Tesla plans China factory that can make 500,000 vehicles a year - <AUTHOR> http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-tesla-china-20180710-story.html <comment><USER2> Tesla should be very wary of the very real threat from corporate espionage in China. Brining a factory to China would allow a bad actor to really get into enterprise and create even better clones. Tesla wouldn't be able to keep up financially if Chinese manufactures built cars using Tesla research resources.

side thought: Maybe TESLA turns into a research company that sells its IP to manufactures instead of actually building cars.

<comment><USER3> I'm doubtful this will happen, based on what we've seen in the car industry in the past. Foreign car companies have had to build cars via Chinese joint ventures for decades, and as yet, not a single Chinese car company has seen any large success outside of China.

<comment><USER4> AFAIK, Chinese people themselves tend to prefer foreign cars, see them as higher quality status symbols.

<comment><USER5> Indeed. Some cultures in Asia are very "look at what I have", BMW and Mercedes do a lot of business over there to their equivalent of middle and upper classes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Apparently Tesla is the first foreign-owned auto manufacturer that has been allowed to open a facility without giving a 51% stake to a Chinese owner. I think it's only electric vehicles which are eligible for this new scheme.

There's a huge demand for non-polluting vehicles in China, so expect other automakers to begin looking at similar factories in that country.

<comment><USER7> That's unusual that they were allowed to do that. Does the government have any stake Tesla's plant? Or just not 51%?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> They seem to say so each year...

Just from 2016:

[https://mashable.com/2016/06/24/tesla-factory- china-9-billio...](https://mashable.com/2016/06/24/tesla-factory- china-9-billion/)

<comment><USER9> "a person close to the matter told Bloomberg"

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Excuse my ignorance, can someone explain how they are going to pay for this? My internet experience in the last months has been mostly articles about how they would keep enough cash with one factory? Then others about Elon said no more cash raises, etc... Even if they start turning a profit on their cars, that isn't going to magically give them the millions (billions?) needed for a new factory.

<comment><USER11> By issuing the debt and new shares that Elon swears he's not going to do.

<comment><USER12> You're misconstruing what Musk actually said. He said they're not going to need to issue / raise in 2018. They're not going to begin building a factory in China this year and won't need financing for it in the next five or six months.

Edit: for the anti-Tesla downvoters -

"CEO Elon Musk has said that Tesla wouldn't require new funding in 2018, in either equity or debt. On a call with investors, in response a question from Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas, Musk said that when it comes to raising new money, "I specifically don't want to." "

[http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-on-raising-more- mon...](http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-on-raising-more-money- in-2018-tesla-2018-5)

<comment><USER11> The year doesn't matter, I have full confidence he'll keep saying they don't need to raise money right up until the day they raise money.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I can't wait until they can run a factory in the USA that could make 500,000 vehicles per year!

<comment><USER14> They're currently at about 350,000/year, so not too far off.

<comment><USER11> Using your numbers that would mean increasing their output by over 40% without a new factory... I'd say that is very much "far off". I mean they had to make a tent to try and convince Wall Street they can make 5,000 cars in a week.

In reality they make nowhere near 350k cars a year. They built 41k in Q2 which was their most ever by a long shot. They celebrated the 300,000th shipped Tesla in Q1 2018...

<comment><USER15> That NUMMI plant used to do ~430,000 vehicles per year so Tesla in theory _could_ produce that many without expanding to a new facility but the shortfalls of a plant on the West Coast away from so many suppliers in a very high cost-of-living area are going to make that a much less attractive proposition. I wouldn't be surprised if they're in talks for a South Carolina or Alabama facility to produce their Model 3s and if they reserve the Fremont facility for their higher-end models.

<comment><USER16> These other factories would have to be completely retooled. It would take a long time and a lot of money. It's not like changing the die in an injection mold or something.

<comment><USER15> Yeah -- I meant, they'd have to build a new factory from the ground up, spending billions of dollars to do so.. not that they could just lease a Corolla plant or something.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I wonder what other countries they considered, did they consider Mexico ? (Ford has plants there) or Brazil? Or perhaps India?

<comment><USER18> I believe the primary reasons are that China, together with Hong Kong, is already one of Tesla's largest markets and it has a great potential for growth as well.

<comment><USER19> At some point, you have to expect that single party control of a government that is hostile to clean tech and initiating a trade war with the worlds largest consumer market for the next 50 years is going to accelerate the exodus of brains and production from the US, too.

<comment><USER20> Is China hostile to clean tech? I thought they were one of the biggest driving forces behind clean energy out there.

They also pollute, a lot, because they produce a lot of energy full stop. Afaik they do everything and anything, right now.

Burning coal doesn't make you anti clean energy , it just makes you a polluter. It's a bit ironic , but then again: welcome to China :p

<comment><USER21> Throwaway5752 is referring not to China, but rather the USA, as having "single party control of a government that is hostile to clean tech and initiating a trade war with the worlds largest consumer market for the next 50 years".

<comment><USER20> That makes complete sense, and I totally missed it. Sorry, and thanks!

<comment><USER19> No, it's odd to think of the US in those terms and still feels strange. I understand!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think Nvidia should be as worried about IP theft as Tesla. I remember from the Model 3 teardown, the commenter was saying the Tesla logic boards were way above the quality of the other car manufacturers. He compared them to cell phone PCBs.

</comment><comment><USER5> Hopefully for export, otherwise they'll unfortunately mostly be powered by coal :(

<comment><USER23> China uses more coal and produces more CO2 for electricity, but uses less total fossil fuels (60.6%) than the US (64.2%). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_China) VS. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_of_the_Unit...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_of_the_United_States)

China has a significantly higher % of it's electricity generated from renewables than the USA and a much faster adoption curve. So, adding electric cars is still a very large net gain for the environment over IC cars.

<comment><USER14> The US is about 1/3rd coal, 1/3rd gas, and the rest carbon neutral (mostly nuclear). China is about 2/3rds coal, a tiny bit of other burning stuff, and the rest carbon neutral (mostly hydro).

Looks to me like the US is much better for emissions. Especially since US coal plants are probably a lot cleaner.

<comment><USER23> China is ~56.4% coal and dropping fast which is a long way from 2/3's. This is down from 81% in 2007 so having recent numbers is really important.

USA happens to have a lot of natural gas which is better than coal for the environment but still much worse than solar/wind etc. Further, because they still use a lot of coal and they use more total fossil fuels it's not as a big a difference as you might think. Really the important question is what is going to come online to fuel electric cars, and that mix is vastly better than oil especially when you include extraction, transportation, and refinement.

PS: China is something like ~58% coal equivalent vs ~47% USA coal equivalent (assuming natural gas produces 1/2 the carbon of coal.)

<comment><USER5> >China's energy companies will make up nearly half of the new coal generation expected to go online in the next decade.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/climate/china-energy- comp...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/climate/china-energy-companies- coal-plants-climate-change.html)

<comment><USER23> That's not saying what you think it's saying. "Chinese corporations are building or planning to build more than 700 new coal plants at home _and around the world_."

Coal is very much on the way out, but it's not quite useless yet. Far more coal power plants are going to be destroyed in the next 10 years than built. But, if you are going to build a coal powerplant then paying a Chinese company can be a good choice.

<comment><USER5> Fact is, they're building more coal plants in the country because they can more quickly meet energy demands with coal and as of last September the world was building coal plants faster than they were being closed (and I suspect China is).

<comment><USER23> "Shanghai Electric Group, one of the country's largest electrical equipment makers, has announced plans to build coal power plants in Egypt, Pakistan and Iran with a total capacity of 6,285 megawatts — almost 10 times the 660 megawatts of coal power it has planned in China." So yea china is still building some coal but not that much looking at actual production presents a different story.

Electricity production in China (TWh) From coal

      2014	4,354
      2015	4,115
      2016	3,906

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Can someone more knowledgeable tell me what good a MOU in China is?

<comment><AUTHOR> > _what good a MOU in China is?_

Jack shit.

<comment><USER25> You do realize China is the second largest consumer market in the world? If MOU were jack shit, people wouldn't be doing business there. Many companies intentionally share their IP in order to do business in China.

<comment><AUTHOR> > _If MOU were jack shit, people wouldn 't be doing business there_

It's a great place to do business. Their MoUs and LOIs are worth jack shit.

<comment><USER25> This is not some mom & pop shop, when multibillionaire companies sign billions of dollars of MOU, it has to be worth something.

You could argue MOU is jack shit in general, but saying MOU is jack in China but China is great to do business with does not a computer, considering some of the largest companies in the world are signing MOUs and going ahead with their project just fine.

<comment><AUTHOR> > _You could argue MOU is jack shit in general_

MOUs from non-mainland companies may get you financing. MOUs from mainland Chinese companies will not. They have a high rate of falling through, and are most properly treated as prettified e-mails. Different commercial cultures.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> No faster way to kill your company than to do business with China.

<comment><USER27> Just look at the dead husks left by Apple, BMW, and Cisco!

<comment><USER26> With the exception of Apple, you do not have a great point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism.

<comment><USER29> This seems to be an issue with all tronc (née Tribune) papers: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17480636](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17480636)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> This article is blocked to the EU.

