Ask HN: Considering leaving my job at a startup? What should I consider? - <AUTHOR> I have a solid job at a rapidly growing startup. I joined about 6 months ago. But its changed a lot since I joined (we're doing well so the team is growing quickly). Everyday I feel like I want to leave to start something of my own. I'm in my early 20s and would be able to take the risk financially, as I've saved up quite a bit. I have several ideas, but I am always so exhausted after writing code for 8-9 hours a day that I definitely don't want to come home after commuting for 45 minutes (plus I like having somewhat of a social life).
The projects that I have worked on lose steam eventually because I've been working on them for months and see little progress. Part of me feels like its a no brainer to leave. I have no responsibility, I can afford it, and I feel like I will enjoy it more. Plus, I feel I'm really only learning from myself at the startup.
The other half of me thinks it's silly. I should stay for 6 more months and get my small amount of equity to see what it will be worth. Even at an absurd outcome >1B the payout won't affect my life all that much.
Any other things to consider? Any advice? I feel like other people have had similar thoughts or even experience leaving. <comment><USER3> Six months may feel like a long time right now, but it really is not. I would stay at the current position, get the equity (not matter how small). Use this time to prepare your startup, getting a startup making revenue is a lot more than just coding. You can start to educate yourself about how to best set up a company, talk to potential customers (email or phone). If you think this is not very interesting to do then I suggest not starting a company at all.

If you still feel the same after this time then take the plunge.

Reference: Worked with a lot of startups.

</comment><comment><USER4> I was in the same situation as yours 6 months back. I left my job and persuaded my desire to startup. Turns out it takes more than being great at coding to build a startup. I'd to learn Marketing, Pitching, Emailing etc. skills in my journey which I never thought about before starting up whereas, I thought building a good product would cover that part. So, I'm not scaring you away from starting up but I'm just saying that you should consider these points as well in your decision making process.

I've gathered few questions and important points which I would ask/tell myself before starting up again. Here are they:

1) Do you have a co-founder which can leverage your skills?

2) Have you zero down on an idea and did your market research?

3) How confident are you about the target market?

4) Do you have a execution plan or Goto market strategy?

* Market first, product later

* Ideas are worthless unless they're executed really well.

Thanks,

<comment><USER5> _Turns out it takes more than being great at coding to build a startup. I 'd to learn Marketing, Pitching, Emailing etc. skills in my journey which I never thought about before starting up whereas, I thought building a good product would cover that part._

This reminds me of my days teaching test prep classes for Kaplan. At some point in every Kaplan teachers career, there came a point when you'd do the math and realize that Kaplan was charging students $100/hour but only paying you $20. Inevitably a few of the best teachers would try to go out on their own. They soon realized that getting students took a lot of work - <USER2> flyers up on campus, working your network looking for referrals, building a word of mouth reputation. Most ended up failing and coming back or moving on to something else. There were a few that made it big (e.g. Robin from TestMasters) and it turns out that these were not necessarily the best teachers, but they were definitely excellent marketers.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree 100%. I think marketing is the most important thing with almost any business. My rationale is I'm not going to get better at it while writing mindless code. The best way to get better at it is to market products, right?

<comment><USER6> It sounds like you'd be happier in a product management role than as a programmer.

Kick ass on the code for a couple years (you might find that you enjoy it if you can get out of Java Hell and start doing functional programing) but, from the sounds of it, you'd be happier as a PM. PMs get a bad reputation because 80% (or more) of them are idiots, but the other ~20% can be invaluable for their ability to market technical work, internally and externally.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> There's a lot of fantastic advice here from people much more experienced than me, but I will just say having done a couple startups myself and continuing to be in the startup "industry" as well that they're all right... So to echo all of them in summary:

1.) Stay for the equity and for the experience of watching a truly growing startup grow - most startups never grow in any significant way, they just die

2.) If you're burned out now after 8 hour days, wait until you're doing 14 hour days to survive with your startup... if you can't find the energy to do it at night (or your social life is more important to you), you're possibly not cut out for running your own startup

3.) Startups are much much more than coding (unfortunately)

With all of that said I wish you the best of luck as I also left my first job out of college (Edit: realized this is not necessarily your first job out of college (or that you went to college) but leaving this here none the less) after less than a year to pursue other things (in my case a masters program) and I understand how the first job is not necessarily the right job.

<comment><USER8> Comparing the burn out of making someone elses dreams come true vs your own seems ridiculous to me.

<comment><USER7> It's true at first when you work on your own stuff you have this great level of enthusiasm, but eventually like any other kind of work it becomes a grind. It is my personal opinion that people who are not passionate enough to get started at night when working a 9-5 job, are probably not passionate enough to be self starters completely on their own. But again it's just MY opinion and obviously I would need to know OP personally to make more than a grand generalization.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> If you lack the motivation to work on your project after work and you typically lose steam after a few months, I think leaving a steady job would be the worst thing you could do. The cited obstacles seem more like excuses than things legitimately standing in your way. Get excited about something, then take the plunge.

</comment><comment><USER10> Rather than advice, how about some tasks?

1) Make an investor pitch deck for your idea. What questions will investors ask? Where is your idea strong? Where is it weak? What's the market size? Who are your competitors? What are they doing wrong?

2) Make a business plan. What do you need to succeed and why? Who pays you and why? What are the risks involved? What are your exits and pivots?

3) Make a one-page sales cutsheet. How can you convince someone to part with their money by handing them a single page of paper? What will they like? What won't they like?

</comment><comment><USER11> If you can do it, take some time off and see if you can take a small project from inception to completion. It's harder than it seems, especially as a solo person, but you'll learn a lot from it. Spend some time trying to get users to learn about marketing and sales. Even if you don't succeed, those skills (full product life-cycle, marketing and sales) become very marketable resume points.

I'm also of the opinion that it's good to spend some time in the trenches at a big tech company to better appreciate the differences between small startups and mega-corps (and if you can something in between). It's one thing to read about it and get an idea, it's another thing to experience it and understand better what the pros/cons of each environment are. If you end up at another growing startup, this experience will better help you understand what's happening to the organization as it grows. Too many founders end up with growing organization and don't understand what a big shop looks like or how it functions and end up dragging the potential of the company down around them.

Both of those experiences can become very valuable to any future career direction you choose: small startup, on your own, big software house. If you're missing one or two of those, it's hard to say you have a complete picture.

Alternately, 6 months is really not a lot of time to learn and observe. Startups always go through lots of rapid changes, but seeing some of those through to completion (or stagnation) can be very informative. You're young enough that another year or so there won't kill you and won't prevent you from pursuing anything you want after that. Only you'll have more perspective and experience to work off of.

</comment><comment><USER12> If you leave the job, you should also leave the Bay Area and go somewhere you can afford to live while trying out your own ideas, as you'll give yourself 2x - 3x the runway.

<comment><USER5> _you should also leave the Bay Area_

Did he say he was in the Bay Area?

<comment><USER13> Did he say he was a 'he'?

<comment><USER7> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_gender#English](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_gender#English)

"Problems arise when selecting a personal pronoun to refer to someone of unspecified or unknown gender (see also Mixed and indeterminate gender above). Traditionally the masculine has been used as the "default" gender in English."

It's just proper English by traditional standards to use _he_ when you don't know the gender of the person. People take it as some kind of an affront, but those of us with English training were just taught that way in college. Source: Minor in English.

<comment><USER13> And many of us object to that male default. About the first thing I learnt at any serious level of linguistics teaching is that language does not stand still, it evolves. It would be trivial to say "did they say they were in the bay area" in this instance.

<comment><USER5> Using "they" would be grammatically incorrect since the subject is singular. To be politically and grammatically correct I could have gone with "he/she" or "the OP" but statistics and history are on my side with "he" knowing the demographics on this site.

<comment><USER14> "They" can be and is commonly used as a gender-neutral singular.

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

<comment><USER5> In the acceptability section of that Wikipedia article, most style guides reject singular they usage.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> If you're really serious about starting something on your own, you can do nothing better than stay exactly where you are. You are getting first-hand experience with the challenges a growing company faces. You have a real opportunity to learn how this process works, you should be thrilled at the chance to see it through to the end.

Everything gets easier when you can point to a win on your resume. From finding a great co-founder, getting yourself into the accelerator du-jour, or luring early investors. More importantly you'll actually have a good jumping off point for your future.

There is a big gulf between building a product and building a viable business. If your goal is the latter you need to embrace the opportunity you have to learn. It's an invaluable experience.

</comment><comment><USER16> If you are making and saving a lot of money, I'd recommend to stay put (unless you can do immediately better somewhere else).

You have a lifetime in front of you. The opportunity to make an unusually high salary might not always be there. But a stack of cash might help in a lot of ways later on.

Disregard this advice if you have groundbreaking idea and the capabilities to carry it out. (Not to be nasty, but rather realistic), you probably don't. Sit down and have a good honest heart to heart with yourself about this.

