Ask HN: How to make peace with my lack of degree? - <AUTHOR> I'm a software developer without a bachelor's degree (28, Canada, 4.5 years in mobile development).
I'm very concerned with my lack of degree:
- I'm being paid less.
- I can't get certain jobs or promotions.
- I can't get a visa to work in many countries (e.g., USA).
- All of my family and friends have bachelor's degrees.
- I feel like I'm taking less seriously.
- I feel like getting good jobs will only get more difficult.
- I don't know what fundamental knowledge I'm missing.
On the other hand:
- I'm an autodidact and I've already learned a lot of advanced CS concepts over the years.
- I can't imagine going back to school full-time for the next 4+ years.
- I'm not sure a bachelor's degree will automatically give me a significantly better job/salary/knowledge/satisfaction.
- A bachelor's degree is still not enough to do my dream job (HCI in a research lab).
- I still fantasize about creating my own company or working for myself as a freelancer, none of which require a bachelor's degree.
- AI might automate most jobs and UBI will be implemented.
I probably wouldn't worry as much about my lack of degree if I already had
a successful career, a paid house, a profitable business, proof that the demand for programmers will go up over the next 20 years, or significant wealth.
I don't want to continue using my lack of degree to justify my lack of success ("If only I had a degree, I would be earning $200,000 at FAANG!"), nor do I want to invest 4+ years to get one, realize that my life is the same ("I'm still not working at FAANG"), and continue finding excuses for my lack of success ("I didn't go to a prestigious-enough college", "I don't have a master's degree", "I suck at technical interviews", "I'm too old for this industry", "Life is unfair").
To those who don't have a bachelor's degree and have stopped worrying about getting one: How did you do it? <comment><USER2> Im in the same boat, I thought myself because I wanted to know not because my parents told me to goto university or get a job.

Its this driven, self starter attitude that sets me apart from other developers I am competing with. Some people recognise this as an advantage, some people need more convincing.

Luckily for us the proof is in the pudding, if you'r not capable you cant hide it. It's generally worth the risk for some one to give me the job and let me prove myself, than for them go for a lesser developer that is used to having their hand held.

When hiring I think most people look for the degree as a checkbox exercise but your years of experience is what will get you the job.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> This is a follow-up to this question:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19139195](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19139195)</comment>


Julia: Come for the Syntax, Stay for the Speed - <AUTHOR> https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02310-3 <comment><USER2> I've been following Julia for many years now and it hasn't quite picked up outside the Data Science/Research communities. I'm at a loss to understand why it hasn't gone mainstream. Technically, isn't this a superior language to everything out there if you are getting performance + readability?

To start the discussion, maybe one factor could be the lack of a package manager like npm/crate. What else?

<comment><USER3> The initial precompilation times may give some new users the wrong idea, but those have been for me a total non-issue once I'm using the language regularly.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Something I always try with new (to me) languages: write a short script to

(1) load a .txt file containing space-delimited columns of data;

(2) fit a linear model in which one column is predicted by a linear combination of the others;

(3) plot the predicted values again the actual values using dots and overlay a y=x line

Tried this with Julia a short while ago and basically gave up, couldn't figure out how to get something to plot. Has the Julia-verse changed? Is it easier now?

I can do this in MATLAB in basically 3 or 4 lines of code. Python, not much more than that.

<comment><USER5> Not familiar with matlab but its not as terse as R

``` using GLM, CSV, Plots

data = CSV.read("data.csv", header=["x","y"], types=[Float64, Float64]) #returns dataframe

ols = lm(@formula(y ~ x), data)

ypred = predict(ols)

yall = Base.hcat(data.y, ypred)

plot(data.x, yall, linewidth=2, title="Linear regression", label=["y", "ypred"], xlabel="x", ylabel="y")

```

<comment><USER3> The comment I was going to reply to disappeared, but for something closer in form to the Matlab example that used to be here:

      using Plots, DelimitedFiles
      d = readdlm("data.tsv",'\t')
      A = [ones(10,1) d[:,1:2]]; B = copy(d[:,3]); X = A\B
      plot(B, seriestype=:scatter, color=:blue); plot!(A*X, seriestype=:scatter, color=:red)

I find Julia syntax feels closer to Matlab than to Python or R, just different enough to be frustrating for the first month or so (followed by a period of "oh, _that 's_ why Julia does it this way instead!")

<comment><USER6> No need to `copy` from `d[:,3]`. Slicing already creates copies (so you're copying twice), but even if it made a view you could still just write `B = d[:, 3]`.

<comment><USER3> Ah, didn't realize slicing always made copies. A view/alias/whatever would have been fine for the example, but having multiple variable names referring to the same memory has caused me enough problems to try to avoid it by default.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Where can I access live, raw data of Covid 19 cases by country? - <AUTHOR> I'm working on a calculator to calculate the actual number of Covid 19 cases based on the number of deaths in a region (using https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCa0JXEwDEk as reference).
Does anyone know where I can access the live, machine readable data of Covid 19 cases by country?
Do I need to build this out myself by parsing the html of WHO or such? <comment><USER2> This might help: [https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19](https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19)

</comment><comment><USER3> There's a few problems you'll need to overcome.

1) We don't know what the fatality rate is yet. If you have a super-accurate count of deaths to covid-19 you can't work out the true infection rate because estimates of lethality range from about 0.% to 3%.

2) You can't get a super accurate count of deaths, and certainly not a real time count. Looking at the UK we have "deaths of people who tested positive for Covid-19 who died in hospital". We're not testing people, even if they're in hospital. There's a presumption that if you have certain symptoms then you have covid-19. So there's a bunch of people being treated for covid-19, who die from covid-19, but who were not tested as having covid-19. Their deaths won't be in these daily figures. And then we have deaths outside hospital: covid-19 is currently ripping through care homes. Maybe 50%[1] of covid deaths are happening in care homes, but if they're not counted in the daily stats you're missing all of them. The UK does have a more accurate figure from the Office For National Statistics, but there's quite a lot of lag in those figures. Someone dies, a doctor certifies the death, that's registered, and then sent to ONS for coding.

3) Everywhere is counting deaths and cases differently. I've talked about the UK and that's just 4 (or 1) countries.

Here's the UK daily covid dashboard: [https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c9...](https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/f94c3c90da5b4e9f9a0b19484dd4bb14)

Here's the Office For National Statistics page talking about the different ways of counting death: [https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2020/03/31/counting-deaths- involving...](https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2020/03/31/counting-deaths-involving- the-coronavirus-covid-19/)

Here's the NHS England_Improvement Covid-19 stats page, with excel files: [https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work- areas...](https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work- areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/)

For worldwide there's the John Hopkins dashboard: [https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html](https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html)

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22854047](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22854047)

<comment><AUTHOR> You're 100% correct. It won't be fool proof, by any means. But, it'll be better than the current situation, which is to have only the confirmed cases and no estimate of actual cases.

I'm thinking of making the best guess on the fatality rate, time to double, etc, and allowing people to tweak the variables. And using the officially reported death numbers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I use this:

[https://opendata.ecdc.europa.eu/covid19/casedistribution/csv](https://opendata.ecdc.europa.eu/covid19/casedistribution/csv)</comment>


Kim Dotcom: If I Was President of the United States…. - <AUTHOR> http://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-if-i-was-president-of-the-united-states-120823/ <comment><USER2> wow,

This list is one of the most naive I've ever seen.

"Tax citizens with the highest income the most and with the smallest income the least."

So..if he truly believed this, why was he living in a mansion funded by his Megaupload money? Why not give all your money to charity Kim?

I love #15: "Fix all other problems"

Great! I wish you were president!</comment>


User experience isn't just visual design - <AUTHOR> http://alistapart.com/articles/learntowrite <comment><USER2> Agreed. I think it related to point #3 here: [http://jtame05.wordpress.com/2007/07/03/learning-from-the- ip...](http://jtame05.wordpress.com/2007/07/03/learning-from-the-iphone/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Up voted...I found this article extremely useful. As a hacker learning to do design(and doesn't want to use Photoshop) this is a Godsend thank you!</comment>


Ask My Clone: Siri-fy yourself - <AUTHOR> https://askmyclone.com

<comment><USER2> Reinventing UI for user signup is going to hurt user signups - unless you're only targeting the tech-space (and even then it'll probably hurt user signups)

Style a simple button that can be clicked. Not everyone uses tab/space/enter to fill forms. Some people, such as my mother, tab between fields but use the mouse to click 'submit' and she would miss the "then press enter" instruction entirely.

Upon creating 'me':

The first field seems incorrect. It should be what _others_ are asking _me_. Not "What would your bot say to others?" The field appears to create _unanswered questions_ and the second field allows replies.

What might be better is to create an a->a',a",a'",a(n) field creation. (I'm using ' instead of sub font 1/2/3/n)

      a: Question --> a' (one answer) [+]

Where clicking [+] would allow other answers to be chosen as possible answers to the question.

<comment><AUTHOR> Awesome, thanks. I know the UI is terrible...

