".

<comment><USER33> "Web scale" refers to dealing with the problems and issues that occur when you have hundreds of millions of global users. This includes performance and availability, but also security issues, social/cultural issues, and business/tax/legal issues. (Not that "web scale" is in Websters -- just google around and look at the other uses)

<comment><USER34> The naming problem is no greater _proportionally_ 'at web scale' than it is at lower numbers of users. Used in this context, it's a cringeworthy bit of chin- stroking jargon.

At global scale would be a more sensible. 'At web scale' doesn't mean, 'With users from outside the US'.

<comment><USER33> re: proportions: If Google+ was only for Chinese plumbers, the percentage of "problem" names (and the kinds of problems those names posed to the G+ DB schema) would obviously be different -- hence the usefulness of the term "web scale" when talking about this sort of problem.

re: "web scale" not implying/talking about global users... Do you know of anyone operating a web scale business that doesn't have global users? Even sites that are supposedly for US customers only (netflix, etc -- caused by regional licensing), still have non-US customers using proxies to bypass their geo filter...

Web scale /is/ global scale. :p

<comment><USER34> Hmm, actually global scale is wrong too - I retract that :) The problem arises regardless of 'scale' (number of users).

To reiterate: the number of users (scale) is irrelevant to the issue of problem names.

I can see why someone sprinkled buzzwords on the HN title that didn't exist anywhere in the article, and weren't applicable though. Makes the issue sound more 'techie'.

<comment><AUTHOR> I wrote that article, and consider the title I assigned to it here on Hacker News to be its official title; this is also the title that I used when I linked to it on my Facebook Page. Why, therefore, it matters at all that these words "didn't exist anywhere in the article" is beyond me.

As for "buzzwords", if you deal at all with Google employees, this becomes an irritating mantra: systems that have less than a hundred million users are often considered "toys" (and, to be clear, I can totally understand why this would be this way to these people).

And yes: I think that the point that "this actually happens to everyone everywhere" is an interesting point, and was the first comment on this post by patio11. I found that a very interesting insight, as many of my examples are more "those cases that come up when dealing with a global user community full of interesting edge cases", which to me /defines/ "web scale".

<comment><USER31>
      Why, therefore, it matters at all that
      these words "didn't exist anywhere in
      the article" is beyond me.

What is the purpose of the quotation marks then? Irony?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes. Again, that is the official title of the work: imagine that it had been at the top of the linked to page, ironic quotation marks and all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> You should be so lucky.

My entire planet is forbidden.

</comment><comment><USER35> Can somebody explain the problem with allowing people to choose their own names? They claim it is to foster "an environment." What kind of environment? Surely not an honest one, since using real names doesn't cause people to act honestly.

Forcing real names fosters an environment of rigidity and conformity. But I guess people like that about FB and Google+. At least MySpace allowed you to pick your colors.

The Internet could be it's own place, it's own unique environment, but instead people like FB or Google+ want some poor attempt at a one-to-one mapping of the real world.

</comment><comment><USER34> NB: the nonsense phrase _when operating "at web scale"_ doesn't appear anywhere on the linked page.

<comment><AUTHOR> Given that I wrote both the article in question (on a medium, Google+, that has no title field) and the title of this post, I think it is fully in my right to assign the title the way I want to ;P.

For context, though, that phrase is there to point out that when you are dealing with a worldwide audience of tens to hundreds of millions of people, you cannot make silly assumptions (see patio11's set of "myths") regarding names.

As for using that /specific/ wording, that is how Google themselves often describes the state of operating with that large, and that diverse, of a userbase, making it anything but "nonsense" and in fact fully "apropos".

(Also... what is "NB" supposed to mean?)

<comment><USER34> Implication of "NB" in this context: don't blame the author of the piece for the cheesy buzzword in the HN posting.

I twig now that the author and the HN poster are one and the same internet celeb. So... sorry about that :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> For the most part, I think that Google's crackdown on pseudonyms and anonymity is actually a good thing. In _most_ cases, anonymity online brings out the worst of us—just look at 4chan, littered with mobs of minions proliferating senseless hacking and child pornography[1]. You need but look at the news lately to see the damages of unchecked anonymity: "LulzSec this," "Anonymous that" and so on.

Enforcing real names is a good thing. It means people finally start to take responsibility for their actions, and there is accountability. People behave much better when the threat of embarrassment is in the balance.

I only see one legitimate reason for someone to be allowed a pseudonym: if they are more widely known by that name than their real name. This applies to authors, artists as well as web community members. The solution is easy: allow a nickname field in addition to your real name: [First] "[Nickname]" [Last]. Some already do it. Day9, for example, goes by Sean "day9" Plott online.

Lastly, I realize the hypocrisy of posting to Hacker News without my name visibly attached, so for the record, I am Kenneth Ballenegger from kswizz.com.

[1]: I have browsed thru /b/ many times, and the behavior of people there truly is the worst I've seen ever. I was in the middle of the SF Giants riots last year, and the people setting fire to cars and breaking windows seemed more civil by comparaison.

<comment><USER36> I guess I haven't seen much correlation between real names and quality; more seems to be between the forum type and quality. I'd be interested in a study of that, though.

Two random examples: HN is mostly pseudonyms and has pretty good quality discussion; my local newspaper now uses Facebook Connect to have users post under their real names, and its readers dutifully post a bunch of ignorant trash under their real names.

I do like having semi-stable identities, whether pseudonymous or real. It makes more of a sense of community if you actually recognize people and ascribe viewpoints/personality/etc. to them, rather than every post in effect being written by RandomUser92736 with no continuity between discussions, or any ability to form within-community reputation.

<comment><USER29> I think you're on to something here.

There are good communities and bad communities.

Norms play a huge role. Expectation plays a role, Participants' culture plays a huge role. Some communities work well based on in-real-life associations. Some work based on technical means (strong moderation tools). Some have weak moderation tools but an aggressive enforcement community and back-channel discussions for dealing with egregious abuse, though from my experience those back channels are used far more rarely than might generally be expected, and may even take on an inside-joke status.

In the same sense, real-world communities may or may not be well-behaved, and often have similar foundations. The better-behaved ones tend to be well- established (but often hard for outsiders to break into), highly policed, based on cultural norms (common religion, ethnicity, purpose, social class, interests). It's where multiple structures break down that problems become most severe.

Even short-lived communities can be very well behaved. There are few communities more transitory than college campuses, yet they have very few management issues.

