Ask HN: Agile - Pros and Cons? - <AUTHOR>

Hi all,
The company I work for are on the verge of introducing the agile project methodology to our coding process.
Having read Steve Yegge's Good Agile, Bad Agile - http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/09/good-agile-bad-agile_27.html - I am somewhat skeptical about it being anything more than an unnecessary fad.
What are HNer's experiences with agile and would you recommend/advise against it?
UPDATE: Changed title to something less black and white :-) <comment><USER2> _Extreme Programming Refactored: The Case Against XP_ [<http://apress.com/book/view/9781590590966>] was a fun book for showing the other side of the XP coin.

It does a good job at critiquing the XP movement (and agile), including some of the examples from Kent Beck's Extreme Programming Explained, e.g. showing how the XP/agile poster-project, the Chrysler C3 payroll system, failed.

It's focused on XP, but many of the points work for other agile methodologies.

</comment><comment><USER3> Agile - great if you're mostly seniors with experience, a good sense of time management and communication.

Else run for the hills!

</comment><comment><USER4> No tool is 'bad' per se or 'good' per se, agile is not different in this respect than a hammer or a compiler.

It's not a religion, try it see if you like it (or parts of it), discard it if you don't perceive any benefit.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not sure about that - a methodology necessarily makes assumptions about what is important in running a software project.

If a methodology says that you must write everything down on cards and pair program, etc. etc. as the fundamental basis of the approach, and that is really ultimately counter-productive to the efficient running of a project, then you could quite fairly describe the approach as 'bad', or at least faulted.

It's a question of whether it helps or gets in the way.

Also, you can really only take good parts of it if the people executing it don't start themselves seeing it as somewhat religious - if they feel we should 'do agile' and that means following it as written down, then they're unlikely to be open to cropping bad pieces off.

<comment><USER4> It sounds as though you've already made up your mind ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, I'm certainly biased to think it a fad, yes, thanks to Stevey's post!

But I do wish to contend that a methodology _is not_ just a tool and inevitably has some sort of a dogma attached to it, well it seems that way to me anyway :-)

<comment><USER4> It seems to me that way too. But I think that there are shops that get good mileage out of agile, even if not for the reasons they think they are.

For the most part, agile shines if you had no organization in place at all, then it is easy (low entry barrier) to get going and to see an immediate improvement.

But when comparing agile to any other SDM it's just another tool in the box and not spectacularly better or worse than any other.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Sometimes I hate Java - <AUTHOR> http://malexandre.fr/posts/2012/Nov/21/sometimes-i-hate-java/

<comment><USER2> There are plenty of reasons to hate Java, but these aren't them.

Why are you wrapping and unwrapping your objects three times over? Just use hibernate properly and it can replace all those generic DAOs.

Yes, generics aren't available via reflection for backwards compatibility reasons, and this is unfortunate. But the getModelClass() workaround is pretty simple, and you only need it at all because you've overengineered everything.

Yes, traditional java.util.Date is terrible, we know. It can't be replaced because of, again, backwards compatibility. If you're doing serious work in Java you use JodaTime and your life is good again.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hibernate can manage the client/server communication ? I thought it was just to manage the server/database communication, and we used OpenJPA for that, so it's kind of the same. My DAOs (yes the name isn't exactly the right one, but I tried to simplify) are for the client/server communication, and in my case for the GWT's RPC service implementation. And instead of having a lot of service (on for each screen for example), or a lot of method in one big service, I tried to have only one service. And for the Date, JodaTime is awesome, but again, not compatible for the GWT's client-side. But yes, there is other solutions than the built-in Date.

<comment><USER2> Hibernate won't do client/server communication (or at least it's not its main focus); given what you've now said, the point is that you don't need more than one "DAO". After all, the implementation code is the same in all cases.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Social skills for hackers - <AUTHOR> Coming a bit late to the party, but I'm coming to understand that just being a highly skilled professional won't get you far without networking skills.
Since it doesn't seem to come easy to a lot of us - how did you learn to network, have people like you, keep a conversation going etc.
Any recommended books? Videos? Courses? <comment><USER2> Practice with colleagues. I find networking events impossible if I go by myself but fun if I go with someone from work. As far as specific books go - find something that fits your culture. Lots of people from the USA rate Dale Carnegie highly, but as a British person that approach doesn't feel quite right. General interest psychology can be readable and enlightening. Thinking Fast and Slow. Emotional Intelligence. Maybe something on Mindfulness if you aren't familiar with focussing on your own feelings and emotions.

<comment><USER3> You make a very important, and often overlooked point: Social skills vary from culture to culture. Make sure to research this from the context of your culture and location.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Networking, having people like you, and keeping a conversation going are three different skills. You should divide and conquer them.

I started with conversational skills because I found practice to be easy to do (you can practice with your family).

Networking is more complex but boils down to finding common interests with strangers. On Twitter, I seek out people with whom I seem to have something in common (python for example). Then I just follow them and join in their tweets in a friendly way. This approach helped me get a job after hurricane Maria destroyed my home country and I had to relocate.

Getting people to like you, well, that's the hard one. What has worked for me is tons of empathy, actively looking for ways to help people, and checking up on their progress. I'm neither good looking, charming, nor an extrovert. It's a lot of work but it's worth it.

Go read Dale Carnegie's How to make friends and influence people. It's a good solid start. You can also email me and I'll gladly help you on your journey.

PS. I'm soon doing a conference talk on this subject titled Networking for nerds: for people who are bad at people. It will appear on the developer on fire conf this coming January. I assume it will later be available on YouTube for free.

</comment><comment><USER4> Go to a trade show and find an invite to one of the trade show parties. There will be lots of sales people there with "sales person" personalities. Talk with them. They're usually good at talking so you should not need to feel stress to keep the conversation going. You might pick up some techniques.

PS it's usually easy to score a trade show party invite. Just ask at any friendly booths where the best party is that evening.</comment>


Why the free upgrade to Windows 10 still works - <AUTHOR> https://borncity.com/win/2019/11/30/why-the-free-upgrade-to-windows-10-still-works/ <comment><USER2> This is just blog spam of this reddit comment: [https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/e35i4i/apparently...](https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/e35i4i/apparently_microsoft_is_still_allowing_free/f92802f/)

Which contains a bunch of questionable statements, such as "this was brought up by the brick and mortar stores that they were doing simple clock changes on customer devices during the upgrade challenge to get around it"

This doesn't really make any sense because windows connects to a Microsoft server to validate keys, so it would presumably be possible to not allow the keys to unlock entirely different software, regardless of the PC's time.

</comment><comment><USER3> Because Windows 10 has a negative real price. It's adware.

<comment><USER4> Can you elaborate? I have been using Windows 10 for years on multiple computers and yet to see a single ad. I haven't taken any steps to disable them either.

<comment><USER5> It is a well known fact, so if I think you should elaborate what Windows version you use, what country etc.

Though I am expecting you are throwing a bait and when someone gives an example you will respond that that obvious advertising is not ads

<comment><USER6> > It is a well known fact,

Many things are well-known while not actually being facts. This may be one of them. (At the very least, the _amount_ of advertising is enormously exaggerated)

<comment><USER5> OK, so check this article [https://www.howtogeek.com/269331/how-to-disable- all-of-windo...](https://www.howtogeek.com/269331/how-to-disable-all-of- windows-10s-built-in-advertising/)

tell me if the images are faked and maybe point to an MS website that will show that they never pre-installed candy crush, never suggested paid apps in your start menu, I am thinking maybe this people that do not see this ads are maybe considering as not ads. they used a different installed for windows that changed the settings to turn off all the crap.

<comment><USER4> I don't consider any of those to be advertising. But that's just me. I accept that they are ads for other people.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


"Word lens" is lame because you're still dumb - <AUTHOR> http://www.cooper.com/journal/2010/12/word_lens_is_lame_because_your.html One-way translation, only half a solution <comment><USER2> I think the OP is first drawing a valid if glib opinion I don't agree with (Word lens is lame) and then mixing up his correlations (because you're still dumb) as well as vocabulary (it would be more accurate to say ignorant).

