The ShapeShift Hack - <AUTHOR> http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/04/25/shapeshift-hack-simply-incredible/ <comment><USER2> Erik responded: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4gdxe9/cornell_pro...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/4gdxe9/cornell_professor_doubts_shapeshift_story/d2gy4iz)

</comment><comment><USER3> So we've got three potential theories here.

1\. ShapeShift has the right version of events.

2\. Rovion is Bob who is having fun mocking and misleading the CEO, safe in the belief that he will never be caught.

3\. Rovion is another insider who is providing himself with cover to blame Bob and an outside hacker if he's ever caught.

This post criticizes the first theory on Rovion's interaction not making much sense. And indeed it doesn't unless Rovion is a fairly weird guy.

The second theory makes some sense. By telling this yarn, Bob managed to steal two more times, while having all evidence of how he did it the second 2 times not being taken as leads to who he is now or what he is doing.

The third theory makes a ton of sense. Rovion can either be someone who was already planning to steal. Or just an insider who saw how easy it was and was motivated to do the same.

One interesting detail is that Bob's initial theft is just sitting in a wallet, untouched. So apparently he didn't need that money. The first theory would say because he got paid by Rovion and can wait. The second theory would say because he made 2 other withdrawals that he can use. The third theory leaves that open.

Based on human nature I'd rank them 3, 2, 1. Based on his leaving a bunch of money untouched, and my opinions about criminals, I'd rank the theories 2, 1, 3. Either way the CEO should be dubious about the story he was fed by "Rovion".

<comment><USER4> I think you missed the insinuation at the end of the article:

4\. The CEO faked the entire story (perhaps using Bob or Rovion or both as patsies-- or perhaps taking the money for himself) because the same money- stealing "we learned our lesson" thing happened at Paypal, and Paypal became hugely successful shortly afterward.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, I did miss that insinuation.

The CEO has already made enough on previous companies that I find that one a stretch.

<comment><USER5> Someone who has made a lot of money using one-off tactics to make a lot more money? Why would they do that!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I agree that ShapeShift's account has holes in it and the CEO seemed a little too willing to take Rovion at his word, but this rebuttal swings too far in the other direction. Some comments:

> Red Flag #1. Bob is somehow able to connect with a hacker who has been > hiding in their systems for some time.

Actually, in the original article Rovion says "We contacted Bob." Which makes total sense -- if Rovion eg. had access to the email account of a ShapeShift employee, he would have seen the drama with Bob unfold and been able to contact him easily.

> Red Flag #2. Rovion identifies Bob by his real life name "Bob," without a > moment of hesitation. > Why on earth would Bob run a criminal business under > his real name?

If Rovion had access to some internal communications at ShapeShift, he would of course have "Bob"'s real name and no reason not to use it.

> Red Flag #3. Bob chooses to sell his backdoor access to Rovion instead of > using it himself. > Red Flag #4. Bob demands only 50 BTC for a backdoor.

There's a lot more risk in stealing something yourself vs just providing information that can be used for theft. Letting someone else do the dirty work could definitely be a rational decision. And anyway, the hot wallet at no point after the original hack had 315BTC again, so the expected value of the second/third hacks were a lot lower.

> Red Flag #6. Rovion is a moralistic individual who not only is a thief > himself, but wants to see Bob, another thief from whom Rovion supposedly > obtained credentials, severely punished

It's not surprising to me that someone could adopt a moral framework that let them steal from poorly-secured foreign companies while still considering it wrong to steal from your own employer.

> Orange Flag #9. Voorhees talks derisively about Bob's competence during the > period of time when Bob was employed prior to the hack.

Many countries, possibly including Switzerland, do have a very high standard you have to meet to fire someone with cause. This process could be especially delicate if Bob is of an ethnic or racial minority.

</comment><comment><USER7> Isn't this the standard scam -- crypto-currency exchange gets cleaned out by an insider/owner and then a there is a story of an disgruntled employee or other evil hacker. Everyone is supposed to hate this made up hacker instead of suspecting the owners themselves.

Maybe it is just the news bias, but crypto-currency seems to attract shady characters. I understand the sentiment about the central banks and global cabal of money controlling plutocrats and all that, but then the same people turn around and hand money to a bunch of amateurs with a website and trust them instead.