The biggest hazard in either online or physical cultures is creation of a mob (root word: mobility), in which an antisocial mindset spreads through a population. What are needed aren't strong authentications ("papers, please"), but circuit breakers and dampers to dissipate these energies.

If it is in fact civility and community which are valued.</comment></comment></comment>


Would Twitter have made it as a YC applicant? - <AUTHOR>

... <comment><USER2> I wondered the same thing about Delicious, back in my day. I'm pretty sure the idea sounded less interesting than the execution.

<comment><USER3> You certainly would have. Whether we got the idea or not, we'd have at least interviewed you based on your resume, and once we talked to you in person we'd have been convinced you'd do something good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Yes. The most important thing to us (or to me at least) is what the founders have built previously.

<comment><USER4> That begs the question, what about Google? A couple of first-time student founders taking on the hardest hitters in the industry with little more than a some ideas about how web search could work to show. (Presuming this was before they had a working prototype and even perhaps afterwards.)

Perhaps a better question: At what point in their development would Page and Brin have been interesting? Or would a couple of Stanford PhD students have gotten them an interview on that alone?

<comment><USER3> Being students in the CS PhD program at Stanford would have been enough to get them an interview. We don't put that much weight on where people went to college, but grad school admissions are a fairly meaningful test.

We wouldn't have counted it against them that they wanted to take on big companies. That kind of courage is exactly what we look for. When combined with rationality.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think it probably would have. Twitter was originally started as a side incubator project within Odeo.com (it became obvious corp). Three guys, @noah, @jack, and @csshsh (florian) were working on it day and night. They basically lived at the office, focused on getting something working quickly, had a good set of ideas and some examples of how it could work. From initial idea to working prototype was just a few days. They even had a business model, which was thrown out, to make money via sms from the carriers. Later as it grew, not having a business model and focusing on the platform, tools, scaling, and community made more sense.

</comment><comment><USER6> On the one hand, the idea is an intriguing one (especially if the demo was already up and running), and the founder of Twitter had a stellar background considering Blogger. On the other hand: revenue plan?

But the guys who made Twitter weren't planning to make it into a business. It was just a cool idea that they had and expanded on.

<comment><USER7> They've stated publicly that they _have_ a business plan, just not what it is. Speculation abounds (as I'm sure you know), and many potential plans that have been dropped online could work pretty well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> ttrp, time to ramen profitable = ;)

</comment><comment><USER9> depends on who else applied.</comment>


Uber Is Hurting Drivers Like Me in Its Legal Fight in California - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/opinion/uber-drivers-california-regulations.html <comment><USER2> I have a hard time coming to terms with the dichotomy between drivers saying they used to be able to make a lot of money before Uber and riders saying that getting a cab then was a nightmare if they even managed to get one.

Another thing that bugs me is quotes like this:

> While Uber cries out that having to follow the law would hurt its business > model, Uber's leadership curiously neglects to mention the billions of > dollars in cash reserves it has told investors it has available or the > generous compensation packages offered to its executives

Do people not bother to do math anymore? How much do they think these "billions of dollars" would yield in terms of ongoing driver income, had it somehow been distributed evenly (even at the cost of feasibility)?

<comment><USER3> It's easy for me as a tech worker (safe) to point it out, but there's been a gigantic shift to "woe is me" economics in the last 5-10 years. Inequality, wage gaps, slow wage growth, these statistics have spread and UBI support, etc. are accelerating.

I honestly believe the technology sector has had something to do with it. All the $8 an hour workers are tired of seeing some 20 something on the cover of Forbes after what (they imagine) was just a few hours of coding a silly flapping bird app. They also have no conception of net worth vs. liquid cash. Their obsession over the Bezos bank account leads to increasingly ignorant statements like "he could just spend the whole $100 billion and end world hunger!".

It's evidenced in statements like this about Uber's cash. No mention of the fact that they lose nearly a billion, with a B, dollars every single quarter. The extremely competitive market they are in for talent leading to those pay packages. Similar to the discussions around rent control in my opinion, there's very little substance. If you dig, it comes down to a simple truth - the prices are too high for me, I want them lower. That person has too much money, I want it.

<comment><USER4> Conversely, I feel like I keep seeing "woe is me" whining from corporations when there are calls for them to maintain even the barest pretense of responsibility to their employees. I've lived in both CA and MA and both states have rolled out gradual increases in minimum wage, with employers gnashing their teeth all the way and claiming they'll be ruined and need to start huge rounds of layoffs.

There has been a growing gap for decades now between productivity and real wages [https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay- gap/](https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/)

It is only rational for the people being left behind - often the ones doing the labor that generates all this value - to demand their fair share

<comment><USER5> Demand you fair share through the market and voluntary negotiation not through force.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm torn on the whole gig economy topic. On one hand I sympathize with the drivers, in the precariousness of their work. And of course we all want to make more money. On the other hand, the businesses may not be sustainable both from an economic perspective and from a driver elasticity perspective if drivers are all employees (and especially if they're full time employees).

Both sides seems to want their cake and eat it too. Drivers want benefits and better pay, but also the flexibility to pick their own hours and have uber / lyft be in business long term. Uber and Lyft want to keep drivers as "contractors" but not have people complain.

If the tradeoff are between:

1) flexible schedule and being able to work for multiple gig companies at the same time vs benefits and stability.

2) Making more money vs leaving uber / lyft in a position where they can be a sustainable business (I assume most drivers don't want them to go out of business).

Then where is the balance point? And is there another setup that satisfies both parties?

<comment><USER7> A setup that is better than the 2 above (I'm not claiming optimal setup):

1) Universal Healthcare, regardless of employment status

2) Keep the drivers contractors, allowing them to work multiple jobs if they like.

3) Tax the income over 5mil a year more aggressively.

In the end:

1) Everyone gets healthcare. All the drivers have flexible working hours, and work as hard as they like. They gain healthcare,but they don't get better pay.

3) Companies like Uber can keep operating well. Only their rich executives get more tax.

4) Decouple healthcare from the job, lowering the barrier for people to abandon bad jobs and move to the next one. It has a healthy benefit for the economy as a whole, allowing the employees to vote with their feet on whether the business is good.

In the situation, both side asks for all the cake and eat it too. The setup above is IMHO a better compromise.

Opinions are my owns.

<comment><USER8> To be frank, the healthcare thing is a US problem (admittedly this is about California).

But in countries where that's a solved problem then the problem becomes Uber/Lyft have no duty of care for sickness or holidays, they're doging other labor laws.