<comment><USER31> Because the LA times, being a local newspaper, doesn't want to bother with EU laws.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Great idea! Take billions in US taxpayer subsidies, then give away all of your technology to our biggest geopolitical and economic competitor. All because mass manufacturing is "boring" and "hell" and you can't keep up with demand.

</comment><comment><USER33> There's a story behind the story re: Tesla's scaling difficulties. America has lost its manufacturing base and with it the skill set to build large scale manufacturing easily. Tesla is going to China because that's where the expertise is.

<comment><USER34> _America has lost its manufacturing base and with it the skill set to build large scale manufacturing easily._

There's a reason why the NUMMI factories failed in the first place. The Hawthorne factories were located in the wrong place. The region's culture and human capital couldn't support the best efforts and know how of Toyota. It worked in Brazil, however.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUMMI#Makeover](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NUMMI#Makeover)

<comment><USER27> I love this excerpt from your link:

> the need Toyota had to start building cars in the United States, a > requirement due to the possibility of import restrictions by the U.S. > Congress.

So much irony.

<comment><USER34> Irony for whom? I think free trade should be the norm.

<comment><USER27> Irony in the sense that this entire thread is dedicated to complaints about Chinese protectionism in the automotive sector through forced joint ventures, IP-sharing, and import tariffs when the NUMMI plant was built specifically as a joint venture between American and Japanese manufactures to share production techniques with American companies and skirt or head-off import tariffs.

<comment><USER34> I see. Quite astute.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


For the Brain, Cash Is Good, Status Is Better - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=for-the-brain-status-is-better <comment><USER2> This seems intuitive if you consider that social standing is generally more important for procreation.

 _He notes that this new insight into how the brain processes social standing may have important public health consequences, possibly even paving the way to new stress-reduction therapies._

The prospect of the government trying to reduce public stress by making sure everyone gets laid makes me laugh.

<comment><USER3> Does it make you laugh because it's unlikely, or because it's a bad idea? Because it strikes me as a decidedly good idea. Mood disorders are a medical problem, and the source of those for many people is in not getting laid. In a system with socialized healthcare, this is government's problem. And it's not like the solution is hard to come up with, either.

<comment> daniel-cussen This is reminiscent of Pantaleon y las visitadores. It's a military dude in Peru who has to get a squad of prostitutes together to keep the soldiers in other squads from misbehaving.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> 'So what's more important — money or social standing?' - aren't they the same thing, at least in modern America?

<comment><USER5> No, just strongly correlated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I hope to someday live in a society where sex is 100% consequence free for both men and women.</comment>


The Sleepy User Agent - <AUTHOR> https://blog.cloudflare.com/the-sleepy-user-agent/ <comment><USER2> I hope that post stated the obvious for most people. However, +1 that cloudflare offers a WAF.</comment>


Smallpt: Global Illumination in 99 lines of C++ - <AUTHOR> http://kevinbeason.com/smallpt/

<comment><USER2> 99 lines of completely incomprehensible C++. I would have been more impressed by 500 lines of well documented, conceptually clear code.</comment>


Is Apple experimenting with Android-style sharing on iOS? - <AUTHOR> http://cgranier.com/post/64488602161/is-apple-experimenting-with-android-style-sharing-on

<comment><USER2> Look up UIDocumentInteractionController. It's been around a while.

You can also do quite a lot with URL Schemes but more apps need to implement support and publish their requirements.

There is also the X-URL-Callback spec which could be implemented by more apps. Google is using this spec on iOS.

[http://x-callback-url.com/specifications/](http://x-callback- url.com/specifications/)

[https://developers.google.com/chrome/mobile/docs/ios- links](https://developers.google.com/chrome/mobile/docs/ios-links)

[https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/uikit/...](https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/uikit/reference/UIDocumentInteractionController_class/Reference/Reference.html)

Finally, let's get away for guessing about what Apple might be doing. It was easy enough to search "iOS open in" to find this support to support this feature and it had been around a few years. There's no reason to suggest that Apple is copying Android on this feature.

<comment><AUTHOR> It still raises a number of questions...

1\. Why is this happening only in iMessage?

2\. Why does iMessage offer so many options to open a picture in? And why are apps that don't share photos included in this list?

3\. Why can't iMessage share photos to iCloud?

4\. Is iMessage broken? What makes iMessage different from other Apple apps included in iOS?

5\. Why isn't Apple leading the charge and actively pushing this much needed interaction?

I think Android's approach is much better, which is why I was so excited at the possibility that Apple might be working on something similar. Alas...

And I did search and found nothing related to what's going on within iMessage, which I found odd. Nothing wrong with trying to guess what a company is doing.

Thanks for the links ;-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is one of the reasons that I find Android far more useful for most workflows than iOS. I was amazed that Twitter and Facebook integration had to be built in manually.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Apple seems to be experimenting with native inter-app sharing on iOS 7 within the iMessage app. If you try to share an image you've received through iMessage you'll notice a much larger selection of sharing options than normally available on other iOS apps.</comment>


Dell launches updated XPS 15 - <AUTHOR> http://pcworld.com/article/3153704/ces/dell-taunts-macbook-pro-users-with-an-updated-xps-15-that-sports-new-hardware.html <comment><USER2> Is there somewhere I can find full pricing information for every spec configuration? I dislike how difficult this is to find on new non-Apple laptop announcements.

<comment><USER3> New XPS models are not available yet. The official press release for CES lists starting price: $999 and the avaiability date is stated as "COMMING SOON"

[https://app.box.com/s/nlzmc9x01j4j2vcd2awpbyoxgxvovo6z/1/144...](https://app.box.com/s/nlzmc9x01j4j2vcd2awpbyoxgxvovo6z/1/14476495696/119429302700/1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I for one would welcome a top spec XPS15 for development. A more efficient Quad core Kaby Lake, gorgeous 4k screen on 1050 4gb GPU, 32gb memory, 1tb NVME - and a proper selection of ports including a Kensington lock as well as a full set of keys (FN+Esc). Oh and they bumped the battery to 97whr.

<comment><USER5> What OS would you use? Or are you windows based?

<comment><USER4> I'd use Windows actually, being a .Net developer. I used Ubuntu for a while too (when doing Php), but have too many bad memories of trying to just get my darned X1 Carbon (gen1) trackpad to work properly. Win10 is great now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> But have they fixed the CPU whine?

<comment><USER7> You want believe me but it was fixed even in 9550 model after one of firmware updates. And now I don't hear anything.</comment></comment>


Henry Ford's Soybean Car - <AUTHOR> http://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/2015/03/05/the-truth-about-henry-fords-soybean-car/ <comment><USER2> Oh, that. Wikipedia at one time had no end of trouble from the "hemp car" enthusiasts, until finally documents were dredged up from the Henry Ford Museum.

In the early days of plastics, there were lots of attempts to find some filler that could be dumped into the mix to save money. Sawdust works, as do other plant fibers. Cotton is still used to improve resilience - pure phenolic is brittle.[1] Fillers with plant materials absorb water, though, so they don't last well in auto body panels. Glass fiber and carbon fiber are still used. Asbestos filler has been phased out.

[1] [http://www.reblingplastics.com/phenolic.htm](http://www.reblingplastics.com/phenolic.htm)

</comment><comment><USER3> I feel like this article ends halfway through - with the pictures of the car and...that's it? No explanation if it's real, if the panels were indeed made from soy, if the factory actually produced anything...it started with a mystery and then nothing?</comment>


Mark Twain's adventures in love - <AUTHOR> https://theconversation.com/mark-twains-adventures-in-love-how-a-rough-edged-aspiring-author-courted-a-beautiful-heiress-90739?xid=PS_smithsonian <comment><USER2> Marvelous story. Of course, any reader of his works knows not to believe in the _literal_ truth of every tale Samuel Clemens recounts.

</comment><comment><USER3> Excellent piece, but this is not the original source. It points to and credits The Conversation.

<comment><USER4> Thanks, we've updated the link from [https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/for-mark-twain-it- was...](https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/for-mark-twain-it-was-love-at- first-sight-180968141/?no-ist).</comment></comment>


TSA's gun policy: Confiscate it, Instagram it  - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/09/technology/social/tsa-instagram/index.html

<comment><USER2> I note that every single one of them caught by running your bag under the x-ray and/or a metal detector. The TSA provides no evidence that grabbing your nutsack or fondling your wife's breasts has found any weapon or threat that a simple bag x-ray and a walk through metal detector wouldn't find.

</comment><comment><USER3> The headline is a bit odd. The TSA blog gives clear and simple instructions on how to take your weapons onto a plane. (Not loaded, not in your hand luggage.)

Some people have said (on HN as well as other places) that the TSA have never stopped weapons getting on board a plane and if they had they would have heavily publicised it. In fact, they stop about 20 to 30 guns each week from getting on board a plane. Those guns and knives are posted to their blog.

Perhaps posting images on Instagram will let more people know that the TSA manage to stop some weapons (although I don't care about the guns they stop, I care about the gun they don't stop and which is then used to harm someone) and to help remind people to put guns into checked baggage instead?

([http://blog.tsa.gov/search/label/Week%20In%20Review](http://blog.tsa.gov/search/label/Week%20In%20Review))

Note that I'm not defending particularly defending TSA here.