<comment> rm_-rf_slash "I'm an investment banker. I...move money from one place to another." -Michael Douglass as Nicholas Van Orton, _The Game_ , 1997

Finance is a cutthroat industry where the common denominator for success is ruthlessness. Fortunes await the hungry. The hoodied crypto-currency hacker may not strike you as the Wall Street suit, but rampant greed is clear as day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Didn't know

"Who here remembers the story of a bank called X.com? It was a tiny, little- known online bank, until it was hacked and covered in the mainstream press during the first dot-com boom. Its popularity absolutely soared after the hack. I actually had an account on X.com, but if you didn't and never heard of it, you may perhaps have heard of X.com's founder, a fellow who goes by the name of Elon Musk."

</comment><comment><USER9> It seemed to me like Rovion is Bob, but just taking on a different identity, hence the "Let me know when you plan to arrest Bob" comment.

<comment><USER10> occam's razor suggests that Rovion, Bob and Voorhees are all the same person. Any other reading would, as the article points out too-obliquely, involve too much strain on reality.

<comment><USER3> Given the information in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Voorhees](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Voorhees), there is every reason to believe that Voorhees has more to lose here than to gain. He already has personal wealth well in excess of the amounts stolen, and his personal cost from continuing to run the business in a shut down mode likely also exceeds the thefts.

<comment><USER10> if I had a bitcoin for every free-state-believing tax-hating wannabe- nationless pseudonymous SEC-fined bitcoin founder who's taken the money, concocted a fabulous cockamamie story and run, I would have enough to buy a really nice vape pen and a fedora

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Finally, someone who took a stab at this. Ever since I read Shapeshift's version of events I couldn't help but think the entire thing was bullshit. Wild incompetance, improbable alliances, its just weird.

</comment><comment><USER12> I'm just kinda glad that my old-school, been-burned-100-times, cynical self, who also saw red flags galore into the original narrative, wasn't _completely_ nuts.

It's a pretty solid takedown of all the issues in ShapeShift's sketchy story.

<comment><USER13> My no shitcoin rule avoids many messes

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> >By definition, Rovion was in deep undercover mode. How would Bob have gotten a hold of Rovion? Did he know of Rovion's partial penetration? If so, how? If not, then how did they meet up? In any case, how did the two hackers exchange messages?

If the attacker didn't have root or wasn't using a fancy rootkit, it's not surprising at all that his hack could have been discovered. Discovering the hack could be as simple as finding an unfamiliar php file that hosted a reverse shell in some directory. The attacker might've had some scripts in a folder. Communication could be started by editing one of the scripts to print a message instead.

A friend of mine as a student sysadmin once found a server was part of a botnet, figured out the bots communicated via an IRC channel, joined the channel himself, lurked for a while, found the operator connect one day, and talked. The server never had anything worthwhile on it, the server was re- imaged, the school never bothered pursuing legal action as the guy was in Russia, and I'm told they've played counter-strike together sometimes since then.

>Why wouldn't Bob take advantage of the backdoor himself? It's not like he had much to lose. He'd already been ousted from ShapeShift and was already the target of an investigation.

Because he could get a bunch of money now and have someone else do most of the work probably.

>Red Flag #4. Bob demands only 50 BTC for a backdoor. ... Why not split the proceeds in half, for starters?

If Bob has Rovion do all the work with the backdoor access, why would Bob trust Rovion to split the proceeds once he's hit the motherlode? Much easier to get some money up-front and be done with it.

>Red Flag #5. Rovion pays 50 BTC for a backdoor. ... How would Bob, then, demonstrate to Rovion that he wasn't just a scammer, or a honeypot operator, but indeed had a legitimate backdoor to sell?

It probably wasn't a single 50 btc transaction. Start it slow. (Just like how Erik managed to work out some trust with Rovion later.) Bob probably offered to not boot Rovion's original access into the system for a few btc to start with, and they found somewhere to go from there.

>Red Flag #6. Rovion is a moralistic individual who not only is a thief himself, but wants to see Bob, another thief from whom Rovion supposedly obtained credentials, severely punished, for being a thief.