So in the UK, the gig economy argument is focused on that instead, no sickness/holiday pay means drivers are working when they shouldn't, or ending up broke if a long-term illness hits.

There's even been contractors being fined for being sick because they're unable to do deliveries. Which fundamentally goes against the social contract companies are supposed to have in the EU, making them very parasitic.

Then again, most American companies are coming off as extremely parasitic in the EU, doging taxes, etc.

<comment><USER9> > Which fundamentally goes against the social contract companies are supposed > to have in the EU, making them very parasitic.

I found the social contract, but could not find anyone who actually signed it: [https://steemit.com/anarchism/@ritherz/the-social- contract](https://steemit.com/anarchism/@ritherz/the-social-contract)

<comment><USER8> Well, I'm personally happy for you to not invest in the social contract if you're happy to not use any infrastructure or services in our country, including our power, water, internet, etc. and including our legal system after I stab you in the eye and steal all your shit, while I'm happily being protected by Her Majesty's Army, Navy, Airforce and our Policemen, Firemen and NHS.

That sounds totally fair to me, be free little anarchist! Wallow in your shit without sewers or water. Sounds delightfully rustic, but not for me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> A reminder that one driver's story, while important and valuable, needs to be contextualized against the aggregate polling data (as imperfect as it is).

[https://ac32b1ba-8f5b-411f-91ab-b7ae9a046606.usrfiles.com/ug...](https://ac32b1ba-8f5b-411f-91ab-b7ae9a046606.usrfiles.com/ugd/ac32b1_1b6e5bdc853e466398779c53540ada0c.pdf)

Unfortunately, until we actually have the election, this is all just anecdotes fighting against potentially flawed data.

<comment><USER11> That poll is an exercise in false-dichotomy. They didn't ask "What percentage of drivers would like to earn at least minimum wage after expenses?". I bet you 80%+ of respondents would have said yes to that too.

Given the choice between "Let us be ICs" and "Uber/Lyft leave CA" or "Half of drivers will lose their jobs", of course the data is going to show people want to be ICs. That choice ignores the third option, which is Uber/Lyft treat people with dignity.

<comment><USER10> Did you read the poll?

The questions were fairly straightforward:

"Thinking about your work driving or delivering with app-based rideshare and food delivery companies, do you prefer to be an independent contractor or an employee?"

"Even though you are not sure, if you had to choose would you prefer to be an... Independent contractor 58 Employee 42"

"Thinking about your own income, for you is rideshare driving/delivery: Your only personal source of income 19 Your biggest source of personal income, but not the only source 17 A significant source of personal income, but not the biggest 25 Just supplemental income, not a significant source of personal income 38"

I recommend reading through the entire thing: [https://ac32b1ba-8f5b-411f-91ab-b7ae9a046606.usrfiles.com/ug...](https://ac32b1ba-8f5b-411f-91ab-b7ae9a046606.usrfiles.com/ugd/ac32b1_63f0f776a70a4cc5b532f4521ebab453.pdf)

To reiterate, there is no substitute for a full election, and the design of polling questions will be litigated forever. But it's still better than a single heartfelt anecdote.

<comment><USER11> You cannot take a poll in isolation like that. It's not like the drivers don't understand the implications involved in the questions. Uber and Lyft have spent a ton of money making it seem as though they have no choice in the matter and will have to fire half the drivers and put the other half on rigid schedules if they become employees. That context will affect the answers.

The real nugget of gold in that study is Q13. 83% of drivers support a third class of worker (between employee and IC). CA's Congress failed drivers with AB5. They should have defined that third class. Now Uber/Lyft get to dictate the terms we will vote on instead and drivers lose either way.

<comment><USER10> > You cannot take a poll in isolation like that.

No more than you can take a single driver's anecdote in a NYT Op-Ed in isolation. The argument is that the aggregate poll is _better_ than the anecdote, not that it's the platonic ideal.

> The real nugget of gold in that study is Q13. 83% of drivers support a third > class of worker (between employee and IC). CA's Congress failed drivers with > AB5. They should have defined that third class. Now Uber/Lyft get to dictate > the terms we will vote on instead and drivers lose either way.

I'm not sure how that refutes anything, it's strictly additive. One question asks about the status quo, the next question asks about how they feel about a future proposal. Both provide pretty valuable data in analyzing the political popularity. And of course Uber/Lyft get to dictate the terms, until now the legislators dictated it by passing AB5 (the current status quo). From the first set of questions, it's pretty clear that drivers polled feel differently about the status quo. Now Uber/Lyft are proposing an alternative.

<comment><USER11> A flawed poll is not necessarily better or worse than an anecdote. I believe the poll is polluted by the FUD Uber/Lyft have been propagating (including most recently threatening to shut down with little notice if they didn't get their way in court). Of course someone who wants to work will say they prefer the option that seems more safe/stable, and that's being an IC right now.

<comment><USER10> > I believe the poll is polluted by the FUD Uber/Lyft have been propagating > (including most recently threatening to shut down with little notice if they > didn't get their way in court)

Honest question: what would convince you that a poll isn't "polluted by FUD"?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Mirror: [https://web.archive.org/web/20200904091002/https://www.nytim...](https://web.archive.org/web/20200904091002/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/opinion/uber- drivers-california-regulations.html)

Accurately describes every single conversation I had with every Uber/Lyft driver.

</comment><comment><USER13> All good points. But is it really better from a returns standpoint for Uber to cease California ops or was that just a ploy? If that move will make them the most money under the new regulatory regime, no one can compel them to operate.

<comment><USER14> I think ceasing operations was due to not having the infrastructure in place to operate legally under the new requirements. Uber is a big business and these are significant changes to how they can run their business, so they may need a long time to get things in order to operate within the new mandate.

<comment><USER15> They had over a year to comply since the law was enacted. And even more since _Dynamax_ was ruled on.

<comment><USER14> They made the changes that they thought were necessarily for their drivers to not qualify as employees under the new law. Then on short notice a court ruling determined that they hadn't done enough and the drivers would still count as employees. That's the "short notice" aspect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Prop 22 is the ballot initiative in California that will overturn AB5, the law that Uber is fighting against.

They have a huge uphill marketing battle ahead of them. Every time I see an ad for prop 22, almost all the comments say roughly: "I'm voting no because drivers deserve health care and sick leave!"