Word Lens is a breakthrough mainstream application when it comes to language barriers. Discounting that because there are still existing problems with communication in the world is, uh, dumb.

<comment><USER3> I think the writer meant "dumb" in the sense of "mute", while going for provocation since it's an obscure meaning of the word to many people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> "But, until we get a voice, a way to communicate back, Word Lens is little more than an amazing party trick."

WTF? A party trick? Okay sorry for the outburst there mate, why don't _you_ make something better?

<comment><USER5> Criticism should not depend on the ability to create.

That said, this critique was crap.

<comment><USER6> What didn't work for the critique? I'm the author, and. As someone who does a lot of global business travel I simply haven't found a huge need for only translating signs. It might be a good first step but the immediate next step is to try to communicate about the content of the sign which is where a real- time translator would be really handy. The question I tried to ask (and might have put badly) is, what is the need this is serving?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> OP's blog post reminds me sorely how depressing it is to create something and get feedback from the world. The most accurate description of Word Lens I've read is "take a look! This is the future." And still, there are people to write nasty articles calling it lame because it doesn't fix breakfast as well.

So I found my resolution for the new year. I'll stick to my anonymity when creating products, and hire somebody to get feedback while filtering out the nasties. And never, ever ego-search on my products.

<comment><USER6> The speed of the translation, the directness of the interface, that you don't need to fumble about typing with your thumbs THAT is the future... But the extremely limited application of translation technology which meets an edge- case need isn't the future. It's a good first step toward solving translation problems. Criticism is a valuable part of a product's lifecycle. Glowing praise is fun to get, but it doesn't help you move forward and improve.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> The video isn't all that impresssive, as it's just the same thing in reverse; they can talk Hindi using the translation, but can't understand it.

<comment><USER6> Really good point. I'd intended the video to show the other half of the solution, but as you point out you still wouldn't have had any idea what the other person replied, leaving you with another version of the translation problem.</comment></comment>


Martin Fowler's Domain-Specific Languages book is out - <AUTHOR> http://martinfowler.com/dslwip/ <comment><USER2> Perhaps someone who knows this material can advise us about something. I just looked through the linked ToC and am surprised that nearly everything is about DSL internals. Example:

 _Express statement sub-elements of a function call by putting them into a closure in an argument._

This is all easy stuff! The hard part is figuring out what a DSL should _be_. For all the hype about them, there are precious few examples of good ones. The successful ones are nearly always purely technical things like regular expressions that, while marvelous, do not even attempt to deliver on the promise of accessibility to domain experts. By far the majority are junk because they do a poor job of modeling the domain. This has little to do with closures or even parsers. To focus on such details is to take the easy way out (though I suppose it might sell more books to programmers infatuated with the idea of DSLs, who are more interested in, say, syntax-directed translation than in insurance or crop yields).

When asked what they thought of Elvis Costello, the Sex Pistols replied, "He wears glasses without any actual glass in them." Surely Martin Fowler has not written a Domain Specific Language book without any actual Domain in it?

<comment><USER3> I interned at a language engineering research lab in 2003-2005 and I heard the exact same sentiment about DSL's from most people working there. All the typical examples are techie languages (SQL, Rake, ...). I've almost _never_ seen a non-techie DSL whereas that is ultimately the promise of the concept. It's sad the DSL story has barely changed in seven years.

I haven't read the DSL book, but if it's about parser/evaluator technicalities as you claim, one might as well (re)read SICP.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> I noticed another thing about this book. The index has a dozen or so references to Lisp, but no mention of Forth. This is unfortunate. I bet there are more true DSLs in production in Forth systems than Lisp ones. They're scattered throughout the industrial world. Real people, i.e. with no knowledge of computing who are simply at work in their domain, use them to do things like calibrate lathes. Since the main thing we need if DSLs are to become more than design patterns squared (a technical scourge making things unnecessarily complicated for years to come) are _real working examples_ , it's bad to ignore the richest source thereof. Of course this is one of the hard things about writing about software; where are you going to find such examples? On the other hand, I don't think people try very hard.

The DSL philosophy runs as deep in Forth as it does in Lisp. Consider this passage from _Thinking Forth_ :

"Programming languages designed especially for particular applications such as robotics, inventory control, statistics, etc., are known as 'application- oriented languages'. FORTH is a programming environment for _creating_ application-oriented languages. (That last sentence may be the most succinct description of FORTH that you'll find.) In fact, you shouldn't write any serious application in FORTH; as a language it's simply not powerful enough. What you _should_ do is write your own languages in FORTH (lexicons) to model your understanding of the problem, in which you can elegantly describe its solution."

That's from 1984. Yeah, that's right: 19 freaking 84. Has there ever been a clearer description of the idea?

<comment><USER4> _Thinking Forth_ - discusses a bunch of ideas that didn't become popular until Fowler et. al invented them. (Incremental development, (re)"factoring", etc.)

A lot of those ideas came from cross-pollination between the Forth and Smalltalk communities, didn't they? Just like many others came from Lisp.

<comment><USER2> Please assure me you omitted quotes from "invented" in some kind of ironic seizure. :)

I'm not aware of any interaction between the Forth and Smalltalk communities, nor did I ever hear Forth referenced in oral histories along the Smalltalk->XP axis. It would be interesting if this were true. I bet your question reduces approximately to, "Was Ward Cunningham a Forth hacker?"

Moore was influenced by both APL and (especially) Lisp, which he studied with McCarthy. But Forth predates Smalltalk, and the two moved in very different circles. Still do I guess.

While I'm at it, I've been meaning to write the following down somewhere. Out of the great small, regular languages (Lisp, Smalltalk, APL, Forth, is that it?) Forth stands out as the only one that originated in working hackerdom and not a research environment. Forth is the incarnation of that design style in the land of the Von Neumann architecture, doubtless because Moore was a working programmer all those years, just trying to get things done. The remarkability of this fact has yet to be appreciated. Consider Lisp by contrast: it began existence far away from the machine and has been trying to find its way back ever since (or bring the machine up to it). With Lisp, bottom-up programming nonetheless starts pretty high up; Forth starts at rock bottom. That's important, and I wish more of us (myself included) had a better grasp of it. One could do worse than to make it the introduction to computing, or at least teach it alongside Scheme/Python/etc. I think it would be very exciting to young hackers to begin at the beginning in this way.

<comment><USER4> I think I read about Forth influencing Smalltalkers on the c2 wiki somewhere - IIRC, it had more to do with the problem solving approach than the language itself. I could be wrong, though.

Edit: Found one reference - "It must have been ten years ago that I tried to explain the essence of Smalltalk to my brother, a Forth programmer. We found common ground by programming -- one day in Forth, another in Smalltalk. In Forth we wrote the essential Smalltalk: object identity and method dispatch; in Smalltalk we wrote the essential Forth: dictionary, words and builds-does. We both showed off our respective environments with great skill, pride and confidence. Oh, if only all programming could be so educational. -- WardCunningham". (<http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ForthInSmalltalk>) So yes, Ward Cunningham knew Forth, for one.

As for other "great small, regular languages", there's also ML, Prolog, and SNOBOL. I haven't used SNOBOL for anything, but it AFAICT it introduced pattern matching, so it's been pretty influential. There's probably more good candidates in HOPL I and II. Maybe also awk.

(And yes - the original version of the "invented" sentence was positively _unctuous_. ;) )

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Or you could just read Chapter 4 of SICP: [http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full- text/book/book-Z-H-25.html...](http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full- text/book/book-Z-H-25.html#%_chap_4), the first edition of which was published 26 years ago.

<comment><USER6> This is an excellent suggestion. Other suggestions: read the wikipedia articles on Simple LR and General LR parsers; google "python descriptor" and read the top results.