Don't go away from something. Go towards something.

<comment><USER17> This. Many people will think their iOS app will revolutionize some niche market. Chances are, no it won't.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> The best time to take risks is when you don't have any responsibilities, so in that sense, you're at the right time of your life to do this. On the other hand, if you're good at starting things but not finishing them, then why not make a pledge to yourself before you strike out on your own: Get an MVP version of your new business up and going first.

If you don't try, you'll never have the possibility for success. But stack the odds in your favour first.

</comment><comment><USER19> Not sure if this is your first 6 months in the working world or not. I'm guessing that it is. I'm not trying to discourage you from leaving, but I wanted to offer some perspective.

If your startup is indeed rapidly growing, I think it is invaluable to see the growth first hand. Only a fraction of startups really see true rapid growth. Having that first hand experience will give you some perspective when hopefully, one day, your startup experiences that growth. Additionally, when interviewing at the "big hot startups", I think it's a major plus to have seen that growth somewhere else. But be honest with yourself if it's real, rapid growth, and not just some vanity metrics.

Secondly, I share some concerns that if you're burned out after your workday now, that quitting to do your own thing is going to be better. However, I can certainly empathize and understand that it is possible, but harder, to build a product part time at night. To hedge your risk, you should find that idea that you're really excited about, commit to getting an MVP and some traction to prove to yourself that you have an idea, and then quit.

While doing so, keep your responsibilities and cost of living structure low. Don't sign a new bigger apartment while you're getting a salary. Also, I'm not sure if you've thought about how long you can live without a salary. Do you need to supplement your ramen profitable startup with any extra income (contracting or otherwise?) If that's necessary, you'll need to spend time getting work and doing the work. I personally dislike contract/consulting work. I could never mental hack my way into feeling ownership of it. I've learned I'd rather work at a product company and work on something on the side, than do a startup "full time" while part time consulting to cover bills. Your preferences may be different.

Remember that startups are really hard. I've been through it to an acquihire, and I've had friends that were acquired for tens of million of dollars. And when I talk to them, I'm reminded that even though they're doing well, it's really hard. I absolutely think it's worth it if you're willing to bet on yourself.

Feeling like you've hit a ceiling at work and that you're only learning from yourself, sometimes can be fixed. Talk to your manager. Let them know. Maybe there's more responsibility for you. If you strike out on your own, guess who you'll have to learn from. Just you again. While joining a large community of people working on their own startup is fun, it's also lonely. No one cares about your startup more than you.

</comment><comment><USER20> Based on what you have said, I think that you may want to try to change your position at the company. If the company is growing quickly then there are probably positions in the company that will exist soon or were just made that can provide you with very useful skills and knowledge. You may be able to do other things during the day instead of coding, which will probably reduce the amount that your work is taxing you, allowing you to work on side projects more. You may not want to move into a role with responsibilities that aren't programming but as others have said the knowledge and experience you gain during growth is crucial to success, which you will learn even if the company doesn't execute well. It will also help you know what qualities you would like in a co-founder,if you want one, or how you should approach starting something of your own.

</comment><comment><USER21> One of my friend was in the similar situation, I managed to convince her not to quit, so she got a developer to build the MVP and test the market. The idea didn't workout but she had her job and got promoted to much better positions.

So hiring someone to develop the MVP is an option you might consider.

<comment><USER22> Any recommendations on where to find a competent developer for a MVP?

<comment><USER21> She went to some local meetups, and got lucky to find a good developer.

So attend some meetups and ask around. If anyone is interested get work samples and vet by giving him/her a short paid relevant assignment.

You can also find great remote developers, but vet them with short communication and coding assignments. Github/Linkedin/Dribbble are good resources to find someone remote.

Good luck and I hope you find someone well rounded with excellent communication skills.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> If it's only six months, stick around for the equity and the opportunity to be a part of the team as it scales up. That's invaluable experience. If you can manage it, put the pieces in place to get your idea off the ground by the time the summer rolls around.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER24> Have been on similar boat and started my own ~7 mos back. Here are couple of points: 1\. Be prepared for your savings to Last >1yr, unless you can get seed funding now 2\. Is your gf/spouse ready for this 3\. A start-up will not eat into your _somewhat_ of social life, unless you want it to. IMHO I would say please hold on to it. You need that support. 4\. PG talks about the weekend project thing .. didn't work for me coz they just loose steam 5\. For the leaving NOW decision I would also consider if you have someone with somewhat of complementary skills ready to jump ship, If not I will spend the next 6 months finding that person and then quit [together]

</comment><comment><USER25> I was in a similar position few months ago, getting bored doing the same thing again and again. I could have changed jobs for a better pay and profile but it would not have been a significant improvement in work quality. Also the job was intense so I would end up thinking about the startup all the time with no time left for personal projects. I have decided to take a break of couple of years to learn new stuff I have already made a list of, experiment with some personal projects I always wanted to create and figure out what I would like to do later. Just ensure that you have a fair bit of runway so that if any of your projects get serious you can pursue it to end.

</comment><comment> aps-sids I'm in a slightly similar situation. Just that I'm in my final semester sitting for placements. But I don't really want to join a company or work for someone else's startup right away.

I'm actively looking for good ideas and people to start up with. While I'm not very experienced developer, I'm indeed capable of working on an MVP for testing out an idea, and taking things from there, if it all works out fine.

I would love to hear from you and see if we can make something out of this. You can support me a bit while MVP development, and if it looks promising, you can quit your job and we can completely concentrate on this thing.

</comment><comment><USER26> I was in your shoes just over a year ago and decided to go with starting my own startup. I thought having started two startups prior with some success would make it easy but I was wrong.

The reality is that the default of any state of any startup is failure. You probably won't understand the magnitude of the problems you'll face until you see them directly. At this point, your ideas are just ideas and you should work on validating them.

There's a lot of ways to go about doing this and it'll really depend on the market you're chasing. It's likely that a combination of customer interviews and sales will let you gauge which of your ideas have promise and which won't. Something that really helped me was thinking about questions VCs ask when they're evaluating a startup. What's your unfair advantage? Why hasn't this worked before and why will it work now? These questions are incredibly important even if you're not interested in raising venture. There's a lot of books and literature on the web so I won't get into this deeply.

You probably noticed that I didn't say writing code. Sometimes writing code is how you should be validating your idea but most of the time it isn't. You should get in that mindset. However, when you need to write code there's a few ways to get over that commute drain:

1.) Wake up earlier and put some time in before you start your day.

2.) Live closer to your job. It'll alleviate a lot of the problems of coming home and not wanting to do more more work.

3.) Write code on the weekends instead.

Also, whatever you do, don't do it alone. I did it alone for the first time and it's awful. Your job is a great place to find future cofounders or employees. Do hackathons with them on the weekends. Tell them your ideas. See what they excited about.

A year later, I'm doing some consulting on the side to pay the bills and getting into a pivot that's finally moving the needle. Even though most of this year was a total failure, I couldn't be happier and I'm glad I did what I did. Feel free to shoot me an email at jr.sunny at gmail dot com if you have any questions or need any help.

</comment><comment><USER27> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." \--George Bernard Shaw

</comment><comment><USER28> If you're sick of it, find a new job. If you start something of your own, try going freelance first. It's far easier to sell and you can cut your teeth there. Definitely don't sink yourself into a startup that hasn't gotten any traction. You have to seriously tell yourself this will be your life for the next 10 years or so.

Unless right now one of your apps has like 400 followers/likes and not even an alpha to test, don't do it. But once you do, go nuts!

</comment><comment><USER29> A job at a fast growing startup is worth a lot. It's an amazing way to take on a lot of responsibility quickly. You _should_ be learning a lot.

My recommendation would be to keep daydreaming about doing your own startup, but don't quit until:

\- you have the killer idea

\- you keep obsessing about your idea

\- you have talked to 10 people about your idea face to face

\- three of those 10 people told you to quit unequivocally

</comment><comment><USER30> Read Running Lean and other related books. They will help you create a project that gets traction before you write any code. Customers before Code prevents project burnout you describe.

Also, start networking. It can take 6-18months (or more) to find your confounders.

While getting paid its a good time to ramp up CustDev and Lean skill sets

</comment><comment><USER31> Does it have to be a startup right away? Can't you take a timeout and use the time to build something and see if there's traction? Maybe turn it into a passive income source at first? Or a lifestyle job?

If it doesn't work out, you can get another job, save up some more and try another idea?

<comment><AUTHOR> What's the difference? Isn't that effectively what a startup is? I'm guessing your definition of startup is raising money and hyper growth?

<comment><USER31> [http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Personally I would stay a bit longer, especially if you are considering trying to start your own. The amount of knowledge and experience you will pick up, even in the next 6 months is worth it. You say it is solid, try to see it through.