Seriously, this is just grasping for straws. That doesn't seem so strange. Or hell, maybe Rovion just wants to try to throw someone else under the bus morally. People trying to justify themselves is nothing new.</comment>


Bitfinex, Tether Seek Subpoenas Across US in Hunt for Missing $800M - <AUTHOR> https://www.coindesk.com/bitfinex-tether-seek-subpoenas-across-us-in-hunt-for-missing-800m <comment><USER2> Tether (USDT) is similar to fiat currency in the blockchain world. Bitfinex is the central bank. How they operate is a bit of a black box. I know for a fact that major firms indeed conduct fiat conversions through them, but you need a Hong Kong bank account.

Tether is less sketchy than people say, but the fact it _seems_ sketchy is actually a benefit for a lot of traders who worry about coins such as USDC being seized on court order (USDC retains functions in the contract to freeze funds, and maintain US physical presence). The theory that USDT is printed to pump up the BTC price is not accurate.

</comment><comment><USER3> Articles like this sure don't help drive adoption of crypto... At this point I think more has been stolen over the years then actually spent.

<comment><USER4> Reminds me of this shared on Facebook by Kumar Thangudu:

"A long form on Cryptocurrency...here we go...It took me a few years to wrap my head around this..... and I'm always learning more.....

If anyone tries to explain cryptocurrency to you without talking explicitly about money laundering or capital controls, it might cause you to miss out on the purpose of cryptocurrencies and why 2017 had a meteoric rise in value of them.

This has to start with an explanation of the world's global systems......

Planet Earth: 195 countries 180 currencies Fiatmarketcap.com 5% of cash is paper, the rest is not.

You can visualize the macro financial world as 32,220 unidirectional money pipes between countries.

Roughly speaking, there's rules assigned to each pipe that regulate: \- Frequency \- Magnitude \- Coordinates (dirty money) \- Speed

Governments don't want you to be able to seamlessly transfer and convert money between countries and convert between them because of a long litany of money laundering laws.

European banking is speedy because their governments are perfectly fine with money laundering for terrorists, cartels, and more...not because they are more sophisticated....

There's all sorts of acronyms for this and organizations centered around it.

FinCEN - financial crimes enforcement network AML - anti money laundering FATF - Financial action task force

Complying with money laundering laws for financial institutions can be so complicated that many of them pay $150K/year for an entire almanac on the subject.

It's called bankersalmanac.com which has:

625K documents 22K banking institutions worldwide represented in it.

Globally, many foreigners look at the USA as a great way to launder money because of asymmetric reporting duties to foreign governments.

If you're American and you have money in a foreign bank account, they'll report it to the IRS, the vice versa doesn't apply.

\---okay---now that you're somewhat familliar with US laws and how the banking system works---let's talk about fungible assets---and their evolution----

Now let's evaluate the last 30 years of hyped fungible assets --- these are goods that have been traded for speculative values, are globally liquid, and can overcome capital controls with ease.

\- Pokemon Cards - Counterfeiting was their demise, but it had its hype cycle stateside

\- Magic the Gathering- hard to counterfeit, easy to move

\- Second Life - there's 500M USD of in-game assets on secondlife and 60M USD moves through it annually from what I've been told.

\- Persian Rugs -- hard to transfer but one way to convert Iranian Rials to USD is via persian rugs. Persian rug dealers are actually just sophisticated money converters.

\- Art - 1T USD worth of art moved from China to the USA over the last 20 years. If you house it in a public gallery and play with antics....you can avoid taxes forever with like-kind exchanges, just don't hold the cash for longer than 180 days.

\- Luxury goods - Breitling watches etc... there's online platforms where you can trade watches that cost millions of dollars etc...

The list can go on and on, you get the point.

All of a sudden, cryptocurrency comes along.

Zero physical Globally fungible and verifiable Converts to fiat Bitcoin even has ATMs There are OTC brokers (Both shadow and compliant) which means you can convert between currencies outside of an exchange.

So then, the question is, what caused bitcoin to become so valuable in October 2017?

Xi Jinping gave a 205 minute address to the Chinese Congress that outlined his future vision of increased censorship, autocracy, and military might.

The Chinese wealthy wanted to get their money out but they could only take out $100K USD per a year.