<comment><USER7> A parser does not a DSL make. I find this advice, and the advice of the parent, dangerous, as it suggests writing a DSL is just a, relatively simple, technical challenge.

It is like advising the Dragon book and someone replying 'meh, just read SICP'. As in that case, SICP or articles on LR parsers do not even remotely stack up to the Fowler DSL book combined with the ANTLR reference.

<comment><USER5> Two things: (1) classifying Chapter 4 of SICP as a chapter about parsing is just plain wrong and (2) Fowler's DSL book just came out; by definition you simply can't place it in the same class as the Dragon book.

I think if you actually read Chapter 4 you would have a much different opinion. There's nothing "simple" about it. If you actually grok Chapter 4 then you grok Lisp. After that, it becomes apparent that the phrase "Domain Specific Language" is really just unnecessary terminology.

<comment><USER7>
      classifying Chapter 4 of SICP as a chapter about parsing
      is just plain wrong

I classified my parent as suggesting writing a DSL is mostly writing a parser. I classified your post as saying writing a DSL is mostly a technical challenge, because there are many issues about writing a DSL that SICP doesn't touch upon (or at least, that's mostly what you will get from it on a first reading. See the final paragraph of this reply).

      Fowler's DSL book just came out; by definition you simply
      can't place it in the same class as the Dragon book.

I didn't place it in 'the same class': I suggested Fowler's book _plus_ the ANTLR reference have many interesting, relevant, even necessary, things to say about the subject of writing DSL's that aren't in SICP (but again: see the final paragraph of this reply), like the Dragon book has many interesting, relevant and necessary things to say about compilers that aren't in SICP.

      After that, it becomes apparent that the phrase "Domain
      Specific Language" is really just unnecessary terminology.

You didn't originally get that just from chapter 4 of SICP. You have much, _much_ more knowledge of all kinds of things relevant to writing DSL's that you didn't learn from chapter 4 of SICP. That it may all be implied in that chapter does not mean it is a useful resource for someone touching the subject of DSL's for the first time, because they won't grasp the implications. Implications may be clear _in hindsight_ , when you apply all your other knowledge to that chapter, but that doesn't mean they were even remotely clear to you in the first place.

      If you actually grok Chapter 4 then you grok Lisp

And you won't grok that chapter until long after you have acquired a vast array of secondary, additional, related knowledge on the subjects the chapter touches upon.

SICP is like a deep philosophical work: you need to study philosophy and read a lot of primary and secondary works to truly understand it's references and implications. To most people, it is not useful as an initial guide to writing DSL's.

<comment><USER5> _You didn't originally get that just from chapter 4 of SICP. You have much, much more knowledge of all kinds of things relevant to writing DSL's that you didn't learn from chapter 4 of SICP. That it may all be implied in that chapter does not mean it is a useful resource for someone touching the subject of DSL's for the first time, because they won't grasp the implications. Implications may be clear in hindsight, when you apply all your other knowledge to that chapter, but that doesn't mean they were even remotely clear to you in the first place.

SICP is like a deep philosophical work: you need to study philosophy and read a lot of primary and secondary works to truly understand it's references and implications. To most people, it is not useful as a guide to writing DSL's._

This is a fair point and worth talking about. When I read SICP I already understood Lisp macros, which is a major conceptual leap. So I will admit that I cannot provide a datapoint myself to support the idea that Chapter 4 is stand alone. However, the text itself was used in MIT's first computer science course for many years and they did teach through Chapter 4. Many other schools have used SICP in the past as well (<http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/adopt- list.html>). I think the fact that college freshman are capable of grasping it in a semester provides some evidence against your claim that you need "much, much more knowledge of all kinds of things". Hell, even spending a year to learn it would be fantastic.

Look, I'm with you on the fact that SICP is hard. But let's just reflect on the fact that Chapters 4 and 5 in a book written 26 (or 14) years ago give you a _strong foundation_ in programming languages and compilers. There's tons of stuff you can do with this foundation, including writing DSLs. It's a pet peeve of mine that we seem to be constantly rehashing various ideas in SICP, except that we need to write thousand page books on how to express these ideas in languages like Java or C#. Based on a quick glance of the book draft, this bloat is immediately apparent! For example, the distinction between internel and external DSLs? Completely unnecessary. With an understanding of Lisp the idea of an internal DSL disappears; it's just a natural part of the language. And when you think about it, the idea of external DSLs isn't useful either. If the external DSL is expressive enough, it's just like an internal DSL; simply an extension of the language you implemented it in. If not, well then you're parsing am external file format and not a language.

So yes, to reiterate, teaching SICP is _hard_. But we'd be better off just biting the bullet to avoid all the bloat and repetition that results from not teaching it.

<comment><USER7>
      I think the fact that college freshman are capable of
      grasping it in a semester provides some evidence against
      your claim that you need "much, much more knowledge of all
      kinds of things".

I would say they probably grasp it as much as I grasped quantum mechanics after the first course: I was able to go through the motions and explain the concepts involved, but that doesn't mean I actually understood it. I would claim that at some later point, after more courses, labwork and discussions on the subject, I did understand certain parts of it. Much of the additional knowledge and principles I learned are already implied in decent basic texts on the subject, but I simply wasn't in any position to 'expand' those implications.

      There's tons of stuff you can do with this foundation,
      including writing DSLs.

However, writing your first DSL on that foundation requires you to reinvent many wheels, some of which you will reinvent in a square way that first time. Knowing how to write a programming language in Lisp doesn't tell you how to write DSL's, like having a Ph.D. in English means you know how to write a novel, without you actually being capable of writing an _good_ novel. They would still benefit from reading books on 'writing novels' by people that have practical knowledge in writing actually good novels, even if those books were written by authors whose genre they dislike and the style of whom's examples they dislike.

      the distinction between internal and external DSLs?
      Completely unnecessary.

If everyone would program in Lisp: yes. However, people write DSL's in different languages, for all kinds of reasons you may or may not agree with. That means books on writing a DSL in other languages than Lisp simply have their place. And may also be valuable for those writing DSL's in Lisp, for the reasons mentioned above.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I bought this book as a "Rough Cut" a few months ago. If you want a very high- level introduction to the field of DSLs this book may be for you but don't expect to be able to do much useful after reading it. It really is just the 50,000 ft view.

I was disappointed because I wanted to get my hands dirty and so I got The Definitive ANTLR Reference a day or two later. While it has nothing like the breadth of Fowler's DSLs it has enough depth to be very useful.

[http://www.pragprog.com/titles/tpantlr/the-definitive- antlr-...](http://www.pragprog.com/titles/tpantlr/the-definitive-antlr- reference)

<comment><USER7> As a newcomer to writing DSL's, I found the book very valuable as an introduction to all the intricacies that can be involved in writing a useful, nicely integrating, DSL. The abstraction of the 'semantic model', which Fowler advocates strongly, has proven indispensable, allowing me to easily build GUI- based DSL editor for an initially completely text-based DSL, without changing a single bit in the code executing the parsed DSL.

Incidentally, this book and the definitive ANTLR reference are exactly the two books that appeared on my radar when searching for literature in DSL's.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> on amazon: [http://www.amazon.com/Domain-Specific-Languages-Addison- Wesl...](http://www.amazon.com/Domain-Specific-Languages-Addison-Wesley- Signature- Martin/dp/0321712943/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1286241603&sr=8-1)

</comment><comment><USER10> The link has changed?

<http://martinfowler.com/dslwip-gone.html>

"Now that my book on Domain Specific Languages is published, I have taken down the online drafts from my web site"

</comment><comment><USER11> Needs web design

</comment><comment><USER12> Martin Fowler seems so 2008.

To think I believed him that TDD was a good idea... It seems so far in the past.