These folks don't realize (because the prop 22 people are doing a terrible job at marketing) that prop 22 actually requires those things to be provided. I think a lot more people would favor prop 22 if they actually read it.

<comment><USER4> Most of what it provides are far less than existing state law. It counts "engaged time" only as the time a driver is actually carrying a fare. They're suggesting a 30 cents/mile reimbursement rate; the IRS 2020 rate is 57.5 cents/mile. CA worker compensation laws also provide much stronger protection for workers, crucially on a no-fault basis.

The pro-22 companies have contributed $110 million to the campaign. That's plenty to hire some good PR, and two orders of magnitude more than the groups opposed. So one could hypothesize their terrible marketing on 22's employee protections is because it has poor protections compared to the alternative

<comment><USER16> It certainly doesn't provide as many protections as being an employee. Hence the compromise part. The reason they don't want to classify them as employees is because of the onerous cost of doing so. At the same time, the people doing the work want the flexibility of being a contractor while getting some of the important benefits of being an employee.

So yes, it's a compromise, but it seems like a pretty fair compromise.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Uber functions as a payday loan company. They take advantage of desperation to survive the next month to leave workers in a worse place than if they didn't use them at all.

As a contracted driver, you may be able to pay your next bill by driving, but once car maintenance and taxes come due you will have earned less than minimum wage, and would have made more money working at Starbucks.

This is why most drivers leave after less than 6 months when they have discovered they have been scammed.

</comment><comment><USER18> Why not do what they did in SF for restaurant workers?[0] Add a CA Health Tax to your fare and give the drivers a public health benefit. If it means I have to pay an extra $1 on that $10 fare, so be it. They get health insurance and I still have access to a valuable service.

[0][https://healthysanfrancisco.org/](https://healthysanfrancisco.org/)

</comment><comment><USER19> _That's why I and my fellow drivers were relieved when California legislators last year passed a law effectively requiring Uber, Lyft and similar companies to extend workplace benefits and protections to drivers, including a minimum wage and paid sick leave. But this is something the companies have refused to do, arguing that we are independent contractors._

The elephant in the room is that the only reason this is an issue is because we as a country have an ass backwards system where your health care is tied to your employer.

If we as a country think that there everyone deserves a "livable income" (and I agree), make corporations pay the taxes necessary and increase the amount, availability and access to the Earned Income Tax Credit.

</comment><comment><USER20> Uber is a scam, designed to cream off lots of cash from drivers and investors alike.

If you're an investor or a driver, you won't make money, and you'll be out of pocket.

The only people who gain from Uber are the Uber Administration.

</comment><comment><USER21> These discussions always remind me of this MMM blog about his experience being an Uber driver:

[https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2017/11/22/mr-money- mustache...](https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2017/11/22/mr-money-mustache- uber-driver/)

This is one of my favorite quotes:

"Imagine developing a company specifically to take advantage of people's ignorance of how expensive it really is to drive their own car. What would this company look like?" (the answer is of course that it would look like very much like Uber or any other ridesharing company)

<comment><USER22> Good post, but I'm inclined to take all the stated numbers with a grain of salt. Not because he is lying, but because so many drivers have so many different experiences. Some are paying off their car, some aren't. Some of their cars get 15 MPG, some 35. Some drive in rush-hour traffic, others on airport or suburban trips. Some drive a few hours a week during surge pricing and if they get lucky can make more than what they do in their day jobs. Even the standard IRS vehicle deprecation rate is wildly inaccurate in most cases.

To me that highlights a more important problem - Uber/Lyft are enjoying the benefits of a massive data asymmetry. Neither customers nor drivers can make the right economic decision because we have a very, very tiny slice of the whole picture.

Maybe one quick way to start solving the rideshare problem is force them to publish this data publicly?</comment></comment>


Review My App: An iPhone game about "Knowledge and Enlightenment" (Upcoming) - <AUTHOR> http://www.threewiki.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN,

This is my upcoming game/app. It's based on an existing Wiki game, and modified to reinforced the cognitive process of "learning through connections". So far, I have personally learned a lot while developing this game (e.g. "pines" are "coniferous trees", and "coniferous trees" lives in "northern hemisphere".).

It would be nice to have some early feedback and suggestions. The app should be out in couple weeks. By then I will put out some free copies for fellow Hacker Newers.

Thanks,

Ivan

<comment><USER2> Little nit, are you sure this 'available on the iphone app store' modified button is legit? I seem to recall having to sign/checkbox to use it, besides, isn't 'available' supposed to mean something's available.

<comment><AUTHOR> ah good call. I am going to change it now.

thanks for noticing it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> The "vote for the price you think is fair" thing is brilliant. I'm assuming that you're using this data to inform the decision on the actual price.

I think though, that having a limited set of choices will influence the votes. People will pick the middle one. You should have a fill-in box.

I see this problem all the time with people trying to implement the "wisdom of the crowds" or market concepts. It is important that people make their decision in isolation of other people's opinion. Otherwise social pressure and other factors distorts the outcome.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, this is that "anchoring effect." If you tell someone that you think a pair of jeans costs $400 and ask them to guess a price, chances are they'll quote one around $400 even when the actual price is something like $40.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I love going on explorative journeys through Wikipedia, so the app really appeals to me. Definitely a task I wish I did more often. I'd throw down a dollar or two for an app like this, but my platform of choice is Android.

</comment><comment><USER6> Excellent concept. I know I've personally lost many, many hours following random links on Wikipedia. If this app can suck in the user in the same way, I'll be hooked.

Any reason you decided to do this as an iOS App instead of a as a Web App?

<comment><AUTHOR> Need to earn some cash to bootstrap for my startup (vittyo.com). iOS is much easier to make some food money in my opinion.

Behind the scene, the logistics is actually mostly server-based, using Cocoa just for the eye candies. So it is really easy to convert it into a web app or onto Android.

<comment><USER7> Seems perfect for a web app. Your viewing a page about frued, google/amazon puts some links up for psychology books. Heck you modify the wiki article such that if the person has books written or authored about them or the subject you could Amazon link it easy. Seems more profitable..

<comment><USER8> Yeano. Because a 6% affiliate revenue from Amazon will not provide an eCPM of > $6. Really. Better of with iAds.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm not sure if you know, but a similar game exists already: <http://thewikigame.com/>

Try to take this fact as validation of your concept. TheWikiGame's interface is a bit clunky. So if you do it better, more power to you.