</comment><comment><USER33> This post, also currently on the HN front page, seems relevant: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8779799](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8779799)

<comment><USER34> That post is a thinly veiled ad from a recruiter offering terrible advice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> you work only 8-9 hours a day and have just a 45 minute commute and you're whining about it? For someone in their twenties that makes no sense to me. I'm twice as old as you, work longer hours than you, have a longer commute and manage to raise a daughter and contribute to my github projects when she's asleep. I'm no better than anyone, my point is that you sound so whiny and entitled. If you don't like your job then change it, but you definitely don't sound like someone who would do very well going out alone.

</comment><comment><USER6> TL;DR: it doesn't sound like you should jump ship.

 _Everyday I feel like I want to leave to start something of my own._

This is a normal impulse, but until you're getting a solid signal that you _can_ start something of your own, and without taking onerous financial risk, don't take it too seriously. It's "freshman wants to drop out and write a novel" syndrome. Everyone goes through it, and we survive. You'd be weird if you didn't have this impulse on occasion.

Size up your current situation for whether you're getting the mentorship and resources and connections that'll make you be able to be a founder for real, and preferably without severe financial risk. If you are, great. (I'm guessing that you're not there yet, but a good startup will put you on the path.) If you're not, find a way to change your job as it currently is, in order to make it so. This may mean befriending people in upper management (a skill worth learning) or furtively re-focusing your efforts toward networking and career growth (also a skill worth learning) or something else.

If you're considered to be a valued contributor, then see if the founders will introduce you to investors on a casual, social basis. Yes, it's a political risk to ask, but this kind of political risk is insignificant in comparison to the risk involved in starting your own project.

 _I am always so exhausted after writing code for 8-9 hours a day that I definitely don 't want to come home after commuting for 45 minutes (plus I like having somewhat of a social life)._

If that 8-9 hours of work is advancing your career, it's not wasted. If it's not, then start slacking a bit (once you've established a solid reputation based on your first months, you can) and direct your focus toward building contacts and advancing your technical knowledge-- that is, work hard on the parts of the job (as you define it) that advance your career and slack on the stupid shit that doesn't.

 _I feel like I will enjoy it more._

That's "grass is greener" syndrome. If you're a natural entrepreneur (and it's OK if you're not; they're only ~1% of the population, and people who are not that can still be great entrepreneurs) then you'd enjoy bootstrapping, even though you'd have no money most of the time and most people (including almost all of the VC-funded entrepreneurs) would find it exhausting and miserable, and would rather give up some autonomy for a stable income. (The trait of the natural entrepreneur is an outlier stance on the rich-versus-king spectrum.) It's completely OK if you're not a natural entrepreneur; I'm certainly not. That just means that you're going to want to work for someone else and learn on their risk and dime, for at least 5-10 years, before you're confident enough to go out on your own.

If you're not a natural entrepreneur, though, you're not going to start a business unless you have funding already delivered (and, by the way, that's probably the right strategy for most). If you're going to try to raise a seed round with no connections, forget "enjoyment". The odds are against you, and fundraising if you're not part of the in-crowd (and it sounds like you're not, because that's 0.1% of the Valley, and it sounds like you're under 25, and you're in an employee role at a startup) is _fucking miserable_. People have been driven to suicide by the fundraising process. It is that fucking bad. Of course, if you run into a business co-founder who comes with the resources in- hand... that problem goes away. Then again, you're also likely to be #2 at best. It depends on you whether that's OK.

 _Plus, I feel I 'm really only learning from myself at the startup._

You're ~22. Unless it's a shit-house, you're not the best and most experienced programmer there. Find someone you can learn from and start asking for his or her time, preferably in small amounts. See if he'll talk about his favorite subject over lunch. Internal networking is as important a skill as external networking. Take this opportunity to learn it. Mentors aren't "assigned" from the top, and finding "a mentor" or "a rabbi" is really rare. It's more sustainable and practical to learn a little bit from a larger number of people.

This is a great opportunity to learn things (such as internal networking, and how startups work) on someone else's risk and dime. But it's not going to be handed to you on a silver platter.

 _I should stay for 6 more months and get my small amount of equity to see what it will be worth. Even at an absurd outcome >1B the payout won't affect my life all that much._

Employee equity is, except for executives, usually a fucking joke. It's good that you learned that early on. Don't get bent out of shape about the fact. It's just worth recognizing the equity is almost never worth making career sacrifices over. If you have 20% of a business, you might favor the needs of the business over your own career goals and reputation. At 0.05%? Pfft. Think of it as a lottery ticket, and keep an eye on your own career objectives because, unless you're lucky and become the protege of someone important, no one else will.

That said... even if the equity isn't a reason to stay, your reputation is. Six-month stints look like absolute shit on your CV, and if you leave a "rapidly growing startup" to go out on your own but can't raise, it'll look like you were fired. The job-hopper stigma is fucking shitty, but it's real. Tech is more forgiving of job-hopping than, say, Wall Street or government, but leaving at 6 months just looks really bad. I'd say that, unless the job is horrible, that alone is a reason to tough it out for another year.

If it becomes clear that the startup is going to do nothing for your career, then drop the focus on your assigned stuff and put time into building the skills you want for your next gig ("powerslacking"). It's easier to act productive and engaged when powerslacking (another skill you might as well learn early on) then when just fucking around.

 _Any other things to consider? Any advice? I feel like other people have had similar thoughts or even experience leaving._

Yes. The time to ditch a startup is when you're no longer growing with the company. If you keep getting better projects and promotions, stick with it. (It's too early to tell, because you've only been there for 6 months.) It's when the company starts growing above you that you should bounce. Good startups promote internally, but most startups are crappy and pull their leadership from the outside (a social-climbing mentality) and when it gets into the state that you know you'll never be promoted because externals are going to get the best projects and roles, that's when you should jump. You're not going to have a good sense of whether your startup is in that state, yet; it'll be clearer in 6 months to a year, and that would be a good time to reevaluate. Even at that point, I'd say that you'd do better to get another job (external promotion) than try to wing it on your own... unless you can co- found with someone who can deliver Sequoia and Y Combinator on an idea.

Good luck!</comment>


Don't Buy into the Gender Pay Gap Myth - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/karinagness/2016/04/12/dont-buy-into-the-gender-pay-gap-myth <comment><USER2> Journalism should be about facts. The fact, here, is that some statistically challenged organizations appear, maybe, to draw conclusion from U.S. Bureau of Labor surveys about _median_ wages of men and women as if the data were about _mean_ wages.

But instead of offering a lesson about the difference between mean and median, or a discussion of why the apparently needed average wage data isn't collected, Forbes tries to discredit the idea of a gender wage gap in general and calls these statistics "debunked".

</comment><comment><USER3> Should say (2016) in the title.</comment>


Oracle customers fear its reaction if they use Amazon's or Microsoft's cloud - <AUTHOR> https://www.businessinsider.com/oracle-customers-fear-oracle-licensing-gotchas-with-aws-and-azure-2019-3 <comment><USER2> This article appears to be particularly low-effort, designed to engender fear more than enlighten.

The core thesis is that Oracle customers fear license audits if they use a non-Oracle cloud platform. On the face of it, that fear seems reasonable enough, since this is the kind of anti-competitive behaviour that a company could reasonably be capable of.

However:

* That "fear" is based on a report from a single survey, and the survey results are locked behind a register-to-read e-book.

* That survey was sponsored by a company in the business of migrating customers to Oracle cloud services (on arbitrary clouds), and the e-book -- presumably with marketing intent -- describes how to manage licensing issues. This firm has unclean hands, since it financially benefits from assuaging customers' licensing fears.

Furthermore, the article punts on the question of whether this fear is reasonable. It provides a confirmatory opinion only from a CEO of a _company providing audit defense services_ , who obviously has a very direct, financial incentive in sparking fears to assuage for money. Furthermore, despite this CEO having previously worked for Oracle, he is not quoted as asserting that Oracle actually engaged in audits for anticompetitive purposes -- at most he speculates that Oracle's sales team would raise licensing FUD.

Finally, despite this story being of no urgency, it appears the journalist has not waited to give Oracle a reasonable time to respond. The article states that "Oracle did not immediately respond to a request for comment," yet evidently the inciting e-book was only publicly released this morning ([https://twitter.com/AppsAssociates/status/111053306358133145...](https://twitter.com/AppsAssociates/status/1110533063581331456)).

I'm disappointed. In my book this is borderline unethical journalism, since the article insinuates practices that would be sensational if proven, without evidence that there's any substance behind the story.

<comment><USER3> Not entirely [https://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/news/3071114/oracle-cloud- gr...](https://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/news/3071114/oracle-cloud-growth- driven-by-threats-to-customers-claims-shareholder-lawsuit)

<comment><USER2> That's interesting to read, since it provides an additional air of credibility to the reported fears.