I vote MF take Zed Shaw up on his ring match offer. At least ZS has an honest job now, soaking up government-guarantee student loans while MF seems to still be rolling ignorant corporations with his "experience"...</comment>


Expert reaction to study on the clinical effectiveness of sertraline - <AUTHOR> https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-study-on-the-clinical-effectiveness-of-the-antidepressant-sertraline/ <comment><USER2> I've often wonder what the subtle differences to the human psyche are brought on by the use of medication like this. It's very difficult to imagine that it's so finely balanced that there is no effect beyond the reduction of adverse anxiety.

My wife has been taking it for quite sometime and it's sometimes a struggle to see how she moves past it. And while it is ancedotal I feel sometimes there are things that should bother her but don't and I wonder if normal mental anxiety is suppose to play some part in that. Hard to have any definitive answer but I find it and interesting thought.

<comment><USER3> I was always a little freaked out by the idea that taking this sort of thing could turn you into an entirely different person. I'm guessing this is doubly odd for those without some kind of religious basis for the concept of a soul.

<comment><USER4> I've heard others with that same fear, and sadly it stopped them from taking advantage of a medicine that could significantly improve their quality of life.

Depression and anxiety, even when mild, can be pernicious in their self- preservation. Self-identifying with a symptom, and avoiding a potential cure because "it could turn you into an entirely different person" by removing that symptom, is often the disease talking.

SSRIs don't turn you into a different person. When working properly (i.e., right dose, right med), they simply give you more mental space to deal with and work through problems. Who you become after working through your issues is entirely up to you.

<comment><USER5> I avoided SSRIs for years based on this fear but after starting lexapro I can safely say I have never felt more free.

YMMV of course.

<comment><USER6> I also struggled with this worry, and also am infinitely better on Lexapro.

I still have anxiety, it just doesn't take complete control. I'm not a slave to my anxiety anymore, I can push past it if I really want to do something, something that in the past would have had me utterly paralyzed and broken.

It's not even a high dose.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Can somebody provide context on this study? It's sometimes interesting to get a glimpse at the state of a field. Is it just that or is there more to it?

<comment><USER8> So, for several years the actual efficacy of antidepressants has been called into question. There's lots of reasons for this, some related to the general replicability crisis, but in general it followed from reanalyses of datasets suggesting the efficacy of antidepressants is significantly lower than previously thought, and some might not have any efficacy at all.

At the same time, there's been acknowledgment that the forms of illness encountered in reality don't really map on well to diagnostic categories. So rather than major depression and generalized anxiety disorder, it's more like there are levels of general distress, and specific problems with low positive emotion, or high negative emotion, or arousal. This has contributed to things like the NIH RDoC initiative.

These two things have sort of combined to lead to a lot of questions about what antidepressants are actually doing, in terms of how it's affecting dimensions of mood and other areas of functioning, thought of in a more detailed way. So in this study rather than targeting a specific diagnostic population, they did a randomized controlled trial of a heterogeneous group of patients, and then assessed antidepressant effects on distress and well-being in a more detailed, comprehensive way than the typical diagnostic assessment.

The results aren't really surprising but are interesting to think about in the context of these issues. For instance, it's not surprising that antidepressant effects might manifest in well-being or anxiety measures, because general anxiety and depression measures can be correlated as high as .8 or .9, and well-being, while less correlated, still tends to tag along. From a replicability standpoint it raises some interesting issues because there's sort of a "fishing expedition" given all the measures, even though things were preregistered, which is worth some discussion, but the effects are all in the anticipated direction even if not significant, raising the question of whether or not p-values really are the most important thing in general.

Overall the study is one piece, but it fits together with a more general body of evidence suggesting that antidepressants are really fuzzy in their effects, and might better be thought of as "antidistress" agents, or as having a general calming effect. Not mind-blowing, but does contradict the way the meds are typically portrayed in public discussion.

<comment><USER7> Thanks for the context! Now I can read the expert statements with more understanding.</comment></comment></comment>


The Thin Line Between Surgery and Mutilation - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/02/opinion/fgm-ruling-intersex-surgery.html <comment><USER2> This issue really is an interesting window into the morass of inconsistencies in the human mind.

I wasn't even aware of how common these 'corrective' surgeries were on infants until somewhat recently and at first I thought it was probably the right thing to do but the more I think about it the more obscene it seems. These days I tend to think of any medically unnecessary surgery on infant's genitals (including circumcision) as wrong and fundamentally at odds with a 'do no harm' or 'do the least harm' medical philosophy.

Not to get sidetracked from the intersex issue, but it really does bother me that it seems that most people's reason for being okay with circumcision these days comes down to at least one of

* I'm circumcised and I want my sons penis to look like mine

* I think circumcised penises look better

* Circumcised penises aren't susceptible to problems caused by ignoring the very minimum requirements of personal hygiene.

* Circumcised penises aren't susceptible to phimosis (though phimosis is much much rarer than botched Circumcisions)

All of these reasons are relatively absurd when put next to the fact that you're putting your infant child at a considerable risk of serious medical complications should something go wrong and arguably minor sexual impairment even if things go right.

</comment><comment><USER3> Fascinating how the article avoids mention the common practice of non- medically necessary genital surgeries on boys. It get so close, talking about consent, classes and cultures. What is normal and "normalizing". How "parents who want these procedures for their children are doing so because of cultural norms and fear of ostracism".

But no, all we get is weird comparison between female circumcision and intersex surgery on girls (and boys?). Not even a mentioning of Iceland proposed law to make all non-medically necessary genital surgeries illegal until the age of consent regardless of gender and religion.</comment>


NASA web developers obviously not rocket scientists, how silly. - <AUTHOR> http://nasa.gov/ This is silly.  If you try accessing http://nasa.gov/ it does not open up, unless you add www. <comment><USER2> You are not the first to point out this perceived problem: [http://wiki.nasa.gov/cm/blog/nasadotgov/posts/post_130686081...](http://wiki.nasa.gov/cm/blog/nasadotgov/posts/post_1306860816073.html)

Short version: They have decided the cost of doing so is not worth it. I could not agree more - sure, redirecting example.com -> www.example.com is technically straightforward, but setting up a highly-available cluster (which NASA would certainly require) is not free.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> This is silly. If you try accessing <http://nasa.gov/> it does not open up, unless you add www.</comment>


Lego-style apartment transforms into infinite spaces - <AUTHOR> http://faircompanies.com/videos/view/lego-style-apartment-transforms-into-infinite-spaces/

<comment><USER2> Fabulous for a single person. For me though, the idea of having a flat like this is better than the reality.</comment>


Steam Direct: $100 to publish to Steam - <AUTHOR> https://www.polygon.com/2017/6/2/15729276/steam-direct-fee-valve <comment><USER2> tl;dr Valve is replacing the greenlight system with a per title fee. Supplement above with [http://steamcommunity.com/greenlight/discussions/18446744073...](http://steamcommunity.com/greenlight/discussions/18446744073709551615/133256758580075301/) for details on how they'll handle games in during the interim.</comment>


I am looking for a co-founder - <AUTHOR>

<comment><AUTHOR> I am looking for a co-founder

Qualities:

-ability to get things done.

-integrity. honest and fair, but also being able to recognize the truth/reality (critical for business success, I believe).

-determination to dig out of a hole; perseverance but not stubbornness.

-humility; accepting the possibility you could be wrong even when you think you are right. willing to learn from others and situations

-admit responsibility when you screw up.

Skills:

Either business skills or the stuff I am deficient in: flash (seems like cool demos cant exist without them), javascript (to manipulate different media players), and able to design nice web pages.

If you are a developer, I expect you to be very competent.

I have an application that IMHO is different. It is close to beta, and I wrote it in Swing, Java. However, people say it is not user friendly. I have also lost a lot of time (in part, because I am cautious and also had bad advice. I should have released it long ago).

I am willing to give you a one hour online demo/presentation. However I would need some kind of assurance from you that the ideas will not be copied nor given or divulged to potential competitors.

Please email me and tell me more about yourself and if you think there might be a good match.

thanks,

Anil Philip

email@example.com

<http://juwo-works.blogspot.com/>

<http://juwo.com>

<comment><USER2> "If you are a developer, I expect you to be very competent."