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Siri-fy yourself using simple text matching. Simple idea, simple interface, useful for FAQ's... give it a go if you want, and if you find a use for it (you get your own URL) send some feedback.</comment>


Apple Fixes Cookie Access Vulnerability in Safari on Billions of Devices - <AUTHOR> https://threatpost.com/apple-fixes-cookie-access-vulnerability-in-safari-on-billions-of-devices/112246 <comment><USER2> It's about time. While they're at it, hopefully they'll also fix all of those weird syncing bugs (e.g. after syncing some new songs don't appear in their playlist, apps that were deleted on purpose re-appear, ringtones disappearing, etc.)</comment>


Ask HN: 6-figure freelancers of HN, what do you do? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> @thr2178008 Hey there. I'll give you a proven roadmap to six figure freelancing right now.

1) Pick a new up and coming language or framework. Something like elixir or pheonix or something else that is really hot and just starting out.

2) Learn it. As you learn, write a series of really awesome tutorials and articles on your blog about that stack.

3) Help people out on SO and other forums that talk about that tech. Point folks to your posts if it looks like it might help. Add your blog to your profile page.

4) Try to guest on some podcasts about this same technology, or maybe even create your own podcast.

5) Keep doing steps 1-4 with constancy and over time your luck surface area will grow and new opportunities will come your way.

When you start contracting in that tech you'll be able to charge much better rates than your old rate because you will be a thought leader in that space.

Also, you will be able to capitalize on sites like airpair.com

Hope this helps!

<comment><USER3> > "really hot and just starting out/new up and coming language or framework"

As a consultant this strategy is very smart, very stupid for a company tho.

1) Consultant goes to company and sells his new hot tech stack that is just released.

2) Company buys in and pays a lot of money.

3) Consultant now is locked himself a nice position because nobody wants to deal with this technology and he is the only expert they can get.

<comment><USER4> Startups might be willing to take this risk - if the new technology shortens the time to launch, then all the better. If it finds itself locked in 5 years down the line, who cares, it's 5 years later and they're a 100 million dollar company.

<comment><USER3> > if the new technology shortens the time to launch

Not sure what technology you are referring to but it's definitely not elixir or pheonix.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Not a freelancer. That's how I do it.

I don't think you're asking the right question, though. 100k+ USD/yr in some parts of the country is a lot different than 100k+ USD/yr in other parts. The really smart ones have found jobs in metro areas that pay lots, but work remotely from areas with low cost of living expenses, and put all the extra away into college funds for their kids and Roth 401k's invested in high risk, low-load index funds, with a significant amount invested.

And most of all, they ask for it. Once they get it, they don't piss people off, they do great work, and they get references.

<comment><USER6> I think the OP is specifically asking freelancers because 100k as a salary is not exactly rare, it's what I've paid some of my juniors.

100k+ as a freelancer is significantly more rare - requiring either very steady work, a niche skill-set, or great marketing skills.

<comment> King-Aaron Do you mind me asking what industry you're in, where a junior can make $100k?

<comment><USER7> Software? An entry level developer position in the bay area can be a fair bit higher than $100k

<comment><USER8> Silicon Valley is fairly unique, and not remotely comparable to the rest of the world. In most of Europe, a senior dev makes less than that. Freelancers are a bit more likely to make more.

<comment><USER9> Sure, but that's cost of living. $100k/yr is needed in Silicon Valley just to cover your portion of rent for the above-garage apartment you share with 8 other people.

<comment> King-Aaron That seems ludicrous to be honest (*though I do note the satire)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Back-End Dev here (Node).

I do integration between Brazillian mobile carriers and international Apps (content providers in general) who wants to get into Brazilian market, usually to bill users on their mobile plan instead of paypal or inApp Purchase. The funnil gap is much lower when you Bill users in mobile plan.

Brazilian carrier has a tough and slow integration process and, without a local IT support is almost impossible to connect with them.

As I have everything ready for all major carriers, it's easier/faster/cheaper to hire me instead of build the integration by itself.

www.2brazil.rocks

<comment><USER11> Interesting! How can i start something like this for my own country?

<comment><USER12> First you need to get a job in some telco company and work on related projects. That knowledge is not available on github or books. Actually it is the same with other high-pay integration areas like finances, banking, logistics etc. Once you gain some expertise and see a niche you start freelancing.

<comment><USER10> Exactly!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> What exactly counts to count as 6-figure? My hourly rate is €80. Working 32 hours per week, 45 weeks per year, my yearly revenue would just be 6 figures. Of course after I deduct some costs and retirement savings, my taxable income is in the high 5 figures.

I'm not doing anything special, other than having 15 years of experience and not being terribly bad at my job. I do notice that to get more than this, I need to make a bit more of a name for myself. Just being a good programmer is probably not enough; it seems I need to bring something special and specific to the table to justify a higher rate.

<comment><USER12> Really nice schedule. I think the thread is about scores. Once debt free I would prefer to get more private time than trashing my life for 6 figures in somebody's sweat shop projects - the more than I can eat.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Two options that I can think of:

1\. Experience: After a while doing what you're doing, you are an experienced developer/freelancer. You hit the ground running, you mentor, you contribute enough to justify your high day rate.

2\. Go into Finance. Specifically banks. They hire contractors all the time. The work is terrible, the challenge is mostly dealing with the restrictions of the systems around you and the bureaucracy that envelopes everything there, but to counter that they pay well above market rates. In fact they pay silly rates. I did that for a little while and decided my soul is worth more.

The contract market is a funny one. Can be hard to find gigs one month, and have too many to choose from the next. But in general, going above 6 digits contracting is not that hard. Keep in mind that you have to manage your own taxes, so a good accountant is key.

</comment><comment><USER14> Front-end JS for the oil-and-gas industry. Custom, industry-specific customer- facing web applications. Interesting work, but the business logic required by some companies is freakin' terrifying :)

<comment><USER15> How did you get into this kind of work?

<comment><USER14> Front-end JS? Need, mainly. Most of the UI/UX people I worked with have not maintained their skills, and I was getting tired of knowing more and doing better work than them in their own field. As it happens, there's a much better market for that work than for the back-end and architectural work I've been doing the past couple of decades.

Oil-and-gas? Luck - I live in a city with a lot of head offices. Eventually almost everyone works for one of them :) It was just my turn. But it looks like a long-term gig, which is great.

<comment><USER15> Yeah, meant oil and gas. It seems pretty difficult to get in direct contact with such client to me.

<comment><USER14> Friend of a friend situation - a guy I worked with at another company had a friend who we game with once in a while (board games and miniatures games), and she works for this company. She let me know they had an opportunity and I made the cut :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> The obvious answer is to specialise. The problem is how?

There seem to be two options:

1\. Become an expert in a rare, rising tech stack (see elixir/phoenix)

2\. Specialise in a market vertical

On hn and as a dev Option 1) is very appealing. And just a matter of time and keep doing it.

Many (smart) folks, however, tell you that 2) is the better bet long term and financially. Which makes sense because you shift from providing technical solutions to delivering business results. But it is much harder to get into (which long term turns into an advantage because you build barriers)

I would love to go route 2) but never actually went anywhere. But I didn't do 1) either because I'm stuck between those two. It's quite frustrating actually.

Is anyone else in a similar situation?

</comment><comment><USER17> I made a deal with an e-commerce site to take 10% of revenue added, after marketing expenses from new channels I create.

Added 300k+ of revenue a month.

<comment><USER18> Congrats! I think you are the perfect person to give some feedback on a product I want to validate and build. If you have the time, please let me know what you think of this.

The product is a personalized Facebook app created for the ecommerce that aims to increase the number of emails collected for the ecommerce's newsletter and increase traffic from these newsletters by sending Facebook notifications to the users that signed up to the app.

Basically I create a Facebook App and provide the sign-up link to the ecommerce. The ecommerce adds the link next to the "Sign up to our newsletter" CTA they usually have on their website giving the user two options to provide their email: the regular input field and the link to do it via Facebook (this is not a Facebook Login btw). If the client click the link, they are directed to Facebook's authorization page, one more click I have the access to their email and the ability to send them notification (only if the user is accessing Facebook on the web, as FB do not send app notifications to native mobile apps).

I then send the user's email to the ecommerce and send FB notifications everytime they send a newsletter (linking to the web version of the newsletter).

So, what dod you think?

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> 1) Do networking and listen. It's not about how great you are in your wildest dreams.

2) Deliver a little bit more than expected. That'll help to get you some recommendations.

3) Don't follow every new tech stack, framework whatsoever hype.

Choose your toolchain where you are feeling comfortable with.

4) Raise your hourly rate. There's nothing wrong with it, if you're doing a great job based on past projects.

5) Say "No" to nasty, time consuming and time wasting clients.

6) Build your own brand to be proud of.

</comment><comment><USER20> Does contracting count as freelancing? Serious question. Or do you mean freelances as only in gigster/upwork sense?

As a contractor I am technically working via my one man company but mostly work in a company office alongside other employees, so not sure if you count that as freelancing.

<comment><USER21> Are you in the US? I think you should be an employee instead.

<comment><USER20> I'm in UK. You should be an employee if you work in a single company for 2+ years. Contractors often only work in 6-12 month contracts so you are not definitely an employee if you only come to work on a project for 6 months and then go work somewhere else.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> 1\. Get a degree in computer science.

2\. Work in corporate development for large, medium, and small companies, startups, etc. for 20 years.

3\. Keep skills sharp, keep investing in new opportunities.

4\. Learn project management.

5\. Dress up (in a suit, etc.)

6\. Find people who want work done.

7\. Figure out what they want to be done, how long it will take to do it, and how much is reasonable to charge for that.

8\. Ship it.