So what did they add to the arsenal of money laundering tools?

Cryptocurrencies.

Lots of dumb retail investors like you and me are fine taking the profits.

For many of China's wealthy, if they wanted to convert 100M USD of RMB, they didn't mind taking a haircut on their wealth to get it to cold hard US dollars.

Also, once they get it to the freedom bearing USA --- it's very easy to just pay off the IRS and keep the money and wealth here.

Bitcoin and the 2K+ cryptocurrencies were a giant money laundering substrate, the catalyst was Xi Jinping.

Bitcoin leads the way because it has the most anti-money laundering, KYC, and money service business licensures. There are no mainstream alt-coin OTC desks(Over the counter.) where you can get your dogecoin converted to US.

The thing that caused the market to be toppled from the top was the implementation of anti-money laundering and identification enforcement laws on cryptocurrency exchanges.

Shapeshift.io lost ~95% of its trading volume the moment KYC and AML were implemented.

Anytime cryptocurrency rises, the only questions I ask myself are about who's trying to move money and from where.

I will always HODL a bit of it because I believe capital flight is a normal part of human behavior, and I'd like to capture the upside."

<comment><USER2> > _There are no mainstream alt-coin OTC desks_

That's completely false. Circle Trade did like 30 alts including DOGE. That's where all the money is for OTC as BTC has razor thin margins.</comment></comment></comment>


Segmenting Jazz Tracks into Beats - <AUTHOR> https://www.edwardshu.com/ml/music/2018/03/07/2018-Breaking-Jazz-Tracks-into-Beats-with-Unsupervised-Clustering.html <comment><USER2> You might find the work of Mason Bretan on this [0][1], and the video demo here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbyvbO2F7ug](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbyvbO2F7ug) relevant to your future work. Nice writeup!

[0] [https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.03789](https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.03789)

[1] [https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.04486](https://arxiv.org/abs/1706.04486)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the paper recommendations. I've definitely come across the autoencoder paper on my deep learning music project last semester. We actually have a novel model that "walks" across a VAE encoding space to produce songs. By walking in circular motions, we can produce repeating themes and rhythms. You can find it samples of it at www.deepsymphony.com

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Nice write up!

I think you might see some interesting results using a non-parametric [one that doesn't require specifying the number of clusters apriori] clustering algorithm, like mean-shift. I've never seen an adaptation for discrete data like this, but it should be possible.

You could have the same tradeoff between note-distance and time-distance.

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool, I'll definitely look into these types of algorithms. Do you have exposure to these? I'm still a 3rd year undergrad and my maths isn't strong enough yet to grok some of the crazier algorithms.

<comment><USER3> I certainly do! Mean shift ([https://spin.atomicobject.com/2015/05/26/mean- shift-clusteri...](https://spin.atomicobject.com/2015/05/26/mean-shift- clustering/)) is commonly used in image/volume segmentation, when you have CPU to burn. I've done a decent amount of work on optimization of it.

Actually I was curious enough about this novel use (and I happen to be interested in music myself, who isn't) I saw your post and thought about replicating it and emailing you results. I'd be more than happy to work with you on any non-commercial stuff. (An email address which works for me is on my HN profile, could you send me a note? Even if nothing else it doesn't make sense for all of us to spider/scrape the same datasets over and over...)

<comment><AUTHOR> sent!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> relevant: A Generative Theory of Tonal Music. [https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/generative-theory-tonal- music](https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/generative-theory-tonal-music)

</comment><comment><USER5> Cool post! Keep writing this stuff, you're good at it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! I was unsure if the blog would be a good idea or not because I have never tried writing about my projects too much. As a person who struggles to groks research papers I find blog posts that analyze them immensely helpful. I also find it helpful to summarize my thoughts for my own learning.</comment></comment>


[Talk] Kafka on ZFS: Better Living Through Filesystems - <AUTHOR> https://www.confluent.io/kafka-summit-sf18/kafka-on-zfs <comment><USER2> This really was a very good talk. It was delivered at a speed which I could keep up with and at no time felt overwhelming, but we still covered a huge amount and I learned loads!

</comment><comment><USER3> I for one enjoyed this talk.