You don't expect other people you work with to be equally competent?

Maybe you wrote it this way because you find other competencies harder to evaluate. If that's the case, try the "animal test": <http://www.paulgraham.com/start.html>

<comment><USER3> Exactly. There is no point in expecting cofounder to be competent in same areas. What is more important for cofounder is share same passion as you do. Technical stuff can be learned. Languages and technology comes and goes.

<comment><AUTHOR> passion is emotional. It is necessary. Unfortunately, brains and talent are also required and are innate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Anil, you forgot to mention where you are geographically located. To be successful it would probably need to be someone who is close to you.

<comment><AUTHOR> I am in Kansas City. Yes, ideally cofounders should live close by. But cant we work remotely?

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Please visit <http://juwo.com>

<comment><USER5> Your navigation links are broken. They still have the 8080 port reference from your development code.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> How do you make money?

<comment><AUTHOR> 2 main ways. \- consumer pays $5 to upgrade viewer to editor because it is a useful tool. \- banner advts where media player is playing.

Theoretically if only 0.1% upgrade, and you have a website that is 1% of youtube traffic - 660K unique visitors per month, then you would have about $1.6M per year for that website. Of course, I am mindful of the "China Coke problem" - where we pick large enough market numbers to get overly optimistic projections.</comment></comment>


Lock Screen Drawer Prototype on iOS - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BAFlLzkH3M

<comment><USER2> I highly doubt those settings get changed often enough by 99% of users to make it worth putting them on the home screen.</comment>


The Dumbest User Interface of 2016 - <AUTHOR> https://eagereyes.org/blog/2016/the-dumbest-user-interface-of-2016 <comment><USER2> > The package wouldn't be complete without the entire process being much > slower than the old card swipe. What took a second or two before now seems > to take millennia.

Now that I recalled, most of my chipped POS transactions have been indeed a few seconds slower than swipes. I wonder if that's caused by the data encryption/decryption? Embedded hardwares are very capable theses days, I am surprised to see that's the case though. Can someone with expertise on this issue explain?

<comment><USER3> Before, swipe to approved was 2-3 seconds at most. The chip takes 15-30 seconds with no indication of the breakdown of time (e.g. connecting, transmitting, encrypting, etc). I'd like to know what takes the bulk of the time.

<comment><USER4> It takes considerably more time than simply swiping because chip payment transactions ivolve much more communications between the card the POS terminal, the bank entity, payment provider, etc...

Encyption/Decription times are neglible.

<comment><USER3> Yeah I found this description of the process: [http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-how-chip-cards- wor...](http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-how-chip-cards-work- htmlstory.html)

Do the systems in Europe take the same amount of time, and have the same amount of communication? I can't imagine passing a JSON object back and forth could take that long.

<comment><USER5> The USA is definitely slower than everywhere that's been using the system for more than a decade now. No idea why though as some of the slowest connections I've experienced have been in LA.

In the UK transactions typically take less than 5 seconds with more than 10 seconds usually prompting a response from the owner that it's "playing up today". In New Zealand it's quicker still, and contactless payments seem to get processed slightly quicker as well, although that could just be psychological because it removes the whole insert-wait-enter pin part.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I noticed the punishing error sound that these devices emit when the transaction is successful and it's time to remove the card. I thought I was alone in noticing and being annoyed by it. Why not make _two_ sounds - one for successful transaction -> remove card and the other for unsuccessful transaction -> remove card ???

Another seemingly unsolvable problem for about 15 years with these machines is choosing whether to use credit or debit. In order to use credit, you have to press "Cancel" when it asks for the pin. Obtaining the answer to this very simple question has and continues to be beyond the technical ability of these imbeciles for nearly a generation.

</comment><comment><USER7> I have actually started carrying cash again because of these things. That 2 minutes of standing around at a check out line when you just want a damn pack of gum is infuriating. Not to mention when the chip stops working and you get to stand there trying it over and over again while everyone else in line is groaning and the machine is beeping at you loudly. What an awful technology.</comment>


Propagation of Error and the Reliability of Global Air Temperature Projections - <AUTHOR> https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart.2019.00223/full <comment><AUTHOR> Author concludes:

"The unavoidable conclusion is that a temperature signal from anthropogenic CO2 emissions (if any) cannot have been, nor presently can be, evidenced in climate observables."</comment>


Gmail alternatives - <AUTHOR> Are there any good alternatives to gmail? It doesn't necessarily have to be free. I'm more interested in a quality comparison of features and service. <comment><USER2> Check out fastmail. Very similar experience for mail and calendar.

<comment><USER3> Throw my hat in the ring for Fastmail too. I was looking for a GMail alternative for a particular and settled on Fastmail. (I still use Inbox for other accounts)

I've found their technical team helpful, their instructions with screenshots (although not on the most current version, but a close enough version) helpful, and the web interface smooth (though I typically use native mail clients)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Have you tried Google inbox? Just kidding, Zoho mail is descent, we switch to it a few years ago and it has steadily gotten better.

<comment><USER5> I have my custom domain's email in Zoho, and I'm pretty happy.

They have an Android app now, and the UI is good and improving (not yet Google-class, but very usable).

Zoho's CEO has been a Hacker News user for a long time, and he promised to keep the basic tier free:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sridharvembu](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=sridharvembu)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I can understand lots of reasons why you might want to migrate away from Gmail, but so that people can suggest the most appropriate alternatives, what is it about Gmail that makes Gmail not appropriate for you?

</comment><comment><USER7> As other's have mentioned I love using zoho for my personal domains. Has pretty much all features I need in an email client, plus it is free for most use cases.

</comment><comment><USER8> Reliable quality email fastmail - 4 words that go together. Webmail is decent but not as good as Gmail. Hotmail is great NOW. But there was a time when it was ad filled & crappy. Same for Yahoo which was great at one time but unbearable now. In free email, gmail & Hotmail are the best I know. Fastmail is not too fancy, but its a good email service.

</comment><comment><USER9> Protonmail is at capacity, but are an encrypted email service if security and privacy are a concern. I know, it's kind of silly since "big brother" has most of your email because it has all of everyone else's, but I figured it was worth a mention.

[https://protonmail.ch/invite](https://protonmail.ch/invite)

</comment><comment><USER10> Or if you are looking for something more secure in means of eavesdropping: [http://www.techspot.com/article/896-secure-email-and- cloud-s...](http://www.techspot.com/article/896-secure-email-and-cloud- storage-services/)

</comment><comment><USER11> Are there any services that allow for inbox and settings import from Gmail? I have a good ten years invested in mine, so far it's the only Google product I've not been able to fully cut the cord from.

<comment><USER6> What does Google Takeout give you? Is it not something that can be directly imported into other mail clients?

<comment><USER11> Looks like it supplies an MBOX file, which should I guess be sufficient, save that my mailbox at this point is 12GB.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Windows Live Mail is an alternative, for both personal and business uses.

</comment><comment><USER13> Fastmail feels very solid to me.</comment>


Where Is My Mind? - <AUTHOR> http://m.nautil.us/issue/79/catalysts/where-is-my-mind <comment><USER2> I think trying to essentialise consciousness is a wrong move. Consciousness is just an advanced strategy employed by self replicators in order to keep on replicating. It is the result of the environment and competition/cooperation for resources.

Concretely consciousness is a loop including environment, perception, deciding on an action and then acting and observing the results. The agent has to fight against external perturbations and for that it learns the value of various states and actions. It learns from positive and negative reenforcement.

It feels like something because it has perception (internal and external) and these sensations hold value because they represent the path towards life. Agents that don't properly assess the value of the states they are in and don't select good actions perish, thus only those who act in accordance with the needs of the body survive. Feeling is just a way to assess the best next action.

The real magic of consciousness is not just in the brain but in the self replication abilities of the agent and in the complex challenges presented by the environment.

