Ask HN: My web app is going viral. Now what? - <AUTHOR>

Here's the backstory:
A few months back, I wrote a small web application called "Cheer Me Up" (http://www.cheermeup.info/). In a nutshell, it's basically FMyLife with a far more positive aspect (which is that you can cheer up random strangers, and not just revel in their misery).
Over the past few months, visits have hovered in the 10-15 day range, but for some reason, in the last 15 hours, the site has seen 15,000 visitors (and its growing, quickly).
Now, I'm asking you all because I'm certain a fair number of you have experienced this before. How do I take advantage of this situation? <comment><USER2> Do this and feel good about it:

      * Create a leaderboard for your 'cheerleaders' (ie. the most cheery people).

      * Let them send eachother virtual gifts. Make all but a few of them free.

Do this and take a pill in order to sleep at night:

      * Automate the creation of 'sad' entries. (Just enough to make your 'cheerleaders' feel important, but not too much, or they will feel spammed)

      * Automate the sending of free gifts, send to lots of 'sad' people. Basically, here you're trying to seem like a vibrant gift-giving community.

      * Automate the sending of premium gifts, send to only a few 'sad' people. To set a precedent for paid gifts. Be sure to show this on your front page, and somewhere in your app.

      * After a real-life user posts a 'sad' entry, immediately redirect them to Facebook to share their sadness, thus increasing the spread.

</comment><comment><USER3> Find a few "cheery" books and products on Amazon and put them on your page with an affiliate link.

<comment><USER4> I would suggest putting the current banner _below_ the forms and buttons because a) it makes the site look much better and b) people might click it by mistake when they go for the 'Find Someone to Cheer Me Up' button

<comment><AUTHOR> I did this and it upped click-throughs tremendously.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Make the site as best as possible, given your concept is sound. Check out: <http://www.thathigh.com/> Maybe have a follow up section, where users can build a story, leading hopefully to a shared resolution.

</comment><comment><USER6> In your header banner, remove the .info from the clickable link. It looks spammy.

Put a small border around the paragraph below it so that it looks as if the page has structure to it.

After you cheer someone up, you're sent to a page saying thanks. Make that page automatically redirect the person to the home page after a few seconds.

</comment><comment><USER7> Get Feedback from your users. Find ways for them to play more with your site, for example even though reddit is a text only place there are lots of games users play like ITAP or GoneWild or AMA, what you should try to do is find ways for your users to play that kind of games.

Another good example is also Chatroulette where users play games like Tilt your head, Play you a song, show you the bird, etc.

</comment><comment><USER8> I should be able to read interesting posts without having to sign up. Many people lurk before getting engaged in a site, if they ever do so at all.

I'm sure many people read FMylife for the schadenfraude -- there will people who may just wnat to read, without contributing directly

</comment><comment><USER9> High unlikely your app is going "viral". It's probably on the front page of something big. Uhh, can't you look at the referrer logs to find out where?

<comment><AUTHOR> I am. Most of the visits are direct.

<comment><USER9> Are they hits to the front page? Direct would suggest something like a Twitter client or email. But I don't see much mention of your url on Twitter. Perhaps it's been shortened. Really annoying that there's probably no way to figure out what's going on in that case. What's the network distribution of your visitors? Does it look legit?

<comment><USER10> _Direct would suggest something like a Twitter client or email._

Or a mention in a newspaper, magazine, or on TV. Even mentions in backwater publications or channels can have a big effect traffic wise.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Any updates on the number of visitors?</comment>


Amazon to Acquire Whole Foods for $13.7B - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-16/amazon-to-buy-whole-foods?cmpid=socialflow-twitter-business&utm_content=business&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social <comment><USER3> Oof. I wonder what this means for Whole Foods culture and employees.

If you don't know, John Mackey, the CEO / founder, is a major believer in conscious capitalism and of empowering his employees.

Whole Food employees get paid pretty darn well with some crazy good benefits for their industry and line-of-work (UNION FREE most of the time too!).

WF banks on them being true believers and motivators of the cause - <USER2> dedicating a fair amount of paid time to trainings. I've heard mix stories about how Amazon treats employees. I wonder how that will mesh.

So I guess I'm asking:

* What is going to happen with employee culture?

* What is going to happen with all the "Fair Trade" deals WF has in place that might not be the most economical decision now?

* Here comes store automation and hefty lay-offs?

Source: Worked at WF for 3 years

<comment><USER4> Disclaimer: I work for AWS, but my opinions are my own.

I don't think you have much to worry about if you're a WF employee. Amazon actually treats their employees very well. In my experience here, I've never seen any of the things the NY times article talked about, either on my team or any other team I've interacted with. People have a healthy work/life balance (40-50 hours a week), get paid very well (definitely above average, and probably in the top 25% of industry), and in general they are concerned with long-term employee sustainability, rather than letting employees burn out and quit.

I know that there are some stories about bad experiences in the fulfillment centers, but keep in mind that those positions are temporary seasonal work by unskilled labor. That's a completely different environment than full time employees work in.

<comment><USER5> _I know that there are some stories about bad experiences in the fulfillment centers, but keep in mind that those positions are temporary seasonal work by unskilled labor._

The tone of your writing suggests that you are OK with treating these people badly. If a company treats some set of its workers badly, what stops them from treating other employees the same way? In this case, they may treat SW engineers well because there is a lot of demand for engineers, and they have to be treated well to retain good folks. That is not comparable to the good culture that OP claims WF has.

<comment><USER4> Have you ever worked a minimum wage food service or warehouse job before? I have, and believe me, it's hell. I spent my high school years working as a cook at KFC. Hot summer days spent making $3.35 an hour standing over pressure cookers full of 400 degree hot oil and lifting 50 pound baskets of deep fried chicken out of them. You get a 15 minute paid break every 4 hours, and a mandatory 30 minute unpaid break for lunch.

I'm not saying its ok to be inhumane or break laws and treat your workers like cattle. I'm just saying that if you've never worked at a minimum wage unskilled job before, you probably don't realize how much it can be hell, just due to the nature of the work. The same thing can be said for lots of labor like farming, construction work, mining, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> [https://twitter.com/dkberman/status/875701677504024576](https://twitter.com/dkberman/status/875701677504024576)

"Amazon did not just buy Whole Foods grocery stores. It bought 431 upper- income, prime-location distribution nodes for everything it does."

<comment><USER7> I don't think that is right, Whole Foods stores are already full of...food. They don't have room for hundreds of additional products, never mind tens of thousands.

<comment><USER8> Place an order by noon for groceries plus anything you want from Amazon. Amazon fills up truck(s) at whatehouse and drops off at local Whole Foods. Stop by on your way home from work and they bring your items to your car.

You get free same day delivery. Amazon just greatly saved on last mile delivery costs.

That's the value of those nodes without having to store all the inventory.

<comment><USER9> I'm closer to Whole Foods' nearest distribution center than an actual Whole Foods. The nearest Whole Foods is almost 40 miles away.

If this works out for Amazon, I wouldn't be surprised to see Walmart try and buy Trader Joe's. They own Aldi, which has made a big push to compete with Walmart's reach outside cities. The nearest Aldi is closer than Walmart, and that's already not far away.

<comment><USER7> Walmart has ~4500 (US) stores already. Aldi is expanding rapidly but has far fewer than that.

The two Aldi locations I drive past are both located less than a mile from the nearest Walmart locations (I expect they do a fair amount of piggybacking).

The purchase doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me. I guess the most sensible thing is that they see the stores being located by the best populations to start out doing food deliveries for (affluent, so they can charge higher prices while they figure out how to do it).

Walmart has a pickup service. They keep experimenting with rapid delivery but people don't really want to pay much for it.

<comment><USER10> After a few initial hiccups, my wife is sold on Walmart's grocery pickup service. For short-range delivery, they are also experimenting with "terrestrial drones"[1] which I have seen around town once or twice.

1\. [http://www.chainstoreage.com/article/different-kind-drone- ro...](http://www.chainstoreage.com/article/different-kind-drone-rolls- walmarts-backyard)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> _HUGE_ news in the grocery delivery space.

Groceries are one of the few large markets that require some proximity to customers due to costs and spoilage. Each grocery store is a type of mini- distribution center for grocery products.

Shipt and Instacart have succeeded to date because they use existing distribution channels and set up marketplaces for the "last-mile" of delivery. This is in contrast to Webvan in the early 2000's who tried to do grocery delivery by building their own distribution and failed spectacularly.

Amazon has become an expert in distribution and logistics. But it is clear that using their current model doesn't generally work with groceries (RIP Webvan, 1998-2001). Bananas need to be treated much differently than books.

So what does Amazon do? But Whole Foods!! A moderate sized grocery store with a significant national footprint and lots of higher income customers.

Now they instantly have a pre-built distribution channel that is already optimized for the grocery business (which again is much different than non- perishable consumer goods etc).

Things definitely just got interesting in this space!! I still believe that Instacart and Shipt can succeed, but they need to maintain a laser focus on making their shoppers and customers happy! And grow as fast as possible while Amazon digests Whole Foods!

[Note: I was the early CTO for Shipt responsible for building their grocery delivery platform and initial engineering team. Go Shipt!]

<comment> FLUX-YOU > I still believe that Instacart and Shipt can succeed

Amazon could just buy Shipt and/or Instacart as well, barring FTC intervention.

I'm not sure what B2B partners Shipt has, but I know they have a mobile app. Joining the mobile app to Amazon would give Shipt a boost and Amazon a start, I'd imagine.

[I worked with one of Shipt's mobile developers at a previous position. Go Shipt!]

<comment><USER12> Serious question: would it be beneficial for Amazon to buy out an existing grocery distribution company like Instacart when Amazon is already an expert at distribution?