</comment><comment><USER4> It was awesome!</comment>


My "app": Free, balanced, multi-purpose NDA form [pdf], with curator's notes - <AUTHOR> http://www.ontechnologylaw.com/2010/08/precut-nda/

<comment><AUTHOR> [FROM OP:] This was a side project; it's the first of what I hope will be a series of "read, sign, and go" baseline contract forms and curator's notes, available under a _Creative Commons_ license. Comments and other feedback are welcome, especially suggestions for other types of contract that are needed in the community.</comment>


Die Ass Poor Ugh - <AUTHOR>

Open source projects sometimes need help with branding. Any suggestions for pleasant sounding names that don't need the pronounciation and meaning explained?<p>Surely they can spend some of that sweet Kickstarter money on a domain... <comment><USER2> Diaspora is a real word. There will not be confusion like you think there will be.

<comment><AUTHOR> I know it's a real word. Now explain it to the masses on Facebook.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Maybe something related to Dandelions?</comment>


Magnolia to The Matrix: was 1999 the greatest year in modern cinema? - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/jan/10/magnolia-to-the-matrix-was-1999-the-greatest-year-in-modern-cinema <comment><USER2> Judging from the two ho-hum movies mentioned (Magnolia, Matrix) the answer is no.

</comment><comment><USER3> 1994 hands down</comment>


I'm 20, brilliant and totally lost - <AUTHOR> http://www.salon.com/mwt/col/tenn/2009/10/20/20_and_brilliant/index.html

<comment><USER4> I think this article roots to the kids narcissism - just because you have an high IQ, does not mean you will become somewhat more important, more powerful or more successful than "Joe the plumber". Let me ask you this: Was Godel happy? Was Alan Turing happy? Even though they both were brilliant and had academic success, still - their personal lives was pretty much a sad state of affairs, and depression characterized their lives. Brilliance and success is not happiness. You are 20 (!) - I was around 25 before I found my academic passion, which by that gave me a inner calm. I wish you the best of luck. But to expect every piece to fall at place at the age of 20 is plain naive, actually a bit provoking. In addition to the large tasks here in life (like education and career) the small enjoyments like coffee in the morning, listening to the birds, getting a proper workout - is what keeps you smiling, or at least, it's what makes my day swell.

<comment><USER5> Well, "Joe The Plummer" wasn't a plummer and wasn't named Joe but he was still more successful as a media sensation than this kid has been so far.

Still, I think you put a finger on the Kid's narcissism. But consider, we're getting closer to a society where being well-thought-of in High School really _seems_ like as good a guide for your chances of becoming a billionaire as anything.

I mean, Sara Palin resigns as governor of Alaska because being a manager is kind-of a hassle but still seems to be taken seriously as a potential president. Now it's starting to make sense...

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I honestly thought this was terrible advice. The problem this kid has is everyone has praised him seemingly since birth and so he thinks everything is simple. The mere fact that one teacher saying his dream was silly could throw his life into chaos shows he's underprepared for the world.

In fact, the only reason he seems to feel lost is because he doesn't stick with anything beyond the initial thrill.

Rather than narcissisticly wandering the world and becoming even further ingrained in this "do what's easy" philosophy I say jump into the real world. Join a startup and realize the joy of working against insurmoutable odds. Where not only do people call your dream silly but a lot of them won't even meet with you to hear you out.

Then he'll get enough backbone to pursue his own dreams

<comment><USER7> The majority of startups also don't stick with anything beyond the initial thrill. That's something you have to learn for yourself: no external organization is going to hand it to you.

When I started actually completing projects (and I was older than this guy is), it was largely _because_ I'd tried a bunch of things in superficial depth and found that they weren't all that satisfying. I bounced from a physics major to philosophy to sociology back to physics and finally ended up with a CS degree. I tried out orchestra and guitar and bass and taiko and sailing and fanfiction and sci-fi/fantasy and programming as hobbies. I "learned" dozens of programming languages by website & academic paper before actually settling down to write some code. I needed that experience to figure out for myself what I really considered important and was willing to put the time into learning well.

<comment><USER8> ha, myself a physics to economics to cognitive science major early in college, now settling in on Computer Science to sit down, gear down, and actually MAKE some stuff.