<comment><USER3> I think the vedantic approach makes more sense. Can you (or can anyone) experience something outside of consciousness ? Why assume any such thing exists if we don't need it to explain our experience ?

In the vedantic approach, matter is not primary : consciousness is, as in our experience. And consciousness is the only thing there is. Matter is a representation of what happens in consciousness at large, an interface humans use. Humans are localised bundles of consciousness, like "whirlpools" in a "stream of consciousness" if you will.

<comment><USER2> I used to have the vedantic viewpoint. But now I think it has no power, it's just a convenient explanation. On the other hand evolutionary methods and reinforcement learning proved they can lead to intelligent behaviour. They can both explain and produce human like actions, and are much more parsimonious. They don't require a cosmic consciousness as the source of individual consciousness, instead they require environment, agent and self replication, which are concrete things that remain within the laws of physics. AI has proven how perception, attention, memory, imagination and reward based learning could be implemented in neural nets.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> chupa-chups [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVFLgx8o7XM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVFLgx8o7XM)</comment>


You can now create software without programming knowledge - <AUTHOR> http://www.softr.io <comment><USER2> So... is this for building web apps? Desktop apps? iOS / Android apps? And how does it exactly work? All I've seen is a bunch of features including buzzwords like machine learning and "custom lambda functions". The one that concerns me the most is "Payment integration". Then again, how? That's important stuff to know even before consider this platform, and this website tells nothing.

And oh my, the prices are HIGH.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Luis,

Thanks for your response, agree website can be improved to explain it better. Your feedback is definitely valuable, we will take it into account! Softr enables non-technical people build web & mobile applications.

It's a visual programming platform, where users describe what needs to happen, not how. 1\. Using drag & drop, pre-built templates (e.g. for e-commerce, social network, etc.) and pre-built components (profile, login, messaging, payment, etc.) you build your frontend part. 2\. You define the application workflow (business rules, what is happening after each action, which events are generated etc.) 3\. You connect the frontend components with backend APIs, algorithms, database models (either generated or user created).

Example: with Softr you can build AirBnB, Facebook, Amazon, ProductHunt type of web-apps.

Hope this gives more context. The prices are 10x cheaper compared to the cost and time spent on building the same thing when hiring an engineer/freelancer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Can you explain how your offering is better than this:

[https://bubble.is](https://bubble.is)</comment>


Show HN: logtime - plain text time tracking in python - bevesce- http://procrastinationlog.com/2016-09-26-logtime.html <comment><AUTHOR> Since you're working in Sublime Text, you should check out this automatic time tracker that works with ST2 and ST3:

[http://wakatime.com/](http://wakatime.com/)

Full disclosure: I built it.</comment>


Ask HN: Which behavioral interview questions must a SWE be prepared for? - <AUTHOR> I have an upcoming SWE interview. Four rounds will be technical and one is "tell me about a time when..." types of questions. As someone trying to transition into SWE from a position of 50% programming and 50% other stuff, what types of behavioral questions must I be prepared to answer? The first thing that comes to mind is "tell me about the hardest bug you've ever dealt with" or something like that. Any other questions I must be prepared for to prove my mettle as a Software Engineer? <comment><USER2> I hate those things so much. Amazon almost solely uses them and it's not even a conversation - just a sequence of "tell me about a time when you failed" with every word of response typed into their laptops.

I had a phone interview yesterday which I presumed would be all about what I've done and how I could do the job. The hiring manager was ex-Amazon (surprise!) so it was a litany of "tell me about"s instead.

In the Amazon case, at least one can look at the Bezos Commandments ("The Leadership Principles"(tm)) and mock up answers in advance - twice to take care of double asks. It's hard to predict by comparison what some random is going to use.

<comment><USER3> > I had a phone interview yesterday which I presumed would be all about what > I've done and how I could do the job

The trick is to answer the questions in a way that provides data such that it highlights what you did. For interview debriefs we need to provide explicit data points. At first I was put off by the mechanical nature, but I now do feel it at least attempts to have a more objective and lower bias standard.

...although some people take it too far IMO. I try to keep the behavioral questions more of a fluid conversation about work they've done.

<comment><USER2> Thanks for that insight. What blocks me is the seeming emphasis on failure rather than success. The latter is so much easier to incorporate my contributions. The former just ends up making me feel bad then and afterward.

<comment><USER4> When you are asked about a failure, it is not to make you feel bad, it is to see how you deal with and learn from mistakes. There are learning opportunities in failure, usually less so in successes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> They are so cliche. The ones I hear the most are about that time you had a hard time doing X and also that time when you disagreed with someone like your manager or a client and how did you deal with those.

</comment><comment><USER6> Some incredibly skeptical hiring manager asked me once, "Tell me about a time you had to deal with a deadline."

</comment><comment><USER7> Redefine the word "failure" for them.

Convert it to "learning experience" or "amazing opportunity to discover".

This way it will be hard for them to put you down no matter how hard they'll try by their books.

You may also quote Bezos a few times and make sure they are aware you are quoting Bezos (if you're interviewing at AMZN).

</comment><comment><USER8> Tell me about a time you disagreed with your manager...

<comment><USER7> There is never disagreement - there is always "productive discussion"</comment></comment>


This $4 iPhone Will Connect the Poorest in India - <AUTHOR> http://www.thememo.com/2016/06/27/freedom-smartphone-india-cheap-ringing-bells-will-connect-the-poorest-people-smartphone/ <comment><USER2> > This $4 iPhone

> iPhone</comment>


Ask HN: I'm working on an ad product and need feedback from 10 people. - <AUTHOR>

I have been working on a new kind of ad tech that i believe both compels people to pay attention to it and is also interesting.
So far its all been in stealth but i believe that hearing different opinions will help gain some clarity as to whether or not the idea is actually any good.
Email me at tapha[AT]live.co.uk and i will send the link. And some more information.
Look forward to discussing it!
Cheers,
:)
Tapha. <comment><USER2> Why only 10 people, and if only 10 people, then why aren't you just talking to people you know rather than broadcasting it on HN? I think people can see through the fact that you are trying to gain interest by making it harder to access.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm actually not trying to do that. I did all the above in the hope that it would attract only those with experience with ad tech and have an interest in it.

I posted on HN because i'm much more likely to get good advice on something like this here than i would get asking friends.

<comment><USER2> You'd have even better advice with > 10 and ability to provide feedback via a basic form/getsatisfaction or similar.

Usually people would just provide a site with info on how it works and a form in which they could provide you with an email address if they are interested.</comment></comment></comment>


Kindle zealots trash bestseller to spite publisher's lack of e version - <AUTHOR> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393072231

<comment><USER2> Wow. Who'd have thought people could be so passionate about their Kindles.

It's sad that the innocent author is being taken out as collateral damage in the Kindle fanboys' desire to send a message to the _publisher_ , but what I never expected was that the Kindle was getting the kind of passion that we've come to expect mostly over some Apple iPhone/iPad...

Maybe it bodes well for the Kindle's future (if not for the civility of its fans).

<comment><USER3> I have never heard of Linux or OS X users trashing software reviews because there isn't a version for their preferred platform. Thinking about it, the last time I saw this was over the Spore DRM, but that was about the product not the platform.

It is a shame that Amazon doesn't have the Kindle equivalent of the "I would really like a DVD of this" button. I am losing a lot of respect for Amazon's customer support in that they are not dealing with this (allowing their customers to be heard without damaging some poor authors reputation).

<comment><USER4> They actually do have a link specifically for telling the publisher that you would like to see a Kindle edition.

<comment><USER3> Wow, thanks I totally spaced it. I saw the kindle but didn't read the text. Ok, well now I really think Amazon needs to be deleting these reviews as inappropriate.

Maybe they put a little more into that "tell the publisher", but that is probably just me not being as observant and I could be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm a bit surprised that amazon would allow their feedback section to be abused as a means to pressure publishers (especially over the back of an author), but since amazon probably profits from selling more e-books they seem to allow it.