I wish that the Business Insider article had linked or at least mentioned it, but if they did then perhaps "customers are scared of Oracle" would not have seemed like breaking news.</comment></comment></comment>


Seattle passes smaller 'head tax' on big companies after impassioned debate - <AUTHOR> https://www.geekwire.com/2018/seattle-passes-smaller-head-tax-big-companies-will-compromise-appease-amazon/ <comment><USER2> > City of Seattle revenues have grown dramatically from $2.8B in 2010 to $4.2B > in 2017, and they will be even higher in 2018. This revenue increase far > outpaces the Seattle population increase over the same time period. The city > does not have a revenue problem – it has a spending efficiency problem

<comment><USER3> That quote (from Amazon representatives) implies that revenue is non-linear to population -- but that expenses should be linear. I don't buy into that view. Especially in a "boom".

<comment><USER4> Meanwhile real estate prices have gone up 2-300% in the same timeframe, and they are building light rail to deal with the gridlock.

<comment><USER5> Very slowly for many parts of the city - Ballard is looking at a 2030+ timeline to get a light rail expansion.

That said, it's better than nothing!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This seems a little silly - it's an irritation, but it's not big enough to amount to anything really. If anything, it hurts lower-end positions more than any other, since it's a flat head tax. If you're counting the beans closely, it starts to make sense to hire 9 people with the salary you might have allotted to 10, and so forth.

All this would really seem to do is piss off Amazon and Microsoft and the other big players, which is kind of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

<comment><USER7> Most Microsoft employees are in Redmond, which already has employee taxes at $106.90/yr, or $0.056/hr for part-time work: [http://psbm.net/licenses- taxes/redmond.html](http://psbm.net/licenses-taxes/redmond.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Sad to watch SF and SEA be the cause of their own slow-motion downfall.

<comment><USER9> Where exactly do you expect business to go?

<comment><USER10> In the case of Seattle, Kirkland and Bellevue are host to quite a few small and large tech companies already. The office space is plentiful and cheap on this side of Lake Washington, and there is less of a worry of being hit with poorly planned taxes and regulations that Seattle is, at this point, infamous for enacting.

With the way the housing market is going, and the upcoming King County property tax hike, I wouldn't be surprised if tech workers started creeping out into Snohomish County and favoring jobs on the Eastside instead of Seattle due to traffic.

<comment><USER11> The north and east side are the worst places to live in the Seattle area, however, if you are young and without a family. It is very much like comparing San Jose to San Francisco (I say this living in Bellevue and having grown up in Bothell).

<comment><USER12> i think the east side is the best place to live, the worst place is sodo.

<comment><USER11> I don't know many young people that agree with that. Families, sure, east and north side is better for schools and such, since it is basically suburbia.

Most of Sodo still isn't zoned for residential.

<comment><USER12> I have a family and live in the east side :-) I've seen it a million times, people move to seattle, get an apartment, then couple up and buy a smaller condo, have kids, need space, move to the evil eastside.

<comment><USER11> Well, who knows what it will be like in the future. Seattle isn't losing population, some more suburban part of Seattle (e.g. West Seattle) are booming also. It is possible that millenials will stay put and not migrate to the east side.

<comment><USER12> my kid is almost finished with school, I might move to seattle after that.

<comment><USER11> Seattle has ok schools. I have a toddler, currently living in Bellevue but the thought of him going to school with a bunch of snobs is scary. Maybe move to Mercer island instead :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> So let me see if I understand this. Companies hire people, they become successful and make their employeees successful (at least their non warehouse, non call center employees) making the city and population at large successful; growing the economy. For that good they get taxed more? It's no wonder AMZ for one is looking for an HQ2 location.

I know it makes people feel good, but honestly, the only answer to homelessness is a federal approach. Piecemeal approaches tend to attract people to homeless friendly places creating a positive feedback loop.

Why not go the whole hog and institute an "automation tax". Tax companies for every job they automate which leads to an unemployed willing worker, avoiding the creation of a homeless pop. This would be less ridiculous.

<comment><USER12> There's not a good way to get more revenue to cover the infrastructure needed as companies hire more employees. We don't have income taxes here. If we did, as you hire an employee you'd get more revenue to cover the fractional cost of bus service, etc. A head tax is a way to do that. Are you against income taxes? They could accomplish the same thing.

<comment><USER14> Florida and Texas do not have income tax and yet they appear to not suffer from the same ailments that the city of Seattle and SF are suffering from.

In a couple of years the city council will move to raise the head tax, stating that their new record tax receipts are not enough to implement their working solution. It is easy to spend money that isn't yours.

The city of Seattle has had record tax receipts for the past couple of years and yet they somehow are always "short" on money.

<comment><USER12> Saying Seattle has record revenue is just a completely misleading thing to say, without enough information. Your comment doesn't clarify anything about whether Seattle is spending money poorly or wisely. Seattle's costs have been going up, partly because lots more people have been moving here, and we don't have income taxes, and businesses can hire more people without that leading to increased tax revenue. The city has to build more infrastructure to handle us (roads, transit, bike lanes, tunnels). There's no clear match between infrastructure needs and revenue.

<comment><USER14> As you can see from the data[0] the city itself raises tax through a variety of channels. The largest being property, business, and retail taxes. As you can imagine, when the city grows all those enumerated taxes grow accordingly. As you can see in data[1] the tax receipts for the years 2000 is roughly $600ish million. For the 17-18 fiscal years, according to data[0] Seattle had receipts of $1.1-1.2 billion.

So tax revenues for the city are close to 100% increase. If you see the Census for the year 2000, the population of Seattle is at 564k. For the year 2016, the population is at 750k or so. So a 100% tax revenue increase and a 50% population increase. I'd dare say the city council is just belligerent with other people's money.

Also, there is a legitimate far left socialist on the board. You should watch the Shapiro debate against the Seattle $15 min wage. She's full of ideas with no substance to back it up.

[0][https://sccinsight.com/2016/10/03/understanding-the- seattle-...](https://sccinsight.com/2016/10/03/understanding-the-seattle-city- budget-part-2-revenues/)

[1][https://www.seattle.gov/financedepartment/0102Adopted/City%2...](https://www.seattle.gov/financedepartment/0102Adopted/City%20Revenue%20Overview.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> One question comes to mind... I wonder if this will result in more companies allowing/encouraging remote work. Obviously, it won't work in every case. I just wonder if things like this will push companies more in that general direction.

<comment><USER16> For a company with multiple locations, they'll just shift jobs to the other locations. Working remotely has become very unfashionable in tech after many studies showed that remote employees are very inefficient.

<comment><USER17> Quite the opposite: [https://hbr.org/2017/11/a-study-of-1100-employees-found- that...](https://hbr.org/2017/11/a-study-of-1100-employees-found-that-remote- workers-feel-shunned-and-left-out) [https://www.inc.com/farmers-insurance/do- these-3-things-to-f...](https://www.inc.com/farmers-insurance/do- these-3-things-to-foster-a-flexible-remote-work.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm fiscally conservative and I don't mind the tax, it's just very poorly planned. $20M in revenue for businesses is not much. It's a regressive tax, and it is appropriated to homelessness which the city has done a very poor job of dealing with. Money will no doubt be wasted.

I do support a more fair tax in Bay Area that goes directly to transportation and infrastructure improvement

<comment><USER12> Since we can't do income taxes in washington state, we can't make it a perfect tax, which would be to tax rich software engineers more, and say construction workers and baristas not at all. this tax would be better that way. They try to limit it to people working at big companies. I think they should do something like make it only for people making 100k or something. But would that tip it over into an income based tax, probably?

So what's your idea for how to raise money to deal with homeless people. My idea is copy what worked in Utah, which is start with building tons of housing, enough for all the homeless people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> A $21/month tax on each employee. Feels like Amazon could swallow this and might provide some incentive to hire outside the city core.

<comment><USER20> Last I heard, they were shopping around to build a second Fortress of Dar^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H ... ahem ... HQ. Might this be incentive to accelerate things a bit?

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I'm not really against the tax but its use. Spending more money on the homeless giving them handouts is only going to attract more worsening the problem.

I think the homeless problem should be tackled on a federal level since it is easy for them to move states but not countries. Thus, any non-federal government that spends tax revenue to help the homeless will likely just attract more homeless people from other areas worsening the local populations lives through the negative externalities and the costs which only reduce other local governments homeless expenses.

<comment><USER12> If that were true that we are making it too easy to live here in Seattle, then consider Utah, which basically has provided housing for all homeless people. They have not been swarmed with everyone moving there. I have noticed this has not happened in Seattle :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> The amount of dumb things I hear coming out of Seattle lately blows my mind. Every other city that wears it's "progressive"-ness on its sleeve should take a wait and see approach to what Seattle does, so that when these terrible policies do nothing to fix their problems and exacerbate others (like blaming tech companies for housing shortages in SF) they can hopefully avoid it.

</comment><comment><USER23> Why not tie this to CEO pay... whatever multiplier the CEO earns (including bonuses) above average workers is what they pay, so say it's 400x they'd pay 400 per head, if it's 200 they'd pay 200... Then the company just needs to pay 1 worker less money to keep more for the business itself and shareholders/etc... Or the business could pay workers more to lower that 400:1 ratio.