<comment> FLUX-YOU They would be paying for customers and talent. Why spend time building your own network when you can buy someone else's for the right price?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Wow... all the articles I've been reading about Whole Foods lately deal with how they're hurting, and losing market share to more affordable competitors like Trader Joe's.

If this is about Amazon thinking they can turn things around for Whole Foods, then it will certainly mean drastic changes to price, selection, and employee structure.

If this is about Amazon using a brick-and-mortar chain as a tool to help Amazon's own ventures (e.g. grocery delivery, local storage for same-day deliveries, product return and support locations, etc), then it will certainly mean drastic changes what a Whole Foods store even is.

Either way, I can't imagine a course in which Whole Foods as we know it isn't basically over. Which doesn't necessarily bother me (I migrated to Trader Joe's and similar competitors long ago), but does seem like a big deal in the grand scheme of things. The grocery industry was heading in a Walmart-ish direction... and Whole Foods was almost single-handedly responsible for bringing a counterculture into the mainstream, and forcing all the other chains to reverse course and up their game.

<comment><USER14> I think this is more about amazon easily acquiring a ton of retail space for it's JIT order deliver business. I'm starting to think they're actually serious about this drone delivery stuff.

<comment><USER15> Yeah my thoughts did rev up to the drone delivery concept till I realized Elon Musk is building a tunnel underneath because thats more realistic than drone delivery.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Amazon is now (or more so now) like Evil Corp in the Mr. Robot kind of way. You can ship your Evil groceries via Evil Prime purchased via voice-command with your Evil assistant device paid for with your Evil credit-card. Evil.

Frankly I don't buy as much from WF anymore considering that what they carry is much more like "organic junk-food" than actual food.

If you really want to support the "cause", find yourself a local farmer or CSA to buy from and support them directly.

[https://www.localharvest.org/csa/](https://www.localharvest.org/csa/)

<comment><USER17> They don't offer bank accounts yet. Only then Mr Robot could come and change the world by hacking them /s

<comment><USER16> If Amazon could drop $13B on a national grocery retailer they could just as easily drop some number of billions to buy every podunk regional bank willing to sell and merge them into the Bank of Amazonia.

If Elon Musk doesn't do it first to enable easy financing for Elon Musk-fans' buying everything Elon Musk. Musk.

<comment><USER18> Where do I sign up?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Bezos: "Alexa, buy me something from whole foods"

Alexa: "Buying Whole Foods"

Bezos: "Shit"

<comment><USER20> Credit(?): [https://twitter.com/ChicagoPhotoSho/status/87570898151116390...](https://twitter.com/ChicagoPhotoSho/status/875708981511163905)

<comment><USER21> Nice catch. Plagiarizing for upvotes is rather sad.

<comment><USER22> So is public shaming.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> You know the race for global trade dominance is heating up and playing out regionally when the same company tries to buy Slack and Whole Foods in the same week. While one is familiar with conglomerates holding a diverse array of businesses, it's fascinating and slightly unnerving (in terms of market power increasingly concentrated in fewer hands) to see it in motion.

<comment><USER24> Agreed. I love Amazon prime, and also love Slack. But I fear the day when all of the "good companies" end up being owned by one corporate overlord.

<comment><USER25> That's nothing new...

Media:

[http://libreria.sourceforge.net/library/Free_Culture/images/...](http://libreria.sourceforge.net/library/Free_Culture/images/media- concentration-cl.png)

Food:

[http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7KY4dEnHmnc/U9bkkriu8hI/AAAAAAAAD9...](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7KY4dEnHmnc/U9bkkriu8hI/AAAAAAAAD9U/Iay01ZL4amg/s1600/Food+Co%27s.png)

<comment><USER26> A large share of media companies owned by a single conglomerate.

A large share of food companies owned by a single conglomerate.

A large share of retail, cloud hosting, and online messaging owned by a single conglomerate.

You're right that there's long been some serious consolidation in sectors, but those two examples seem a little different from Amazon grabbing up large portions of _multiple_ sectors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> tuna-piano Some quotes from a 3 month old article about Amazon and physical grocery[1]

"The whole premise [of online grocery] is that you're saving people a trip to the store, but people actually like going to the store to buy groceries."

"A bunch of smart people at Amazon have been thinking about re-imagining the next phase of physical retail. They want more share of the wallet, and habitual, frequent use of Amazon for groceries is the ultimate goal."

"Long term, a stronger grocery business could position Amazon to become a wholesale food-distribution business serving supermarkets, convenience stores, restaurants, hotels, hospitals and schools. "

"A group of Amazon executives met late last year to discuss the disadvantage Amazon faced compared with grocery competitors such as Wal-Mart and Kroger because of its lack of physical stores and customer apprehension about buying fresh foods online. They decided they needed something more to jump-start Amazon's grocery push beyond plans already under way for the Amazon Go convenience store, modeled for urban areas, and drive-in grocery pick-up stations suited for the suburbs."

[1] [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-03-20/inside- am...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-03-20/inside-amazon-s- battle-to-break-into-the-800-billion-grocery-market)

</comment><comment><USER27> I don't mean to be a naysayer, I don't really know what this means. But with all of the euphoria I'm hearing regarding Amazon and the doom-and-gloom regarding "traditional" grocers, I can't help but remind myself how horribly bad people are at predicting the future. Most of the people I'm hearing make predictions about what this means have been wrong about _everything_ to this point.

Not saying it won't be a game-changer, but it is fascinating to watch people extrapolate this out to the extremes as soon as the news hits the ticker.

To put it another way- if it were that obvious that buying Whole Foods was going to make Amazon the dominant grocery seller, why weren't people predicting that they would do it all along and asking what they were waiting for? It isn't until Amazon acts that people say "Oh yeah, that was the right move."

<comment><USER28> Scott Galloway predicted AMZN buying WFM last month: [http://www.businessinsider.com/scott-galloway-explains- exact...](http://www.businessinsider.com/scott-galloway-explains-exactly-why- amazon-would-acquire-whole-foods-retail-acquisition-billions-2017-6)

<comment><USER27> I saw this and I give him credit although I think his idea that Amazon will be the only winner is pretty irrational. Less than 10% of purchases made today are online and even with that number growing, there are lots and lots of very smart companies with tremendous resources who can compete, not to mention lots of very smart people who can innovate in this space in ways Amazon won't think of and disrupt them. It happens virtually every time a newcomer is predicted to become monopolistic.

<comment><USER28> I agree, he also has a video where he posits that Amazon will kill brands, and make brands obsolete. I don't think we will ever live in a world where every product is manufactured and packaged by Amazon. Sure Amazon would love that outcome, but it goes against the consumers need for choice, and then there's also the fact that brands have the resources to compete like you mentioned.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA2-iMz479o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA2-iMz479o)

I watched this video a while ago about what Amazon Go is a precursor for. In summary, if AWS is renting out server infrastructure for people, then you can imagine that Amazon can make the infrastructure to lease out Amazon Go to other stores. They first integrate it with Whole Foods, then as customers expect no more checkout areas, they will only go to Whole Foods because it's faster and maybe cheaper. Then because customers want it everywhere, Amazon could force other stores like Walmart and Target to integrate Amazon Go infrastructure to their stores, without Amazon directly competing with these stores, and make a ton of money leasing it out without spending money on building whole new stores. Of course, the acquisition could also be like nodes for warehousing and delivery, but both avenues are not mutually exclusive.

<comment> tuna-piano Counterpoint... is Amazon Go really that difficult to build? If given three years, do you not think a different software company can build a similar system as well? Is this type of system really a winner-take-all market?

<comment><USER17> Same with AWS. First they were the only ones, now they seem to lose market share to Google and Microsoft.

Amazon doesn't have a monopoly in any of their businesses, they're just very successful in a lot of them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> tuna-piano I'm confused.

Amazon is known to work backward from an imagined future press release, and then do the actions necessary to make that press release. How does Amazon see the future in this case?

-Amazon already has PrimeNow and Amazon Fresh, which offer a great grocery delivery service. For those who have tried these services, it's easy to see how addicting they are vs going to a physical store.

-I can't see Amazon using existing retail stores as distribution centers. I would think you really only need one grocery distribution center for each city in America, and PrimeNow (and AmazonFresh) already has that! Or, has Amazon determined that picking/packing from a retail store is actually efficient? Retail as a DC seems tough to automate, items are in the wrong spot, suspiciously missing, etc. I don't get it.

-I would have guessed that online grocery from highly automated distribution centers is where the majority of the market would be within ~20 years. Does Amazon, the king of online, not think that!?

-Or does Amazon just believe that they can run Whole Foods better than it is currently run?

-Do they just want the purchasing, existing relationships, etc to also sell their customers through other channels?

<comment> tuna-piano One thought. People still like food and food things and being social, and the "farmers market" feeling. Even in a future which makes online grocery great for mundane shopping, people still need stuff to do.

Whole Foods already has bars, cafes, and restaurants. Maybe Whole Foods locations turn into places where people can hang out, try new things, and buy online grocery delivery (or pickup delivery as well)?

Who should be trembling in their sleep even more so with this news:

-Blue Apron, HelloFresh, Plated, etc

-Drizzly, alcohol delivery, etc (I think absolutely doomed)

-WalMart? (Maybe completely different customer sets)

-Target, Kroger, other grocery?

-Instacart (I think absolutely doomed)

Whole Foods is a large cafe/fast casual business. I assume competitors in that space aren't scared at all yet... but I would not necessarily sleep well if I were Starbucks or Chipotle. Amazon seems to play to win, and they usually win. Do they want to play is my main question.

<comment><USER30> Whole Foods is an instacart equity owner. I would be curious how this is being handled given the new conflict.

<comment><USER31> Probably factored into the final price, heavily discounted given Amazon's own plans for last-mile.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Looks to me like the ultimate war between grocery stores in the US will be fought out between Amazon/WFM (premium, delivery) and ALDI/Lidl (discount, no- frills).