8\. Send invoices.

9\. Cash very large checks.

Technology lets people who are very good with tools, make amazing things all by ourselves in the same time or less than a team of people who are average with tools in a cube farm.

I guess a simpler version of this would be:

1\. Get very good at tools.

2\. Get people who believe you can deliver.

3\. Deliver.

4\. Invoice.

If you do it right, you'll be time- and price-competitive with much larger, slower, and more-expensive entities, and nobody will care because you're still delivering. It's a time of great opportunity.

</comment><comment><USER23> C/C++/Java/Python for capital markets, customers mostly in NYC.

<comment><USER24> Any tips on how to get into programming for financial institutions/capital markets?

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> 110K at 21 yrs old in the UK contracting, hoping to reach 150k by this time next year - I help big companies figure out how to embrace new technologies

<comment><USER26> > I help big companies figure out how to embrace new technologies

What do you mean?

<comment><USER25> I guess I'm being deliberately evasive to protect my own interests, but I help them go digital, use ML/AI, use APIs, Blockchain etc

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Six figures is a pretty useless distinction these days. It's like how every homeowner is technically a millionaire. The term sticks though.

In any case, freelancer is a vague term. Working on smaller, ad-hoc tasks it is probably harder to make a big payday, but working longer contracts (also called a contractor) can pay very well.

<comment><USER28> Every homeowner is far from a millionaire in the US.

<comment><USER27> Yeah, a bit hyperbole. The point though, is that being a millionaire isn't as impressive as it used to be 50 years ago, but we still use the term to signify someone incredibly wealthy.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Long-term automation projects.

Chef development for one customer. Ansible for the others.

<comment><USER30> Interesting. Is one of your customers looking for more DevOps help? I have a teammate looking for an opportunity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Application developer at a hedge fund. Mostly front-end design/dev work on a web-based platform used to run all aspects of their business.

</comment><comment><USER32> Not making 6 figures, but I could if I took fewer holidays. London based, doing full stack javascript - mostly focus on the front end.

<comment><USER33> What sort of level would you say you were at with regards to your js knowledge, and how long have you been working with it?

I'm still pretty green and living up north, but looking to the future, I could see me having to move to get a decent salary, just wondering how feasible it may be.

<comment><USER32> I was hired as a senior contractor. I work with JS for about 5 years, 3 years as primary language. All of it professionally.

I think it's totally feasible. I moved here when I was 19 with the salary between 30-40k. 3 years later, I am doing something I always wanted for a great amount of money. I think without these two rules I wouldn't make it: \- Invest in knowledge \- Don't put your age on CV

But London is all about trying imo.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Well first off, use the term "consultant", and you'll see a 50% increase in revenue.

</comment><comment><USER35> Clojure(script) | AI (mainly python and R) development for trading companies and startups.

<comment><USER36> any general-theory getting started tips/links?

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> At first I was an SAP Development lead (ABAP programming language primarily)

Later managing IT Operations

</comment><comment><USER5> Seems like everyone's interpreting 6-figures in whatever currency they use, so here are the exchange rates, using USD for conversion since that's easier:

100000 Argentine Pesos = 5755 USD, 100000 USD = 1737740 Argentine Pesos

100000 Australian Dollars = 79514 USD, 100000 USD = 125764 Australian Dollars

100000 Bahraini Dinars = 265156 USD, 100000 USD = 37714 Bahraini Dinars

100000 Botswana Pulas = 9833 USD, 100000 USD = 1016942 Botswana Pulas

100000 Brazilian Reals = 31543 USD, 100000 USD = 317028 Brazilian Reals

100000 British Pounds = 129272 USD, 100000 USD = 77356 British Pounds

100000 Bruneian Dollars = 73743 USD, 100000 USD = 135607 Bruneian Dollars

100000 Bulgarian Levs = 61190 USD, 100000 USD = 163425 Bulgarian Levs

100000 Canadian Dollars = 79790 USD, 100000 USD = 125329 Canadian Dollars

100000 Chilean Pesos = 160 USD, 100000 USD = 62578223 Chilean Pesos

100000 Chinese Yuan Renminbis = 15171 USD, 100000 USD = 659165 Chinese Yuan Renminbis

100000 Colombian Pesos = 34 USD, 100000 USD = 293255132 Colombian Pesos

100000 Croatian Kunas = 16111 USD, 100000 USD = 620679 Croatian Kunas

100000 Czech Korunas = 4589 USD, 100000 USD = 2178982 Czech Korunas

100000 Danish Krones = 16055 USD, 100000 USD = 622874 Danish Krones

100000 Emirati Dirhams = 27223 USD, 100000 USD = 367343 Emirati Dirhams

100000 Euros = 119434 USD, 100000 USD = 83728 Euros

100000 Hong Kong Dollars = 12778 USD, 100000 USD = 782620 Hong Kong Dollars

100000 Hungarian Forints = 391 USD, 100000 USD = 25581990 Hungarian Forints

100000 Icelandic Kronas = 951 USD, 100000 USD = 10518565 Icelandic Kronas

100000 Indian Rupees = 1565 USD, 100000 USD = 6391818 Indian Rupees

100000 Indonesian Rupiahs = 8 USD, 100000 USD = 1333333333 Indonesian Rupiahs

100000 Iranian Rials = 3 USD, 100000 USD = 3333333333 Iranian Rials

100000 Israeli Shekels = 27978 USD, 100000 USD = 357426 Israeli Shekels

100000 Japanese Yens = 911 USD, 100000 USD = 10982976 Japanese Yens

100000 Kazakhstani Tenges = 298 USD, 100000 USD = 33534541 Kazakhstani Tenges

100000 Kuwaiti Dinars = 331580 USD, 100000 USD = 30159 Kuwaiti Dinars

100000 Libyan Dinars = 73952 USD, 100000 USD = 135224 Libyan Dinars

100000 Malaysian Ringgits = 23420 USD, 100000 USD = 426989 Malaysian Ringgits

100000 Mauritian Rupees = 3052 USD, 100000 USD = 3276862 Mauritian Rupees

100000 Mexican Pesos = 5594 USD, 100000 USD = 1787694 Mexican Pesos

100000 Nepalese Rupees = 979 USD, 100000 USD = 10219724 Nepalese Rupees

100000 New Zealand Dollars = 72430 USD, 100000 USD = 138064 New Zealand Dollars

100000 Norwegian Krones = 12879 USD, 100000 USD = 776482 Norwegian Krones

100000 Omani Rials = 259715 USD, 100000 USD = 38504 Omani Rials

100000 Pakistani Rupees = 949 USD, 100000 USD = 10535188 Pakistani Rupees

100000 Philippine Pesos = 1953 USD, 100000 USD = 5120066 Philippine Pesos

100000 Polish Zlotys = 28017 USD, 100000 USD = 356926 Polish Zlotys

100000 Qatari Riyals = 27240 USD, 100000 USD = 367105 Qatari Riyals

100000 Romanian New Leus = 25990 USD, 100000 USD = 384766 Romanian New Leus

100000 Russian Rubles = 1704 USD, 100000 USD = 5867167 Russian Rubles

100000 Saudi Arabian Riyals = 26661 USD, 100000 USD = 375074 Saudi Arabian Riyals

100000 Singapore Dollars = 73743 USD, 100000 USD = 135607 Singapore Dollars

100000 South African Rands = 7672 USD, 100000 USD = 1303373 South African Rands

100000 South Korean Wons = 89 USD, 100000 USD = 112359551 South Korean Wons

100000 Sri Lankan Rupees = 654 USD, 100000 USD = 15288182 Sri Lankan Rupees

100000 Swedish Kronas = 12567 USD, 100000 USD = 795748 Swedish Kronas

100000 Swiss Francs = 104577 USD, 100000 USD = 95624 Swiss Francs

100000 Taiwan New Dollars = 3320 USD, 100000 USD = 3011957 Taiwan New Dollars

100000 Thai Bahts = 3011 USD, 100000 USD = 3321156 Thai Bahts

100000 Trinidadian Dollars = 14876 USD, 100000 USD = 672215 Trinidadian Dollars

100000 Turkish Liras = 29016 USD, 100000 USD = 344640 Turkish Liras

100000 Venezuelan Bolivars = 9915 USD, 100000 USD = 1008583 Venezuelan Bolivars

<comment><USER20> That's also not too accurate as living expenses and taxation differ radically across those countries. Some of those countries you might pay 35-40% tax from your 100k salary, some of them 12% or less.

<comment><USER5> There are also benefits from living in certain locations that don't factor into living expenses but just affect quality of life.

[https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/quality-of- life-f...](https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/quality-of-life-full- list)

<comment><USER20> Yes and there are a lot of other factors like healthcare, education (if you have kids) etc. For a healthy young single person a country with very low taxes such as Singapore might be the best choice. For somebody older who is married with kids Germany would be better (taxes are high but you get a lot of value back for the money you to in like cheap/free education).

<comment><USER12> Also timezone difference may be the factor depending of what level of presence and availability is negotiated.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Everyone makes six figures before tax. You should clarify after tax ;)

<comment><USER39> Ha! No.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I build algorithms, apps, websites, and APIs for startups.

</comment><comment><USER41> I do web development and mobile development for startups.

</comment><comment><USER42> Ethereum DApp development

<comment><USER43> I wanna learn it!