<comment><USER4> > to help remind people to put guns into checked baggage instead

I have to wonder how many of the firearms they stop are just regular law- abiding concealed handgun license bearers who, in their rush to get to the airport, forgot that they keep a loaded firearm in their purse, briefcase, or backpack. Since the penalty is a $7,500 fine and not 20 years in jail, I have to presume this scenario is far more common "malicious guy planned to hijack plane."

This would be a very easy statistic to publish, too (only 10% of the people we stopped were even licensed to carry a handgun!), but since I haven't seen that statistic advertised, I would presume they find most of the stopped citizens to be guilty only of carelessness.

<comment><USER5> I feel like I am the only person on this thread that thinks the scenario that someone just happened to "damn, went to the airport and _forgot that I had a gun in my bag while going through airport security_ " is pretty far-fetched.

A pocketknife from a fishing trip? Understandable. Being forgetful about having a gun in your bag? While going through airport security to get on an airplane? Not so much.

<comment><USER6> Is your opinion then that 20-30 people a week intend on using a weapon on board a plane?

<comment><USER7> I don't know what their point was, but mine would be this: those 20-30 people a week shouldn't be allowed to keep their guns. I support their right to ownership and carry, but they really should lose that right (or at least that firearm and a substantial sum of money) if they're so careless as to forget that they have a lethal device stuffed in a bag that they've just packed for a flight. That kind of stupidity and negligence gives careful gun owners a bad name.

Ownership of a firearm requires a certain level of responsibility. A concealed carry permit increases that quotient of responsibility substantially. In my mind, forgetting where you put your gun is basically inexcusable. There may well be the odd, vanishingly unlikely circumstance where one could plausibly excuse unintentionally carrying a firearm through airport security, but I can't think of it.

My bet is that most of these idiots knew they had their guns with them but thought they'd try it on anyway, reasoning that if they went home to drop it off, they'd miss their flight.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This smells like a desperate attempt by the TSA to justify their own existence.

Note that none of these confiscated weapons by themselves necessarily constitute an intent to use them. Knives especially are commonly carried and can easily be forgotten about.

<comment><USER9> > _Note that none of these confiscated weapons by themselves necessarily > constitute an intent to use them._

Exactly. If these were instances of the TSA _actually_ protecting us then _" passengers who try to go through security with a firearm usually get a citation and can face a fine"_ would not be the case.

Not unless our plan is fining and citing terrorists out of existence.

<comment><USER10> Personally, I see this as an attempt to add humor and levity to a repeated and horrible violation of our rights and person.

"Hey, check out this gun! It has pink glitter! Aren't you glad we confiscated it!?"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Those sepia toned filters might actually make me rethink my opinion of the TSA. They should get plaid flannel uniforms and change their motto to "We were groping old ladies before it was cool"

</comment><comment><USER12> This feels kinda wrong, but I have to keep in mind that these people chose to give up these items.

From the TSA Blog (I cannot confirm if true)

When prohibited items come through the checkpoint, passengers are given options:

1) Take the item to the ticket counter and check it in your baggage or a box provided by the airport.

2) Many airports have a US Postal Service or other shipping services area where boxes, stamps and envelopes can be bought so you can ship your items home.

3) If there is somebody seeing you off, you can hand the prohibited item to them.

4) If your car is parked outside, you can take the item to your car.

<comment><USER13> In many places, none of these suggestions would help someone who realizes he is carrying a handgun.

1) There are guidelines for how the firearm must be shipped; simply sliding it into your checked baggage will not work.

2) Handguns are generally prohibited from being mailed via the USPS.

3) The person seeing you off may not be properly licensed to transport the handgun.

4) Storing a valuable object in a vehicle which is in long-term parking sounds like a bad idea. Municipalities which have strict theft-reporting requirements do not have exceptions for "I was out of town and didn't know that my car had been burgled."

<comment><USER12> 1 & 2 are true for handguns (as checked luggage, they have to be in a hardsided locked case for example.)

but 3 & 4 I think would practically be the best route, despite some risks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I wonder how many TSA empoyees it takes to run an Instagram account.

All kidding aside, I wonder what mega IT company won the bid to run the Instagram account.

<comment><USER11> It being run a program called "Optical Grating". Its a low cost alternative to "PRISM"

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> While it is kind of a sad PR stunt from someone with a 14 year old hipster child at home, it is kind of cool if you look for the ways people try to smuggle goods and weapons onto flights.

<comment><USER16> Except for all the horrible jpeg compression artifacts.

...or is that considered "art" lately?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> It is worth pointing out, a trick a number of photographer friends use when having to check their photo gear is to include a flare gun (or was it a starter pistol) in the case and note that there is a firearm. It increases the scrutiny and tracking of the bag.

Lifehacker had an article on it --

[http://lifehacker.com/5448014/pack-a-gun-to-protect- valuable...](http://lifehacker.com/5448014/pack-a-gun-to-protect-valuables- from-airline-theft-or-loss)

</comment><comment><USER18> So our tax dollars are not only paying the TSA's jack-booted thugs to harass us at the airport, but they're also paying for TSA dorks to sit around and post on Instagram? Jeeeeebusssssss....

And people wonder why I'm such a government-hating Libertarian. _sigh_

</comment><comment><USER19> One of the pictures has a clear visual date stamp with a "/90." Maybe this means nothing.

But I wonder if they are misleadingly posting these as if they were just discovered, rather than over what appears to be at least 23 years.

<comment><USER20> Or you're reading it upside-down, making it "06/" which would mean it was taken in June (much less surprising since it is now early July).</comment></comment>


Ask HN:Ok to be in programming if you hate the process but love the result? - <AUTHOR> I've been really debating this a lot. The process vs. the result. I think I'm finally more admitting to myself that I actually dislike the majority of the process of making a web site/application. For me, I just want to have the working app or prototype or functionality on the other side. I want to solve a specific problem. That's why I develop/code. The process is mostly just endless tedious task after endless tedious task.
Is it ok to stay in web development if you generally loathe the process and are only in it for the end result?
Does anyone else here face this dilemma? <comment><USER2> When I fall into the mindset of just the end goal, my 9 to 5 becomes hell.

There is a lot of busy work googling and finding code on Stackoverflow to solve some tedious problem. It's not exactly fun, and if I get stuck googling for a day or two on a single problem it's incredibly stressful.

Alternatively, I put on my research hat and see the source code and the tech stack as a series of questions and unknowns I have yet to figure out. Every piece of tech has a story of what the world was like before it, and that tech is the solution that was created to fill that need.

When I put on my research hat I slow down, and focus on learning everything around me inside and out, bit by bit. If I google vocabulary I'm unfamiliar with and end up on a Wikipedia page, this might lead to a handful of new questions. I recursively learn everything around me.

There is a middle ground between research and getting the product out the door. When this middle ground is found, not only is development accelerated, but work becomes smooth sailing. You become an expert in the tech around you, and if you learn it properly you only have to learn it once. After a few months of doing this you stop having to Google so much. You start being able to help others around you. The pressure of the goal stops becoming the obstacle and the challenge of writing code that minimizes future bugs and increases readability fades into the forefront.

Unless it's crunch time, being tightly focused on the end goal is one of the least productive and most painful ways to write software. There are better ways to go about being a software engineer that are at least worth considering.

<comment><USER3> I think you've got some great advice here, and "recursively learning" is a good way to explain it.

In open source, especially, this is such a good strategy to follow. It's why Linux is fun :)

I don't know how you apply your philosophy to employment though. At work, I pretty much do the opposite of what you're suggesting to avoid my 9 to 5 becoming hell. I focus only on the end goal, where that goal is employer satisfaction.

Here are some pragmatic tips for how to achieve satisfaction for all parties in employment:

* Maximally pad estimates. Don't know how long something will take? Tell your team that you need some time to figure out how long a project will take. Use this time to get to an 80% solution, or at least have a very solid plan. Now that you understand the problem but your employer doesn't, you're in a much stronger position to provide good support for your heavily padded estimate. If a manager pushes back, you have lots of info already and can speak with confidence. Compromise as appropriate and be friendly about it, but remember that every hour you can pad is another hour you've reclaimed. This is by far the most important thing. The ratio I look for is 40 hours of estimated work to 8 hours of heads-down problem-solving.

* If you can't figure out the solution to a problem in a couple of hours, break the problem into parts. Only give estimates on the parts you've already solved. Managers are happy to see multiple tickets for what you might think of as one task, because it gives them the appearance of their team achieving more.

* In agile, you should try to stay at least one sprint ahead. Your team will appreciate you being proactive if you're always looking at what's coming up next sprint.

* Save your teammates from themselves. Look at their estimates before sprint meetings, try to come up with a few things they maybe didn't think of, and ask "are you sure that's enough time? what about x, y, and z?". You want to both pad your estimates and help your coworkers and managers pad their estimates as well. I believe the #1 reason for underestimating is not putting in enough time to come up with good reasons why something may take a long time.

* Keep good notes. Always be ready to give an update on what you did on any particular day. I write bullet point notes every day in a personal wiki, and I use them as talking points in standup the following day. Share some of these notes (re-phrased as a friendly update) a few times a week with management via text. If you think someone's nervous, take a little extra time to give them an update so they feel in control.