As a German I'm amazed by the "food haul" videos on YouTube and the positive feedback for ALDI US (belongs to ALDI Süd), Trader Joe's (ALDI Nord) and Lidl (part of Schwarz Gruppe, they just started in the US yesterday).

<comment><USER33> Don't count out Kroger, the largest supermarket chain in the US. According to Wikipedia in 2015 it trailed only Walmart and Costo in worldwide revenue, and had 20% more revenue than Amazon.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retail#Global_top_ten_retailer...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retail#Global_top_ten_retailers)

<comment><USER16> The Kroger-based store where I live just botched a floor-plan change so badly I should hope that it was just a local screw-up. This particular grocery store went from okay to "penny-thriftstore" useless.

<comment><USER34> Kroger is the primary grocery store in my neighborhood and I shop there at least once a week. Despite that, I can never quite grok the store layout. It feels like it's been designed to make it impossible to find the last three items on your list so that you will roam the store endlessly picking up random impulse items while hunting your white whale condiment.

<comment><USER16> This makes me wonder, has anyone used the Walmart "drive-up" shopping system where you shop online, drive to a specified location and they load your groceries after you pay?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> This is not good for Instacart. My understanding is WF was their biggest partner and source of revenue. No way amazon will use them.

<comment><USER36> Challenge often becomes an opportunity. Instacart recently landed Publix who has MUCH higher market share in the markets they serve.

Disclaimer: I'm an Instacart investor.

<comment><USER37> Challenge will be that folks who shop at Whole Foods (aka Whole Paycheck) are already relatively price insensitive compared to people who shop elsewhere. Instacart was such a good match for WF because it's the same demographic of people who are willing to pay a lot for convenience. Your average Publix shopper is likely to be much more price sensitive.

<comment><USER38> Whole Foods is reasonably priced for actual food. They just have a different approach to high-margin products where instead of Twinkies they sell you special homeopathic Twinkies.

<comment><USER37> I call BS. I really like Whole Foods, but they are WAY more expensive to fill a "normal" grocery list than a place like Publix. Granted, a lot of that is because they only sell more expensive versions of things (e.g. sometimes organic-only produce, and their meat especially tends to be much more expensive), but it's still very difficult to shop cheaply at WF.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> This is a Walmart counterattack. Walmart is on the verge of capturing large swathes of busy "middle-class buyer" pickup orders.

Amazon saw it and responded quickly.

<comment><USER40> Busy middle class buyers don't go to whole foods except for definitions of middle that are inclusive enough to appease the diversity committee at UCB.

<comment><USER41> Middle class people definitely shop at Whole Foods. There aren't enough upper class people to sustain something as low margin as a grocery store.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> I quite like wholefoods. Now that Amazon will own it I feel less likely to support it.

Amazon is a cut throat profit making machine at the expense of human exploitation.

Wholefoods felt like the little guy who was trying to do things differently from mainstream supermarkets.

<comment><USER43> By that reasoning you would also have to stop visiting any website that uses AWS.

I think that would mean you'd have to stop using the Internet entirely.

<comment><USER44> Are you implying that it's unreasonable for him to dislike Amazon for its labour practices if he's an internet user? That doesn't make any sense.

<comment><USER43> No. I tried to say that if he wants to avoid things to stop supporting Amazon, then he will have a hard time. A similar case would be Nestle, since they own so many products.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> AmazonFresh is an expensive service. The team is searching for routes to dominate the high-end grocery market (worth billions) before launching into the worldwide grocery market (worth hundreds of billions). AmazonFresh customers and Whole Foods customers value convenience and quality. They are much less price sensitive than most.

Whole Foods has millions of customers. Amazon will surely be advertising AmazonFresh or some re-branded form of it - such as "Whole Foods Direct" \- to Whole Foods customers. Do Whole Foods turn into AmazonFresh warehouses? Possibly, but it's unclear how the two business will eventually integrate. It's also possible that Instacart gets acquired by Amazon, but for the most part I see them getting screwed in this deal. Instacart's business development deal is like bringing a knife to a bomb-fight.

The other major value this deal brings to Amazon is the industry-specific knowledge that the Whole Foods team brings. As a frequent East Coast, Whole Foods shopper, I am always amazed to see how much of their food comes from the West Coast/all over the world. I think the execs of AmazonFresh, who are mainly HomeGrocer/Webvan execs, appreciate the complicated logistics of doing the businesses. Amazon will be able to combine its software engineering knowledge/logistics knowledge with Whole Foods' expertise at creating an amazing grocery-shopping experience.

</comment><comment><USER46> Interesting so they are looking to take on Costco in the organic grocery market then:

[http://www.seattletimes.com/business/retail/costco- becomes-l...](http://www.seattletimes.com/business/retail/costco-becomes- largest-organic-grocer-analysts-say/)

I'm surprised the article didn't mention this.

</comment><comment><USER47> Amazon wants to kill retail and their biggest threat is Walmart. Walmart currently uses groceries as a way to get people in stores and when they're in the store they buy other things as well.

Now imagine if you are Amazon and you'd like all those people going to Walmart to just use your services. If I could get my groceries delivered to my door and only need to go to stores once in a blue moon I'd be really happy.

<comment><USER48> > Walmart currently uses groceries as a way to get people in stores and when > they're in the store they buy other things as well.

Walmart groceries is a sad and pretty recent phenomenon. It got people in the stores just with cheap prices long before they had groceries.

<comment><USER40> Walmart only has good grocery selection at super-centers for the most part

<comment><USER49> Which is almost all of them now?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> $13.7B is quite a satisfying amount.

That's $1 for every year since the Big Bang.

<comment><USER28> Or $30M per Whole Foods (rented) stores.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Grocery stores are a tough market with razor thin margins. Whole Foods has a ton of competitors like Trader Joes that happens to still have organic options.

Since I did not see it asked, any idea if we will see some new Prime benefit at Wholefoods?

<comment><USER52> Out of curiosity, what's your insight into grocery store profit margins? Were you an exec at a grocery chain, or something giving a similar window into their numbers?

<comment><USER53> they're called 10-k's. [https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse- edgar?action=getcompany&S...](https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse- edgar?action=getcompany&SIC=5411&owner=exclude&count=40&hidefilings=0)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> I'm from the Twin Cities in Minnesota which has tons of co-op grocery stores. They're successful and growing with cheaper prices than Whole Foods and much more progressive values (as well as giving regular folk an ownership stake in a crucial community institution). Whole Foods seemed to me to be just a poor copy of cooperative grocers. I'm surprised no one else has mentioned that in the comments here.

I'm not shedding any tears for Whole Foods' "culture" now that they've been bought by Amazon. They were always a sort of sham-progressive company. In the words of Portlandia, "Whole Foods is CORPORATE."

I suppose if you're going to be corporate, might as well go full Amazon. They do it very well.

<comment><USER55> Seward Co-op is literally my standard for grocery store. I always laugh at stuff like Whole Foods and Trader Joe's because, like you said, they are sham- progressive in every sense IMO.

<comment><USER56> interesting. i never thought of Trader Joes as progressive. do they try to market themselves that way?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> Since the article doesn't mention it, Whole Foods is apparently:

> an American supermarket chain exclusively featuring foods without artificial > preservatives, colors, flavors, sweeteners, and hydrogenated fats.

I was waiting for this to appear (a common grocery store with seen-as-healthy stuff) but it already exists. TIL.

</comment><comment><USER58> WF has been struggling because they helped paved the way for mainstreaming of organic, sustainable, etc. They couldn't pivot really and everyone else was undercutting their high prices and they've been unable to increase profitable foot-traffic to stay alive. Amazon could basically use WF as a laboratory for deploying Amazon Go without having to build grocery logistics from scratch. Hope it works out.

</comment><comment><USER59> I think this might signal the walk in walk out payment paradigm of Amazon Go going national. If we could say goodbye to lines, I am all for it.

<comment><USER60> ^ This. Quick video on what Amazon Go is: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrmMk1Myrxc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrmMk1Myrxc)

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> One thing I haven't seen mentioned here yet is that I wonder if Amazon intends to sell on their regular online store some of the non-perishable items that Whole Foods sells. Currently, Amazon is not usually competitive vs. VitaCost, Lucky Vitamin, and Swanson Health. I didn't realize until checking just now that VitaCost is owned by Kroger.

</comment><comment><USER62> What happens to Sprout's Farmers Market?

People seem to think it will be bought, but this would seem to be negative news because the price paid for Whole Foods was about half what Sprout's is trading at.

</comment><comment><USER63> Aw, poor Blue Apron.

<comment><USER64> Blue Apron is not a good company relative to the other meal kit delivery services anyway. Their recipes are overly simplistic and their whole experience using UX dark patterns limiting which meals one can get in combination turned me off, and misleading people regarding cancellation.

The higher quality meal kits like Home Chef won't have this problem because they give you, for about the same price, more complex recipes with cool ingredients like demi-glace. There are enough things you can't buy in small quantities easily.

<comment><USER65> HelloFresh automatically re-activated my membership when I thought it was paused, with no notification until after they'd charged my card on file and shipped a week's worth of food. Never touching them again.

Home Chef proactively emails you a week ahead of time telling you what the menu is. I've forgotten to customize my meal selection once or twice, but have been happy enough with the defaults for the "carb conscious" eater profile that I never really have to.

Don't _think_ I had any major issues with Blue Apron, except that yeah, their recipes were simplistic, and often used lots of bread, rice, and potatoes.

<comment><USER64> That's exactly the experience I saw canceling Blue Apron. You request to cancel, they acknowledge your request and say okay but with a weasel word reply. Something like 4-6 weeks later a new shipment shows up unexpectedly and they purport that they can't refund because it's been delivered.