It's hard to tell how you think your game is going to work... it's not obvious to me how "enlightenment" motivates players, but you never know. I rather like TheWikiGame's beat-the-clock dramatic tension, and that one plays against others. TheWikiGame can be addictive especially if you play it with other friends in the room suggesting strategies.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the link. I found it as a good way to learn, and to remember what you just learned. So I think it could be more like an app, instead of a game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Congratulations! Nicely done.

I actually built a very similar system about two years ago, when I was screwing around with the Wikipedia dataset as a playground for some graph theory experiments, but it never occurred to me to make it into an iPhone app. Brilliant move.

If you're looking to make an "advanced" version, I coded a variation where each page was weighted by the number of in-bound links from other pages, and the goal was to minimize the weighted path. I found that led to some interesting lateral thinking to find more obscure connections between topics.

</comment><comment><USER4> That's something I'd definitely be interested in. Just make sure that the connections are well-related and that I'll end up walking away with a set of nicely integrated facts. I said I'd pay $0.99 for it because it'd be a nice addition to my Reference folder and also because I can't stand iPhone app ads -- they're obtrusive and there's not much screen real estate to spare.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's where the social curating aspect of the game kicks in. Good, educational connections stays on top (on weekly basis), bad ones got flushed away. It's much like Hacker News in a sense.

<comment><USER11> Yes: the social aspects, as well as a little bit of competition (perhaps contests/judging of answers/maybe even prizes) will be the selling points. Building the community will be your biggest post-launch task (and starting it pre-launch is definitely a good step).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Your website is funky in my Mobile Safari on my iPhone. It's wider than the screen and the pinch-to-scale isn't letting me fix that.

Looking forward to your game.</comment>


Ask HN: Just like HN, any "secret garden" you religiously follow - <AUTHOR> HN has brought a transformation in me. It's like before HN days and after. With the perspectives from discussions/comments, eye opening articles, I always had an edge during technical discussions with my fellow geeks. Like HN, do you follow any other sites for topics like finance, personal well being, medical, leadership, spirituality etc <comment><USER2> This is a fairly common question here. For example:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1365094](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1365094)

If you search the site for previous discussions, that will get you lots more hits.

<comment><USER3> Oh, it's a year 2010 thread

<comment><USER2> I have personally seen multiple such questions in recent memory. I am just not good at finding them.

It's a common question on this forum and has been for years.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Despite a ridiculous signal-to-noise ratio, the YOSPOS subforum of Something Awful had some wicked smart posters. It's been years since I visited though

</comment><comment><USER5> [https://www.techdirt.com/](https://www.techdirt.com/)

</comment><comment><USER6> AI researchers on twitter

www.twitter.com/smerity</comment>


Apple's iPad Just a Big iPod Touch - <AUTHOR> http://www.pcworld.com/article/187888/no_second_coming_apples_ipad_just_a_big_ipod_touch.html <comment><USER2> Sure, and the iPod is just an MP3 player, and the iPhone is just a phone... who in their right mind would buy that... =)

<comment><AUTHOR> The iPod wasn't another MP3 player. It was _the_ MP3 player, featuring the most songs in the least amount of space. For mobile devices, this makes a big difference.

Compare the iPad launch video from today with the original iPod launch: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN0SVBCJqLs>

The iPhone was the first phone capable enough and attractive enough for third- party applications. It came two years ahead of competition.

The iPad comes after the Kindle, and alongside plans from Microsoft and others to launch their own tablets.</comment></comment>


We Scrapped The App Store To Find Every Single Retina-Optimized iPad App - <AUTHOR> http://appadvice.com/special/apps_updated_for_retina.html <comment><USER2> _scraped_ ?</comment>


The FBI Can Now Legally Hack Everywhere Around the World - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/the-tesseract/f-now-the-fbi-can-legally-hack-everywhere-around-the-world-ad73e0f8f66a?source <comment><USER2> Still nobody was able to explain me how this would be possible.

Not even the secret agency in my country is allowed to do that to me. How can the FBI claim they can do that "legally" now.

Under which legal base should this be legal? Which legal base allows them to overwrite my local laws? I really dont get it.

I realize they dont care, but nether do i have to care when they cant use anything against me legally anyway.

<comment><USER3> >Which legal base allows them to overwrite my local laws? I really dont get it.

It's the other way around. The laws in your country have no authority over the FBI.

<comment><USER4> We spy on you, you spy on us. Then let's trade information (withholding the juicy bits for ourselves of course). Say it with me everyone: loopholes!

Not that something being illegal has ever stopped governments before.

<comment><USER2> I am not implying that. It just really annoys me that major media outlets use "legally" and "hacking the world" in the same sentence as if the U.S. were some kind of super power above the law.

They took themself the right to hack everyone would be way more reflecting reality.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Previously: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13100301](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13100301)</comment>


How to Turn Your Ideas into a Shipping Product - <AUTHOR> http://blog.goodsense.io/2013/03/19/how-to-turn-your-ideas-into-a-shipping-product/

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm curious developers. What are your relationships with product managers like? I've been on both sides.

When I was a developer I always convinced product managers to work on features that I thought were needed. As a product manager I did the opposite and convinced developers that their features weren't as important.

It was always an internal struggle playing both sides.</comment>


How Cornelius Ryan's 'The Longest Day' changed journalism - <AUTHOR> http://www.cjr.org/second_read/the_reporter_who_time_forgot.php?page=all

<comment><USER2> I'm not sure why this is Hacker News, but I upvoted it anyway because, having read it, I find that Cornelius Ryan is now another one of my heroes.

<comment><AUTHOR> I rate journalism among my passions, which is why I enjoyed this, but I added it for its relevance to the ongoing discussion about news media. Solving 'the news problem' with technology means blaming 'the news problem' on technology, and I think it's a far more widespread cultural issue where tech plays but one role.

<comment><USER3> "Meanwhile, The Longest Day was reissued in 1994 for the fiftieth anniversary of D-Day. It still sells—a fact that belies the glaring omission of Ryan's work from so many anthologies of literary journalism, and also offers a powerful lesson for a trade trying to figure out what people will pay to read. There is nothing, it turns out, like a densely reported story propelled by the palpable sense of a reporter chasing his story."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> "Over the years the trade had produced occasional flashes of inspiration in which a writer—Daniel Defoe, Rebecca West, Joseph Mitchell, W. C. Heinz, John Hersey—took a turn at bringing to a true story the qualities of fiction."