<comment><USER42> Ok, so for learning the tech, I would recommend the following guides and articles:

Wallet & Web3 Browser: \- [https://parity.io/parity.html](https://parity.io/parity.html)

\- [http://metamask.io/](http://metamask.io/)

Solidity: \- [https://learnxinyminutes.com/docs/solidity/](https://learnxinyminutes.com/docs/solidity/)

\- [http://solidity.readthedocs.io/](http://solidity.readthedocs.io/)

\- [https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/12/build-server-less- appli...](https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/07/12/build-server-less-applications- mist/)

Interacting with Ethereum: \- [https://geth.ethereum.org/downloads/](https://geth.ethereum.org/downloads/)

\- [http://truffleframework.com](http://truffleframework.com)

Tutorials and whatnot: \- [https://souptacular.gitbooks.io/ethereum-tutorials- and-tips-...](https://souptacular.gitbooks.io/ethereum-tutorials-and-tips-by- hudson/content/giant_ethereum_resource_list.html)

StackExchange: [https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/](https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Marketing consulting.

<comment><USER45> if you don't mind me asking - assuming all of that is services related: what % of that is strategy vs execution?

<comment><USER44> At this point it's half and half, but it's been trending towards strategy over time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Work on Upwork, Rails+Javascript+Elixir. Fullstack.</comment>


Rejecting Engineering Candidates with Respect - <AUTHOR> http://deap.co/2016/02/04/rejecting-engineering-candidates-the-right-way/ <comment><USER2> I find that patronizing: "Tell them what they can improve".

They might not need improvement at all, you just got an impression of what you think their flaws are, where you might be in the wrong.

I see what you are trying to do, but you should seriously re-phrase those emails in a different way. It would certainly piss me off to receive such a rejection email.</comment>


Interactive online quantum circuit simulator - <AUTHOR> https://strawberryfields.ai/ <comment><USER2> The company behind this is loaded with the most PhDs I've ever seen in a startup:

[https://www.xanadu.ai/about/](https://www.xanadu.ai/about/)

<comment><USER3> Makes sense, it's hard shit

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I get some of the parts but idk what others do. What's the best resource on this?

This is actually unusual compared with other quantum simulators as it's a continuous variable quantum computer, not a digital one.

<comment><USER4> If you are comfortable (mathematically) with the idea of "a gate" and "a qubit", then Wikipedia is surprisingly good at explaining what each new gate does.

Otherwise the standards reference that starts from scratch (prerequisites being linear algebra and intro quantum mechanics) is Quantum Computation and Quantum Information by Nielsen and Chuang. It is a very thick book and it takes a sustained effort to read it, but stackexchange is always eager to help. Preskill's lecture notes are amazing as well.

Regrettably, I do not know of a good book that does not have the prerequisites I mentioned.

<comment><USER5> With classical gates it is possible to make a complete characterization by enumerating the inputs and corresponding outputs (e.g. in table format). Would that be easy/possible here? How big would the table be?

<comment><USER4> Something like that is possible. A quantum gate is a linear operation, therefore it can be represented as a matrix (it happens to be a unitary matrix).

A gate acting on N qubits would be a square matrix of 2^N rows.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


How knitters got knotted in a purity spiral - <AUTHOR> https://unherd.com/2020/01/cast-out-how-knitting-fell-into-a-purity-spiral/ <comment><USER2> An important difference from the comparison to the Maoist movement and the like (besides degree), is that historically these spirals had at their heart, at least at the beginning, a premeditated ploy for power. The posturing was conscious and malicious.

It's really important to point out that that's not usually the case with the internet version. People aren't setting out to build an instagram moral empire; in fact they may set out with genuine, legitimate concern for the real moral issues. The problem comes from that "ratchet effect", where the only way to stay safe is to keep escalating things. The internet abstracts away people's humanity, dampening any compassion/charity, and the temperature rises on its own. Seeing this lack of (original) malice makes it easier to forgive and to step outside of the cycle.

<comment><USER3> > a premeditated ploy for power. The posturing was conscious and malicious.

Do you really think that Mao was completely cynical and didn't believe that what he was doing was "the right thing" that would improve the lives of his countrymen? Most people think they are doing "what's right," and some are willing to overlook unethical acts (or actions that let them accrue power to themselves) if it _serves the greater good_.

I tend to believe both these folks, and Mao for that matter, intend to do what they think is right & what will make the world better–and if you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, so be it.

It's a comforting thought that there are "bad people with bad intentions who do bad things on purpose" and "good people with good intentions who do good things (and occasionally do bad things by accident)" but in reality these two groups are not that distinct.

(It goes without saying that these folks are not "as bad as Mao" I mention it only because it was already brought up as an example.)

<comment><USER4> I agree that these folks are probably acting with good intentions. And that can actually make the situation worse. This CS Lewis quote comes to mind: "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

<comment><USER5> But CS Lewis was wrong as history of genocides and purges show. None of them started for the good of victims and they were definitely in the category of worst oppression.

<comment><USER6> I think Lewis had in more in mind something like what happens to Winston in George Orwell's 1984, where it wasn't enough for the Party for him to obey them but not agree with them; it wasn't enough for the Party to discover that he didn't agree with them and kill him; they were only satisfied once they'd tortured him into agreeing with them as well.

I'd _much_ rather be under killed for disagreeing than tortured until my captors are satisfied that I really agree with them.

<comment><USER5> Afaik, all genocides involved a lot of torture - both of targets and of those who refused to cooperate or talked against it. Sometimes it was to gain information, force agreement, force compliance etc. It also involved quite a lot of petty rule making to keep those who were being oppressed in line.

And quite a lot of it was basically for fun or hate.

\</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>--

Besides original quote is about motivation. People who organized genocides were fully ok with their own conscience. They were in fact proud over their own good work.

And as fun it sounds and as easy it is to use against certain disliked people, it is not true in the sense of how world really works when things go bad.

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm a bit more optimistic than the author. Whatever the name ends up being, this is phenomenon is only getting better known and pretty soon lots of communities will be immunized against it when a majority of the people in them have already seen it happen before and start calling it out in the early stages. Purity spirals will never completely stop, but their impact will likely be contained, starting in, oh, a couple decades or so.

<comment><USER2> We can hope. The internet is an unprecedented acceleration mechanism for this pattern; that's why it's becoming so common. It's possible that with that commonality will come awareness; it's possible it won't. We'll see.

<comment><USER7> Awareness is already on the way. It's been there from the beginning in primitive form in the right wing's disdain for "political correctness", but I've seen pretty hard-line progressives acknowledge that cancel culture (IMO a different face of the same problem) is toxic. This is biting everyone, and even though humans are dumb sometimes, it's not a stretch to believe that we'll notice it. The internet accelerates identification and naming of problems as well.

<comment><USER2> The problem with the "anti-political-correctness" camp is that it traditionally goes much farther. It's all relative, I suppose, but "turns out cancel culture might be bad" is a long way off from "I resent the very idea of having to be considerate towards others". And then those two and everything in-between get lumped all together, so that the former tends to be judged based on the latter's history.

<comment><USER8> Political correctness begins with notion that you can set a policy that adjudicates what is "right" i.e. "moral". What follows is a struggle for who has the authority to set moral policy. That's where you get these purity spirals from.

Being against political correctness is being against the idea that another fallible individual has the authority to say what it is moral for you to speak or write. This stance rails against the notion that anyone should have any power over your speech save arguing against it with speech or writing.

Political correctness, better termed "moral policing" always ends with the attempt to silence those judged to be "wrong". This is incompatible with the principles of liberty.

Me personally? I'm against political correctness because of what it really is, not because I wish to be rude with impunity.

<comment><USER9> I'm down with Stewart Lee's take on political correctness

[https://youtu.be/x_JCBmY9NGM](https://youtu.be/x_JCBmY9NGM)

(warning, contains British Humour)

I think the error in your argument here is to always reduce the application of political correctness down to flawed individuals.

If there is consensus at a societal level that certain hateful speech should be prevented for the general good of society, (and there is) then enforcing that makes sense. We've evolved past bear baiting and public flogging (in most parts of the world), we can evolve past racism, sexism and other limiting behaviours.

<comment><USER8> There is not a consensus on prevention of speech, hateful or otherwise. There is the attempt to claim a consensus, but only so as to move on to creation of enforcing bodies.

I think we should enforce laws against behavior, not speech or thought. Political Correctness attempts to police speech and thought. This is dangerous, especially when armored with the force of government. You get tribunals in Canada charging people with hate crimes for writing books.

Government is people with power. It always, always comes down to flawed individuals. It is flawed individuals applying it to flawed individuals.

Should there be outcries against racism and sexism? Yes. Should there be laws that say if you act based on bias (denying jobs, housing... etc.) that you face consequences of punishment under the law? Yes.

Should there be someone allowed to decide that your facial expression requires that you be subjected to 2 hours (or 2 weeks) of "education"? No.

We can come to an agreement on what we as a society consider to be "nice" and "polite". That's part of how societies work. We must never enforce being "nice" (to Stewart Lee's take) because it is an ever-changing, subjective thing. How will we come to value the next societal advancement if we aren't allowed to hold and discuss opinions that differ?

This freedom is too important to a civilization dedicated to freedom to allow it to be sacrificed on the altar of propriety, anyone's propriety.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> I've personally had several anxiety breakdowns trying to grapple with the hatred I see on Twitter, and I've been fortunate enough to never really have any aimed at me directly.