In the short term, it's a financial drain to spend extra time during your college years to try everything that interests you. But in the long run... WHO CARES. Better to spend a couple years finding yourself in your early 20s than having a mid-life crisis when you're 40.

<comment><USER9> I hate to tell you this but ... most people do both :) Don't think of them as crises, though, because they're not - they're just what it feels like to outgrow your life. The more often it happens, the more you're growing, so take heart in that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> What good are video games? Since I also always wanted to create them (and still haven't created a great one, just small ones): for me I think they are part of a greater quest against loneliness. Sure, creating a vaccine would be nice, but loneliness is also a killer (I don't have numbers, but it is not only suicides - also older people who just die when their spouses die and so on). Maybe they are not for everyone, but games were important for me in certain stages of my life - they helped provide save havens in times of emotional turmoil, they helped to get together and connect with people, and so on.

Maybe games are not the best cure against loneliness, or the only one. Maybe I should have just become a therapist. On the other hand, maybe one day my game will help some other scientist over a depression and enable him to finish working on that vaccine.

I don't subscribe to the notion that only vaccines are "really important" - even stupid things like fashion play a part in the bigger picture. Ultimately, one has to ask what are we living for. Sure, somebody has to create those vaccines to enable us to live on, but working on the question on what to live for matters, too - otherwise, why not just die.

<comment><USER11> Video games fill the role that any art does. They help us find ourselves and fill us with a static strength that we can't get from people, who are constantly changing as fast as we are.

I've actually always had the opposite reaction as that teacher in the article. I've never felt interested in science or technological process. It fascinates me, but I shudder at the thought of spending my life dedicated to it. I want messier things to spend my life achieving. But then, I also identify a lot with the person that wrote this, though I don't feel as beaten as he does, so this might not be a particularly unique perspective on the matter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I was above average intelligence in a school with a slightly below average age group. As a result I stood intellectually taller than my peers and breezed through.

I was brought up with my parents doting on me telling me I was brilliant and destined to great things.

As a result I was a little shit at 18.

It was university that brought me crashing down, gave me social skills, got me laid and focused my education. But that was only by luck (I changed course at the last minute - my original choice would have been easy as school).

However it never found me a purpose or passion (beyond an enjoyment of "hacking" and programming). I left university a much nicer person but just as lost.

Now it's only 18 months later but I have a real serious career and a passion and am doing pretty good. Again that was total luck.

Sounds like this guy is just getting to the "lost" section; don't worry it will figure itself out. It might take a couple of years (I know a guy who it took till about 31 to really sort out what he wanted). But the fact he is _asking_ means he is on the right path.

Best advice I believe you can give people like that is dont think too far ahead - I still want to be a millionaire playboy at 30 with 10's of businesses behind me. But thankfully now I know that is just a dream to help drive me to whatever success I do end up with. It might well be as good as that - <USER2> not. But hell, ill bumble along ok regardless :)

Or in summary: this shit generally works itself out so long as you work hard on the moment in hand.

EDIT: I see a few people trashing the armed forces option. I couldn't disagree more. If you make the decision in the right way and understand what your signing up too it could be a great experience. No need to worry about your ling term future for the moment :)

</comment><comment><USER9> Dear Tired and Lost,

Welcome to your life. You are the latest man in a chain many thousands of years long to wake from his deep sleep and discover that he is incomplete without a purpose.

First, the bad news: the pain won't go away by itself. It will get worse, like a constant implosion dissolving your heart from within. During sex and danger the pain may abate - and then come back, strong as before. Be warned, though; ignored for too long, the pain can numb. Then your purpose has abandoned you, and you are lost.

The good news: if you find your purpose and live it, the pain will go away. As I said, you are the latest inheritor of this burden - many have walked this road before you. They have left you way markers - the world's great spiritual traditions - to help you find your path.

You must open yourself profoundly to the world around you. Find a teacher, meditate deeply, question incessantly. Test yourself at every opportunity. Find your true purpose, and give yourself completely. Do so, and you may be enlightened, suffused with joy at the wonders that have always surrounded you. Fail, and die an anonymous end to a vacant life.

Happy hunting.

</comment><comment><USER13> This kid's real problem is [insert projection here].