* Make sure you have one "no meetings" day where you can go heads-down with a stimulant of your choice. Complete all of your obligations for the sprint on that day, but keep them stored on your local machine so you can roll them out as you like. Try to make sure that's your only real work day. The rest of the time should feel more like a social club if you're doing it correctly.

* For remote workers, always be on Slack. Use a script that prevents you from going idle, and set up your phone to get your messages. That shows that you're always online and available if someone needs you. Usually people won't bother you outside of core hours anyway. Respond quickly when contacted, even if it's just an acknowledgment that says you saw it and you'll get back to them.

* For office workers, spend as much time in the office as you can. Try to make it pleasant for yourself. Come in early and have breakfast while people show up. Eat lunch with the team, but take a little extra time for a personal phone call to catch up with a friend or handle some personal business. Late afternoon, a few days a week, try to get to the gym. Your goal is to be first in and last out, but without actually making any personal sacrifices to do it.

* Sometimes hold your commits until after work hours. Managers who pull these metrics from github are evaluating the completely wrong thing, but it doesn't hurt to give them what they want to see. You can use a shell script to sleep then commit/push/pr.

* Be friendly and helpful. A little extra attention goes a long way. Make notes about significant events in people's lives and reference them later to show you care, just like a CRM.

* If you see someone stressed and struggling, offer to jump into their problem with them and try to help them solve it. If you can help, great. If you can't, at least you tried, and maybe you added some value.

* If someone asks you for something or to do something, write it down and set a reminder. Never let a request go unanswered. Failure is often ok, but disregard is never ok.

If you follow my approach, you should be able to acquire goodwill with your team and a track record of dependability. You'll complete all of your work with minimal stress, make friends along the way, and present very well to management.

I still hate work, and I would rather do pretty much anything else with my time, but this is the most palatable strategy that I've come up with.

When I tried your approach, which again, I think is the correct way to actually learn and build anything, work was a daily struggle. Now that I do about 20% of the "work" (as I used to think of it) and spend 80% of my time managing relationships, I find myself in a much better situation.

<comment><USER4> Wow both your response and the original response are great! Basically you guys wrote out exactly what I've been feeling as I get to my 9th month at my second job. Any tips about working in an area you don't care about? I care about getting better at tech in a utilitarian sense (I'm not a nerd that fawns over deep irrevelant stuff) and professional skills. I don't like the domain I'm in now.

<comment><USER2> >I don't like the domain I'm in now.

You might appreciate this: [https://medium.com/thrive-global/ikigai-the- japanese-secret-...](https://medium.com/thrive-global/ikigai-the-japanese- secret-to-a-long-and-happy-life-might-just-help-you-live-a-more- fulfilling-9871d01992b7)

Not everyone can meet all of that criteria, and that's okay. But if you slowly work towards ikigai, your life will become happier for it.

<comment><USER3> This doesn't work for me.

1\. What do I love? Software!

2\. What am I good at? Software!

3\. What can I be paid for now — or something that could transform into my future hustle? Software!

4\. What does the world need? Software!

I absolutely hate being a commercial software developer.

<comment><USER2> Is it that you love using software and hate developing software, or is it that you have a love-hate relationship with developing software?

For me, most of what I hate about being a dev is the culture and who I'm working with. Though I hate getting stuck on a problem I can't figure out too.

By being able to identify what I like and what I dislike about a thing, diving into the gritty details, I am better able to steer myself towards a better future.

<comment><USER3> I love free software, and I hate non-free software.

Writing free software doesn't pay very well, on account of it being free.

Maybe I should work for FSF or Mozilla, but I'd really like to make enough in industry to be comfortable far into the future before I forfeit the chance to retire.

<comment><USER2> What about free software do you like in the work place? What about non-free software do you not like in the work place?

Keep increasing your awareness by responding to your answers by asking questions, breaking it down further and further.

For example, I patched Squid and Apache on the job, and those are "free" software. Out of everything I've done on the software engineer side, I hated that one the most, because the code bases were difficult to navigate for me at the time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think that wanting the end result is the _best_ reason to do something. If you foresee the value of the uses you put programming to, to be greater than the pain of programming, then keep at it.

E.g. music. Nobody* likes practicing. They like making music. The people who like (or find meaning in) making music enough will stick with it and grind out the hours so they can get the prize: the music itself.

(*) I mean sure, someone somewhere probably does

<comment><USER6> The most extreme example I can think of is probably sports. Something like Olympic running or swimming is probably about 99% pain.

You don't always have to love the work you do. But I suppose a lot of people find pride in being one of the few to push past the pain barrier.

A lot of high end coding is like that too. You still have to slog through actual books.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> _Is it ok to stay in web development if you generally loathe the process and are only in it for the end result?_

"Ok to stay"? It depends on what you're really asking, but I'm going to assume you mean, "If you were a close friend and cared about me and my future, what would you advise?"

If that's the question, my answer would depend on your other options. Most of a developer's time is spent developing, not admiring the result, so I would recommend doing something you like more overall (like both the process and the result), provided such an option is available. But then, if it were, I can't imagine you'd be asking. You'd do the obvious thing.

So maybe you're question really means, "I hate it but don't seem to have any better options. Will it get better?" In that case, I suspect it won't get better. If you actually do like the product but hate building it yourself, you might be a good candidate for marketing or sales. I've always loved programming, but I've worked with plenty of people who only did it because it was a "good job", and I've seen some of them switch to marketing or sales where they were much happier.

<comment><USER4> What kind of marketing or sales jobs? Did they use their gained experience in software dev and understanding software systems from a holistic level, down to the details?

<comment><USER7> Yes, I'm referring to a few people I've known who switched to marketing and sales jobs at software companies. Technical credentials (such as work experience, not just school) always make candidates more attractive to sales/marketing teams at companies with technical products/services.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> >> The process is mostly just endless tedious task after endless tedious task.

This is why work is work and it appears on all jobs so you might want to figure out how to change your mindset so you can deal with the never-ending tedium that comes with every job before you move on.

Having said that I will say that this type of situation happens in many fields. There are doctors that hate being doctors but love medicine, lawyers that hate being lawyers but love the law and on and on. What they end up doing is that they explore tangent fields that they like better. Some look at journalism and specialize in their field others go into management and still, others go into sales.

I think you should start exploring other fields. You might want to try project management, web design or maybe product manager. If you really have the discipline you might even start your own business.

The way I see it; life is too short to be stuck doing something you don't like.

<comment> o-__-o > you might want to figure out how to change your mindset

What do you mean by this?

<comment><USER8> It is possible to set your way of thinking in a way that helps with your work's satisfaction.

You can have a negative mindset or a positive one. It's possible to look at all the work that needs to get done as the building blocks towards the production to a great end product rather than endless tedious work. Each step is very important to get the product done so the better you master the steps the better the end product is. Or you can look at work as what you need to do to feed the family you love. Or whatever you decide.

Life is all about how you think about things. You can look at them from a positive view or you can look at the negative view. Looking at it positively is immensely helpful towards life's satisfaction.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Well there are a few different aspects. Tedium is one. Frustration is another. Motivation is another.

Tedium means it's boring or dull. It is normal to have a fair amount of boring or dull tasks in programming. Ideally though, you can generally find at least some problem interesting and not totally dull because you are engaged in solving it.

I have found that it's much easier to be motivated about side projects. It's also easier to be motivated when there is something slightly challenging about your tasks.

Loathe is a strong word. I would say though that many programmers do hate their job sometimes. But if it's really a constant then that is basically torture.

I would try to find a side project you are interested in as a test. If you really hate the process entirely of a challenge that you created for yourself, the entire time, then that makes it sound like you are just abusing yourself.

Don't be quick to decide it's not for you though. Programming is definitely a job that requires patience and perseverance and sometimes boring tasks. Try to mix things up a bit by coming up with creative solutions. Maybe create a module or tool to help you accomplish a task that seems boring.

It's not necessarily the funnest career. For example, playing video games on YouTube is a job for some people now. Or filming Nerf gun battles. But solving problems is more rewarding than that stuff probably.

</comment><comment><USER10> Perhaps you are better suited to a business analyst or technical project management role.

Plenty of exposure to the tech and instrumental to the end result without what you dislike about the practician.

<comment><USER11> I agree with this. Less being in the code all day, and more handling what you want the result to be.

Learn what a software architect, possibly a solutions architect does. You may need a few more years experience in software development, but those types of roles deal with more of the expected result, without having to deal with the day-to-day programming details.

<comment><USER12> Or an Architect role, if you can see the "bigger picture" aspect of the problems you are solving -- which is far less common than one might think.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I have felt that every job has its irritations, but one should choose the kind of irritations with which one is most compatible.

When there's a miserable frustrating bug that comes and goes, it's not something I'm happy about (I, too, would prefer to get quickly to a working result), but it's something I'm used to dealing with and I'm willing and able to tackle. It doesn't keep me up at night. It doesn't make my stomach hurt.

On the other hand, a friend of mine is an excellent manager. Dealing with the kind of work inter-personal conflict that _would_ cause me pain and sleepless nights is just a part of _his_ job. He knows how to deal with it. He doesn't want it to happen, but fixing it is what he's good at.