The key is mindfulness. Healthy detachment. Decouple your internal moral system/self-judgement mechanisms from those of the people around you. The two don't need to line up perfectly; they shouldn't be the same thing. Theirs may be rooted in real and valid experiences, even if it comes out as something destructive. Yours may too. You don't have to fight anything or anyone to gain your own peace and clarity. Stepping back is the only way out of the spiral.

<comment><USER10> My solution was to delete my Twitter account. I've never regretted it, and feel downright smug when I hear about the latest purity shitstorm in the communities I used to follow.

<comment><USER11> Have you found new communities, though? Surely there is some lost value -- maybe not specifically on Twitter, but generally -- when one drops an old group.

<comment><USER10> The only communities I miss were on old-school forums, not Facebook or Twitter. There could be plenty of drama but not at the scale and virulence of Twitter. I think the reason is that people were more interested in communicating than in signaling.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is a great article.

I've been conscious of and annoyed by the symptoms of these spirals for years. I was aware that this was the effect of one-upping and a desire to demonstrate personal virtue, but I didn't have a name for this phenomenon or a very complete model of why people were interested in these types of communities.

The purity spiral! A nice name, and a model that seems to describe the situation very nicely.

<comment><USER13> It's a lot like a religion. Purity tests, dogma, things you can't say, good vs evil, self-flagellation, original sin, kicking people out who don't conform...

<comment><USER14> Definitely a lot like religion. I really recommend the book "Christianity: the first three thousand years". Post historical crucifixion of Jesus the first few hundred years of Christianity sound like a purity spiral, monarchism, gnosticism, origenism.

The original church in Antioch first applied the word catholic to Christianity (καθολικός / katholikos) but was then later ejected from the western church in 1054 for not being catholic enough.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> If you want to see the mentioned knitter's one-year-old blog post about her excitement at visiting India, including her apology, it is here: [https://fringeassociation.com/2019/01/07/2019-my-year-of- col...](https://fringeassociation.com/2019/01/07/2019-my-year-of- color/#comment-87070)

This will be fascinating for future internet archaeologists.

<comment><USER16> I must be out of touch or too old or both, but what compels these individuals to fall in line? Why can't they tell their critics to buzz off? Some possibilities I can imagine:

\- The identities are real, so there is danger of external real-life impact (harassment of friends/family, job loss, etc)

\- Craving for approval - might get ostracized by the community

\- Internal impact - might e.g. lose business from the community if it's some kind of store

<comment><USER17> Pretty much. An accusation of being -ist can get you fired IRL. Even if you're completely in the right, a big enough mob will convince your boss you're 'toxic' and they'll let you go.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I think most people agree racism exists and is bad.

The central conceit of this article, and all the other ones about socially deleterious movements, is the assumption that the author is objective enough to identify those movements - which in this case concerns identification of racism going, in their mind, across the line which they see so clearly. I'm always curious about what qualifications or experience they have that makes their vision so clear.

Even if I assume for a moment that they see where that line is so clearly compared to others, I have to ask myself if they're identifying a genuine social movement - or if they might be mistaking the ability of the internet to now allow people to say what they think instantly to others, with some kind of new social ill.

<comment><USER19> > I think most people agree racism exists and is bad.

Sure, by the definition of racism that you and I would use. But not by the one that's been weaponised in these purity spirals. By their definition, as explained by the academic interviewed in the podcast, it is literally impossible for someone raised in modern society NOT to be racist. Taking offense at being called a racist is more evidence of racism. Trying to explain how you aren't racist is more evidence of racism.

It is like Original sin, but without any path to redemption.

<comment><USER20> Its really not rocket science. If you say hurtful things when you don't mean to, that's one thing. Denying the other party's feelings are valid and continuing to say hurtful things for really no reason other than to be stubborn makes you a jerk.

Redemption is to just try not to be a jerk.

<comment><USER21> > " _If you say hurtful things when you don 't mean to, that's one thing. > Denying the other party's feelings are valid and continuing to say hurtful > things for really no reason other than to be stubborn makes you a jerk._"

I note that this says nothing about the original speaker's feelings and opinions. If the other party denies the validity of the speaker's feelings and opinions, are they not also jerks?

<comment><USER20> It applies universally, yes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Communities used to be small with the members mutually dependent upon one another, e.g. a medieval village. Everyone knew everyone else and the arrangement _had_ to work. If it didn't work then people suffered and could be seen to suffer.

So it's perhaps not so surprising that large 'communities' which are full of strangers and where membership is optional are subject to very different problems.

</comment><comment><USER23> > _[Professor Kuran 's] theory relates to things like the fall of the Soviet > Union, where almost no one saw the end coming, because they hadn't realised > that an entire population was falsifying their experience to each other. He > sees a clear parallel._

The article didn't seem to indicate how the end of this movement would come, unless I missed something. Based on this analogy, how would this come about?

<comment><USER24> If we draw from the Society analogy, people realized that their neighbors weren't happy with the government all along and production quotas weren't actually being met.

So presumably, the author thinks people will look around and realize that. . . they were all more racist and sexist then they were letting on? Yeah the analogy doesn't actually hold when stretched that far. One of the key steps in purity politics is to engage in self-flagellation about your own inadequacies as a member of a privileged group (if you are) or to ham up the victimization and harm inflicted on you (if you aren't). I suppose there would be some "realization" that the "harm" being claimed is being blown out of proportion, but again I think this is something most people understand already.

<comment><USER25> More that they were being a bunch of godamned idiots who were neither helping outreach against bigotry, harming actual bigots, nor helping those harmed by it really. The collective lie/delusion is that they are involved in anything remotely good in spite of intentions.

I would put it in the Soviet analogy as "Even if the boss and shareholders get richer from your work under capitalism doesn't mean that the Soviet system did anything to help the workers. They are doing perfectly fine and you are only hurting yourselves."

Not a perfect metaphor of course but really the nominal target is fundamentally irrelevant to the impact of their actions.

<comment><USER26> I love and hate the evolution of the use of the word 'bigot'.

Such folks engaged in purity policing throw it around like it's just another word for 'bad person', but almost every use of it I see is highly ironic.

The dictionary definition is 'a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.' Almost everyone I've ever seen calling someone else a bigot online was using it to shame or beat down those who are not displaying bigotry, but merely different opinions.

They may have been objectionable opinions. They may even have been racist or sexist opinions. But never have I seen 'bigotry' applied correctly, and usually it seems to be applied by people unaware that they are the bigot in the situation.

I suppose in time the original meaning is lost, and we are left with just another insult. Which is a shame. But in the mean time I get to enjoy the irony.

<comment><USER27> >But in the mean time I get to enjoy the irony.

There are so many fun words like this.

I've only recently gotten any good at seeing the metagame strategies evolve. I used to get worked up when new words came into favor overnight to be abused in various ways.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Knitters or Open Sourcers, the history repeats. Instead of knitting patterns and diversity discussions we have Codes of conduct and... diversity discussions.

Humans are fascinating, as a group we are stupid while the constituent individuals may be wise. Quite the opposite of ant colonies...

</comment><comment><USER29> > _In 1967, Mao's Red Guards took to the streets determined to root out the > 'four olds' of traditional Chinese culture, killing hundreds of thousands in > the process._

There's a lot of parallels to Mao and what we're witnessing in culture today. Another example is Mao's use of "thought examinations" to consolidate power and influence.

<comment><USER30> I certainly see the parallels: both Mao and groups in modern Western culture are trying to control thought at the expense of free speech. But let's not overstate this: nobody is going door to door and carting people off in hoods for their ideas.

<comment><USER31> > But let's not overstate this: nobody is going door to door and carting > people off in hoods for their ideas.

Let me re-introduce you to China and Russia

<comment><USER32> or the UK policing tweets with real police and real jail.

<comment><USER30> I wasn't aware of this. Links?

<comment><USER32> A total of 625 arrests were made for alleged section 127 offences in 2010 – a number which had ballooned to 857 by 2015.

During the years 2010-2015 2,130 people were arrested between 2010 and 2015 for "sending by public communication network an offensive / indecent / obscene / menacing message / matter" – which is a criminal offence under section 127.

[https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/02/social_media_arrest...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/02/social_media_arrests_up_37pc_london_section_127_communications_act/)

[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uk-man-jailed-over-facebook- sta...](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/uk-man-jailed-over-facebook-status- raises-questions-over-free-speech/) (2012)

[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7415233/Mother- arre...](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7415233/Mother-arrested- calling-trans-woman-man-Twitter-charged-trolling.html) (2019)

<comment><USER33> > A total of 625 arrests were made for alleged section 127 offences in 2010 – > a number which had ballooned to 857 by 2015.

There's a very low bar to being arrested in England. The arrest rate isn't important, it's the conviction rate that you need to be presenting. Also, the law is developing (because that's how a system with case law works) so you need to be showing what's happening now, not ten years ago.

That last link isn't a great example. She engaged in a long running campaign of harassment, using two twitter accounts to harass and defame someone, including leaking financial and medical information. There's a reason the Daily Mail isn't a reliable source for wikipedia. These conversations always seem to place the right of some cunt to behave like an utter cunt above the rights of all the people who have to interact with that person to be protected from protracted campaigns of harassment. The UK and EU sees protecting the rights of others, protecting them from harassment and defamation, to be a legitimate aim.