I even tweeted at their CEO about the company's use of questionable and shady growth tactics to no avail. That is the kind of move that makes me open a credit card dispute against the company and write them off for good.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> The old joke is that it isn't "Whole Foods" but "Whole Paycheck" because of how expensive they are. I wonder how that will change with Amazon's typically price cutting ways. The two seem somewhat at odds with each other.

</comment><comment><USER67> I'd be curious about what this also means for Instacart given their strategic partnership with Whole Foods and their direct competition with Amazon Fresh.

</comment><comment><USER68> If the brick and mortar grocers weren't scared of Amazon before, they sure are now.

<comment><USER69> Investors are scared too. WalMart shares down 5%, Target down 8%.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> This might just be a strategic move to block Instacart as every WF I've been to recently had created an entire checkout section just for Instacart.

<comment><USER71> Whoa, really? I've never seen this in New York.

<comment><USER72> Are you upstate? In the stores I've used around NYC, the Instacart presence in WF is huge. Branded coolers by the doors for deliveries waiting to go out and everything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER73> I wonder if they'll roll out the tech they showed a few months ago for the store in Seattle where you didn't have to check out.

<comment><USER64> The impression I got was that the store is more of an R&D project. It didn't work super well or scale with number of people so they had to artificially limit food traffic to keep it working. I'd be surprised if they rolled that out in an environment as busy and complex as Whole Foods stores so fast (or ever).

</comment></comment><comment><USER74> Well, if successful, it will be a great leap forward for Amazon to advance its grocery vision. Maybe some kinda deal will be given to Prime members? Amazon Go Wholefoods? For the employees, it is neutral, if the company keeps underperforming Amazon will surely do something about it.

</comment><comment><USER75> This is very bad news for InstaCart. I know most of InstaCart orders are WholeFoods and CostCo

<comment><USER76> How do you know that?

</comment></comment><comment><USER77> This is another step in how an online book store slowly becomes the Umbrella Corporation.

</comment><comment><USER78> What does this mean for Instacart I wonder? Will Amazon shut them off from their stores?

<comment><USER79> Probably. Which is good, because AmazonFresh has much better inventory control and tracking than Instacart—which has none.

</comment></comment><comment><USER80> Now that they control the distribution, they should control the supply. Well functioning, scalable greenhouse solutions should definitely pique Bezo's interests. I'd love to be a head grower over a large operation like that.

</comment><comment><USER81> I wonder if they're going to implement Amazon Go in Whole Foods [https://www.amazon.com/b?node=16008589011](https://www.amazon.com/b?node=16008589011)

<comment><USER82> pretty sure that's the partly the motivation behind the acquisition

<comment><USER17> Probably in the long term. Over the next years, the technology is not likely to be ready for the number of customers a wholefoods can have.

But the stores should work well as distribution centers for grocery (and other) deliveries.

<comment><USER82> Yep it will take a while. But it's a faster and less risky route to market than Amazon branded brick and mortar grocery stores from scratch. And many other synergies like you say

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER83> In this part of the country, it seems like Kroger's ClickList service has been very successful. I'd imagine other larger chains in other parts of the country are doing similar things. Sure, it's not delivery but if you are driving right past the store on the way home and don't even have to get out of the car, it's a pretty close competitor. That's especially true in smaller communities where Amazon's grocery delivery doesn't yet make sense. Might this be a partial reason that Amazon is making a bet on the grocery market?

</comment><comment><USER84> I can't wait for drones to deliver organic quinoa straight to my door.

</comment><comment><USER85> Anyone know if they'll pilot Amazon Go approach at some of these stores? I don't think it's nearly ready for scale but could see it working out for certain locations...

</comment><comment><USER86> I've noticed that comments here that are critical of Bezos gets met with downvoting. Sad. Why Microsoft got the 3rd degree and Amazon gets a pass is beyond me. I guess that large unethical companies like Amazon can use AIs to police sentiments about them and do the needful. We should start looking for anti AI mechanisms in discourse as well as work to ensure paid sockpuppeting and gas lighting is not going on. The truth is going to be harder to get at these days.

</comment><comment><USER87> People are also forgetting that CEO Mackey was about to get ousted or his wings significantly clipped.

I feel this is more Mackey cashing out than anything else.

Whole Foods is about to change a lot and quickly.

</comment><comment><USER88> Nothing Amazon does makes sense immediately. Only in hindsight does the strategy emerge.

What would be also helpful would be for Amazon to disrupt the wine and liquor sector.

<comment><USER89> > disrupt the wine and liquor sector

Explain?

<comment><USER90> Maybe they mean the inefficiency in the producer -> distributor-> retailer chain? What value does the middle guy add?

<comment><USER91> Liquor is heavily regulated on a state by state basis. The distributor relationship is often required by law.

<comment><USER92> So Amazon will create a spin off a distributor company

<comment><USER91> Yeah, that might work. It appears to be very political/corrupt in Massachusetts at least. It doesn't really matter what liquor store you go to as prices are basically fixed here. They'd have to get the distributor license approved, and a separate retail license... and then (I think) a single company is allowed no more than 3 retail locations in the state.

Anyway, I agree there's a lot of bullshit that adds to the cost of alcohol, and does make it look ripe for disruption, but I suspect there'd also have to be a lobbying effort to get the laws changed on a state by state basis (for it to be scalable), and whoever was trying to get the laws changed would be facing the alcoholic beverage industry lobby, who are also a fairly powerful/entrenched group.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER93> Well this is a huge exit for WholeFoods which was seeing fewer and fewer people enter it's stores and increased competition from value grocers introducing organic foods. A number of articles asked if WholeFoods had a future in this new environment. As for Amazon, I see this more as a real- estate play to help them further their new push into grocery and the no- checkout process.

</comment><comment><USER94> Amazon is getting too big.

How's this for an investment strategy... Long AMZN, short a basket of all other mid to large retailers & grocers.

<comment><USER17> The acquirer stock price often falls after an acquisition. So probably not a really good strategy.

Conglomerates have happened in the past. They become very big until they stop making a lot of money and people realise that they could be more efficient if you split them up. Amazon and Google can afford growing so much because they have a very successful business line. If growth there stops they would likely start selling some parts.

<comment><USER95> > Conglomerates have happened in the past. They become very big until they > stop making a lot of money and people realise that they could be more > efficient if you split them up.

Yeah, who could forget when companies like Standard Oil or AT&T decided to split up, entirely through the power of market forces, with no government intervention at all.

<comment><USER96> Conglomerates are companies that hold unrelated businesses. Berkshire Hathaway is a conglomerate. Railroads and car insurance in the same company!

Standard oil and AT&T were not broken up because they were conglomerates. They were broken up because they were monopolies in single (or closely related) markets.

<comment><USER95> The reason for Standard Oil's success was not specialization so much as expanding into every single business that could possibly affect the price of oil. Their ability to boss around railroads, and their eventual direct investment in railroads themselves, certainly calls Amazon shipping to mind.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER97> Pretty good rundown of reactions and implications of this deal here: [http://circulaat.com/main/amazon-to-acquire-whole-foods- in-1...](http://circulaat.com/main/amazon-to-acquire-whole-foods- in-137-billion-bet-on-groceries-2)

</comment><comment><USER98> Wow all cash? Amazon's cash pile will be pretty small relatively speaking after this. Less than $10B.

<comment><USER94> I read they will have to borrow the purchase amount.

<comment><USER98> Ah okay. I tried searching around a bit for more details but skimming only got me the same info from main outlets. Do you know where you read that?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER99> Does anyone else think that this purchase is largely in part so they can get AmazonFresh in a lot more places quickly?

In my area where there is a big college campus, they have been hiring for AmazonFresh devs for over a year. We have no AmazonFresh here but we do have a Whole Foods.

<comment><USER100> Are we talking about SLO haha?

<comment><USER99> Yes :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER101> I buy things on amazon when I feel the price is good or better than I can get locally. Whole Foods doesn't fit that mold at all.... now maybe they provide different products but then Whole Foods isn't Whole Foods anymore.

</comment><comment><USER102> I wonder how long until the first beta of Elastic Grocery System?

<comment><USER103> How long till somebody develops the UBER of groceries? Your neighbour could do your shopping for you.

<comment><USER29> Like a decentralized Instacart, interesting.

<comment><USER28> Why isn't there a total decentralized on demand platform? The bulk of the value is in the people performing the services, not the app technology to connect them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER104> Bezos will then start putting pressure on farmers. I don't know how these things work in the states, but the dairy industry would be the prime example in the UK.

</comment><comment><USER105> I wonder if they will keep the brand or change it to Amazon.

<comment><AUTHOR> Said it will operate as a standalone business for now.

<comment><USER106> Completely standalone, or integrated into the Amazon infrastructure while maintaining the Whole Foods brand and product line? I could see Amazon using whole foods as a kind of local "base" for grocery delivery services. Having a physical store to offload perishables onto if online demand doesn't match supply really makes sense.

<comment><USER107> Margin on them asparagus water is tremendous!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER108> I wonder if instead of Amazon building out their own stores, they're going to use Whole Food's... unlikely but possibility is there if they do it well.

</comment><comment><USER109> Perishable goods like groceries are one of the few businesses that Amazon is not in yet. My guess is that Amazon is looking to take Pantry to the next level.

<comment><USER110> What do you mean? Currently I can have fresh groceries delivered to my door by an Amazon Fresh truck or I can drive to a local Amazon Fresh pickup store...

</comment></comment><comment><USER111> What an exciting development! It will be interesting to watch Amazon apply its logistics experience to a large-scale groceries operation.

</comment><comment><USER112> I wonder what happens to Whole Foods business code of conduct, including the "Online Forums" approval requirement I dislike.