And I've heard that even the best sales people are constantly dealing with rejection and failure to close a sale. It's just part of the job - if they've got a good enough batting average then they just don't beat themselves up about the one that got away.

</comment><comment><USER14> I face the opposite dilemma, I enjoy coding, but I'm never fully happy with the result.

I think there is an element of extrinsic motivation vs intrinsic motivation here.

Extrinsic motivation is where there is something external that is driving you to develop software (money, prestige or perhaps a finished product in this example)

Intrinsic motivation is where you motivated to develop software (or whatever) because you want to develop software (no external reasons)

Obviously there is always an element of both present, and there is nothing wrong with either type of motivation.

The thing to consider is that with extrinsic motivation, it changes. You might have to constantly remind yourself about the reasons, or the motivation may disappear entirely at stages.

With intrinsic motivation, your motivation doesn't change much over time, and people who are motivated intrinsically to do their kind of work usually do well in their field with far less effort than others.

But even for those that are intrinsically motivated to code, there are always parts of it that are just pure toil.

</comment><comment><USER15> Ultimately only you can make this decision for yourself; if it were me personally, I wouldn't want to have a job or career (or hobby for that matter) that I hated, no matter how much I liked the output.

Which is perhaps why some people start software development companies...?

I have heard of people who absolutely hated programming, but were extremely good at it and made great money, so they continued to do it. But they hated every minute and couldn't wait to get back home.

That doesn't sound like a fun existence to me, but I know honestly I am lucky to have a career as an SWE as something I love to do. Most people don't have that luxury. Most people are lucky if they have a job they can tolerate, let alone love. Many more have jobs they dislike, but they can do them well, and go home later to unwind.

So "is it ok"? Again - only you can answer that, but I would say for some people - maybe many - outside of SWE - would say that yes, it is ok to stay in a job you loathe.

</comment><comment><USER16> For how long have you been doing web development?

For a novice it's common to feel a bit frustrated and lost. You however are simply bored by it, so I don't think that matters in this case.

Is there anything else (realistic) you'd prefer to be doing? Can you imagine yourself in some other position? Does it invoke happiness?

<comment><USER17> In addition to the the frustration, I think there's a lot of idealism around programming, whether that comes from the media, forums, Twitter, the blogosphere, etc. You dream of best practices and beautiful code and trendy frameworks but find the reality is writing error handling code for malformed CSVs you import from a website that looks like it was last updated in 2002. As in all things, you learn as you get more mature that the world is no where near as beautiful as you were told, and often the messengers are nothing more than that, and haven't written production code in years.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> _Is it ok to stay in web development if you generally loathe the process and are only in it for the end result?_

That's totally up to you to decide. If you think the results (and presumably compensation) are worth it and you are willing to grit your teeth and bear it, then you can do that.

It's also fine to feel it's worth it this year, then change your mind at some later date. Maybe you decide there's more to life or maybe you start grinding your teeth in your sleep because the process is so miserable and you decide you've finally had enough.

Things that are worthwhile usually involve some level of discomfort to make them happen. It's up to you to decide which things are worth which personal costs.

</comment><comment><USER6> You don't have to enjoy the work itself. I think there's a lot of pain in development. I can work on my feet in a hot kitchen for 14 hours straight, and that is less painful than say, an hour of data entry or 2 hours of programming.

But the way I see it, the pain is a necessary part of getting there. The only way you can stand out is to go through more of it.

Is it really a bad thing? Like exercise, it hurts, but it's really just up to us to not take it personally.

The pain isn't there to discourage us. It's there as a warning. It's up to us to learn how much of it we can safely ignore and push through, and when we should be taking a rest.

</comment><comment><USER19> That's actually a positive quality in business. The end product is what makes money, so getting there should be the goal, not to enjoy the journey of programming...

Some programmers (like my self) enjoy the act of programming and lose sight of the end goal.

Ideally when making an app or website you want to code as little as possible, whilest leaving it open for extension.

Your distain for the software development process would actually motivate you to iterate on products faster and choose better ways to develop faster...

</comment><comment><USER20> You may not like the process. But if you do something really amazing, it will take time and effort. Just like music. Or doing anything worthwhile, actually.

If you get any good at it, the process may actually grow on you. In order to build something complex, you need strategies to manage the complexity. Discipline to use naming conventions, etc. All the things that programmers universally do -- because it actually makes life easier.

</comment><comment><USER21> I think it's OK.

Everything has things about it that suck, after all. The question is do you love it as a whole, not do you love every aspect of it.

I honestly think that Sturgeon's law (80% of everything is crap) is more true than false. It's just a variation of the 80/20 rule in computer science.

</comment><comment><USER22> Yes, my dilemma goes away and comes back. The tedium can be good, neutral, or "sub-optimal." I value the dilemma, not necessarily the tedium.

Good advice from other posters here, I found myself repeating it so I'll keep it short.

Enjoy work if possible. Find happiness.

</comment><comment><USER23> Sort of a judgement call but from my perspective the process part (which is actually the part I tend to enjoy) of things takes up way more of your life than the result part.

</comment><comment><USER24> Is it ok to do something you hate 95% of the time and love for the remaining 5%? Only if it's your best available option...

</comment><comment><USER25> Have you tried designing/project management? Imo more abstract portions of a project?

</comment><comment><USER26> Most people have some qualms with programming, yes. Most people love the result.

</comment><comment><USER27> Is it OK to be cook if you love to eat but don't like working in the kitchen?

</comment><comment><USER28> That's what side projects are for.</comment>


FlightCaster (YC S09) open-sources Crane: Hadoop Clusters on EC2 - <AUTHOR> http://measuringmeasures.blogspot.com/2009/12/flightcaster-open-sources-crane_03.html

<comment><USER2> _For Hadoop systems, using Cloudera's distribution can be very helpful with this, but existing Java libraries force Clojure developers to deal with the Java world of static compilation, command-line JAR execution, and configuration via XML. This serves as a major impediment to the kind of interactive and simple experience we expect with Clojure systems._

What is the benefit of using Clojure (as opposed to another Lisp) if the language's main USP, i.e. access to Java libraries, is turning out to be a problem? This is not a rhetorical question.

<comment><USER3> icey mostly answered your point, however the trick here is that without wrapping in libraries like this, you're simply getting the same experience as java to access the particular libs, which is still easier than accessing them from another lisp such as sbcl.

Easier than everyone else does not default to "stupid easy" all the time, at least not without work from people making wrapper libs like this.

<comment><USER2> OK, thanks for the explanation. I still wonder how good an idea it is to make such wrapper libraries instead of writing pure Lisp libraries in the first place, not in this particular case but as a general idea.

<comment><USER3> Certainly where it makes sense to invest the time writing pure clojure libraries (or mostly clojure with optimized java in a few key areas if you're running into spots you can't get as good a performance in pure clojure but java will) is preferred, but at least this gives you the option of using the non-fp styled libraries until such a time as someone writes them. Improved bootstrapping at it's finest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Although most of this post is over my head, it's nice to see smart folks open- source stuff like this.

Out of curiosity, does YC have a say in what tools their companies open-source or not?

<comment><USER5> No, not in this or any other such decision.</comment></comment>


Psychological tricks in marketing - <AUTHOR> http://blog.businessofsoftware.org/2009/03/greasing-the-wheels-for-persuasion.html <comment><USER2> Something similar is known as the <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruen_transfer> where you have a monotone environment and then give customers something to focus their attention on.

</comment><comment><USER3> Seems like a very naive version of an idea presented in "Predictably Irrational", which is that relative positioning sells.

</comment><comment><USER4> The flaw in his argument is he was dull following exciting. His proposal for swaying a customer is to present exciting following dull.</comment>


A stunning visualization of our divided Congress - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/04/23/a-stunning-visualization-of-our-divided-congress/

<comment><USER2> All the dots are blue or red. :(

I wish we had more minority party representation.

<comment><USER3> Then vote third party, even if you think they won't win. Because they won't win "this time," but if you never vote for them they'll never win.

You may be fearful that the party you think are bigger idiots than your party will win. But so what. Are you impressed by anything that either party has done? It really doesn't matter. It doesn't.

If you want more than two colors, vote third party. If you always settle, there will only ever be two colors.</comment></comment>


Video encoding up to 86.47% faster with Transloadit's 'Turbo Mode' - <AUTHOR> https://transloadit.com/blog/2018/11/launching-turbo-in-public-beta/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hello, I'm kevin. I run Transloadit, a file encoding service. Developers integrate with us to add our uploading, encoding, resizing, capabilities to their apps. We just launched Turbo Mode in public beta, which works with FFmpeg to distribute encoding jobs over a large fleet of machines, allowing us to decimate encoding times. We have a free plan for open source & testing so I would love to hear what you think</comment>


Drunk at the Seelbach Hotel - <AUTHOR> http://bittersoutherner.com/f-scott-fitzgerald-at-the-seelbach <comment><USER2> The false Seelbach Cocktail story is repeated here:

> Max "Scoopie" Allen was making an Old Fashioned in the Seelbach Hotel > Rathskeller in 1917. Whether someone bumped him or was walking by with an > open bottle, somehow champagne splashed into his mixing glass.