Here's the Crown Prosecution Service page for communications offences committed on social media: [https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/social- media-guideline...](https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/social-media- guidelines-prosecuting-cases-involving-communications-sent-social-media)

<comment><USER34> What used to be called Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction nowadays increasingly attach at the point of arrest (and even more so at the point of charging, even if an acquittal is the outcome of the trial) because of publicity (names end up in the press often when people are arrested and then are available on Google forever) and the fact that they'll be listed on enhanced criminal records checks (needed for entry to certain occupations like teaching or in many cases financial services).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I feel like this dude should have and easily could have linked more often to various titbits relevant to his story rather than references loosely attached.

I don't disagree with the ideas in either but his other article [1] calls some dude talking about media control on his website selling anti-aging pills a tech philosopher and with such hyperbole employed and an unrefined search for backing for a premise one can inflate 2 or 3 people throwing shit in a small community into a vast mob.

[1][https://unherd.com/2018/11/the-growing-power-of-the- youtube-...](https://unherd.com/2018/11/the-growing-power-of-the-youtube- right/)

</comment><comment><USER36> > _Lindsay pointed to the atheist movement of the mid-2000s, from which he'd > come: a community that once had the wind in its sails, but had imploded into > infighting by 2011, as half of its members jagged off in an social justice > direction. Soon enough, the likes of the evolutionary biologist Richard > Dawkins were being problematised as stale, male and pale._

I'm not saying virtue signaling was never a force in the atheist community. But it seemed at the time that the thing that people were most upset about was the rampant sexual misconduct. The thing that people were second most upset about was disagreement over whether Wheaton's Law is a good idea or not. Trying to paint that whole sad, sorry mess with the same brush as this knitting Instagram situation is. . . wait for it . . . problematic.

<comment><USER37> Don't forget about how many Atheist YouTubers went full anti-feminism after Gamergate. It created some of the strongest repugnant feelings for the community (even today).

<comment><USER38> There was a lot going on around Gamergate that wasn't directly related to gamergate though. I used to follow games journalism quite fervently and stopped around 2013 due to the purity spiral it was going down.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I believe that the allure of being in an Internet mob is that it inverts the traditional monarch-subject power structure. Normally the crowd must cower before the individual King... in an Internet mob you can take even the highest status individual and make him cower before your crowd.

</comment><comment><USER40> "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity."

W.B. Yeats

</comment><comment><USER39> Jeez... it almost seems like social justice warriors could be a false flag operation by virulent racists, with how effectively they can turn sensible moderates against everything that they stand for.

<comment><USER41> The very term "social justice warrior" is an invention of the reactionary right, though. Flinging it around as an invective like this is _exactly_ the same psychology at work as calling moderate-but-mildly-clueless knitters racists. You're defining an out group and shunning them.

This only gets better when people start to talk about specifics and be (to use your word) sensible about things. Drawing up battle lines trying to make the people you don't like take a stand with the SJWs is making things worse.

<comment><USER42> 'SJW' was invented by the left and used in a positive context, the cynical populist interpretation happened sometime after 2010.

[1] [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- intersect/wp/2015/10...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- intersect/wp/2015/10/07/why-social-justice-warrior-a-gamergate-insult-is-now- a-dictionary-entry/)

<comment><USER41> How is that inconsistent with what I wrote? Words change. The definition used upthread was clearly perjorative and used within the (new! that's literally what the article was about!) Oxford definition described by the coverage you linked to. And it's an insult, and an invention of the reactionary right.

<comment><USER42> It's inconsistent with you said because you said 'SJW' was an invention of the right, it's wasn't, it was an invention of the left.

<comment><USER41> Good grief. The current pervasive use of "SJW" as a derogation, as used by zweep above in the comment to which I directly replied, is an invention of the right. Better?

<comment><USER42> What you said was: "The very term "social justice warrior" is an invention of the reactionary right, though."

This is not correct, and not what you are saying now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> I have to wonder how many of these morality spirals aren't instigated by actual trolls.

An example of this was the explosion of transgender issues into the mainstream soon after gay marriage was legalized. I recall reading a fringe right-wing blogger about the "lesbian vs transgender conflict", a few years before the "T" in LGBT became more prominent. This prominence may well have been engineered by trolls in an attempt to alienate a group of people who were rapidly being accepted into mainstream society.

Infiltrate a community, set off a purity spiral. Collapse the community, and then, as a bonus, complain about "virtue signaling", "wokeness" and "cancel culture". Repeat.

<comment><USER44> You're close.

Now imagine that both sides are doing it. Now imagine that there have been several iterations of this process. Now imagine that the people involved have gone through so many iterations that they've lost sight of which side they started on.

That's culture.

<comment><USER45> S/he was right to start with. Sure, people do it unconsciously but you're foolish if you don't think there are also people who do it systematically and even document the process.

<comment><USER46> Got a list of such?

<comment><USER45> That's basically what Encyclopaedia Dramatica is about, though it's offline at present.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Some might claim the BSD community's focus on security to be a purity spiral, but it's arguably produced things of value. Having small communities around who occasionally drive themselves to the extremes of a particular idea can useful for broader society.

<comment><USER48> That's not the sort of purity that the article is talking about. The article is talking about purity for purity's sake -- a relative and subjective set of rules that exist to provide levers of power.

A singlular and uncompromising focus on OS security serves an absolute and objective purpose, that being... OS security. To the extent that it is objective, it is less subject to being coopted for political purposes.

<comment><USER49> A better example might be the people who fork free software to make it "more free".

<comment><USER19> Perhaps, but wouldn't a better example be the actual purity spiral occurring in open source?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


"In defending me as a woman, you've insulted me as someone who works in STEM" - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@kathyqian/dear-google-in-defending-me-as-a-woman-youve-insulted-me-as-someone-who-works-in-stem-b33975f792aa <comment><USER2> >Did you really think you could say that "much of what was in that memo is fair to debate" and "portions of the memo violate our Code of Conduct and cross the line by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace" without me asking you to clarify which sections you found fair for debate and which portions violated which specific portions of your Code of Conduct?

I don't think google knows where to draw the line between what is fair and what is harmful in the memo. I think they are just reacting to the media outrage. If they tried to draw the line it would just get shot down by both sides of the argument, only fueling the outrage.

</comment><comment><USER3> It wasn't necessary for Google to disprove Damore's arguments, because they didn't fire him over the quality of his science, but rather due to the controversy arising from his claims, whether true or not.

It's completely irrelevant to Google's interests whether his claims were unsupported by data, harmful [to society], or politically incorrect. None of those were the reason they fired him: they fired him because his claims attracted attention that could reflect negatively on Google.

</comment><comment><USER4> Poor google, no matter what they do - they cannot win now, can they.

[http://www.poorlydrawnlines.com/comic/mad/](http://www.poorlydrawnlines.com/comic/mad/)

<comment><USER5> Fair question. Perhaps they could just tell the truth a la

"We live in contentious times, we've surveyed our employees and thought about it ourselves, and decided that no matter what we say we can't win. There is a divide in our culture and we don't have 'THE ANSWER (TM).' Only time will tell what balance we as a culture will come to in weighing out the merits of hushing stereotypes versus questioning everything.

So to avoid hasty decisions we'll bow out, and return the Dalmore 6 months from now.

We're honored this great cultural debate could be started at our workplace, but it is not our intent to make this discussion about us. We are about search, email, etc."

<comment><USER4> I'm pretty sure that if they would say something like this they would lose the lawsuit pretty quickly. Then they'd had to pay the guy a lot of money.

I still think they are probably going to do so, but not as much?

<comment><USER5> Well I was thinking they'd best have done this before firing him, instead of firing him. And after 6 months if everybody, after cooling down, still thought what he did was fundamentally inappropriate _THEN_ they'd fire him.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The piece came off to me as somebody looking for a way to be offended. She criticizes Damore and Google but doesn't point out what is lacking in Damore argument and instead of showing why google is wrong, her argument makes me realize how bad of a PR position google really is in. Stuck between a rock and a hard place.

<comment><USER7> > but doesn't point out what is lacking in Damore argument

I think it's because this article is about Google, not Damore. I;m sure if she really wanted to talk about Damore's arguments, the article would have to be far longer and her main argument watered down.

<comment><USER5> Don't you think though if google had really dived into the science they'd have just opened themselves up to even more criticism than handling it the way they did?

<comment><USER8> If their only goal is to avoid criticism, not even stopping at breaking California law in order to do so, then they're well deserving of being sued. At some point they need to either be intellectually honest and ethical or pay the price, given their motto has always been an explicit claim to the paragon of virtue.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Sensorimotor Mechanics of People with a Sixth Finger - <AUTHOR> https://digest.bps.org.uk/2019/06/12/breakthrough-investigation-of-people-with-a-sixth-finger-has-implications-for-infant-medicine-and-cyborgs/ <comment><USER2> The interesting technology of ctrl labs:

      https://www.ctrl-labs.com/

will give "common five fingered" individuals the ability to catch up.

They use machine learning to decode the nerve impulses in the arm, so you can play video games without moving and can let you synthesize "extra" arms.

search "ctrl labs" and watch the youtube videos, some of scifi possibilities are very interesting.