I'm curious why the writer ignored George Orwell and Ernest Hemingway - because they ruined his thesis?</comment>


Making the Web Faster with HTTP 2 Protocol - <AUTHOR> http://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/182-Making-the-Web-Faster-with-HTTP-2-Protocol.html

<comment><USER2> With all the buzz already surrounding SPDY and the number of existing implementations out there... what are the chances that HTTP-2.0 will simply never get the traction it needs for real applications?

I mean SPDY is here and almost every server can handle it already. (where can != is configured to by default) If google pulls features from HTTP-2.0 into SPDY-1.x in the next couple of months, what would be the benefit of anyone doing HTTP-2.0?

<comment><USER3> It is my understanding that it's very likely that HTTP 2.0 will be SPDY - maybe with some added extensions, but the basis will be SPDY.

A clear case where a working and apparently perfectly well backwards compatible vendor-specific implementation worked so well that it actually might get to be an official standard.

Now if only we could have SSL with name based virtual hosts or much wider use of IPv6 so that SPDY will actually be useful for a wide range of server administrators.

<comment><USER4> We wouldn't need SSL with name-based virtual hosts if web browsers could use SRV records (and thus connect to different ports, so the server would know which cert to cough up without requiring the name.)

<comment><USER5> This doesn't really scale. Every SSL-protected vhost then needs its own port on the server. In current practice there are probably plenty of free ports, but it just seems like a poor choice overall.

(Regardless, as I mentioned above, name-based vhosts work just fine with HTTPS, using SNI. Much easier to fill in the gaps in browser support for SNI than to get everyone to adopt SRV records.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "Another aspect of concern is the implementation of server push of resources that were already cached by the browsers. Mobile applications may also not want to retrieve some resources that the server may assume they want to download. So the criticism is that preemptive server push may end up being an undesirable thing."

Why is it "preemptive"? It seems more like a nonpreemptive push, right?

</comment><comment><USER7> > If the user closes the browser tab and no other pages from the same site are > opened, the browser may send an explicit request to end the connection, so > it does not keep tying the server.

Does this mean keeping a background tab open uses a remote server's resources indefinitely? How can I as the server dev prevent unintentional DDOS?

<comment><USER8> Haven't looked at the SPDY spec[1] too closely, but I think each side of the SPDY (or underlying TCP) connection would be able to idle-disconnect after a timeout or during a high-load situation. (i.e. to prevent idle connections from consuming ports/file descriptors)

So in the case you quoted, the server would _also_ be able to explicitly tell the browser to start a new connection later. (It's not just a browser-to- server signal.)

Generally, most HTTP 1.1 (keepalive-aware) servers have a default timeout for those "persistent" connections[2][3] so this isn't actually a new problem specific to SPDY.

(Aside: simply consuming leaving open an idle TCP connection for later re-use doesn't necessarily imply that idle users will "DDOS" a server. Depending on the server software and OS, the cost-per-socket is low enough that many idle connections isn't actually a problem until you get to port and file descriptor limits — which, again, is already well-dealt with in plenty of other HTTP/TCP applications by using timeouts _at all_.)

[1]: <http://www.chromium.org/spdy/spdy-protocol> [2]: <http://wiki.nginx.org/HttpCoreModule#keepalive_timeout> [3]: [https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/core.html#keepalivetim...](https://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/core.html#keepalivetimeout)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I was so close to not opening this because the source is a website with the name 'PHP' in it... but I'm glad I did, nice article.</comment>


The United States is not the nation of small businesses - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/aug/13/us-economy-healthcare-productivity <comment><USER5> This quote is personally why I support health care reform:

"There are enough risks associated with choosing to start a business over being an employee, but the Europeans don't have to worry that they will go bankrupt for lack of health insurance."

And this is an interesting quote from a Krugman post a/b the study ([http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/big-business- ame...](http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/04/big-business-america/)):

"Another possibility, more favorable to the United States, is that in some European countries (Italy comes to mind) firms stay small to escape onerous regulations."

<comment><USER6> I support health care reforms, but the only reforms I support involve reducing the government's role, not massively increasing it. Things like policy portability, a greater ability to create risk pools, the ability to buy policies originating in a different state and the simplification of red tape and bureaucracy.

The currently proposed health care reforms try to ignore the laws of supply and demand because they don't seem fair. But as we found out in the 70's with gasoline price controls, it is better that 10% of people don't get a service because they can't afford it than 60% of people not getting a service because it isn't available.

<comment><USER7> I'm confused. You say you support reforming healthcare by reducing the role of government, but what exactly do you mean by this? Reducing medicare? medicaid (although that is more of a state run program)?

Perhaps you could enlighten me by specifying what exactly you'd like to reduce, and what you hope to achieve? (Note: statements such as "reduce government involvement" are soundbites, not answers).

<comment><USER6> What are you talking about? I gave 3 very specific examples in my post.

Quote: _Things like policy portability, a greater ability to create risk pools, the ability to buy policies originating in a different state._

The Government restricts all of these things.

In addition, the government could drastically reduce the barriers to creating new drugs and treatments. Do these barriers save some lives: yes. But they end up killing many more because the FDA is always going to error on the side of caution, thereby denying the treatments that work to people who desperately need them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> CEPR, the think tank that did the research, is a left-wing advocacy group: [http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=72...](http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=7226)

That said, I would be curious as to how well their research stands up to scrutiny in the days to come as they've obviously made some provocative claims but I wouldn't accept their views immediately at face value.

update: [http://www.examiner.com/x-14795-Page-One- Examiner~y2009m8d5-...](http://www.examiner.com/x-14795-Page-One- Examiner~y2009m8d5-Lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-from-the-CEPR) \- a debunking of the CEPR paper cited though with a wrinkle at the end that states that the OECD paper "is explaining something unique to the US: which could indeed be the lack of national health insurance" but a relationship is != causation which CEPR obviously attempts to argue.

<comment><USER9> It is hardly a debunking if the author writes in an update at the end of the same article that "My critique is thus wrong".