NYTimes wrote about this created history:

> Shortly after being put in charge of the hotel's bar and restaurant > operations in 1995, Mr. Seger declared that he had discovered a recipe for a > pre-Prohibition cocktail that was once the hotel's signature drink.

[https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/dining/seelbach- cocktail-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/dining/seelbach-cocktail- louisville-fake.html?_r=0)

</comment><comment><USER3> I really like this format of articles. Beautiful typography, high resolution and great pictures blown up so you can see the details and present ONLY where relevant. Reading this article, I felt transported into the hotel and imagined myself getting a drink...

<comment><USER4> Yeah, the drink specified in the story (with its false history, as noted by another comment), sounds absolutely great. I already made a list of the ingredients I don't have so that I can pick them up on the way home.

<comment><USER5> It can be a very good drink. I find it a drink of choice for a New Year's Eve party when champagne alone doesn't sound strong enough, but you want that bubbly excitement.

(Also, I do recommend having one in the Seelbach Hotel sometime, given the chance. It is a beautiful, storied hotel as some of the photos show.)</comment></comment></comment>


How Self-Generated Thought Shapes Mood - <AUTHOR> http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0077554

<comment><USER2> This is amazing. If I understand it correctly, the study found that what you think about when your mind wanders affects your mood (seems obvious), but the content doesn't directly correlate to the change. In other words, certain negative thoughts can make you happier, and positive thoughts can make you less happy. Generally, thinking about the future and yourself leads to an increase in mood (happier) even if the thoughts themselves are negative.

One of my side projects is an application to track whether or not people are feeling positive or negative correlated to external events* (news, weather, location, situation, etc). Users (all 2 of them!) record how they feel by entering a short description of their mood. Recording correlation of internal thoughts is on the roadmap. This sort of research is hugely interesting, and potentially very useful for improving mental health.

* If you have 30 seconds to spare you can help make it better - pop over here [http://usrlab.com/mood](http://usrlab.com/mood) and rank a few words by clicking on the most relevant smiley face. :)</comment>


Low R&D Spending May Be China's Achilles' Heel - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-12/low-r-amp-d-spending-may-be-china-s-achilles-heel <comment><USER2> Good to hear about the R&D-friendly stock exchange. I hope this and eventually private equity will enable Chinese tech to do well enough that they don't need to pursue the less laudable strategy—

> Made in China 2025 is Beijing's plan to dominate global markets in a wide > range of high-tech products. China's strategy is to give large government > subsidies to state-owned companies and supplement their research with > technology stolen from American and other Western companies. This theft > includes using the internet to invade the computers of foreign firms and > forbidding companies to do business in China unless they share their > technology with Chinese firms.

"Tariffs Should Target Chinese Lawlessness, Not the Trade Deficit" in _The Wall Street Journal_ (28 December 2018).</comment>


Ask HN: SQL Help - <AUTHOR> I work for a company where a new feature will be launched. Let's call the existing feature A and the new feature B. We want to track the adoption of new users for the new feature B. Using SQL, how can I get the new account ids for the new feature B that have no usage on existing feature A. In other words, how can I get the new account that are being signed up for feature B that do not signed up for feature A? <comment><USER2> You can do this

SELECT B.* FROM tableB B LEFT JOIN tableA A ON A.key1= B.key1 and A.key2=B.key2 WHERE A.key1 IS NULL

Or use NOT EXISTS depending on the database you use.

[https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/121034/best- practice...](https://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/121034/best-practice- between-using-left-join-or-not-exists)

<comment><AUTHOR> That helps! Thank you!</comment></comment>


ShareMeNot - Protecting against tracking from third-party social media buttons - <AUTHOR> http://sharemenot.cs.washington.edu/

<comment><USER2> Theres a few of these out there. I use ghostery myself: <http://www.ghostery.com> blocks lots of tracking cookies and stuff as well.</comment>


IPlayer Performance tricks behind the scenes - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/bbcinternet/2008/12/iplayer_day_performance_tricks.html <comment><USER2> Look, BBC, you haven't done anything clever here. The British taxpayer OWNS you. We own every programme in your archive, we're already paid for them. Rather than wasting time and money on this you should have made your entire catalogue available for download in an open format like MPEG. A proprietary, DRM-laden format on public property is an outrage.

<comment><USER3> The actual link, which this comment doesn't have any relevance to _at all_ , describes (in rather too shallow detail for my taste) what the iPlayer's built with and how they scale the front end.

The link's about code and development and deployment: Hacker News stuff. Your comment is about none of those things.

Ranting that "you haven't done anything clever" because you don't like their streaming format? Please, I beg you, take it back to Slashdot.

<comment><USER2> No, it is completely relevant. The BBC should not have spent taxpayer's money on any of this. Everything they needed to make the archive available for download in MPEG is freely available. Expending vast resources to solve a non- existant problem in an overly complicated manner is the exact opposite of the hacker/startup ethos.

Not only that but this is the BBC publishing an article on how great the BBC is. That alone should set the alarm bells ringing.

<comment><AUTHOR> It isn't relevant that they didn't use MPEG. What they build was a great platform to browse what content is available that can handle the enormous amount of traffic they receive. That wouldn't change if they offered the video in a different format.

<comment><USER2> Of course it would! Streaming their at all was a very poor technical decision. The very obvious technical and economic solution would be self-contained files shared over BitTorrent. This was and is a pointless waste on the scale of pets.com. The difference being it's not just sucker VCs money, it's every taxpayer's.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Google releases Dart SDK 1.0, a JavaScript alternative - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/google/2013/11/14/google-releases-dart-sdk-1-0-marking-javascript-alternative-production-ready-web-developers/

<comment><USER2> Dart seems interesting, but its sponsorship by Google creates a major problem - what incentive does Microsoft, Mozilla, or Apple have to implement Dart support? What about JavaScript devs who choose not to support Dart? I don't think good answers are available to these questions, which makes me hesitant.</comment>


Ask HN: Accounting software for startups? - <AUTHOR>

Hi, I was wondering whether straight up Excel / Numbers is the preferred option for startups or whether there are more sophisticated options for basic cash flow / income statements / invoice management etc?<p>Any suggestions or useful software that has worked before? <comment><USER2> QuickBooks has a basic program called Simple Start that is an easy to use program for new businesses. It will give you more functionality than Excel. For a discount, go to our website and click on any Intuit icon: <http://www.ropergroup.com>. With Simple Start you can create invoices, track payments, pay bills, print checks and create financial statements.

</comment><comment><USER3> You will probably want to use Quickbooks. A lot of CPA's understand it. Do not use spreadsheets because spreadsheets do not have an audit trail.

Talk to a CPA that has experiance in our industry and follow that persons advice.

</comment><comment><USER4> Do you have an accountant? More than likely, they would point you towards QuickBooks, as it's pretty much the standard.

And if you don't have an accountant, you should probably start talking to one.</comment>


Sell Your By-products - <AUTHOR> http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/1620-sell-your-by-products <comment><USER2> Recently, I was reading a book about sushi, and found out that soy sauce is actually a by-product of making miso.

Early forms of sushi were actually invented inland South East Asia, since they had to find a way to preserve it. It was found that if you put fish in rice and let it sit for months, the fermented rice kills off the bacteria, and keeps the fish edible, even if the fermented rice smelled like vomit.

When the practice migrated to Japan, the lords of Kyoto began to eat the fish earlier and earlier, and found that the rice, slightly fermented, was actually quite good. So, sushi rice came as a by-product of a modified process of preservation for fish.

Later on, somebody invented rice vinegar, so you no longer had to wait months for slightly fermented sushi rice--you just pour it onto freshly cooked rice.

<comment><USER3> What was the name of this book? Sounds interesting.

<comment><USER2> [http://www.amazon.com/Story-Sushi-Unlikely-Saga- Fish/dp/0060...](http://www.amazon.com/Story-Sushi-Unlikely-Saga- Fish/dp/0060883510/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236719418&sr=8-1)

The Story of Sushi.

<comment><USER3> Thanks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> In the sense of "create more value than you capture", you can also do pretty well for yourself by giving away your by-products. It lets you get the best of both worlds of the "charge money for value" and "influential people on the Internet think everything should be free". (I would assume that would be the point of the Rails example.)

You'd be absolutely amazed how much value you can extract out of a blog, for example, if you treat it as a friendcatcher.

(I love that word -- when I was younger and not exactly the most social of people, Mom always advised me to learn to cook because it was a "friendcatcher". It gives you a perfect built-in excuse to invite people over, even if you've just met them, and cooking and eating are so inherently social that it gets you over the "I don't really know you" hump a lot of the time.)

<comment><USER5> I've never heard that term before but I really like it. Hats off to your mother.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I am reminded of a story about a young Armour (of the meats). He bought a cow for $20, raised it and butchered it. He sold the meat for $20, and the hide for $2.

This is the concept that led to Armour Meats being so huge. Since they did all the processing in one place, they could sell things that previously had gone to waste, like organs and hide and hair.

And since he had the marginal products to live on, he could sell the meat at cost, and undercut any local butcher.