</comment><comment><USER3> >suggest that it may be of value to augment normal five-fingered hands with an artificial supernumerary finger

That's missing the big picture in my opinion. This research indicates the human brain is capable, all on its own, of adapting to entirely new sensorymotor functions. Think of the implications. If some type of new functionality were grafted onto you, you'd be able to control it without having to "reassign" any of your current functions. You could move a "third hand" cursor around in three dimensional virtual space as if it were a virtual body part, not just an interface you have to consciously manipulate like a mouse or keyboard.

<comment><USER4> > not just an interface you have to consciously manipulate like a mouse or > keyboard

How conscious is that really tho? I don't think about how to type, I just think thoughts and they come out on the screen. It's about as conscious as speaking.

Same for the mouse. I don't think about the mouse consciously, I just look at an item on the screen and choose to interact. Like grabbing a glass of water with my hand.

<comment><USER5> Now matter how perfect it is, it is by definition less perfect than the movement of your hand itself. The real world is also limited by inertia, which virtual interfaces are not if they bypass the hands entirely. We're a long way from developing really good brain-computer interfaces, but this finding means we have just a little less groundwork to lay.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> m-i-l I remember reading (a long time ago so can't provide a reference) that in 1000s of years most humans would have an extra finger. I'd assumed that this was because of the evolutionary advantage it would have given their forebears, although I would question how much natural selection applies to rational beings like humans these days. But on a quick bit of reading now, it seems like it could be because it is a dominant trait. Although after a bit more reading, it seems it might not become more common over time due to the Hardy- Weinberg principle[0].

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardy%E2%80%93Weinberg_princip...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardy%E2%80%93Weinberg_principle)

<comment><USER6> I know it was just an aside, but I can't let this go:

>I would question how much natural selection applies to rational beings like humans these days.

It's a universal principle, why wouldn't it apply? Each generation is composed of the offspring of those members of the previous generation who reproduced, introducing a statistical bias. Why would it be different "these days", and what has rationality got to do with it?

Besides - as for the notion of 'rational' humans, especially in the context of sex and reproduction - I'll get my coat.

<comment><USER7> > _It 's a universal principle, why wouldn't it apply?_

Because ever since we've invented writing (and arguably even before that - ever since we've invented spoken language), we've left the domain of biological evolution. We now accumulate, evaluate and discard knowledge and technology couple orders of magnitude faster than natural processes. From nature's POV, the entire ~10k years of human civilization happened in a blink of an eye (and note that all the interesting things happened arguably in the last couple hundred years).

<comment><USER8> There is still differential production of offspring who produce offspring. The selection is against kind of people who have few children or have few children who go on to have children themselves. That's how it always has been and always will be unless we abolish natural reproduction.

<comment><USER7> Again, whatever effect this selection has (with quantized increments of the length of a generation), it's completely drowned in memetic and technological evolution(s) which currently operate at the speed of Tweet. In your particular example, this arguably derails biological evolution completely - the decision to have kids, and how many kids to have, is dominated by economic and (secondarily) cultural considerations, which change significantly between generations. Evolution will have hard time identifying genes to promote, when the minimum unit of change is probably "how smart people are" or "how social people are", both having many more reasons for being favoured by natural selection.

<comment><USER8> It's a messy process, and we may not be able to see where it's going, but you can bet that there will be changes in human phenotypes and their prominence over the course of many generations.

> _Evolution will have hard time identifying genes to promote, when the > minimum unit of change is probably "how smart people are" or "how social > people are", both having many more reasons for being favoured by natural > selection._

If I understand you correctly, that's just not true. In his seminal work, _The Selfish Gene_ , Richard Dawkins showed that the individual gene is the unit of selection. A genotype that tends to result in a slightly stronger preference for a family life is exactly the kind of thing that could become more prominent, even within one or two generations. I'm sure this is happening right now.

> _In your particular example, this arguably derails biological evolution > completely - the decision to have kids, and how many kids to have, is > dominated by economic and (secondarily) cultural considerations, which > change significantly between generations._

I was not making a particular example at all. That is the function of natural selection: it selects for the genotypes had by those who have children who go on to have children themselves.

The selection doesn't have to happen at the level of a preference for kids. A gene related to diligence or conscientiousness or just about anything else can have effects that ultimately cause differential reproductive success for you and your offspring.

The fact that it's all too complicated for us to model has bearing on it at all.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> A bunch of my Wife's cousins all had 6 fingers. They had them removed after birth.

<comment><USER10> From what I read, _fully-functional_ and _fully-formed_ sixth fingers are exceedingly rare. More often than not they are neither. They just interfere with daily life and attract unwanted attention.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Ever since I was a child I had this strange idea that I was missing fingers (I have 10 like most). From grade school till middle school I even kept counting them as if something was amiss. I mean, it's not like it's actively bothering me or something, but just a bit of a curious quirk: I think I should have 12 fingers. Although in my case it feels like they should be to the side of my pinky, not between the index and thumb. As far as I know my parents didn't have them removed at birth either. Funny enough I believe the gene for it is even dominant (meaning it needs only one copy to express the phenotype), it's just not very common in the general populous.

</comment><comment><USER12> It would be more useful to have another arm or two.

</comment><comment><USER13> Is there anyone on HN with 6 fingers? How's your typing? Seems like it could only be a benefit on a keyboard.

<comment><USER14> Not quite typing, still insightful. A video from the original paper the article refers to: [https://static- content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs414...](https://static- content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41467-019-10306-w/MediaObjects/41467_2019_10306_MOESM5_ESM.mp4)

<comment><USER15> That's a really cool video, is interesting to experience how much my vision tries to reject the extra finger. Is hard to explain exactly, but every time the hand is held in a way that hides fingers, then my brain goes back to predicting it as a standard hand, then pops back to six digits again when all fingers are visible.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Sounds like 5 fingers is the mutation!

<comment><USER17> Isn't every feature of every living thing the result of a mutation?

<comment><USER18> Ofcourse. But I wonder wonder if the sixth finger arose in humans or if it's an expression of an previously common structure that has been suppressed for the last couple of million years. I would wager on the latter.

<comment><USER19> It's an anomaly. Look at the analogous structures in other vertebrates -- in species where digits are discernable (i.e, discounting mammals with hooves or without front limbs at all), there are practically always five. Even a structure as unusual as a bat's wing is made up of five "fingers".

<comment><USER20> Losing digits seems relatively easy - that's where hooves come from (horses have one toe left, goats two). It's gaining digits that seems very hard. It's possible that some configuration of six fingers could be better, but we probably can't get from our local optimum to that without going through major disadvantages. Apparently five has been the maximum number for most creatures for 420 million years: [https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1org2e/why_do_m...](https://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/1org2e/why_do_most_mammals_have_5_fingers/)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Video of PGs Talk on Mixergy - <AUTHOR> http://www.justin.tv//mixergy#from=11.00%252CFebruary-9-2010&r=171fziU

<comment><AUTHOR> The link changes when you paste it:

<http://www.justin.tv//mixergy#from-11.04,February-9-2010>

Is the correct link. Sorry guys.

</comment><comment><USER2> At least for now, going to

<http://www.justin.tv/mixergy/archive#>

clicking on 'watch my last broadcast' will bring up the talk.

<comment><USER3> The whole video seems to be broken, it's just 11 minutes of Andrew sitting there.

Edit: If you keep hitting that arrow on the right, eventually, you'll get to the interview.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I can't make the link work. I get the error "Sorry, we couldn't understand the date and time '11.00%252CFebruary-9-2010'"

</comment><comment><USER5> Yup link broke</comment>


Show HN: Dashboard to Manage and Monitor AWS SES Bounces/Deliveries/Complaints - <AUTHOR> https://bauns.net/ <comment><AUTHOR> OP here, I built this to scratch an itch, as I run a few other platforms that sent around 16000 emails per day, and SendGrid was getting pricey, but I couldn't get the granularity of reporting for my transactional emails with SES.

I could've built it into my existing platform, but fancied doing something different - and that's how I ended up with Bauns.</comment>


Mobile? Who Are We Kidding? - <AUTHOR> http://andersonjr.com/2014/02/09/mobile-who-are-we-kidding/ <comment><USER3> Where I work everyone gets a desktop in the office and a laptop to keep at home. I can literally throw on a jacket and go to work - no bags, not even anything in my pockets.

It's glorious. I've done the whole "schlepping the laptop everywhere" thing before. It sucks, the author is right. It's not just the weight, it's the unplugging, plugging in, oh-no-the-monitor-didnt-quite-detect-right bullshit dance.

Where is the fulfillment of the cloud dream? I can leave the office, come home, open my work laptop, and pick up right where I left off. This is the promise of the cloud, but very few people seem to be able to enjoy it.

<comment><USER4> Hm, now that we have wireless charging actually marketed as a product (for mobiles and tablets anyway, I assume a "full" laptop might still be tricky? Maybe not if the goal is simply to not use the battery while docket (rather than charging it)?) -- we should be able to do usb1.1+ speeds via some kind of NFC interface -- and hdmi is possible to wirelessly -- so how long before we get docking basins/plates rather than docking stations? Two years?

<comment><USER3> IMO docking stations are the "faster horse". We could've used better docks a few years ago, but now the idea seems silly for most use cases. Why carry around a big ol' laptop when your data is available everywhere, is largely device-agnostic, on-demand? You don't need to carry around an email or spreadsheet or word processing machine - _everything_ is an email, spreadsheet, word processing machine. You don't need to carry a device that contains your work, because your work accessible from anywhere.