<comment><USER8> He's not saying that his entire critique was wrong - his attempt to show that healthcare wasn't the reason was "thus wrong". This isn't to say that the authors' attempt to show causation was true either. But, fortunately we do have better critiques here (and critiques where one of the authors of the CEPR attempts to respond to in the second and third links):

(1) [http://ipeatunc.blogspot.com/2009/08/entrepreneurship-in- oec...](http://ipeatunc.blogspot.com/2009/08/entrepreneurship-in-oecd.html) (2) [http://ipeatunc.blogspot.com/2009/08/entrepreneurship-and- he...](http://ipeatunc.blogspot.com/2009/08/entrepreneurship-and-health-care- in.html) (3) [http://ipeatunc.blogspot.com/2009/08/entrepreneurship-and- he...](http://ipeatunc.blogspot.com/2009/08/entrepreneurship-and-health-care- in_14.html)

To summarize - Scott Shane of Case Western studies states as follows:

"If you compare health care's portion of G.D.P., as measured by the World Bank, with the self-employment rate across the 21 O.E.C.D. countries in the C.E.P.R. study, you will find that the correlation is only -0.19, which statistically speaking, cannot be considered different from zero."

"I know that everyone is focused right now on the health care debate, which is great. But we can't just say that the absence of universal health care influences the size of our small-business sector. It's certainly possible that national differences in health care affect national differences in self- employment and small-business generation in some way."

"But we have to show some evidence of those effects."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Contradictory things are being advocated. Health care reform at least intuitively looks pro-small business. But mandatory vacation days and high unemployment benefits? If they are paid out by the hiring company? I doubt that is helpful for small businesses, who can't shift around workers as easily and will be discouraged from hiring if the costs of firing are so high.

And France isn't a nation of small businesses. Their best industries seem to be those really complicated infrastructure ones that require a lot of state intervention (bullet trains, nuclear reactors) and luxury goods (LV). It may have been nice to have that welfare cushion during the financial crisis, but that's a separate and potentially contradictory goal to encouraging small businesses.

And then there's Taiwan. It has always been a country of small and medium sized businesses, and to my knowledge, there was no uptick in this when national healthcare was implemented in the 90s. It could be high at a percentage for other reasons, though, and that it was so prevalent made it difficult for there to be any additional uptick.

<comment><USER11> "...But mandatory vacation days and high unemployment benefits?...

This is a problem in Germany. One of the reasons only big companies can exist there. Some people there are having 3 month vacation.

"...the costs of firing are so high..." It is very hard to fire there because of the Unions.

"...And France isn't a nation of small businesses. Their best industries seem to be those really complicated infrastructure ones that require a lot of state intervention (bullet trains, nuclear reactors) and luxury goods (LV)..."

Absolutely right. You can extend this statement to other countries in Europe as well.

<comment><USER12> > This is a problem in Germany. One of the reasons only big companies can > exist there.

There are plenty of small and medium sized business in Germany. Ever heard of the Mittelstand? (Not to deny that those regulations can be a problem. On the other hand, Germany does not (in most sectors, yet) have a minimum wage.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> There's something about this set of articles that strike me as fishy.

First, the study was measuring "self-employment" as reported on tax forms. Most small businesses start up and disappear without ever appearing on a government tax form somewhere. My neighbor goes to yard sales. My cousin sells rare books on Ebay. I was a stringer for a small paper for while receiving cash payments. These kinds of ephemeral efforts spring up and dissipate all of the time.

Secondly, in the executive summary we go immediately from small business numbers to health insurance issues, which seems like a bit of editorializing. One can debate health care all day long -- I think it needs to be fixed. But I know a lot of guys who have small businesses, and I've never, ever heard somebody say they didn't start a business due to health care costs.

This just doesn't smell right to me.

</comment><comment><USER14> Aside from the fact that this article is _very_ political and I flagged it, any economic ranking where Greece, Portugal and Italy are leading is probably not indicative of good things.

</comment><comment><USER15> Looking at the comparison in the report I see no correlations between the health care system and the amount of self-employment.

There does seem to be a strong inverse correlation between self-employment and GDP-per-capita, with Norway Luxembourg and US being at the bottom and Spain, Italy and Greece on top. The only thing this report suggests is that a strong economy has relatively large businesses.

</comment><comment><USER16> I'd be more interested in looking at the overall income of businesses under 500 people compared across countries. According to the US Census Beaureau that category of employers plus all nonemployer firms account for about 42.19% of all annual receipts. What's it like for other countries?

</comment><comment><USER17> The US is a nation of free individuals. Big and Small.

<comment><USER11> I would say "the only nation".

<comment><USER18> And that would be a pretty silly thing to say, wouldn't it?

<comment><USER11> I admit I am biased. But I've a very good reason to be.

<comment><USER18> (removed insults)

"Wrong and proud of it", huh? There's no valid reason for that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Printer-friendly version: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/aug/...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/aug/13/us- economy-healthcare-productivity/print)

</comment><comment><USER20> If the US is truly not a nation of small business anymore that's bad. Small businesses are the true engine of the economy and tend to be more stable. A "top heavy" economy is more typical of developing nations.

</comment><comment><USER21> I call bullshit. Someone is spinning the statistics. The latest census data from the US SBA says that 36% of all business in the US have fewer than 5 employees.

<comment><USER22> That statistic can be true without showing that most United States workers work in small businesses.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Internet and Globalization have profound impact on cultural and socio-economic issues across the world due to the non-proliferation of <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_asymmetry>

</comment><comment><USER23> "A country is not made of land; a country is made of its people." -- Unknown

</comment><comment><USER11> I would add a comment about Europe (Germany in particular which I know best) - just try to start a small business in Germany. If you are foreigner - <USER2> it. OK who can be a German citizen - 2 ways - 1) you a German by blood - <USER3> does not matter where are you born - blood comes first. 2) you are foreigner trying to get a German citizenships - even if you get it after 15 years or more stay in Germany you will be always 2nd class citizen. Reasons - a ton of reasons - too much to list it here. France - the same. Probably Netherland is better - but no much business opportunities there. England - forget it a closed class society - you have to be from inner circle.

In Germany - there are several big companies working with thousand subcontractors. Siemens for example. There is a saying in Germany - <USER4> something happens to Siemens - the same will happen to Germany. So basically to have a small business there practically you have to be a subcontractor to some of the big companies there AND better be a German citizen. Big companies there a heavily subsidized by the government. Besides Germany-Russia are so heavily interconnected so you can imagine the subsequences. The pact Molotov- Ribentrop is still not widely known but the European Union wants to make it official data of victims of fascism and socialism because again they are so close. Recently it was discovered German banks with filials in Luxemburg washing money for Iran government - this is a big theme - where the money come in Europe and why this leisure and welfare theme.

Here in US - you can register a business the next day you got your stamp in your passport if you come with a business visa. If you are born here - it is much easier of course, but not much different. I can comment about California where I came not so long time ago but enough to tell - once you understand the US specifics and have a drive you can have a success here no matter what. Opportunities are everywhere even in these hard times.