<comment><USER14> [if you think you're brilliant, you're probably not. The most brilliant people I know tend not to think of themselves in terms of brilliance.]

<comment><USER15> No, they're just smart enough to know that certain signals don't help them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Lucky you! I was 20, brilliant and totally lost. Now I'm 36...

<comment><USER17> To quote the famous (unfortunately hoax) Vonnegut speech:

 _Don't feel guilty if you don't know what you want to do with your life. The most interesting people I know didn't know at 22 what they wanted to do with their lives. Some of the most interesting 40-year-olds I know still don't._

<comment><USER18> On the other hand, we have John Milton lamenting his 23rd birthday (<http://www.luminarium.org/sevenlit/milton/sonnet7.htm>):

      HOW soon hath time, the subtle thief of youth,
        Stolen on his wing my three and twentieth year!
        My hasting days fly on with full career,
        But my late spring no bud or blossom sheweth.

      Perhaps my semblance might deceive the truth,
        That I to manhood am arrived so near,
        And inward ripeness doth much less appear
        That some more timely happy spirits indueth.

      Yet be it less or more, or soon or slow,
        It shall be still in strictest measure even
        To that same lot however mean or high,

      Toward which time leads me and the will of heaven.
        All is, if I have grace to use it so,
        As ever in my great taskmaster's eye.

<comment><USER17> 23 could be a bona fide mid-life crisis in the 17th century :)

<comment><USER19> A 23 year old in the 17th century would expect to live nearly as long as a 23 year old today- the depressed life expectancy statistics are largely due to the fact that 3 out of 4 children died before they hit the age of five.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expectancy>

<comment><USER20> What you say about life expectancy at birth is true, but it's also true that people who made it to adulthood didn't live nearly as long. I'd guess the average life expectancy of a 23 year old in 17th century England was under 60.

<comment><USER7> You don't have to guess if you're willing to move a little forward in time:

<http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html>

So the average 20 year old in 1850 could expect to live an additional 40 years, to roughly age 60. The curve started flattening after WW1 and continued doing so until around the 70s and 80s.

<comment><USER19> Rome wasn't much worse off- a 20 year old would expect to hit 54.

Here's hoping for the hockey stick.

<http://www.utexas.edu/depts/classics/documents/Life.html>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Cary should have saved his time and just said "join the navy". I'm not advocating military service. But if this student doesn't want to stay where he is, doesn't know what he wants to do and doesn't have the means to relocate, it's probably the most stable situation to let him think about his/her own future.

Just saying...

3 years on a boat or sub and he'll know EXACTLY what he wants to do (and will have a lot more means to act upon it).

<comment><USER22> The disaster of that plan is you may very well figure it out 3 months in, and then have a multi-year effectively prison sentence to serve out.

I have deep respect for those who do serve. I just don't think that recommending it as some kind of default "until you figure it out" is remotely a good idea.

<comment><USER23> But when it really comes down to it, isn't almost anything a good thing to do "until you figure it out?"

The lessons we learn are to be found everywhere. Hindsight makes me laugh at how so many of my "lessons" were around me at all times, in even the most mundane things!

I keep forgetting that for me, it's all about the journey, not the destination.

<comment><USER7> I'd say it's much better to do things you can get out of "until you figure it out", because figuring it out often requires going down many blind alleys, and it's nice to be able to turn around and go back if you don't like one.

If I had to give advice to struggling young college grads who don't yet know what they want to do with their life, it'd be _take a job_. Any job, though you should preference ones that will expose you to new ideas and talented people. Go as far as you can with it, then if it's not working out, take another job. Repeat until you have a fair picture of what the working world is like, then start a company. It'll fail (first startups always do), but by then you should have a good idea of what you really want to do, so you can take _the_ job that will most help you achieve that, and start another company a few years down the road.

Unfortunately, most directionless people either go to grad school or join the military, which are about the two worst things you can do. Because both are fairly hard to get out of, and if you find out 3 months in that it's not what you really want, the time spent in them is basically a big sunk cost.

<comment><USER23> What about the lesson learned from commitment? That promises that have strings attached are important enough to require longer than normal consideration?