</comment><comment><USER113> Liked a joke from by spouse:

Mr. Bezos: \- Alexa, buy me something from Whole Foods Alexa: \- Good. Buying Whole Foods.

</comment><comment><USER114> If there's ever going to be a world government, it's probably going to be Amazon.

</comment><comment><USER115> I have a job interview with Amazon next week. Wish me luck, I'll be likely doing entry level work but I hope I can keep working on websites for clients (have 2 currently), keep learning data structures/algorithms, and build a personal project. All this to one day get hired by Amazon for UX or web developer.

</comment><comment><USER22> Race to the bottom!

Amazon checklist:

1) Import cheap Chinese goods,

2) avoid sales tax,

3) destroy the environment (china),

4) destroy brick and mortar stores,

5) destroy small/medium business.

=== PROFIT!

</comment><comment><USER116> i've been helping my friend with his channel and we were pitching for amazon to buy whole foods a few months ago:

[https://youtu.be/fvZ8mGZZins](https://youtu.be/fvZ8mGZZins)

</comment><comment><USER117> "The transaction also may help Amazon sideline Instacart Inc., a startup that has delivered grocery orders from Whole Foods stores in more than 20 states and Washington, D.C."

... I wonder how this will play. Is Instacart's business threaten by losing Whole Food as a client?

</comment><comment><USER55> Now, with a prime membership I'll never need to leave my house!

<comment><USER118> The American dream

</comment></comment><comment><USER119> I do my banking and food shopping at Walmart; I wonder if Whole Foods will offer this. Probably not, but I'm still excited to see Amazon moving into the food retail business.

</comment><comment><USER94> This is all Marc Andreessen's fault. If we had just left it at Gopher, none of this would have happened!

</comment><comment> awinter-py ugh. In 1966 the supreme court forced the 3rd largest grocery chain in LA to divest the 6th-largest (which they bought in 1960). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vons)

</comment><comment><USER120> Why would they buy Whole Foods as opposed to Grubhub/Seamless. Seems like a better fit...

</comment><comment><USER121> What percentage of instacart's business is tied to Whole Foods?

</comment><comment><USER122> RIP Instacart.

</comment><comment><USER123> What will happen to Instacart?

</comment><comment><USER124> Sucks for Instacart.

</comment><comment><USER125> Somewhat off topic, but I have had a weird thought circulating in my head (triggered by reading Red Plenty) that I wanted to put out there:

What is the relationship between a centrally planned economy as for example Gosplan was trying to run in the USSR, and the presence of these huge market- like but centralized entities like Amazon and Wal-Mart inside a free-market economy? This becomes particularly interesting because Amazon apparently does not have any particular interest in turning a profit.

A central problem faced by Gosplan was the collection of high quality data about supply chains and the estimation of the utility function of consumers. I would say Amazon is in a pretty good position to do both right now.

Another question, somewhat related: At what point does it become profitable for Amazon to lobby for more redistributive taxation? This might sound paradoxical because you would assume that Amazon represents the interests of it's owners, who would probably suffer under such a taxation scheme. But shouldn't there be a point at which giving more disposable income to poor people will boost the overall income of an entity Amazon (since Amazon doesn't sells many flat-screen TVs but not as many mansions or yachts)?

<comment><USER6> The major difference is that if Amazon stop running well then someone else will come along and replace them. Whereas government is a monopoly, so if it runs badly then it doesn't automatically get replaced.

Now, democracy is supposed to fix this, by allowing you to vote for a different supplier of government every few years. But because of the voting system in some countries (like the US and the UK) it's actually really hard to do this, because everything gets turned into a black/white struggle between opposing forces, rather than lots of options being available for you make a choice between.

<comment><USER126> Hmm, as I remember the socialist governments were replaced (not easily, but they were). Have we even seen a conglomerate of AMZN size replaced in living memory?

<comment><USER127> Sure, frequently.

IBM, Sears (far more dominant in retail in its day than Amazon is today), General Motors (hi Toyota), US Steel (hi foreign steel), Pan-Am (hyper powerful at its peak), Alcoa (anti-trust + foreign competition), and a dozen others that were every bit as powerful as Amazon at their peak.

Oh and Walmart is slowly being replaced by Amazon. Walmart is/was the most dominant retailer in world history.

<comment><USER128> The rise and fall of major corporations isn't necessarily the result of the inexorable application of market forces. Alcoa's grasp on the market was broken as much by the aftermath of 'war socialism' as anything else, for example. Companies compete with each other on legal, regulatory, and social planes as well as in the marketplace.

I think it's difficult to find any single X that makes "if a company is bad at X, it will be replaced by competitors" a consistently true statement, without X being essentially synonymous with "succeeding".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER129> Better buy than Slack for $9B.

<comment><USER130> I was thinking exactly the same thing except that WF might be a less profitable business.

<comment><USER129> I think in the long run you are likely be right - at scale software margins are amazing. As of today, Slack looses some money & is unprofitable.

<comment><USER130> Really? Slack is bringing in 150m/yr. They can't make money with that product at that rate?

<comment><USER131> Of course they can, but an extremely profitable well-oiled small company rarely gets acquired. You need to have way more employees than necessary and running at a loss.

Slack runs a chat app and has _870 employees_. It's beyond absurd.

<comment><USER132> What percent of that is support and how many customers do they have?

Not saying you're wrong, just that there's overhead for software as it scales for enterprises.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER133> Checkmate, brick and mortar!! Amazon is eating the world.

<comment><USER88> Well...isn't Whole Foods brick and mortar?

<comment><USER133> In 10 years, Whole Foods will not have retail locations, and its distribution network will have shifted to 100% online orders ;)

and, i should add, kroger and supervalu and etc will be struggling dinosaurs like sears

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER134> I wouldn't say obviously. From my perspective Obamacare is fascist even as I support it compared to the alternatives save single-payer national healthcare.

What other ideology than fascism best describes government coercion of its citizens to engage in business relationships with the insurance companies to ensure their profits remain at certain levels?

<comment><USER135> It's not to ensure their profits remain at certain levels, the profits are capped, not floored.

The reason for this particular market is because health care costs in this country have gone out of control, and a major factor in that was people without insurance not paying bills, resulting in higher costs.

That's not facist simply because you don't like it.

<comment><USER134> I specifically said I like Obamacare more than any alternative other than single payer.

And the profits are guaranteed by the individual mandate on young people.

<comment><USER135> You also said it's facist which is wrong. And the profits are not guaranteed by the individual mandate, ALL that's guaranteeing is a slow-down in healthcare costs that are spiraling out of control. Young people use healthcare. Everyone uses healthcare. When it goes unpaid, those of us that have insurance pay for those that don't.

I'd rather have single payer too. But that doesn't make an "okay" alternative to it facist.

<comment><USER136> Nit: Why do you keep misspelling fascist?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> If Hacker News had gold I would give it to you.

<comment><USER52> I don't understand why I got 10 downvotes on this one. What is the matter with this comment? What am I missing here?

<comment><USER137> This comment adds no value and doesn't drive interesting discussion forward.

Reddit norms don't apply here. If you have a low effort comment, just keep it in your head.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER138> "Da $#&@?!"

Sometimes I forget just how big Amazon is.

... But it's nice to know I can get my artisanal, single-source, Fair Trade, organic, small-farm, no-GMO cucumber water with one day shipping now.

<comment><USER139> Or one-hour shipping with Amazon Prime Now, which is beginning to crop up in a lot of places with Amazon Prime Fresh.

I tried Amazon Prime Now in Denver yesterday to buy some fruit. I went for the free shipping in a 2 hour window instead of the $8 one-hour shipping.

I never used Amazon Prime Fresh, because of the monthly fee and sense of commitment that forces. But when you can get a lot of the same stuff (eg, fresh fruit) without the monthly subscription via Amazon Prime Now, it's more tempting to try out.

I'm a little worried about how big Amazon is getting, though.

<comment><USER140> Fruit from Prime Now is of variable quality. Thus far, for example, I've seen two suppliers of Granny Smith apples, one of which produces large, flavorful specimens, and the other of which does not. Better any apples than none at all, but it hasn't really encouraged me to investigate their grocery delivery options in more detail.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER141> Instacarte is screwed

</comment><comment><USER142> Just add it to the list of reasons to avoid Amazon.

</comment><comment><USER143> I love the Windows Updates restart warning in the video. :)

</comment><comment><USER144> Amazon's Global conquest continues.

</comment><comment><USER145> What about Instacart? They had a sweet deal, if it continues then it means Amazon will buy them. If it gets cancelled it means Instacart is fucked.</comment>


Tesla, other EVs required to have 'traditional engine' sound to meet new EU rule - <AUTHOR> https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-evs-gas-cars-noisemaker-law-uk/ <comment><USER2> Very interesting- my tesla is pretty loud when I run the air conditioning but it's very nice to drive when it's not too cold or hot with the windows down and not have the engine noise. I hope this isn't required in the us as well.

<comment> java-man I hope it IS required in the US.

In my opinion, all quiet vehicles must emit some kind of universally accepted noise at low speed, ideally corresponding to the said speed. Think of, you know, the children, blind pedestrians, non-blind pedestrians immersed into smartphones, etc.

One's personal comfort should not come at expense of other's safety, at least that's the kind of world _I_ would like to live in.</comment></comment>


Why gas bubbles appear to get stuck inside narrow vertical tubes - <AUTHOR> https://www.livescience.com/why-gas-bubbles-stuck-vertical-tubes.html <comment><USER2> I thought it was common sense that the bubble gets stuck because the liquid needs to flow down for the bubble to go up. The bubble's pressure pushes the liquid against the wall so that it can flow down only very slowly. Surface tension stops the liquid from breaking the bubble and flowing down the center.