If you're particularly security-conscious, great, throw everything up in a VPN (as everyone _already_ does now) and issue company hardware if you must. At the end of the day having multiple bits of hardware for different contexts not only makes working easier, it also prevents you from having a bunch of hardware floating around on buses, trains, and airplanes containing your sensitive data. Not only that, you're dramatically reducing your odds of data loss.

There are real road-warrior types who will need actual "full" laptops, but the vast majority of people hauling big laptops to and from work everyday really just need a machine for work, and a machine for home, and nothing in between.

<comment><USER4> I partially agree with most of your point -- at the same thime I like the idea of using some trusted hardware as the "heart" of my computing experience. I might store various encrypted data in the cloud, but my decryption keys and password need to stay on a device that is "mine". Maybe a laptop, maybe a smartphone. They both need some external input/output for some workloads - <USER2> 24"\+ screen (or two) - a proper keyboard - maybe a proper mouse. And both needs charging.

While it is certainly is possible (easy even) to tap the i/o points (screens less so than a keyboard) -- rationaly or irrationaly -- I think dockingstations in some form wil serve a function for some time.

But yes, this is more of a "true roadwarrior" problem than a general problem. A business can probably afford to keep two pcs per employee - I can't. And I do occationally work on trains or airplanes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If carrying bags of stuff is not really a problem, then as things get smaller, we carry more of them.

What do I carry? Laptop, paper notebook, my lovely noise cancellng headphones, a charger, an external battery for my phone, a usb charger, some bits of paper. Some times I add a tablet or kindle to the mix. Other times a raspberry pi or other embedded device.

I obviously prioritise having enough tools with me to work anywhere I like with maximum comfort.

Its all a matter of priorities.

</comment><comment><USER6> In most corporations you can't use your home computer to connect to your work VPN or other resources, this is mainly a security issue. Your work IT department has no control over the security of your home systems.

</comment><comment><USER7> My home computer is my work computer, and vice versa. I work from home several days per week, but I'm out consulting for the rest, so my laptop is usually always with me. I've thought about taking just an iPad but I like having the ability to catch up on some iOS programming during quiet periods.

The biggest reduction in what I travel around with has been to leave old PSUs at places I visit regularly to save me carrying them with me.

</comment><comment><USER8> I ran a 30 day experiment only using my 8" tablet when I was not at work or home. I eventually added a small 9" bluetooth keyboard and 90 days later I feel really anchored down if I carry anything in addition to my tablet.

I use a terminal emulator to log into my VPS where I do most of my work. I have had to simplify my work flow but I do not miss the bulk one bit.

As technology changes, I want to be part of the first adapters, I don't see myself being able to take advantage of the cutting edge when I am unable to let go of current and fading solutions.

Of course this is not going to be the best approach for everyone, I find it exciting.

</comment><comment><USER9> I have no idea what this guy is talking about, I'm more moble with better power and access to my data now than when I was in college and never more than 100 feet from a unix terminal.

I have two carry modes: with laptop and without.

In both modes I have a 8" tablet (my note taking device), my phone, and a dot grid notebook for the times when I feel like sketching on paper. Two pens, a pencil, two or three chargers (iPhone, miniusb, laptop).

That's it though. I no longer cary magazines or books or multiple notebooks or paper slides.

The weight of my backpack is half what it used, and that's with a 17" laptop. When I am not carrying my laptop my backpack is so light that i feel uneasy, a veritable Jerry Seinfeld "too light moment" like I forgot or lost something.

Furthermore, even though I often carry my entire 2tb of personal/work files on my person I never worry about loosing my computer or the drives getting damaged because my carbonite/backblaze system is constantly backing up everything with redundancy of github + server for my working files.

<comment><USER10> Google Goggles has a high-contrast mode for taking pictures of documents. Works great for sketches on paper and for taking pictures of whiteboards. I could never get those digitizing notebooks to work for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Very much on board with this post's perspective.

I've been very appreciative of the setup we have at my office, with our development machines being remotely accessible via RDP (through a company VPN). RDP isn't perfect, and it's not something I'd like to do full time, but definitely is good enough in a jam.

This amounts to me only needing my Kindle and phone for my commute.

</comment><comment><USER12> I see these from some co-workers as well, but honestly, I carry my car keys, my wallet and a cell phone (a stupid dumbphone even). I leave my work at work, and at home I have my machine for whatever.

I see +90% of the people on my commute (I drive but then cycle for 5 miles) carrying huge backpacks or messenger bags and for the life of me, I don't understand why they do it.

<comment><USER13> I have college textbooks that aren't available as ebooks yet that I need to carry around for school .

<comment><USER4> If you have something to "e-read" them on, and you're comfortable reading on that thing -- why not just scan the books yourself? Pretty quick on a multi- copier/scanner/printer-thing (the industrial size ones -- like you might find at your library or a copy shop (if you can find one).

<comment><USER13> Because it might be illegal. The legality of it unclear at best, I would rather not take a chance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I don't have this problem when going to or from work, but I did have it when traveling. I have pared down my travel kit to my iPhone and iPad and an Apple keyboard, and more often than not, it's enough. I have all the entertainment I'll need during downtime between games and Netflix/Hulu/iTunes. I can type up quick stuff in any number of text editors for the iPad (I use Pages, mostly). And Prompt is an amazing terminal client that lets me connect to my server or home machine if need be. If worse comes to worse, I can use a VNC client and get to my home machine in all it's glory pretty comfortably. I'd say that combination is pretty mobile.

</comment><comment><USER15> My employer has a policy that I can't use my personal machine for work :( so I have to wrangle with two and the moving of them about.

</comment><comment><USER10> I use an LG gPad and a Perixx folding keyboard. Together they are about as small and light as a paper notebook. I wish Drive applications worked better offline, but I can tether if needed.

I only need to schlep the laptop if I need to code at the customer site.

Tablets really are all that 90% of your users need. If they actually got good tablets, they could step out of their cubicles and communicate with other humans.

</comment><comment><USER16> My previous job I had a desktop PC which I could RDP into from my personal laptop when out of the office.

The current job gave me a laptop (a MacBook Air so limited plugs) but I'm not allowed to leave it plugged in at the office for [physical] security reasons.

So if I want to work from home I have to carry it with me (along with my personal laptop). Can't use personal laptop for home stuff nor vice-versa.

</comment><comment><USER17> Personally, I love carrying my 17inch Macbook Pro around with me at all times. You gotta love your machine.

<comment><USER18> and when it snows, it's big enough to sled downhill on

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I carry books and magazines, just in case I end up at acoffeeshop. Why not an iPad or Kindle? Because a book or magazine focuses me on one discrete thing.

</comment><comment><USER20> I don't agree.

The only things I carry are an iPad, a credit card a sweater and the keys to my home. If it's not cold I leave the sweater, if someone's at home I leave the keys, if I'm not going to work I leave the iPad... sometimes I leave my home w/ just my card.

I think it's just a matter of what you're used to...

</comment><comment><USER21> Because some idiot in Hollywood declared Fanny Packs to be "out of style", now people are forced to step it up to something larger, so then people say, well I may as well fill up this big bag with junk if I'm being forced to carry it.

Solution: Let's kill that douchenozzle who declared fanny packs were bad, and go back to fanny packs. I certainly did. I never STOPPED fannypacking... because I'm not a spineless douchebag like the rest of you are who are too afraid to wear a fannypack.

<comment><USER22> This post is possibly one of the best cautionary tales I've ever heard for "choose your battles wisely". I'm not even kidding- in its own way, it's up there with Napoleon in Russia and the Microsoft Kin. If one is prepared to stand astride the world in open defiance of universal opposition, fanny packs may not be worthiest of causes upon which to blow that particular wad.

<comment><USER23> The question is: does he or she make fanny packs a cause for themselves _outside_ of threads like this? If not, then they're actually showing a pretty healthy attitude.</comment></comment></comment>


Python Interview Problem – Parsing CSV Files - <AUTHOR> http://www.realpython.com/blog/python/python-interview-problem-parsing-csv-files/#.U4pbZTAmf-Q.hackernews <comment><USER2> There are several mistakes here. The biggest is not answering the speed vs. memory question up front. Why read in all the data at once when this problem can be solved with a for loop? If the csv's are huge, you need to at least think through the impact of loading them into memory. If speed is your primary goal then showing you know about Pandas or at least Numpy would be preferable. If you then choose to implement the comparison by hand, great, but in the every-day case, knowledge of shortcuts can be the difference between a productive programmer and a slow one.</comment>


Show HN: Turn a Press of a Button into Notifications - <AUTHOR> https://gary094.github.io/index.html <comment><AUTHOR> Hello!

I made an API endpoint to send yourself notifications. It can be used to notify you about some output of scripts very easily or (what I did) make a doorbell notification device using an esp8266:

[https://v.redd.it/2i6duixufzi31](https://v.redd.it/2i6duixufzi31)

If you want to try it out just follow the step by step guide:

[https://github.com/gary094/gchat-client-android/wiki/How- to-...](https://github.com/gary094/gchat-client-android/wiki/How-to- notifications)

Just a side note: This is work-in-progress and there may be errors or downtime. Also, the system will automatically lock your user after 1 month but depending on when I will finish it I can extend it further. In that case just leave me a mail.</comment>