<comment><USER7> This is true of almost all commodity processing industries. Since usually everyone is using mostly the same processes, and paying largely the same price for their inputs, there is no differentiation and thus no profit in the base processing. Where people start to make money is to find a market for the by- product, and, particularly if the by-product has low bulk value, site a processing plant for the by-product next door to the main plant.

<comment><USER5> Absolutely. My sister works for a company that ships byproducts such as cow hearts and brains over to Europe where apparently there is a pretty big market for the stuff that we're too finicky to eat here in the US.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Work/life balance – Significant other complains you work too much? - <AUTHOR> I got a lot of complains from my gf about me working too much and not having enough time with her. This leads to a common work/life balance question for all the people who want to be success.<p>So how do you handle this balance? and what would you do when your gf/bf/wife/husband complains about it? <comment><USER2> First, I wouldn't get relationship advice from HN, or any pool of nerds. There's a reason our relationships suffer or are few and far between: nerd personalities will spend more time coding at work, trying to build a side project, watch TV or play games than being a healthy, balanced human being.

I work 40 hours a week. If I have work shit poking into my life beyond that on a regular basis, it's time to talk to my manager.

Don't lose your life to sitting on a computer coding. You can write software (or whatever you do) until you die, but you can't get back time lost, moments, relationships, friends and family.

As hokey as it may sound, and as often as I had people around me warning me about this, it took me awhile to figure it out. Sadly, it will take many nerds a long time to figure out and I'm convinced most never do.

When I die, I don't want my only memories to be coding on my laptop at home. There's so much more to try out and discover. Art, music, people, cooking, travel, whatever. IDK. Find some stuff and do more of it.

<comment><USER3> I disagree. I would rather say: Do whatever you want to do. If you wanna code all day, just do it! This is freedom!

So if you wanna work all day, find a way around your gf's complaints. If you think your gf is pushing too much then probably she isn't for you.

Sometimes I have the same problem and I try to be very straight: I always worked so much!

<comment><USER2> In the end you can't have both. If you work all the time your interpersonal relationships with suffer. The original post is asking for advice in a situation where he is unable to spend enough time away from work and appears to want to keep a lady friend.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> SCHEDULE.

1\. Schedule most times spent with spouse. For _everything_. I really mean everything. Dinner date? Schedule it in advance. Going house-hunting? Schedule the visits. Movies? Schedule the evening way in advance. Visiting folks? Agree on a set date.

2\. Stick to the schedules like a mofo. Integrity integrity integrity. Promises broken because schedules could not be kept are more likely the reason for an unhappy spouse (or kids!) rather than the amount of time spent with them. No one likes getting their hopes up only to be let down last minute.

3\. Never accept an impromptu activity with spouse without agreeing to set off existing agreed upon schedules. This reinforces your commitment to the discipline of schedules. They know you are serious about your time and doing so shows that you acknowledge and respect theirs.

4\. Try to keep one day of the week as a wild card where you don't work and simply say yes to anything they (spouse/kids) ask. Schedule this day secretly without telling them. This is the day you can "disrupt" them by saying "Let's go for ice cream" while they are busy. See what happens.

5\. When complaints are raised against you for not spending enough time with them, open your schedules - demonstrate the obvious.

6\. Never work on a Sunday. This should be your wild card day.

<comment><USER5> I strongly disagree with this advice.

There is no faster way to suck the emotion out of a relationship than to put a schedule at the center of it, and hiding behind the excuse of the schedule is just deferring responsibility.

<comment><USER4> Scheduling time with spouse (and for kids) is the only honest and practical way of dealing with the question/challenge of "balancing" work life and family life. It's about setting boundaries. And respectful boundaries are always healthy for all in the relationship.

And by "balance" I don't mean equal - I mean having both.

<comment><USER6> Your post made me angry. I just deleted the post I had written. Here's the replacement.

Not seeing your children unless you have scheduled time to do so is bizarre. Some people would suggest it's borderline mildly abusive.

Children _must_ come before work. It's really fucking simple. This principle is enshrined in the internationally agreed (although I know the US never ratifies these things) human rights for the child. [http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx](http://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/crc.aspx)

Not seeing your children without scheduling time for them has nothing to do with "healthy" (it soumds pathological) nor "respectful boundaries".

The default must be "all my time is spent with my family. Here's the time I set aside for work, but if anything happens to my children I can shift that work to a different time".

<comment><USER7> > Children must come before work. It's really fucking simple. This principle > is enshrined in the internationally agreed...

I read through that Convention, but didn't see any language that backs up your claim. Perhaps I missed it. Can you tell me which part and which article establishes the principle that you claim it does?

<comment><USER6> In the pre-amble

"Recognizing that the child, for the full and harmonious development of his or her personality, should grow up in a family environment, in an atmosphere of happiness, love and understanding,"

And Article 3, section 1:

"1\. In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration."

<comment><USER7> Article 3, section 1 has no bearing on the actions of the individual. Notice that the language that targets institutions and governments.

The preamble speaks only of the environment that a child should be placed in. If it is necessary that both parents work 120 hours per week to provide such an environment for their children, then that is behavior that is supported by that Convention.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Part of a successful relationship is having compatible goals in life. There is no correct answer to how much work is too much. Some people want to never work and spend all day on the beach. Others think the beach is boring and would much rather be creating something. Most people are the middle.

If your girlfriend thinks you work too much, you probably either need to work less or get a new girlfriend.

One thing that is definitely not "quality time" is fighting over how much you are working. Everyone loses.

Good luck!

<comment><USER9> This kind of black and white thinking is just going to cause you to lose your girlfriend. If there's a happy medium, take it.

<comment><USER8> Your comment is totally reasonable and I'm certainly not suggesting dropping someone the first time compromise is required.

But I don't see why there needs to be so much emphasis on couples staying together. The OP doesn't say, and it is certainly possible that I am making incorrect assumptions, but it sounds like they are young and don't have children together. (no one over 30 would say "gf", right??)

So who cares? If they are meant to be, the work/life balance won't be a big issue. If they are incompatible, better to find out now, before they are older and DO have kids.

I want to add that the readers of this site probably put way more time into work (and work-related activities) than the typical person. If your significant other expects work to be 9-5, you should probably disappoint them sooner rather than later.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think it's about setting aside quality time with your SO, so that she feels heard and paid attention to. Quality time isn't watching a tv show together in silence, nor going out with the same group of friends, rather it's more about no distractions, just you and her. But if your work schedule takes up so much of your time that you rarely see her, then that's a problem (and would be for just about anyone). LTRs are like a plant, gotta water it.

</comment><comment><USER11> I went from academia to a startup after being married. My wife was worried this would mean I work way too much. We came up with a specific plan. Three days a week I would be home at no later than 6. I could go in as early as I wanted. The other days I could stay as late as I wanted. Weekends were for us to spend time together. If there was a one off or some important thing, she wasn't worried since we had a clear agreement in place. Later the three days a week was made two days and this was also Ok.

Separately, just listen. If your SO wants to spend more time, make time. If you can't or won't then ask what is important to you and make a decision.

Another thing that helps is to plan specific things to do. Go on a hike, go to the beach, these kinds of memorable moments are more significant than going to a restaurant or hanging out on the couch.

This may not apply if you are in a relationship with dependency or trust issues. If you are go see a counselor and work that out first.

</comment><comment><USER12> > what would you do when your gf/bf/wife/husband complains about it?

When my wife complains about it, I just listen. She's also a working professional who works a ton more than I do so it's usually a red flag if she brings it up. A lot of times it's not about coming up with a resolution but just trying to understand what she is frustrated with.

> So how do you handle this balance?

When I first started working remote about 10 years ago I didn't think it was an issue. It was supposed to be the dream setup.

But then I eventually had kids and started my own company and saw the lines between work/life blur. At first I told myself this was natural since it was one of the side affects of being remote but I quickly became dissatisfied with that answer. This was especially the case when I felt like I had to start choosing between time with my family and time for work.

I eventually came to realize that life stuff (i.e. family, relationships, etc.) aren't a time suck from work but a healthy constraint.

For me, success does not come from pouring every ounce of energy I have into work but from embracing the constraints of my life. I use these constraints to focus on the most important things I have to do for work so that I can get back to my family as soon as possible.

For more of a practical standpoint the following are the things I do to manage the balance (especially since my home is where I work).

\- Have doors on the office.

\- Family time, is strictly family time. No emails on the phone, github issues, harvest invoice, etc. I'm not perfect at this but I try to go with the distraction free iPhone methodology [[https://medium.com/life-hacks/my-year- with-a-distraction-fre...](https://medium.com/life-hacks/my-year-with-a- distraction-free-iphone-and-how-to-start-your-own-experiment-6ff74a0e7a50)]

\- Have strict business hours.

\- Don't blur the line between work and personal health. Which means eating appropriately and getting the appropriate amount of sleep.

<comment><USER8> This is all great advice. The key (over time) is in working more efficiently and productively, not working more hours.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I've been with my now wife for 17 years. Most important rule:

 _Make dedicated time for her_ every day for a minutes, every week for a few hours, every month for a few days, every year for a few weeks.

That basically means dedicated listening for one short conversation a day, one dedicated dinner each week, one dedicated weekend together each month, and one dedicated vacation together each year.