</comment><comment><USER3> "But in this case, the researchers used a custom-made microscope that shines a light onto the sample and measures the intensity of the light that bounces back."

That's how eyes work as well. Well, they need a light source to help, but otherwise ...

<comment><USER4> Not always how a microscope works though.

This article has a nice little comparison of a few different methods, not all of which measure (only) reflection [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark- field_microscopy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark-field_microscopy)

There's also a whole world of microscopy where emissions from the sample itself are measured, often because parts of it have been tagged with fluorescent probes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> You can even see it sometimes, bubble stuck, draining around it slowly. Really no surprise to me...

</comment><comment><USER6> TL;DR:

"Some calculations suggested that the bubble is surrounded by an extremely thin layer of liquid touching the sides of the tube, which slowly diminishes in size and eventually disappears, Kolinski said. That thin layer would create resistance to the motion of the bubble as it tries to rise."

<comment><USER7> But actually they disproved this belief:

'The researchers indeed observed this very thin layer around the gas bubble and measured it to be about 1 nanometer thick. That's what quenches the movement of the bubble as theoretical work had predicted. But they also found that the liquid layer (which forms because the pressure in the gas bubble pushes against the walls of the tube) doesn't disappear, but rather stays at a constant thickness at all times.

Based on their measurements of the thin layer of fluid, they were also able to calculate its velocity. They found that the gas bubble isn't stuck at all but is rather moving "extraordinarily slowly," at a pace invisible to the naked eye'

<comment><USER8> There is also evaporation occurring on the top surface of the gas bubble, and condensation happening on the bottom.

Since there is a small pressure differential, there will be a net upwards movement.

It's a small effect, but it might dominate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> bubble stuck

please send help</comment>


Barbie typewriter (2015) - <AUTHOR> http://www.cryptomuseum.com/crypto/mehano/barbie/ <comment><USER2> "As it was probably thought that secret writing would not appeal to girls, the coding/decoding facilities were omitted from the manual".

Back in elementary, my friends and I had an entire word replacement bank to talk about crushes, teachers, etc. in code. Later on, we would constantly make new pigpen ciphers. Isn't it a stereotype that girls love secrets?

Toys aimed toward girls have been steadily improving. I have noticed a great rise particularly in STEM-focused toys and I am excited (and jealous) to see with what the next generation will grow up.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, I personally think this feature-removal is just plain sexism. Lots of girls enjoy learning new and interesting things to do with math and science, and crypto is an especially great way to introduce kids to abstract thinking.

Not to mention there's the whole "if you remove the feature, how will they ever learn about it" factor .. just plain sexist, imho.

A better, more "pro-girl" approach would be to include the feature and let girls figure out for themselves, if they like it. Also, the boys who might play with these same toys.

<comment><USER4> > Yeah, I personally think this feature-removal is just plain sexism.

It probably had nothing to do with sexism per se; rather it probably was a business call made by people who suspected that while some percentage of girls would like that feature, a certain percentage of parents wouldn't find that feature appropriate or scary or simply not something they would consider as suitable for a toy. These people are paid to know their target demographic and to make choices that maximize profit for any given product.

Their assumptions might be rooted in sexism, but I suspect that most of their frame of reference consists of simply knowing how parents and relatives view these products, _their_ sexist attitudes included. That is to say, if these people suspect that a significant percentage parents want to stimulate exact thinking and problem solving skills in their girls, they will translate that to market decisions (which is slowly happening now).

<comment><USER5> It's sexism in the systems sense, not in the personal bigotry sense. The fun thing about sexism (and racism, etc) in the systems sense is that the intentions can be neutral or even positive yet the outcome can still be sexist (or racist, etc).

Maximising profit is not a neutral decision even if it has neutral intentions.

<comment><USER6> >Maximising profit is not a neutral decision even if it has neutral intentions.

Complaining that for profit companies maximize profit makes about as much sense as complaining great white sharks eat meat. Both do what they were evolved for, both die rather quickly if they don't.

Perhaps we shouldn't put great white sharks in petting zoos. Perhaps we shouldn't put our children's well being into the hands of for profit companies.

<comment><USER5> You're assuming the Friedman doctrine[0] is universally accepted as "that's just how companies work". That view is not universal, even if it's the norm in the US and plenty of large companies see it that way internationally.

You might want to look up "social market economy"[1] and what social democracies in Europe think about the social responsibilities of companies (i.e. that they have those in the first place). I know these are foreign concepts in the US but it's what powers the famous German Mittelstand and our economic stability (though at the cost of missing out on some of the rapid growth possible in the US).

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

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm reminded of _" Barbiephonic (redux)"_[0], although it's only related in the sense that through this story I found yet another story involving Barbie and crypto[1].

> _And the other thing lying around on those open shares were recordings of > names. To reach a wide audience they'd recorded some unstoppably perky young > woman reciting kids' first names, Aaron, Abbot, Abby, Abigail, Adana, Adena, > in an upbeat barbie-girl voice, every single one. And there I was with a > pile of free disk space, university bandwidth, wget and why not._

> _There were seventeen thousand of them._

> _After a bit of experimentation, I figured out how to stitch them all > together with .4 seconds of silence between each. The resulting audio file > was almost five hours long; four hours and forty five minutes of relentless > Barbiedoll voice reciting seventeen thousand first names in alphabetical > order._

> _To my knowledge, nobody has ever listened to the whole thing._

> _Of the six attempts I'm aware of, four were called off when the death > threats started, one due to the near-breakup of the couple making the > attempt, and one person drinking themselves to unconsciousness at about the > 90 minute mark. I'm not saying that to make a joke. I'm telling you because > this is real and it's an SCP-grade psychic biohazard. No highly esteemed > deed was committed here; this is not a place of honour._

The "SCP-grade psychic biohazard" is not that much of an exaggeration, by the way.

[0] [http://exple.tive.org/blarg/2015/12/05/barbiephonic- redux/](http://exple.tive.org/blarg/2015/12/05/barbiephonic-redux/)

[1] [https://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2015/12/inter...](https://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2015/12/internet-connected-hello-barbie-doll-gets-bitten-by-nasty- poodle-crypto-bug/)

<comment><USER8> >> _To my knowledge, nobody has ever listened to the whole thing._

The Youtube mirror [0] has 1,890 views. What is a "view"?

[0]: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_s7GL6ZdG4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_s7GL6ZdG4)

<comment><USER9> A YouTube "view" means that someone played the content for ~30 seconds.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Mattel sometimes made some really neat Barbie toys. I'm sure a toy typewriter would have been pretty cool, with or without its ability to encode messages!

I remember, as a kid, my sister got a "Talk With Me" Barbie, which was a doll that could be attached to a computer(serial port!) and configured to speak your name with its animatronic mouth. The CD-ROM came with some games that would also trigger the doll to speak. I was a boy, so I really wasn't into Barbie, but I was really wowed by that toy and wished my Star Trek toys could do the same! For its time, it was pretty innovative.

</comment><comment><USER11> I don't know anything about cryptography. Would this have been useful for spies? Please tell me spies somewhere in the past were sending and receiving messages on a Barbie typewriter.

<comment><USER12> I would say probably not, since there were only 4 variations of a simple substitution cypher, e.g. you could encrypt some text with option 1-4, and to decrypt you picked option 1-4... i.e. anyone could decrypt using the barbie typewriter and a maximum of 4 attempts... not really secure at all.

<comment><USER13> >simple substitution cypher

And for those that are unaware, substitution ciphers have been unsecure for over a millennium now. So relying on nobody guessing you used a Barbie typewriter isn't an option either.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> What an awesome informational resource.

I really wish they had a Random Article button like Wikipedia does.

<comment><AUTHOR> It probably wouldn't be too hard to put something together with a JavaScript bookmarklet and their archive page. [http://www.cryptomuseum.com/crypto/list.htm](http://www.cryptomuseum.com/crypto/list.htm)

<comment><USER14> I was thinking along the same lines... but a man can dream!

(I don't like the site THAT much that I would bother with creating a dedicated js bookmarklet I suppose is what I am saying)

Not saying I wouldn't install it if somebody else were to do so... ;)

<comment><USER12> CREATE A BOOKMARK! Use the following for the url ( OF THE BOOKMARK ):

javascript:(function(){var a = document.querySelectorAll('li a'),l = a.length;window.location.href = a[Math.floor(Math.random() * l)].href;})();

NOTE: this JavaScript will only work properly ( AS A BOOKMARK ) on the list page. i.e. [http://www.cryptomuseum.com/crypto/list.htm](http://www.cryptomuseum.com/crypto/list.htm)

Instructions:

1\. create the bookmark as instructed above...

2\. go to the list page @ url above...

3\. CLICK THE BOOKMARK!

<comment><USER14> Haha, thanks a bunch!

The code worked perfectly once I placed it into a bookmark!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wonder if this feature came about not because it was originally in the "requirements", but because the layout of the hardware key matrix/wire routing may have not been decided completely, and it was easier to include several selectable lookup tables in the masked ROM than have to change the mask (at great cost) later. Then someone thought of adding the ability to change it at runtime, perhaps for testing, and the rest is history...

...and in case the alternate lookup tables don't seem to map to any keyboard layout, here's an example showing that a typical keyboard more often than not does _not_ have the rows and columns in "physical" order: [http://map.grauw.nl/articles/keymatrix.php](http://map.grauw.nl/articles/keymatrix.php)

</comment><comment><USER16> One of the more unusual bits of Barbie Typewriter lore was that in at least one instance, an ultra-right wing terrorist cell based in Northern Ireland was using these for communication[1].

No indication if the cell was utilizing the "encryption" capabilities of the Barbie typewriter or just putting it to work as the cheapest, most disposable means of conveying demands but the Barbie logo makes an amusing juxtaposition to the operator's violent history (including 72(!) prior convictions). Every time this story surfaces, part of me wants to believe that someone somewhere is still using substitution cyphers for serious ends.