Funny though, I think that to be allowed to 'review' a book you'd have to have read it at a minimum, and you can't really rate a book that you do not have.

Amazon really should nix those reviews, even if it helps them businesswise.

Also, I figure that it's up to the rights owners to pick a format and to set a price, if you don't like it then there are plenty of other books that you can go and buy.

This smacks of entitlement somehow.

</comment><comment><USER6> I don't know what is this about, the Kindle edition sits right up there at the top of the page. [http://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Short- ebook/dp/B003AYZBGQ/ref=...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Big-Short- ebook/dp/B003AYZBGQ/ref=tmm_kin_title_0?ie=UTF8&m=AU5CBAPW043HD)

Though it escapes me, why it is more expensive to have it on the Kindle ($20.68) than in Hardcover ($15.09)...

</comment><comment><USER7> Yes, the _news_ is what it says about _customer loyalty_ to a propriety ereader. I can see why Amazon does not make any attempt to stop the nonsense.

The next chapter will be interesting: Will the publisher cave in and permit a Kindle edition?

</comment><comment><USER8> Well, it may not be so much that they're _zealots_ as that they've invested _cash_ in their Kindles... so it becomes a wallet thing what they can't get what they think "they're entitled" to have on their K.

</comment><comment><USER9> Think that's something? Check of The Lord of the Rings on Blu-ray.

Hell hath no fury like a geek scorned.</comment>


Your Car Knows When You Gain Weight - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/20/opinion/car-repair-data-privacy.html <comment><USER2> This is all FUD with zero data backing it up.

The article makes it sound like there is accurate weight sensors in the vehicle, which is ridiculous. One might be able to derive _some_ number from vehicle performance information, but I'd like to see an actual study showing that it's (a) possible and (b) accurate for any sort of use.

> Modern cars collect as much as 25 gigabytes of data per hour

Sure, add up all the bits in the CAN messages being sent around constantly and you might get that number. That amount of data is neither being stored nor sent off-vehicle.

What a dishonest article.

<comment><USER3> Cars do have accurate weight sensors actually. I'm a former Honda Master Technician. The drivers seat on Honda's from probably mid 2000 onward have a weight sensor. It's used to determine the deployment for the multi stage airbags. I hooked up our diagnostic equipment and sat in the seat once to see how accurate it was. And it's very accurate. However most people sit with their feet on the floor, so it doesn't show the proper weight. But lift your feet up, and it was accurate to within a pound of my actual weight.

However, this is FUD, because Honda didn't do squat with that data beyond the airbag system. It wasn't collected or transmitted. It was simply used at the moment of airbag deployment to determine if it should deploy the airbag in fast or slow mode.

So you're right to call the articles claim BS, but you're wrong if you think there isn't an accurate weight sensor in the car.

I can't remember if the passenger seat had one too. I don't think it did. The dual-stage airbags are really only relevant for the driver side because of the steering wheel.

<comment><USER2> > it was accurate to within a pound of my actual weight

That is extremely surprising to me. I've worked (and do work) in the auto industry and didn't think that anyone would pay for such an accurate weight measurement.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> What's up with this paywall?

It loads so slowly you can get half way through the article before it finally loads and then decides you need to subscribe!</comment>


32bit Windows can use more than 3GB of RAM, MS just doesn't want you too - <AUTHOR> http://www.geoffchappell.com/viewer.htm?doc=notes/windows/license/memory.htm

<comment><USER2> This article is wrong. Microsoft doesn't want you to use PAE, because it's crap.

It was a weird XMS sort of memory extension developed for enteprise applications on the Pentium Pro. Supporting it adds all sorts of weird corner cases that have to be dealt with in the operating system. It is a good thing MS doesn't support it, it's the right technical choice.

Much better to go with a straight flat 64bit address space than hacked up crap. Anyone who remembers segments and offsets can tell you how horrible it is.

<comment><USER3> 64bit is the only way to address 32bit addressing limit. it's related to 32bit chip architecture not to particular operating system. what's amusing is the length of the article. putting that much effort into article (and research) without finding basic things about computers their architecture deserves more than few points down.

<comment><USER4> I think you need to re-read the article. It is not about going around the 32 bit address-space limit. It is about utilizing all available memory in a 32 bit system. Which has everything to do with the operating system.

<comment><USER3> yep, it kinda reminds me to a those small pieces of software that would double your physical memory for 39$.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Anyone have a mirror? "The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to the site owner reaching his/her bandwidth limit. Please try again later. "

<comment><USER6> Seems like his provider didn't want him 'two' use 'to' much of their ram either... :)

I think this might be the article (google cache): [http://184.108.40.206/search?q=cache:Li-1XUnINOUJ:www.geoffc...](http://184.108.40.206/search?q=cache:Li-1XUnINOUJ:www.geoffchappell.com/notes/windows/license/memory.htm+geoff+chappel+32+bit+3+gb&hl=en&client=firefox-a&strip=1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> So MS explains this in a simplistic and patronizing manner to their general customers without going into all the technical details...details that 95% of them probably don't want to know.

Meantime, the price of 64-bit Windows is the same as 32-bit windows, and last I looked MS would swap your Vista DVD for free on request if you realized you should have bought 64-bit. So why do I care?

</comment><comment><USER8> speling faile.

</comment><comment><USER9> "Representations made by Microsoft about memory limits for Windows Vista are misleading or illegal."

Or both...</comment>


JavaScript Physics Engine - <AUTHOR> http://code.google.com/p/box2dweb/

<comment><USER2> I open sourced my "toy" version of JavaScript physics engine just few days ago too. It's not really for serious work, but may be (hopefully) simple and good enough for beginning programmers to learn one way of starting such a project. <https://github.com/fuzzthink/SPE.js>

<comment><USER3> It looks good. Have you tested it with SVG? I've been using <https://github.com/hrj/box2d-js>

<comment><USER2> Thanks! No, haven't had the time to do an SVG demo, but that shouldn't stop anyone from doing so ;) Thanks for the link, didn't know about jquery.svg, maybe I'll play around with that if I find the time or no one builds one already.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> All the physics engines in JS are documented on the very valuable JSWiki: <https://github.com/bebraw/jswiki/wiki/Physics-libraries>

</comment><comment><USER5> Very nice, but where is this alleged AS3 to JavaScript converter? That sounds quite useful!

<comment><USER6> I've been (very) slowly porting an AS3 site to JS/jQ, mostly as a learning experience, but I'd be quite interested in this as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The performance of the demo is awesome. Has anyone tried to do anything more complicated and tested performance. Would be fun to make a js game from this.

<comment><USER8> TBH it's a small demo - I've heard while JS engines these days are fast, they still struggle with complex physics simulations. I can't see any performance details/improvements noted in this release - anyone got figures?

<comment><USER9> Untrue, I used a port of Box2d (not this port, our own version) to build an "HTML5" game for sony, see link - <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AicnuLQxHoQ>

Unfortunately the game was taken down due to the Japan situation. Understandable.

Under Safari i was able to simulate ~80 live physics objects in a high collision environment at full frame render, bound to the DOM at 60fps on reasonable hardware 6 months ago (safari still has the fastest DOM paint time out there now).

Even when using Firefox 3.6 i could manage around 20 dynamic objects.

No CSS3 animation, just math and re-paints.

Javascript Math is not slow (at all), its generally the DOM/Canvas slowing you down.

<comment><USER8> If you've ever used the C++ Box2D, you'll have been able to create _hundreds_ of objects just fine. 80 still isn't much!

<comment><USER9> Of course! This is now nearly possible in Chrome/Safari/FF5, but the limiting factor is still primarily re-paint time rather than the simulation itself.

<comment><USER8> Really? Even with FF5's hardware accelerated canvas?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Cool, how is this diferent from <http://box2d-js.sourceforge.net/>

<comment><USER11> Well... its demo is way cooler, for one. =)

Seriously, I'm having _way_ too much fun swinging this ball around and smashing things. Package it up for $0.99 IMO.