</comment><comment><USER24> Note that "help the homeless" and "reduce homelessness" are two different goals and they are often at odds with each other.

</comment><comment><USER25> How're is this tax supposed to fix or ease homelessness?

Several years ago, some friends were looking to purchase a starter home in Seattle, maybe for $250k or so. But they had such a killer deal on rent, they opted to wait a few more years, _to save up more money_.

Well, in the next few years that dream quickly slipped through their fingers. Now you have to pay upwards of $500k just to get some as-is teardown that you're not even allowed to look inside before you buy.

<comment><USER26> Well, taxing something means you'll usually get less of it, so I guess it'll reduce demand on housing (probably not what they want since it hurts the economy in other ways). If the money goes to building for those in need it could help a bit.

The only thing that will really help over the long term is building even more apartments.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Shame on Amazon for hiring so many people in the Seattle area with good paying jobs.

How dare people blame the poor and beleaguered city government for not solving the city's mental health problem. Record tax revenues? It's still not enough.

Seriously though, isn't this the deal? Business brings in good paying jobs and pays taxes, city lays down the infrastructure to support commerce. With record tax revenues the city government isn't holding up their end of the bargain.

<comment><USER12> Just noting that Seattle has record revenues, is notenough information to understand if Seattle is doing a good job with it's tax revenue. There are more people moving here all the time, so revenue will just go up (like for say sales taxes). It's like saying the government always does a bad job, so the govt. shouldn't do anything - that's just a general statement that doesn't clarify anything. In this case, let's look at the costs and infrastructure the city is facing and the number of people it has to deal with and try to understand if the city's doing a good job or not. I haven't actually read anything that did a good analysis of that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I agree that this tax probably won't fix the homelessness problem. Whatever has happened to Seattle is much deeper then just homelessness. Amazon and the like have ravaged the city of it's ability to provide functional housing even to service and support workers.

I know this is happening in every city, but it's very pronounced in Seattle. The city shuts down at 9PM because no one lives there and then the homeless spill over into the empty well scrubbed streets.

It's soul has been sucked out and been replaced with techno culture. A weird head tax is a reasonable ding for an exasperated set of natives, but someone has to find a way to balance these concerns. Or not... I shudder to think of what the bay, Seattle, Austin, Denver, Boston, etc are going to become without all the people that make up a city that aren't just there to get their next rung up on the way to be CTO for their own gig app.

<comment><USER29> Boston has a very active night life scene, as does Austin and SF... not sure why you think these are ghost towns at night

<comment><USER30> Eh, Boston is pretty dead by midnight, but there's not much open other than bars. I lived out in the country and had a 24 hour pharmacy and supermarket right next to each other but I never something like that in Boston proper

<comment><USER28> Not quite what I meant. Sorry, I wasn't clear. I mean places that price out culture for the tech scenes have some complicated issues with growth right now.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Author Earnings – Traditional vs Self Publishing - <AUTHOR> http://authorearnings.com/the-report/

<comment><AUTHOR> Author Hugh Howey ([http://www.hughhowey.com/](http://www.hughhowey.com/)) wrote one of the most successful self-published Kindle series to date (Wool, and its sequels Shift and Dust).

He (along with an unnamed co-author) wrote a report that analyzed data from public sources about authors' revenue segmented on publishing model and popularity, among other dimensions. The results are fascinating.</comment>


Raspberry Pi Boat Computer Is for Sailors - <AUTHOR> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/raspberry-pi-4-project-boat-computer-sailing <comment><USER2> I'm not a sailor, but this seems really cool. Might be useful for hiking or camping as well with some tweaks.</comment>


Eric Lippert is leaving Microsoft - <AUTHOR> http://ericlippert.com/ <comment><USER2> One has to wonder if that's not related to how C# and .net are being treated as second class citizens nowadays at Microsoft.

As we saw recently:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4842024>

they're looking for someone to work on a C# to native code compiler. Even if .net as a VM and the C# to IL compiler are far from gone (and probably never will be), it doesn't look like C# and .net are in favor at Microsoft nowadays.

Oh well, as long as Eric keeps on blogging...

<comment><USER3> Don't get all conspiracy theory on us.

Sad to see Eric go (just started working with him!) but glad that he's moving on to other great things.

<comment><USER4> Doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to figure out C#/.NET is no longer Microsoft's sole flagship strategy for developers...

Microsoft have recently discontinued their only managed .NET cross-platform managed UI effort in Silverlight in favor of the multi-language Win 8 SDK with JavaScript, C# and C++ bindings. Most Windows applications are still being written in C++ where you would barely notice the difference if Windows didn't have .NET installed, this is in stark contrast for instance with Apple's positioning of their own XCode/Obj-C development platform they've used to build OSX, which essentially would be a glorified terminal if you took away all Obj-C libraries and applications.

Microsoft have also made significant investments in JavaScript and node.js, with even Anders moving off C# to work on TypeScript for a bit.

Basically they're business models have changed where they're now positioning Azure (their new server strategy) as a multi-platform cloud strategy with support parity for .NET, node.js, Java, PHP and Python: <https://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/develop/overview/>

So I don't think it's a stretch to observe there has been in-fact a "Difference in strategic position" with Microsoft's attitude towards C#/.NET.

<comment><USER5> _> Doesn't take a conspiracy theorist to figure out C#/.NET is no longer Microsoft's sole flagship strategy for developers_

"Sole Flagship" strategies, be they for language or DB, whatever, are doomed to fail. The company has "picked a winner," reducing internal diversity and competition between approaches. Past a certain size threshold, a big company has become a number of interlinked ecosystems. Promoting standards to reduce friction of internal information sharing is the way to go. This enhances the positive effect of internal competition, instead of squashing it.

<comment><USER4> >> "Sole Flagship" strategies, be they for language or DB, whatever, are doomed to fail.

Riiight, cause standardizing on a single platform and maintaining one set of documentation and cultivating 1 shared knowledge-base is really hurting Android's use of Java and Apple's use of Obj-C.

<comment><USER5> I was talking about internal big company directives. The ones I've seen failed (Shell Oil), unless they were about infrastructure. (Amazon, Wells Fargo)

Android and iOS are a different case. The diversity they both want, they are getting. The diversity iOS doesn't want is controlled. In a big company, the ecosystems have mostly been internal, and standardizing interoperation has traditionally been about internal efficiencies. App ecosystems aren't necessarily like that -- they are for external consumption. (Though one could make the argument that Intents are about efficiency within the Android ecosystem.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nice to see a move to Coverity. I use their product and it is one of the best static analysis tools I have used. Maybe we will see support for more languages rolled into the tool.

Hey Eric while your there how about you make the CLI tool suck less. I want a simple invocation to test for the presence of failures.

<comment><USER7> Me too, love Coverity although I'm only using it for C right now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> This is quite a shock. I worked at Coverity about 7 years ago, but I didn't have much faith in static analysis (now I'm at Microsoft, ironic).

<comment><USER9> I wonder why you lost or never had any faith in static analysis. On Apple's platforms it's becoming a really big "thing". Also John Carmack talked about the benefits of static code analysis at QuakeCon 2012.

Also a good read: [http://www.altdevblogaday.com/2011/12/24/static-code- analysi...](http://www.altdevblogaday.com/2011/12/24/static-code-analysis/)

<comment><USER10> I hated every attempt at static analysis until I started programming with Xcode. In my usage, Build and Analyze is always right -- that's the difference. Other tools (lint, FXCop) are too noisy. Even warnings in some compilers are an annoyance that you have to code around to eliminate.

<comment><USER11> Fxcop is massively overused. The rules are designed for teams who are building libraries and frameworks (thus the name, Fx is short for framework). For ordinary app development many of the rules are inappropriate, which can lead to an impedance mismatch and frustration.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> If you've never read Eric's blog, I highly recommend it for anyone into language design and implementation (C# or not).

</comment><comment><USER13> C# was my first programming language and no doubt what caused me to love my trade. I wish Mr. Lippert the best of luck and I hope he finds happiness and new found direction in this new transition.

</comment><comment><USER14> Enjoy the time off & Merry Christmas! Good luck at Coverity.</comment>


Google Search: Blink Tag - <AUTHOR> https://www.google.com/#q=blink+tag <comment><USER2> There's quite a few Google tricks like this; [https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#safe=off&q=do+a+barrel+ro...](https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#safe=off&q=do+a+barrel+roll).