Any by dedicated, I mean no phones or computers or texts. Give her your time. It need not be huge amounts. But show she is important.

Of course you will fall short. But the goal is to try. She will see that.

</comment><comment><USER14> This is a difficult question because you're the only one who can answer it. Do you really work too much or is your girlfriend just needy and need to get a hobby? Maybe you're in your early 20's and working a lot right now is more critical to your future than a relationship with a girl who's not the love of your life. Maybe you're in your 30's, work 100hrs/wk, you've been dating this girl for 5 years, love her, and she's your last real chance at a relationship for you. How many more at bats do you have (some function of age and how easy it is for you to get women)?

Only you know the answer to this, so what do you think? Ask yourself, 1) if you worked less and made her happy or 2) your continued working at this pace and let her leave, what would you regret more in 5 years? Maybe you won't know how you really feel about her until you leave her. That's what happened with my wife and I.

I understand the draw of work. To this day I still work too much because I absolutely love what I do and the feeling it gives me. But I've been married 6 years and I love my wife more. If my work got in the way of our relationship, I would change things. But this is only because I _know_ she's worth it.

So look over the advice here, but you're the only one that can really answer that question. The answer isn't at the end of some math equation, it's in your gut. Honestly, IMHO if you have to ask us just let her go and get back to work.

</comment><comment><USER15> If you're asking for relationship advice on HN, I strongly suspect your mind is already made up and you're just looking for useful rationalisations.

</comment><comment><USER16> Imagine yourself having reached the 'success' you are currently pursuing. Imagine how much you will have to sacrifice in order to reach it. It certainly gives a thrill reaching the goals you set in you life. But there is one big question you have to ask yourself: what will you do after you have reached your success? Do you think _you_ will be different? Do you think you will be happier? I can give you the answer: after reaching your goals, you will still be the same person as before, and you will still be as (un)happy as before. But you will have 1 extra question on your mind: why am I not happier now that I have reached my goals?

I hope you play games, because my answer is this: life is like a video game, it gives a thrill when winning it, but the real joy comes from playing it.

Enjoy your time at work, and enjoy the time you spend with your girlfriend. Your personal success is not measured by reaching some goal, but it's measured by how much fun you're having in your life (and yes, work should be fun, but spending time with your girlfriend should also be).

Sorry that I didn't gave a practical answer, but I hope it helps.

<comment><AUTHOR> You brought a very good point. Thank you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> If you're driven to be successful either for financial reasons or because there's something you're passionate about and your partner isn't supportive of that vision or goal, then there will always be a tension when you're pursuing something they don't think is valuable. Is your definition of success the same as their's?

</comment><comment><USER18> I leave the office before 6 almost every day to pick up one or the other kid. Wide does the same. Always have dinner together. Never work weekends unless it's a serious emergency. You'd be amazed how easy it is to just get up and go and finish what you're doing tomorrow. Hasn't slowed my career much at all.

</comment><comment><USER19> Look at your priorities. What level of work makes you happy. What level makes them happy. Which is more important - your success, or your relationship.

Work out what the effects of your choices will be, and then consciously make a decision that will work best for you in the long run.

</comment><comment><USER5> This is about Priorities–

I suggest you spend a few minutes and do a deep session of introspection and meditate on what your true priorities are.

It's not nearly as easy as it sounds...

Here are some questions to get you rolling: Why are you working so much? For you? For someone else? For the money? If so, why? What will you do with that money? Is it for you? A family? Do you find yourself enjoying your girlfriend more than your work? What do you get out of your relationship? Why are you with this person? Why are you working on your specific project?

The idea is to discover what you truly value and align your priorities with that– Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER20> It may be a common problem but each solution is going to be different. Before you have a solution, you need to understand the problem. Listen to her. Why does she think you work too much? What would she prefer you do (spend time with her is too generic: she most likely has specific issues in mind. ASK).

I can't stress this enough: listen to her. Listen to what she's saying, not just what you expect her to say or what you think she's saying. Actually clear your mind and listen. Then the two of you can start to figure out what to do about it.

</comment><comment><USER21> Some ideas: * Listen to them, have a conversation about optimal work life balance. * Think about your habits, ask if you're working too much, too little, or just the right amount. * Ask yourself every hour that you work if you think that hour had been productive, or if you have been unproductively "working" due to exhaustion. * Consider having all of these conversations after a vacation or some other form of time off, because it's easy to be myopic when you're in the middle of working.

</comment><comment><USER22> Run a time tracker and log every task you are doing. Cracking the 40 hour mark means you are not prioritizing your time properly or you are meant to be single for a while.

Time tracking is also perfect for accountability in your performance, and also how reasonable your employer is. If you're on a salary for a 40 hour week but end up in the 50 hour territory you are sacrificing precious family time that you'll never get back, for your boss. For free.

</comment><comment><USER23> Do what you love. Balance is not quite possible. I work a lot. I probably spend an hour or so a day with my kids. But I love my work. They will understand. As for dealing with SO, if they are not on board or understand your passion then you got bigger problems than time management. You are on a mission. Your SO should understand that. It is who you are.

</comment><comment><USER24> Listening to them deeply and finding out their core frustrations is key, just like how you would interact with a user to discover their pain points. In my experience, when my partner claims I work too much it isn't always because I literally work too much.

Of course, sometimes my work/life balance needs to be readjusted and brought back to an acceptable equilibrium. However, the frustration often comes from not conveying my love for her in a way she recognizes and receives it.

The book The Five Love Languages[1], by Gary Chapman, opened my eyes to this. I'd recommend it to everyone. The premise of the book is that we all have unique preferences for what we find satisfying when it comes to love. Your love language is the way that you feel most loved. People usually love their partner how they want to be loved, and that doesn't tend to align with how their partner wants to be loved. You need to convey your love in a way that matches your partner's love language [2].

In my situation, I've thought deeply and talked with my partner about this concept and determined our Love Languages. I now fill the time I spend with her to the brim with activities and behaviors that convey my love for her effectively. I've found that no matter how much time I end up spending with my her, the actual amount of time becomes a non-issue when she feels loved in a way that really resonates with her.

It might help to think about it in terms of the 80-20 rule[3], doing the 20% of effort necessary (conveying your love in a way that actually gets received) to get 80% of the return (a satisfied and loved partner). That may sound a bit cold when applied to relationships- to try to minimize the effort required to convey your love, but it's actually the nicest thing you can do for them.

[1] [http://www.amazon.com/The-Love-Languages-Secret- Lasts/dp/080...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Love-Languages-Secret- Lasts/dp/0802473156/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top)

[2] High level overview of the five love languages:

\- Words of Affirmation \- If this is your love language, you feel most cared for when your partner is open and expressive in telling you how wonderful they think you are, how much they appreciate you, that their world is a better place because you are in it, etc.

\- Acts of Service \- If your partner offering to watch the kids so you can go to the gym (or relieving you of some other task) gets your heart going, then this is your love language.

\- Affection \- This love language is just as it sounds. A warm hug, a kiss, touch, and sexual intimacy make you feel most loved when this is your love language.

\- Quality Time \- This love language is about being together, fully present and engaged in the activity at hand, no matter how trivial.

\- Gifts \- Your partner taking the time to give you a gift can make you feel appreciated.

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

<comment><USER25> What if your partner's love language is Quality Time, and OP knows it?

<comment><USER24> Then OP would have to work on finding more time to spend with them, and a lot of other comments address possible ways to improve this.

Personally, when my partner complained about not spending enough time together, I increased the time I spent with her, and it didn't help alleviate the frustrations she was feeling. She thought that what mattered to her was Quality Time, but it was really hearing Words of Affirmation that was important (I see a similarity with users who say they want a particular feature, but really just want to solve a certain pain point). Only when we figured out how she feels maximally loved was I able to use the time I spent with her effectively.

I thought maybe OP could be in the same boat.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I think the best thing is to be with someone who understands your work life, and either doesn't mind it or has something similar on their own.

There is nothing worse than having a SO who is the type of person who barely works and then wants to party and do things nonstop, while all you want to do is work on that project you have yet to finish.

</comment><comment><USER27> This is rarely about time, and more about relative importance. Work can be an obsession, which is easy to confuse with "more important than me."

I doubt your girlfriend is asking for work/life balance, exactly. She's probably just saying she wants to feel as important as work seems. That's a thing you can work on.

</comment><comment><USER28> You should have in mind that the time you spend on your startup is not linearly correlated to its success.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting. I never thought it this way. They're still correlated though right?

<comment><USER28> Definitely correlated! And the function must be different in each case, but I'd bet it's never linear :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Is every extra hour you're spending working _really_ worth it? I'd figure out how to minimise the time required to accomplish tasks, defer them, delegate them and then also scrutinise the actual tasks themselves.

Once you're done with that do you still not have enough free time?

</comment><comment><USER30> My GF rarely complains that I work too much because sometimes _she_ works too much. That helps a lot!

</comment><comment><USER31> I married a woman who works in my field and understands my hours because she works them too.

<comment><USER32> Understanding doesn't add any hours to the day. So you're not seeing much of each other, and don't yet resent it. But its easy for that to start happening. And I don't know any cure other than 'spend more time together' which means working fewer hours.</comment></comment>