Huzzah! <http://imageshack.us/f/839/towerofpower.jpg/>

<comment><USER12> Here's a more permanent home for it. <http://www.atomitware.tk/games/box2dwebdemo.html>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> It's really flickery in Ubuntu 10.10 / Chrome/

<comment><USER14> FYI, I am on 11.04 / Chrome and do not see any flicker</comment></comment>


Should Browsers Be Allowed To Detect The iPad Mini - <AUTHOR> http://martinkool.com/post/35720264286/should-browsers-be-allowed-to-detect-the-ipad-mini

<comment><USER2> Very interesting! I'd bet on this being a bug. Hopefully apple fixes it.</comment>


Twitch Installs Arch Linux Is Live - <AUTHOR> http://www.twitch.tv/twitchinstallsarchlinux <comment><USER2> It might be more interesting if voting occurred at the level of space separated words rather than characters.

As it is right now, twitch is tripping over itself trying to even type "ls" given the delay. As anyone who's ever tried to use ssh over a poor connection can relate to, there's a whole lot of "llllss" type command lines getting run.

<comment><AUTHOR> They've increased the round length to 20s, and it seems to be working. We're on the point of running fdisk /dev/sda

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Back during Twitch Plays Pokemon, someone wrote a little script that suppressed other people's commands from appearing in the chat. That seems to be badly needed for this: because of the delay it is really important to pay attention to the bot's "Winning Command" announcements in chat

<comment><USER3> nskillen on github has made a script: [https://github.com/nskillen/hexchat_filter_twitch_installs_a...](https://github.com/nskillen/hexchat_filter_twitch_installs_arch)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> What a fantastic time to be alive.

</comment><comment><USER5> Aaand it died, after 5 hours. [https://twitter.com/xrobau/status/660617694840885249](https://twitter.com/xrobau/status/660617694840885249)

</comment><comment><USER6> This is way too easy. The chat is so organized. :-) They will be done in about: 30 minutes times the input delay.

The original twitchplayspokemon took about a month if I remember correctly and it worked because nobody had a concrete plan, unlike here. Their first voting system was very chaotic with an input selected from the chat every x seconds instead of a voting consensus. This time as long as the chat contains at least 50% of voters that vote correctly they will win without mistakes.

A less boring twitchplays would be just a virtual machine with linux and some abstract/vague goal.

<comment><USER7> They just finished the install, so I reckon you're right. I was really hoping for more chaos.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> ...and it's broken.

      apt-get rekt

EDIT: "just a little hiccup with networking, should be full online in 5" \- [https://twitter.com/twitchinstalls/status/660548203054505985](https://twitter.com/twitchinstalls/status/660548203054505985)

EDIT2: It begins!

</comment><comment><USER8> The chat so far is _worse_ than TwitchPlaysPokemon's chat back in the day, which is kinda funny actually. :P

</comment><comment><USER9> now we try to install gentoo at here [https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/3qzg17/let...](https://www.reddit.com/r/linuxmasterrace/comments/3qzg17/lets_install_gentoo_instead/)

<comment><USER10> You probably don't care, but in my opinion using words derived from nazi terminology is trivializing their ideology. Makes me pretty uncomfortable to read this on HN now.

<comment><USER11> Isn't trivializing their ideology a good thing?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Looks like the stream just went down

</comment><comment><USER13> Good timing on the submit. Thanks!

</comment><comment><USER14> What's the purpose of this?

<comment><USER15> See [https://www.twitchinstalls.com/](https://www.twitchinstalls.com/) for an explanation.</comment></comment>


FCC approves new text message rules, giving carriers more power - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/12/18137795/fcc-text-message-rule-classification-spam <comment> kiran-rao Does anyone know if this law will prevent California from taxing text messages as communications services?</comment>


Romack v. Bitcasa, Inc - <AUTHOR> http://dockets.justia.com/docket/california/candce/3:2014cv05005/282162/ <comment><USER2> Apparently a judge still remembers what "Infinite" really means.

If only he would look into the numeric meaning of gigabyte when it comes to storage media.</comment>


Pricing Your Product - <AUTHOR> http://www.sequoiacap.com/grove/posts/afed/pricing-your-product <comment><USER2> Interesting article. One thing that they didn't really talk about is using the real value to the customer and not just perceived value. Hopefully these two are aligned from the start, but I feel it is my job to ensure that the customers perceived value matches the actual value to them. If they perceive the value is too high they will eventually be disappointed and if they believe it is too low then they won't buy.</comment>


Principles for Success by Ray Dalio in a Video Form - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKz095P7LdU&list=PLykIL_1_MFWkWDDgvdZ6L7rsvKCKl-39j&index=1 <comment><USER2> [https://www.principles.com/](https://www.principles.com/) is the full site for his Principles of Success. There's a good interview with Ray Dalio on the Freakonomics podcast: [http://freakonomics.com/podcast/ray- dalio/](http://freakonomics.com/podcast/ray-dalio/) . He talks about his principles, how he applied them, etc. He skirts around the challenges he's had stepping back from the company, but the lines are there to read between. (If you haven't already read about it elsewhere)

It's unclear to me whether Bridgewater's success is due to Ray's principles or more to having Ray and his judgement lead the investment team. And holy shit, some of the descriptions of Bridgewater I've read have made it sound one step removed from Lord of the Flies. The Paradise of Radical Candour is only 10 EQ points away from The Tire Fire of Negative Emotional Externalities.</comment>


Networking: How do you manage your network and stay in touch with your key contacts? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> I'd quite like something like this for my mobile http://people.interaction- ivrea.it/s.blyth/mysocialfabric/design.html

As for answering the actual question, everything is done on my mobile phone, business cards and facebook. Everyone I know well (close friends, housemates etc) are on my mobile. All my aquaintances from university I keep touch with on facebook. Facebook reminds me of birthdays and tells me what their up to in my news feed. Finally I keep all my business contacts in piles of business cards on my desk. One pile for archive, one for people I need to contact soon and one for people I'm awaiting response from. I can even easily tag people by writing metadata on the back of the card.

<comment><AUTHOR> The mysocialfabric idea is interesting, the only problem I see with it is that there is a significant barrier towards adding somebody as a contact (you have to configure an avatar for them - what if you have never met them in person and don't know what they look like?) and I don't see how it scales (what does the screen look like when you have 200 contacts) especially on a mobile. Thanks for the answer, thats an interesting way to do it.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Networking is a vital part of being successful in the business world, connections and human capital can be just as important as cash and intellectual capital. What tools (e.g. email, notebook, post its) do you use to manage your interactions with people, and how do you use this information to further develop your relationships?

</comment><comment><USER3> 37Signals' Highrise -- not out yet -- could prove to be a good way of doing it. I can say that I'm certainly excited. Check out the preview post here:

http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/265-preview-1-an-introduction-to-highrise- the-product-previously-known-as-sunrise

<comment><AUTHOR> yeah I've been following that, the reason I asked this question is I've been working on a product since November that is doing something similar (I was hoping that 37 Signals' product was going to be more CRM-ish) I still think (from what 37 Signals shown so far) that there is still a tool that caters more towards individuals managing their personal networks (a niche within the contact management niche if you will). Any thoughts on this?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> There happens to be a social networking site for old fashion networking. http://www.linkedin.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the link Elfan, I'm already a part of LinkedIn, but I think it is more of a tool for visualizing your connections not managing relationships. What do you think?

<comment><USER4> I'm in college so I don't have that many direct connections and its how I have managed to stay in contact with people from summer work. I'm not sure how it will scale for me in the future.

But I'm *awful* at maintaining friendships, networks, and things for that nature. So I'm not a good person to take advice from on this.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm in college too, actually, I've found facebook to be a good networking tool, especially some of the the global groups (there are a few good entrepreneurship ones), I've made some interesting connections through it.</comment></comment></comment></comment>