</comment><comment><USER3> another easter egg!</comment>


Juicy List of VSCode Extensions for React Native, JavaScript and General Use - <AUTHOR> https://koprowski.it/2020/vscode-extensions-for-react-native-javascript/ <comment><AUTHOR> I would like to share with you my extensions that helps me every day. I'm working as a React Native developer so JavaScript centric section will be the biggest one but not the only one!</comment>


Ask HN: How do you handle beta testing agreements with enterprise?  - <AUTHOR>

Background: We are developing a cloud-based application intended for consumers, but at the same time would be useful for enterprise.  Thus, we have begun talking with enterprises to hear thoughts on the application.  In doing this process, we have been pleasantly surprised to hear interest in beta testing the application.  In exchange for beta testing we offered the application for free (or little cost).  A particular enterprise has agreed in principle, but now we must work out the logistics of the agreement.  As this is our first potential customer, we want to the beta testing agreement to go as smoothly as possible.<p>How has everyone handled beta testing agreements with enterprises in the past?  Do you charge a small amount for the application or give it away for free?  Do you give lifetime licenses or do they expire?  Any successful or failed models? <comment><USER2> We let a mid-sized oil services company beta test our software for free and had our lawyer draft a non-compete/IP protection contract letter;

For the amount and quality of feedback we received, allowing the free beta test worked out great - I could not have paid a group of QA testers to provide as good feedback as I got from the beta test company;

In addition, most companies do not like to 'pay to test' a product.

In our situation, the company ended up purchasing our software and about 18 months later was acquired by Halliburton - Halliburton has its own software division and no longer needed us;

</comment><comment><USER3> There are a number of "beta" agreements available on the web that you might consider as starting points (or templates to give to an attorney to craft into your own).

Additionally, consider what you want to get out of the Beta: If you simply want a name to use for marketing, then ensure that's in the agreement (obligation to support your marketing efforts). If you really want to get end- user feedback, either ask the company to put some skin in the game (money, committed to levels of use, etc...), and consider rewarding them in some capacity if they achieve your goals (x number of transactions, x number of users, y number of bugs, etc...). Rewards could be discounts on purchase when it exits Beta, participation on customer advisory boards, etc...</comment>


What are some things that are easy to describe but hard to code? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Hard to code for who? Embedded device development is hard for those who don't do it regularly, but fairly routine for those who do.

Self-driving cars are hard for everyone at the moment, but in 20 years will probably be fairly "easy" for experts in the field to replicate.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think a lot of computer vision problems seem like they should be "easy" because the human vision system has millions of years of "development" behind it.

</comment><comment><USER4> Projects with trade names. google, facebook, etc.

</comment><comment><USER5> Obligatory XKCD: [https://xkcd.com/1425/](https://xkcd.com/1425/)</comment>


Guaranteed Copy Elision Does Not Elide Copies - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/vcblog/2018/12/10/guaranteed-copy-elision-does-not-elide-copies/ <comment><USER2> Did this get pulled? I get a "We're sorry, but we can't find the page you're looking for" when I follow the link.

<comment><USER3> Yes, it was published before it was ready, it'll be live properly tomorrow.</comment></comment>


Bot written to buy random things each month from Amazon - <AUTHOR> http://randomshopper.tumblr.com/ <comment><USER2> If you look at what he's doing from an art perspective, he's engaging in Generative art, art that is created by process outside the control of the artist: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_art>

I usually think of John Cage when I think of generative art, and the way he let the environment or random events become part of his music.

One of the coolest things I've learned about recently in this realm is Joseph Nechvatal's Viral Symphony, a musical work composed by a C++ program that seems similar to Conway's Game of Life: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_symphOny>

<comment><USER3> "If you look at what he's doing from an art perspective"

What exactly is an art perspective? I buy stuff every month from Amazon to serve different purposes, so that they are pseudo-random if looked from outside without context. That doesn't make me an artist, at least not in my book.

I don't want to start a modern art flame fest, but where do we draw the line? I mean, it seems like nowadays _anything_ is or can be art. And if I say that I don't get it, well, then it is my problem for not looking at it from the right perspective.

<comment><USER4> I define "art" as something I (the proverbial unskilled layman) couldn't do in a weekend.

I was in a Syndey art museum recently, and there are a lot of beautiful art paintings I couldn't create in a thousand years. There are a few proudly displayed "things" that I could create in a couple hours with zero skill. I have no idea what people see in those "things".

<comment><USER5> >I define "art" as something I (the proverbial unskilled layman) couldn't do in a weekend.

Art is also about context. Look at prehistoric cave paintings: I have no technical skill as an artist, but I could easily recreate the paintings myself. But does that mean they're not art? Of course not. To take another example, how about the hasty sketches of a soldier in the trenches in the First World War?

I only use such a stark example to prove the point that technical skill isn't all that makes art _art_. If you don't know what people see in these "things" then perhaps you just need to look a little more carefully. A lot of modern art is taking the mundane, that which we are used to, and challenging our assumptions about it. Assumptions that we didn't even know we had.

I'm not commenting on this post in particular, but all too often I see this dismissive attitude towards modern art, and I think it's unfair and deserves more careful consideration.

<comment><USER4> Consider a painting I saw on TV a while back that is suspected of being done by da Vinci. If the experts concur, it would be worth millions. If they do not concur, it would be worth $20,000 because it's old. If joe starving artist down the street painted it, it would be worth $500 at best.

The exact same painting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> You know what would be really cool? Write a mini-me program, with enough money that hosting can be funded on interest, with a little left over for gifts.

Then, you die (painlessly, after a long and happy life, etc. etc.)

The program keeps running, tracking your descendants over time and gives them little random, appropriate gifts from the ghost of great^n grandpa or grandma.

I wrote about this in 2007 ([https://tubelite.wordpress.com/2007/09/10/autonomous- softwar...](https://tubelite.wordpress.com/2007/09/10/autonomous-software- agents-as-trustees/)). Perhaps Facebook is in the best position to do this, help people plan and create their ghosts.

<comment><USER7> Let's say that you save 10'000 $ in an account with 5% interest, then you'll have 500 $ a year to spend on presents. If every child has two children the amount children in a generation is 2^n. When they grow up we stop giving them presents for mathematical simplicity. Then it's possible to give every child in the 9th generation a $1 gift a year. Which is quite neat. If we have a generation length of between 25 and 30 years this will be between 225 and 270 years in the future.

<comment><USER6> In the long run, it is highly likely that you will either be an ancestor of every single human, or none of them. (<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-19331938>) You don't need to give every single one of your descendants a gift. Give 2-5 gifts a year, randomized after filtering out undesirables using a naughty/nice algorithm.

Assuming total population remains roughly the same, if enough people did this, it would actually work. Most kids would get gifts from grand^n Santa.

<comment><USER7> Nice idea and an interesting article. If the goal is to be remembered for as long as possible giving more presents is obviously better. After 9 generations only a small part

But some might feel that a enormous list of children with ratings of their behavior would be questionable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This was done a few years back as the result of an XKCD, the original article is gone, but there's a few articles about it: [http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-11/09/xkcd- packages...](http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-11/09/xkcd-packages- script) <http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20022153-1.html> it's a cool idea.

Not sure if I'm imagining it, but I think that someone built this into a web service that you could subscribe to and it would buy things for you every day. Does anyone remember this? I can't find anything via HN search, but I'm sure it was a show HN at some point.

<comment><USER9> I'm the guy who built the original XKCD-inspired bot -- the original blog post is still around at <http://bieh.net/wordpress/2010/11/08/xkcd-576/>, though the images have since broken.

Possibly the web service you mean is <http://www.eachdayisagift.com/> ?

<comment><USER10> bieh's had a pretty good run when it was live!

I wrote eachdayisagift.com and it was funny to see all this come back on HN today. I had to freeze mine as it was buying a lot of stuff from Hong Kong that Australian customs classed as 'weapons' (laser pointers, throwing stars), that got me a stern letter from the government.

<comment><USER11> Wait - what? You actually wrote a bot as in <http://xkcd.com/576/> and _actually had the problem in the comic_?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I normally don't like when someone posts an xkcd link, but this was the first thing that came in my mind <http://xkcd.com/576/>

</comment><comment><USER13> Cool. You could use this to set up a "Random Amazon Purchase of the Month Club" and have a decent side business.

</comment><comment><USER14> Off topic: I'm wondering when HN users will figure out how to get permalink of a Tumblr post. Everybody is linking to blog home except companies hosting their blogs on Tumblr.

<comment><USER15> Just to be clear, this is off topic because here the intention probably _was_ to link to the entire blog (all of which is about the bot in the submission title), right?

<comment><AUTHOR> As the OP, I can confirm the intention :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Being a native Swede very much into electronic music I was very interested in learning about Ákos Rózmann! He was a complete stranger to me until now. Thank you very much.

</comment><comment><USER17> I hope the bot buys an ebook about horses.

<comment><USER18> In this (amusing) context, I presume?

<http://horseecomics.tumblr.com/>

<comment><USER17> Yeah. Wow, these comics are amazing too, thank you.

<comment><USER19> Older, but my favorite set of flow of consciousness comics: <http://spamusement.com>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> This is a really cool idea - and it shouldn't be too hard to get it to talk to recommendations, personalisation & wishlist if those APIs still accessible as a web service? However, I haven't used the E-commerce service for a long time and I think it might have been turned off or replaced with something more advertising-oriented.