[1] [https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern- ireland/jai...](https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern- ireland/jailed-gang-who-used-barbie-typewriter-and-bullets-to-blackmail- victims-out-of-15k-29285194.html)

<comment><USER17> and now i have the mental image of a stereotypical terrorist, with a black ski mask and a kalashnikov on a strap on his back, hunched over his pink-and- purple barbie typewriter. amazing. thank you

<comment><USER18> Or maybe a Hello, Kitty AR-15:

[https://www.cnet.com/news/a-hello-kitty-assault-rifle- that-a...](https://www.cnet.com/news/a-hello-kitty-assault-rifle-that- actually-exists/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Something like this with a built-in tablet stand would be cool.</comment>


Marathons, Pirates, and Moving Beyond jQuery - <AUTHOR> http://intridea.com/2011/4/14/marathons-pirates-and-moving-beyond-jquery

<comment><USER2> I had no idea there was a backlash against jQuery, and though the slidedeck <http://www.slideshare.net/rmurphey/the-jquery-divide-5287573> is pretty awesome, I am not sure most web-apps need somebody who knows core javascript vs. knowing jQuery.

I remember writing the whole xmlhttp stuff, and to me, that is ugly code. I'd much rather have $.ajax or $.getJSON. Not only is it easier to write or read, it is also easier for another person to come in later and understand.

I do think people should have a basic understanding of javascript, and I can't imagine writing NOTHING bug jQuery code in any web app, but suggesting that somebody who focuses on jQuery is any less valuable than somebody who focuses on javascript to me seems elitest without much merit (with the exception of a very few outstandingly unique projects which don't fit into the capabilities of jQuery).

Is any javascript app not spaghetti code??

<comment><USER3> JQuery is still javascript, so there's no worry there. JQuery is an abstraction of the DOM (a light one), not an abstraction of javascript. I don't think you're losing much by not having to know document.getElementsByTagName.

Coffeescript _is_ an abstraction of JS, however, so I don't understand why the author wants to go there (considering he wants to move away from JQuery because of fears that he doesn't know JS).</comment></comment>


Show HN: Open-Registry – Distributed Package Registry Owned by the Community - <AUTHOR> https://open-registry.dev/ <comment><USER2> It's nice to see these initiatives. A couple of points of feedback:

\- There's a lot of talk about open but I want to see names, faces, keys, of the people in control. Who runs the domain? DNS? Etc. Who is behind this?

\- What's the point of mirroring NPM? Why not fork the registry and add your own features that aim to make it more reliable and secure?

</comment><comment><USER3> This really isn't an open registry or distributed package registry. It is yet another JavaScript registry. Also, check out Verdaccio.

</comment><comment><USER4> FYI, Chrome will not let me load this site.

> _Your connection is not private / Attackers might be trying to steal your > information from open-registry.dev (for example, passwords, messages, or > credit cards). / NET::ERR_CERT_COMMON_NAME_INVALID_

<comment><AUTHOR> Huh, sounds weird and first time I hear this. ".dev" needs to be over HTTPS, could be that something is in the way and forcing the HTTP version on your side?

Are others having the same problem?

Just tested it with Google Chrome Version 70.0.3538.77 (Official Build) (64-bit) on Arch Linux, and not seeing any issues.

<comment><USER5> Major Browsers have HTTPS pinned on all .dev domains

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Fantastic effort, I really hope this gains some traction.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot! I'm biased, but I hope so too :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Why is "JavaScript" nowhere in the headline of this story? It's specific to a single ecosystem.

</comment><comment><USER8> I like the idea (as with any open stuff). I'm just not sure I see the use.</comment>


Go See Ghostbusters Because It Matters - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/code-like-a-girl/go-see-ghostbusters-because-it-matters-451d2fa28ef2#.px8erdp1k <comment><USER2> I appreciate the apparent social value of remaking Ghostbusters using an all woman cast. The only problem that I have is that - the movie is crap. Sorry but I'm not going to go see a movie to make a social point.

<comment><USER3> How do you know it's crap without seeing it?</comment></comment>


Tim Bray resigns from Oracle/Sun - <AUTHOR> http://twitter.com/timbray/status/9696830860 <comment><USER2> Timothy William Bray is a Canadian software developer and entrepreneur. He co- founded Open Text Corporation and Antarctica Systems. Tim was the Director of Web Technologies at Sun Microsystems until his resignation on February 26th, 2010.

Yes, Wikipedia is already updated.

<comment><USER3> That's a little misleading. His main claim to fame is his involvement in drafting XML standards.

That said, I'm not exactly sure why we're meant to care about him resigning from Oracle/Sun. Seriously - what exactly did he do there?

<comment><USER4> I am not sure in what way it is misleading. Prior to his claim to fame in drafting XML, he was famous for using SGML in an effort to put The Dictionary onto CDROM, and famous for writing one of the first web crawlers, and founding the company Open Text.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> His blog has an entry as well: <http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2010/02/26/Noracle>

He talks about how he really likes the people at Sun, does not mention the people at Oracle.

<comment><USER5> He also mentions: the official integration date here in Canada is March 1st, so I won't ever have actually been an Oracle employee.

It seems he didn't really had a chance to meet many people from Oracle, Of course all the Sun people he liked would soon be Oracle people

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> also his blog - <http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/201x/2010/02/26/Noracle></comment>


Russian Programmable Calculators (industrial controllers) produced since 2007th - <AUTHOR> http://mk.semico.ru/

<comment><AUTHOR> produced since 2007th. Used as industrial controllers, based on i8051, equiped with 200x64 screen, RS-485, RS-232, SPI, 12-bit ADC etc.

May be programmed onboard, without Win/Lin PC. But bundled with SDK and full documentation kit.

Available as desktop devices (MK-152, MK-152M), as portable device (MK-161) and as embedded device (MK-1152)

and an article with some technical details in English [http://arbinada.com/pmk/node/56](http://arbinada.com/pmk/node/56)</comment>


What afl-fuzz Is Bad At - <AUTHOR> http://blog.regehr.org/archives/1238?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+EmbeddedInAcademia+%28Embedded+in+Academia%29 <comment><USER2> Same article was posted here 4 days ago. Discussion:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9489441](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9489441)

<comment><AUTHOR> My error. Thanks for pointing this out.</comment></comment>


Twitter Tools for Community and Communications Professionals - <AUTHOR> http://www.briansolis.com/2008/10/twitter-tools-for-community-and.html <comment><USER2> Wow, great list! Some tools I already happily use, others that I've wanted to investigate, and more that I'm definitely going to check out.</comment>


Well done Ordnance Survey - derived rules clarified.. - <AUTHOR> http://www.edparsons.com/2010/10/well-done-os-derived-rules-clarified/

<comment><AUTHOR> Ordnance Survey released a large amount of UK government funded geospatial data to the public earlier this year, under the Open Data[1] initiative. I was aware that OS traditionally haven't been willing to allow their data to be used in conjunction with the Google Maps API (particularly due to section 11 in the ToS).

It seems that this is no longer the case, which is a great thing for people who want to utilise the (public) data in their own applications.

[1] [http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/index.htm...](http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/index.html)</comment>


Posterous - Dead Simple Way to Blog and Share Files with Freinds - <AUTHOR> http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/fill-the-space-between-your-blogs-with-posterous/ <comment><USER2> Does someone here actually use it?

<comment><USER3> Religiously. ;-)

<comment><USER4> Surely you're not serious.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Me too</comment>


iPhone Upgrade Program - <AUTHOR> http://www.apple.com/shop/iphone/iphone-upgrade-program

<comment><USER2> The part I'm wondering about, and can't find any answer on Apple website: what happens if your iPhone is stolen/lost/destroyed?

</comment><comment><USER3> I doubt this is better than T-Mobile's Jump program, because you get insurance with Jump as well, i.e. the upgradability is just $3 extra per month.</comment>


How the 45 RPM Single Changed Music - <AUTHOR> https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/45-vinyl-singles-history-806441/ <comment><USER2> I don't have any answer but after reading the headine, came to post this: [https://youtu.be/HucOdgey9NE](https://youtu.be/HucOdgey9NE)

<comment><USER3> That's great!

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> Funny how the author thinks colored vinyls existed then :) my first vinyl release had something like 50 copies in red due some reasons (we ordered all black cuz it was cheaper). Pretty sure one can still order colored vinyls but it's a "common knowledge" that black ones last longer. Can't say if that has any merit or not.

<comment> black-tea A true coloured vinyl probably lasts just as long as a black one, but I've seen a few that look coloured but are really picture discs. The pictures discs really are crap because the groove is cut into a thin layer of clear material that is layered on top of the printed picture.

<comment><USER2> Indeed thats the case. I was just referring to what some people think about colored vinyls due to picture discs. I haven't really seen 7" picture disks so talking about albums: singles have nicer sound..

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Is this an actual phrase? "It's impossible to underestimate the impact of the 45"

Seems like it means impossible to overestimate, easy to underestimate, or just impossible to estimate.

<comment><USER5> You are correct, that phrase as stated would mean no matter how little impact you think 45RPM had, you estimate would not be too low.

The author surely meant 'impossible to overestimate.'