The financing possibilities - there is simply no comparison. Small business friendliness - beyond comparison. Business opportunities - beyond comparison.

<comment><USER24> Is this just upmodded because people here like to bash Europe? A simple google search shows that the poster is just wrong.

<comment><USER22> Please tell us in detail what he said that was wrong, and what sources show the correct facts.

<comment><USER25> Can you not check for yourself. Is your only method of retrieving information people on hacker news?

<comment><USER26> I don't see anything wrong with requesting that someone back up their claims in a discussion. Your suggestion that the rest of us should just RTFM (or in this case google it) adds no value whatsoever.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Reading this article I wondered why it is published in UK by an American economist and what is the point of publishing such an article. If this academic economist lived a little bit in Europe he should know better.

I made some research. The bottom line - an American economist supporting Hugo Chávez.

Weisbrot has been cited as the architect of the Bank of the South.

The Bank of the South (Spanish: Banco del Sur, Portuguese: Banco do Sul); or BancoSur is a monetary fund and lending organization first proposed by Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.

Some comments on the artice: "...being the only "no-vacation nation"..." I have been working in West Germany for 4 years and can tell - yes indeed Germans have up to 12 weeks in paid vacation. The question is who is paying for this? You can look at the taxes Germans pay and understand the German government is subsidizing it. In Germany grocery stores, etc. still close at 18:00 PM - the debate is still going on to remove this or not. Most probably not - because of the unions.

"...we have a broken healthcare system that costs about twice as much per capita as that of our peer nations and delivers worse outcomes..."

I agree here in US healthcare payment via insurance is not the best solution. From other side in Germany (I know Germany best) the government is subsidizing it. Guess who is paying this?

"...the French could not afford their welfare state..." Again - who is paying the bills. Somebody has to pay the bills.

"...half as much energy per capita as the US does. A big part of this difference is because Europeans, in recent decades, have taken much more of their productivity gains in the form of increased leisure time..."

Increased leisure time? So what is the point?

"...We estimated that the US would consume about 20% less energy if it had the work hours of the EU-15. This would have a significant impact on world carbon emissions..."

Carbon emissions - this was invented by Europeans academics to get more grants for research, then supported from interested leisure oriented parties as a way to extract money from big businesses - e.g. who has the money.

<comment><USER9> I can't believe a comment that essentially consists of irrelevant objections to the article is sitting at the top. Please don't upvote emotional rants masquerading as arguments.

 _The bottom line - an American economist supporting Hugo Chávez_

The author's political views do not automatically make his arguments valid.

 _Yes indeed Germans have up to 12 weeks in paid vacation. The question is who is paying for this? You can look at the taxes Germans pay and understand the German government is subsidizing it._

First, while the German government might subsidize a lot of things, I doubt that it pays employers for the vacation time taken by employees (except in special cases like childbirth). Even if this were true, since the subsidies would come out of taxes, it would be economically the same as a person choosing to take a pay cut for working less hours.

 _I agree here in US healthcare payment via insurance is not the best solution. From other side in Germany (I know Germany best) the government is subsidizing it. Guess who is paying this?_

I don't recall the author claiming anywhere that healthcare is magically paid for in Europe. His point was that per capita it costs half has much and provides better outcomes.

 _"...the French could not afford their welfare state..." Again - who is paying the bills. Somebody has to pay the bills._

I don't get this rhetorical technique of asking who is paying the bills. Not only is it a bad argument, it is poor rhetoric.

 _Increased leisure time? So what is the point?_

May I point out that almost all art, science and human culture originally came out of leisure time.

 _Carbon emissions - this was invented by Europeans academics to get more grants for research_

Carbon emissions are real. They are byproducts of combustion. It is their trading that was invented. Consuming less energy reduces real world emissions, and _increases_ the tradable commodity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> You guys realize Europe has all kinds of laws against large retailers and in favor of mom & pop shops, right? This is basically about the inefficient "shopkeeper lobby" that makes it difficult to buy various things outside of weekday business hours.

Small businesses are not inherently better than large businesses. In general, employees of large businesses make more money. Larger firms tend to be more economically efficient.

I am not at all surprised that Europe has more [antiquated] small businesses. I'm a bit surprised someone is trying to present this as a boasting point.</comment>


Want Your Dream Job? Get Creative - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2011/11/28/heres-one-way-to-get-your-dream-job-actually-use-the-companys-service/

<comment><USER2> I feel like what makes a "dream job" is so often the people you're working with, rather than your job title or the product. I'd rather be working with smart people who respected my work on a normal piece of software, than working on, say, a fun video game where my boss was a slave-driver.

<comment><USER3> Although I'm a full-time programmer, the best and worst job I ever had was as a bookseller at a major bookstore chain. When I first got there, my coworkers were passionate about books--it was something the store manager looked for when she hired. It was a fantastic place and time to be there. When the store manager was promoted out of the position, she was replaced by a more corporate type who had different hiring criteria. In a little over a year, she turned the place into just another job because she hired people that had no passion. The ones that did left. It became another 9 to 5, and I think the store suffered because of it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The presentation read a lot like "Barney's Video Resume"

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBADPyaZe_E>

Something like 'I built XXXX" or "I Made this :Link:" is a lot more powerful to me than a set of animations promising abstract things I'll achieve.

<comment><USER5> Yes, it _reads_ that way, but if you're just reading the words, you're missing the point. It demonstrated passion for the product, attention to detail, and the ability to get something cool done. Those are things I would hire for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Being creative applies to both the application process AND the search process. For instance, one of the coolest jobs I've come across this month is for Social Games Quantitative Analyst at PopCap, which sounds significantly cooler once you read the description ([http://tbe.taleo.net/NA9/ats/careers/requisition.jsp?org=POP...](http://tbe.taleo.net/NA9/ats/careers/requisition.jsp?org=POPCAP&cws=1&rid=284))

My point is that if you want your dream job, also break out of the standard "ruby on rails nosql..." keywords you're using and feel free to browse rather than just searching.

</comment><comment><USER7> The link to her webinar is broken (i.e. the webinar is no longer available). Any idea where to download it? I'd like to see how to use slideshare like that.</comment>


Art of the Steal – The New Republic - <AUTHOR> https://newrepublic.com/article/144541/art-steal-trump-boosted-book-sales-gamed-new-york-times-best-seller-list <comment><USER2> The title should be changed to reflect that this was published in 2017.</comment>