<comment><USER17> I think that's what it does: [http://randomshopper.tumblr.com/post/35454415921/randomized-...](http://randomshopper.tumblr.com/post/35454415921/randomized- consumerism)

It also bought him a Chomsky book on Linguistics and a electronic music CD. And if the bot did that on it's own that'd be a little too spooky.

<comment><USER20> No, the article says right there it uses search results (presumably by scraping). ECS used to be WSDL - real easy to drive from eg. PHP back in the day. I wouldn't want to be the poor sod parsing the retail website HTML (although perhaps the last redesign improved it).

<comment><USER21> I'm actually not parsing the HTML at all. Not really. I'm using PhantomJS, which is a headless web browser. Each time I load a page, I inject jQuery and just do a simple JS command like

$('#whatevertheIDisfortheform').submit();

It's the equivalent of opening up your console on each page and interacting with it via jQuery rather than a mouse and keyboard.

<comment><USER20> So something has parsed the HTML - but at least _you_ didn't have to reinvent that wheel :)

Still, you might want to look at [https://affiliate- program.amazon.co.uk/gp/advertising/api/de...](https://affiliate- program.amazon.co.uk/gp/advertising/api/detail/main.html) \- the Product Advertising API looks like the latest evolution of the E-Commerce Service API and might let you do things like stop the bot from making duplicate similar purchases, or accidentally fulfilling your wishlist.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Reminds me of: <http://xkcd.com/576/>

</comment><comment><USER23> How is he actually completing the amazon purchase solely via a bot? I know there is no API to automagically buy an item from Amazon.

Would love to see a write up of how this is accomplished.

EDIT: Noticed he is using PhantomJS and running the process through a browser. Very interesting.

<comment><USER24> Apparently <http://zinc.io> does provide an API for placing orders on Amazon.

<comment><USER23> Learn something new everyday on HN! Didn't know this existed and I am wondering how they actually achieve this via Amazon but that's their secret sauce.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I'm surprisingly intrigued by this. It sounds really fun!

<comment><USER26> Good for a conversation piece at parties, if nothing else. "Hey, you guys won't even believe what I got from my random shopper bot this week!"

<comment><USER27> Personally, I'd rather not risk having to explain why I just got 55 gallons of lube and an anatomically correct blow up donkey through the mail.

<comment><USER28> ... or did the bot give you a reasonable excuse to family and friends as to why you have a 55 gallon drum of lube and an anatomically correct blow up donkey?

Hmmmmm. I sense a startup: "we hide your filthy, disgusting pornorgraphy habits from your family by hiding them amongst 'random' automated purchases. Get six days of boring things like glitter and used wing nuts and the seventh day you'll get your favorite, delicious porn. BUY NOW!"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Really funny idea. Are you using <http://zinc.io> to ship the stuff from Amazon?

<comment><USER21> Nope, I'm using PhantomJS, a headless web browser that's mostly used for test automation. I programmed it to log in to the Amazon account, fill out the various forms, and buy/ship the stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> dxRoulette uses an non automated, but similar approach. Although you have to manually buy, it still very fun to sort the item wait for it to arrive in a random date since the product comes from china. <http://www.dxroulette.com/>

<comment><USER30> Hmm, no mater how many times I try, I always get a V for Vendetta mask as the result.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> The two purchases are fascinating. I am curious as to what other purchases of his suggested the CD.

</comment><comment><USER32> I will be writing a bot to buy me random things from musiciansfriend.

</comment><comment><USER33> you have no respect for the value of money, time and our planet. You better use your spare time write a bot to feed 80 human beings in poor country. :\ disappointed how this can get so high on HN. Srsly, you guys are loosing it.

<comment><USER34> And you spend your time commenting on work you don't respect. Why weren't you out farming?

<comment><USER33> what is the purpose of your comment?

<comment><USER35> To point out that there are more things you can be doing for others than getting outraged at a person's lost productivity, if that is your prime concern.

<comment><USER36> I'm not sure that the OP was "outraged at a person's lost productivity". It seems like badv0r may have thought that the project could have potential merit if it focused on something like "feeding 80 human beings in poor country" instead of "Buying random things from amazon each month".

To be more general, the bot currently buys:

<unneeded thing> for <person who can afford it>

while it could buy

<needed thing> for <needy person, who can not afford it>

<comment><USER35> Then they should offer suggestions instead of chastising.

Most persons buy unneeded things whether they can afford them or not. The OP ought to take the time and energy they squander on judging others and devote it to helping the needy. Less anger, more good.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Meet The Drapers, The Family That Defined Silicon Valley's Venture Capital Scene - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/167/the-drapers-of-silicon-valley <comment><USER2> I know this is tangential, but where in the hell is her shoe?

<comment><USER3> Did you notice that the guy in the background is missing his sleeves? I think the photog had a "clever" idea.

<comment><USER4> "clever" photo shoots happened a lot to me.

I remember one where they started with having me eat ("delicious," get it?) and then sitting next to a coworker ("social") and then finally PR shut down the shoot when they told me to feed the coworker.

The picture they used? The one where I'm sitting funny and frowning into the sun: [http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_33/b3997010....](http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_33/b3997010.htm)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Interesting questions brought up...can great tech entrepreneurs be bred?

My opinion is no, mostly because it takes a significant amount of good luck and perfect timing to have great success in SV. Even if you were Mark Zuckerburgs son...he could invest in your company, give you advice, introduce you to good partners/customers. This doesn't automatically translate to success.

<comment><USER6> Also there's a saying that in America great family wealth is typically squandered in three generations. This isn't always true of course, but basically when you're born with a silver spoon in hand, you do have plenty of doors open for you. But you also tend to have less ambition, less grit, less will to survive or die trying etc. Obviously there are many many exceptions but generally it helps to be a self-starter and many self-starters come from less means.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> FastCompany still exists?

Who knew.

</comment><comment><USER8> Maybe the most obnoxious thing I've read this week:

"Katie Anderson, a lanky blond childhood friend of Jesse's, says that growing up in a famous, wealthy family was no big deal for Jesse. "That's the thing about growing up in Silicon Valley. No one's famous and no one's rich . . . because everyone's famous and everyone's rich," says Anderson. "So no one realizes, Oh, not everyone celebrates ski week?"

Like, gag me with a spoon.

<comment><USER9> What's wrong with that statement? Seems about right to me... now can you please pass me the Polaner All-Fruit?

<comment><USER6> It's the nauseating LA-ificiation of Silicon Valley. Yes everyone may be rich (relatively speaking) but the great thing about SV is no one _acts_ rich and certainly no one _feels_ famous. This is the tradition of the valley as demonstrated by Steve Jobs. There are plenty of exceptions but think back to the article that said in SV money represents success but not flashy bullshit possessions.</comment></comment></comment>


The Garden of Earthly Delights by Jheronimus Bosch - <AUTHOR> https://tuinderlusten-jheronimusbosch.ntr.nl/en <comment><USER3> Hieronymus Bosch's work is remarkable and getting to see it in person was one of the most delightful experiences I've had. To convey beauty in the grotesque, the macabre and the unreal: what a genius he was!

(Also, visual art is not something that I used to enjoy for the majority of my life and I still know next to nothing of art but I just found his work spellbinding)

<comment><USER4> I still find his work mindblowing. He's like a mix between Goya, Picasso and Dali but almost half a millenium ago!

<comment><USER5> Painting has deteriorated since the old masters, of whom Goya is sometimes considered the last. Why this happened is not something people have a good answer for, but the end of the 18th C brought increasing rationalisation, modernisation and division of labour which seems to have gradually killed the skills and ways of looking that produced previous masterpieces. It is sad.

Picasso is great, but in a very 20th C way, a lot of what carries his work is a feeling of his energy and charisma, rather than depth of technique of concept. In contrast someone like Bosch was creating these very intensely realised fantasy scenes. Picasso couldn't have done that if he tried, nor can any movie concept artist working today. The same goes for any of the old masters. It's gone, somehow...

<comment><USER6> Pretty sure Picasso was trained in the "old master's way", his early works were more academic and following the painterly tradition, if I recall correctly.. Dali was deep into the techniques of the old masters, and more recently there's a movement sparked by Max Doerner, Ernst Fuchs et al, called Mischteknik that seems to breathe new life into the tradition.

<comment><USER5> Well, that is a matter of opinion. Picasso's early works are certainly realist/academic in style and technique but nobody gets excited about them.

Like I say, this is opinion, but as in architecture, where there is definitely no good classical building happening today, there is no credible 'old master" painting happening now. Even the whole category of figurative art is in question in the same way that ornament in architecture is effectively dead. There are still people who can carve classical architectural ornament but as a creative tradition, it's over.