\---

I don't know if this is a common mix up, like, for example:

"I could care less." (which means you have _not_ reached a minimum of caring)

vs

"I couldn't care less." (which means you _have_ reached minimum of caring)

\---

Or the more pernicious (in my opinion) and pervasive:

" _Not_ all X are Y" (some X might be Y, but at least some are not)

vs

"All X are _not_ Y" (There are no X that are also Y)

<comment><USER6> The author could also have meant to say "it's impossible to understate".</comment></comment></comment>


Please review my personal project site...... - <AUTHOR>

Hello smart people at hacker news.This is a social networking site I built with asp.net technology.I would like to know your ideas, opinions or any reactions about my project.I also would like to know any ideas to attract more site users/members without costing me a lot of money.The site revenue right now comes from the displayed ad from google adsense which is very less compared to the site's operating cost.Is there any way I could monetize the sites services(any ideas)?Anyway thanks in advance for your time to reply and I would appreciate any advise you can give.....<p>the site url: jamafriend.com <comment><USER2> I think it's great that you're trying this. Please keep it up! Some feedback items:

I'd say hold off trying to monetize - take a look at Facebook: it doesn't cost a penny to use the service, all ad driven. If it's easy to stick a Google ad in here and there, go for that.

Also, for creating the blogs - I would suggest taking away the requirement of contacting an admin to gain access. If you really want people to come back often, let em blog as much as they want. If you are fearing that the spammers come by, delete them - it's your site!

One minor design nit-pick / feedback - the mouseover menu items - could you make them a bit bigger? Kind of small targets.

</comment><comment><USER3> well, unfortunately if you're getting into the social network space, you have to consider that you are taking on Facebook and other social networks, and you have to make sure you find a niche.

This isn't the early days of social anymore. What makes your site different? Why should a person use your site instead of Facebook, LinkedIn, Last.fm, Flixter, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc etc. oooh the list goes on and on.

This doesn't mean there isn't an opportunity for you, but if you have something that nobody else has, it is not readily apparent to me from what I can see from your home page.

You may have to allow people to discover some of the non-social content (you list news, sports, etc) in order to grow visits and get people interested.

I don't see the reason to put that behind a sign-in wall

</comment><comment><USER4> What is unique about your website?</comment>


Serverless Bigtable-like database, backed by Cloud Storage - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/adrianchifor/Bigbucket <comment><AUTHOR> Built this over the last two weeks of quarantine, let me know what you think :)

<comment><USER2> This looks very promising. Great idea. Would be interesting to hook it up to Min.io (S3 clone).

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah that would be cool, I'm working on S3 soon and as I understand Min.io is fully compatible with it, so it could be a drop-in replacement.</comment></comment></comment>


I crossed the Pacific on a cargo ship and got the digital detox I needed (2017) - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/quartzy/1150184/i-crossed-the-pacific-on-a-cargo-ship-and-got-the-digital-detox-i-desperately-needed/ <comment><USER2> Seems romantic I guess but there are things I would rather be doing than sitting in the middle of the ocean watching Star Trek. When I quit my job I traveled in Asia and Europe for a couple months, then bought a van and have been happily traveling the US ever since. This seems like a drastic disconnect intervention for someone that truly feels addicted to their devices, but they haven't replaced it with anything. I can tell you from personal experience that staring at the ocean for hours on end does get old, I would have brought some good books.

</comment><comment><USER3> Article is very light on the trip (which perhaps wasn't actually all that interesting) and mostly about how bad cell phones and electronic devices are.

</comment><comment><USER4> Wow, I have literally dreamt of doing this but didn't know it was something you can actually do.

<comment><USER5> It used to be a thing for writers. Being on a cargo ship keeps one from distractions. I believe Alex Haley wrote "Roots" on a cargo ship.</comment></comment>


Whiteboard problems in pure Lambda Calculus - <AUTHOR> http://www.jtolds.com/writing/2017/03/whiteboard-problems-in-pure-lambda-calculus/ <comment><USER2> I'm confused by their "3 part linked list". I always thought the elegance of lambda calculus was that each data structure was equivalent to the method by which you use it. A boolean _is_ a function that does a conditional statement. A number _is_ a function that does a loop. So logically, a list _is_ a function that does a fold, like "LIST :: (a -> b -> a) -> a -> a".

<comment><USER3> There are many different ways to encode lists. You are using the Church encoding, where a value is a fold,

        nil = λn.λc.n
        cons = λx.λxs.λn.λc.c x (xs n c)
        fold = λf.λz.λxs.xs z f

Another option is the Scott encoding, where a value is a case distinction

        nil = λn.λc.n
        cons = λx.λxs.λn.λc.c x xs
        fold = Y (λfold.λf.λz.λxs.xs z (λhead.λtail.f head (fold f z tail)))

And then there is the 3-tuple thing proposed in the article.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It's things like this that make me wonder what the world would be like if we had embraced the Church-style Lambda Calculus model instead of the Turing system. I don't know if it would be better or worse, but I think it's an interesting thought experiment.

</comment><comment><USER5> I've been wondering why a lot of things are the way they are in functional programming, not being very lambda inclined myself, I didn't seek it out, but this post summarized a lot that has been on my mind lately.

In particular, and with apologies for being so clueless – it never occurred to me why currying was necessary – I didn't realize lambda calculus required functions to take only one argument. With that limitation, currying is genius.

</comment><comment><USER6> Tangential book recommendation: I have found the first chapters of "Type Theory and Formal Proof" a great in-depth introduction into lambda calculus and its typed variations.

<comment><USER7> This is a jump straight into the deep end. I can't recommend starting here. "How to prove it" [https://www.amazon.com/How-Prove-Structured- Approach-2nd/dp/...](https://www.amazon.com/How-Prove-Structured- Approach-2nd/dp/0521675995) would be a much more appropriate start

<comment><USER8> Naw, straight into the deep end is to start with reading the Homotopy Type Theory book... [https://homotopytypetheory.org/book/](https://homotopytypetheory.org/book/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Thou shalt not make use of French if thou doest not know the language. Deaux is a village in France (you can google it).

<comment><USER10> > Thou shalt not make use of French if thou doest not know the language.

The ironing is delicious.

<comment><USER11> The washing's even better.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> A while ago I wrote a Brainfuck interpreter in lambda calculus. I abused the Clojure macro system to make my job a little easier, and of course, I wrapped it in an interface that could do IO, but this does compile to a single pure lambda calculus function which takes a (church encoded) brainfuck program and input string and returns an output string.

[https://github.com/MichaelBlume/lambdafuck/blob/master/src/l...](https://github.com/MichaelBlume/lambdafuck/blob/master/src/lambdafuck/core.clj)

<comment><USER13> I also wrote one at

[http://tromp.github.io/cl/Binary_lambda_calculus.html#Brainf...](http://tromp.github.io/cl/Binary_lambda_calculus.html#Brainfuck)

to demonstrate the invariance theorem.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I often feel that Alan gets adequate credit but Alonzo too little. There must be something I don't get.

<comment><USER15> Turing gets more credit in popular culture, but academically Church is more influential. Just look at the list of Church's PhD students: [http://www.genealogy.ams.org/id.php?id=8011](http://www.genealogy.ams.org/id.php?id=8011)

I have no clue why Turing became such a pop-culture icon, though...

<comment><USER16> Turing doesn't really have the status of a pop-culture icon. Outside of the phrase "Turing complete", and maybe historical accounts around breaking the Enigma, I doubt most people have even heard of him.

He's definitely more known than Alonzo Church, though.

<comment><USER17> What about "The Imitation Game"? I suppose that movie made Turing a quite well known figure, especially viz. Church.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Factorials in pure lambda calculus:

[http://www.flownet.com/ron/lambda- calculus.html](http://www.flownet.com/ron/lambda-calculus.html)

</comment><comment><USER19> See, the original post about white boarding in LISP was original with certain humor to it.

I can't say this was even close in terms of enjoyment or originality. Maybe I missed the point?

<comment><USER20> I don't think I saw it as an attempt to be original or funny. It's more interesting and educational in that it shows how to do build up a simple program from the very limited operations of lands calculus.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Another tangential reading recommendation: I only started reading about Lambda Calculus a few days ago. The Imposter's Handbook does a good job covering it, but also praises this medium article that's super helpful (and also explains the y combinator): [https://medium.com/@ayanonagon/the-y-combinator-no-not- that-...](https://medium.com/@ayanonagon/the-y-combinator-no-not-that- one-7268d8d9c46#.m4mobqry9)

</comment><comment><USER22> Reminded me about good old [https://codon.com/programming-with- nothing](https://codon.com/programming-with-nothing)

</comment><comment><USER23> > Anyway, here's fizz buzz in pure lambda calculus:

Serious question: if the code is legit and can't be simplified any shorter (like you could in any C style lang), can we consider lambda calculus the string theory of programming? By that I mean lots of work for little gain (as it turned out to be nowadays) ((I know it has gains in other fields)).

I can imagine it like an assembly like compile target and it can explain the verboseness.

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh, it definitely can be simplified a bunch. There's all sorts of stuff to prune out. I didn't even attempt to try and code golf at all. There's library definitions included in that snippet that probably aren't needed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> The same thing, but in Ruby stabby-proc notation (from 2012) by Tom Stuart:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUhlNx_- wYk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUhlNx_-wYk)

Well, perhaps not _exactly_ the same thing, but only because Ruby requires the Z-combinator due to applicative order.

</comment><comment><USER25> Instead of pure lambda calculus, another less severe route would be to simply restrict yourself to Church-encoded or Scott-encoded formulations of data structures.

<comment><USER26> And a more severe route would be to allow just S and K.

<comment><USER8> Just use Lazy K: [https://tromp.github.io/cl/lazy-k.html](https://tromp.github.io/cl/lazy-k.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I love this so much.

</comment><comment><USER28> Nice article! But you have a typo.

(λx.x y)

does not return y, though

(\x.x) y

does.

<comment><AUTHOR> There's an aside about how I've chosen precedence. The way I've defined operator precedence and binding, (\x.x) y is not a valid expression (parentheses _only_ mean function application), and (λx.x y) returns y. You can argue I defined things wrong, but it is all in how you define things.</comment></comment>