I'd reiterate that the division of labour and the role of the artist means there isn't really any access to the "old master" position any more. Being an artist since about 1900 has been about ego/charisma, a largely self-selected group rather than talents discovered in obscurity and then elevated to greatness by patrons. The art business is structurally similar to how it was, in the sense that it still runs on patronage and prestige, but there is some kind of crisis in the formation of artists. Probably part of a wider loss of cultural direction and the general fact that there is now too much to know about the world and everything (paintings, careers) feels rushed. You still see flashes of intriguing visual ideas, sensitivity to colour, new combinations of different forms of art, but I don't think anyone would claim that even the best of today's art can compete with that from before modernisation took hold. It's a state of disenchantment that we can't wish away by going back to the old techniques.

<comment><USER6> I see, you were making a point about a bigger cultural and historical situation, while I was trying to find examples of artists who were/are (attempting to) keeping the old masters' techniques and the spirit alive.

Along with Ernst Fuchs and Dali, I would place H. R. Giger in that line - <USER2> in terms of specific technique, but "the skills and ways of looking" of an artist, if not a master.. That's a mere trickle though, and certainly not a tradition anymore, just individual exceptions. I agree with your point that "Painting has deteriorated since the old masters."

It rings true about the "crisis in the formation of artists", that in modern times, something essential has been lost in what it means to be an artist. The wider loss of cultural direction, the disenchantment - I wonder whether it's related to the loss of mythology and religion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Being a total art ignoramous but clearly interested in the technical aspects behind the site, I quickly googled the painting and learned that it was a triptych (had to google that) whose dimensions were 87 in x 153 in.

A few questions to anyone who can shed more light:

1\. What would be the likely dimensions of the source image in pixels to reach such a zoomed level of detail?

2\. What kind of camera equipment would I need to photograph such an image of similar size? Can I get away with a run of the mill DSLR such as Nikon D3400/D7500 or Canon EOS 80D?

3\. What kind of lens is suitable? Macro?

4\. What would be the process of photographing such an image? Taking a single high-res image or taking a series of high-res macro images under suitable lighting and stitching them together?

5\. What would be the tools to host the image that would allow this kind of interactivity?

I have a project in mind that could make use of the same technology.

<comment><USER8> Had some success with this amateur setup to get a higher resolution image from multiple Nikon D90 photos :

\- take multiple zoomed-in low DOF overlapping photos, with fixed settings, covering the artwork from a tripod, only rotating the camera

\- stitch with Hugin[1] and export undistorted UHD photo

\- split the it into tiles according to your viewer's format with ImageMagick

\- view with a tile viewer. OpenSeaDragon[2] is smooth and well suited for UHD images, but any can be adapted/used, for example leaflet[3].

Would love to hear about other workflows !

The Bosch websites seems to use Micrio[4] for the UHD viewing and storytelling.

[1] [http://hugin.sourceforge.net/](http://hugin.sourceforge.net/)

[2] [https://openseadragon.github.io/](https://openseadragon.github.io/)

[3] [https://leafletjs.com](https://leafletjs.com)

[4] [https://micr.io/](https://micr.io/)

<comment><USER9> You should prefer to translate the image rather than rotate the camera. Rotation creates images that need to be spherically reprojected to get the rectangular image back out again. You end up losing resolution at the edges of the image, because they are further away from the camera than the center.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> More on the mysterious Bosch and The Garden of Earthly Delights in particular (in the closing quarter of the article) can be found in [1].

See also [2] for an intriguing piece on possible gnostic symbolism in this painting.

1: [http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/08/18/mystery-of- hieron...](http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2016/08/18/mystery-of-hieronymus- bosch/)

2: [http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/246864](http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/246864)

</comment><comment><USER11> A fantastic work of art. It was also used in a Buckethead music video where it was animated: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bSZslEDUl0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bSZslEDUl0)

</comment><comment><USER12> Any fans of Bosch's work should also check out Dave Patchett ([http://davepatchett.net/](http://davepatchett.net/)).

I'm not sure if Dave's been active recently but he's best known for the use of his paintings as album covers for seminal UK doom metal band Cathedral.

I was fortunate enough to meet Dave in 2005 and purchase one his paintings. Chatting with him he confirmed my suspicion that he was heavily influenced by Bosch.

</comment><comment><USER13> Discussed in 2016: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11067566](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11067566)

</comment><comment><USER14> Here's another treatment: [http://s3.imagediver.org/topic/album/4294b0e/garden_of_earth...](http://s3.imagediver.org/topic/album/4294b0e/garden_of_earthly_delights/1/index.html)

</comment><comment><USER15> [http://www.rocklandstrand.com/sites/default/files/heirony.jp...](http://www.rocklandstrand.com/sites/default/files/heirony.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER16> Beside the image itself being awesome, I like the presentation on this website a lot.

Did you notice that the background music changes depending on where you zoom in on the image?

</comment><comment><USER17> I am somewhat shocked to realize, that this is a true altarpiece.

</comment><comment> Iwan-Zotow Getting sometimes NaNs when press on bookmark</comment>


Ask HN: Minimum Viable Product? - <AUTHOR> I have created a web site at www.sipen.com that helps companies and individuals keep track of their time tracking.  This would be helpful for invoicing and other such features, but I have not marketed it yet or even mentioned it much.  (This was created using PHP using the Yii Framework.)
The individual side is free but is missing many of the features offered on the business side.  I think this may be resulting in people getting the wrong impression about the product.  I have not added credit card processing to it yet or anything because I have almost given up on the whole project altogether due to a lack of interest from people I have shown.
I am asking the community here if they could give me some input on this.  Should I change it and give a fully featured option to businesses on a time based trial instead?  Should I keep the 'free for individuals' option?  Also, what features do you think are missing that would be necessary for this to truly be a minimum viable product?  I get the feeling that if I was to put this out there, it would flop because there is so much competition from similar products (even if they are not as easy to use.)
Any criticism would be appreciated as long as it can help make the product better.
Lastly, when the product is really a MVP, how can I possibly sell it?  What marketing and advertising steps do you recommend?
Also, if you want to test out the company features, I have added an account for that.  The username is "demoadmin" and the password is "testaccount" and there is already a basic user set up named "test" and the password for that is "testaccount" even though no information is filled in for it, and the user has never been marked as clocking into the time clock.
I appreciate any feedback. <comment><USER2> I've said this, or variations of this thing a few times in the past, so I'll try to be brief here.

Mainly, MVP is an overused term. An MVP _should_ mean "a completely barebones product that solves a problem to test the market." Time tracking is a proven market, and it's no mystery that you can make money in the time tracking market. There are probably hundreds of companies doing exactly that.

 _Your_ MVP should then be to test what you _are doing differently_ in that market to see how people respond to it. If you were, for example, tracking time through a Tweet-like-system (like IDidWork.com, for example), then build the barebones system that does that and see how people respond. If you can get them to sign up and keep using it, you know you have a winner.

If you have a winner, then you need to progress beyond MVP as quickly as possible, and into a more fleshed out project. Add the other features that you think are necessary to the goal, but only if they're absolutely needed. Figure out what users are asking for, or if they're leaving, find out why. If they're staying, find out why. Respond to that feedback, but be careful of taking everybody at their word -- look for kernels of commonality in the feedback that speak to a bigger truth than what people are actually saying and try to implement.

Add polish. Add all the polish. Make your product inviting, enticing, attractive, gorgeous if you can manage it.

Figure out what use cases your product excels at (based on user feedback) -- target THAT. If your product is better at tracking time spent on customer work than say, other products who are better at tracking time spent for the same project or company, accentuate that. Everybody has a need, and if you have a number of users for which you are solving that need, then play it up and find more.

Then, charge. Figure out the relative value you add. Split-test pricing. Read books on pricing. You might ask your users what they would be willing to pay for this service, but that comes with risks too.

Profit.

</comment><comment><USER3> When you create an MVP you shouldn't be thinking about the products success in terms of it's sales. An MVP is basically an experiment, you should be looking at feedback you're getting from it and how that feedback can be used to improve the product.

Do people like the product's goal but not a certain aspect of it? Great! Now go change that aspect and see what they think now. Repeat and repeat until the product is financial success.

If you're not getting sales that's fine, focus on just getting people more people to try a free account. Maybe change the homepage around one day, see how that affects the rate of sign ups. Keep experimenting and improving.

</comment><comment><USER4> Create an MDP (Minimum Desirable Product) as opposed to an MVP.

</comment><comment><USER5> ugh, sorry, but why go into such a saturated market already full of dozens of niches?

<comment><AUTHOR> I actually could not find exactly what I wanted years ago so I created some time clock software for a company where I worked in some of my spare time. They became the first 'customer', but I allowed them to use it at no charge.

I got one paying customer for it a while later so I decided to go ahead and make it more asthetically pleasing. That is the reason I decided to focus on this instead. I am working on numerous projects, but this is the only one that I actually have some people using so I thought I would put more effort into it and wanted some feedback.</comment></comment>


OS X Continuity – Save (share) App State in the iCloud? - <AUTHOR> http://www.hyperswitching.com/post/87608721580/osx-continuity-app-states-on-icloud

<comment><AUTHOR> Boom I was right!</comment>