Although it could very well be considered a school of hard knocks, learning about x Year commitments at a younger age may help tremendously for same or larger commitments later in life (starting companies, buying a house, committing to a relationship, etc.).

If I choose something I know I can get out of fairly easily, I may not give it enough time to see it work, because I have an easy out.

(Insert reference to military leaders who have cut off their own forces' abilities to retreat here).

<comment><USER7> I think the lesson learned from commitment is very important, but I'm not sure that many 22-year-olds are in a position to learn that lesson.

The most valuable lesson I learned in college was in sticking it out and getting my degree even after it became apparent that I'd royally screwed things up and the administration was not going to let me graduate. However, had that lesson come a semester earlier, I would've said "To hell with it" and dropped out, 3.5 years and $100K sunk cost be damned. In fact, I _did_ have a chance to learn that lesson 2 years prior, the _first_ time I failed a physics course and considered dropping the major (and dropping out), and obviously didn't then.

For every person who emerges with their military service or Ph.D saying "It made me a stronger person," there're a bunch more that say "The government fucked me over" or "My liberal arts education made me utterly unemployable" or "I guess I'm just not cut out to be a researcher." You just don't hear about them, or when you do, you say "It's their own damn fault for not following through."

The same goes for military leaders who cut off their own forces' ability to retreat. You hear about the ones where glorious victories were achieved against all odds. You don't hear about the ones where the forces were slaughtered down to a man for nothing. (Or occasionally you do, and point and laugh at their arrogance, eg. Custer's Last Stand.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Sounds like typical depression setting in, something he's probably unaware that he's been fighting for years. Sometimes your problems aren't new and unique (no matter how 'brilliant' you are), and it can benefit you to reach out to people whom you may not think can help you at first.

<comment><USER11> Is that really depression? I think that what a lot of us confuse for depression is really contentment. This guy is happy to live his life as it is, but for the worry that he _ought_ to have a drive.

<comment><USER25> I would suggest that if he's worried, he's not content.

<comment><USER11> The question is where worry comes from. Sometimes there's an external force contributing to worry, like having to pay rent or living in an apartment with a rabid bulldog. Other times, the worry comes from something inside, like wondering why you don't go out as much as other people or why your house isn't bigger. The internal worries are ones you can fight without necessarily changing your life, because they're fictions in some way.

In this case, he's been told that he isn't happy unless he's feeling a certain way, and now that he's not feeling that certain way, he decides he must be unhappy. The problem's circular.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> This article is a good in conjunction with last week's "I Was Told I Was Very Smart." <http://theferrett.livejournal.com/1346357.html>

An interesting trend in those labeled remarkably intelligent is a tendency toward stymied feeling of self-worth.

<comment><USER21> There's a lot of research available now in education that says that positive reinforcement works, but not when it's talking about intelligence.

For example, students are much better off when you say, "you worked so hard on that project, it really shows that you cared about what you were doing" as opposed to "your project was great, you are so smart".

Children understand the difference between hard work and smarts (where smarts are natural ability and hard work is a virtue).

Later in life those students that were positively reinforced for working hard are better off than those that were simply told they were smart. Which is a nice reference to what it takes to be a startup founder (smarts are great, but only when paired with strong work ethic. However a strong work ethic and tenacity could overcome a natural gap in ability).

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> At least he recognizes he's lost now, when there's plenty of time ahead to fix it. A lot of people won't see it for another 30 years.

<comment><USER5> Oh, but he also "recognizes" that he's brilliant, the two realization should exactly cancel each other out...

<comment><USER28> Totally agree. Being academically successful is one thing while leading the life you want is another. Most average people figure out how they fit in our social order ok. I think the appropriate quip would be "Welcome to the real world, now get off my lawn!" Move on, nothing new here.

<comment><USER29> He's got a step on me. I was academically unsuccessful and thought I was brilliant. But the truth is whether you are brilliant or not is meaningless. Only how hard you try really matters.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> This happened to me (although I was not brilliant). My social awareness (or whatever you might want to call it) only developed when I started university, and it made me look at what I was studying with disgust. Having said that, I think the advice given by Salon sucks. There is no "finding yourself" this is bullshit, there is only "making yourself". You have to choose and you have to throw yourself after your choices, there is no way to think yourself into life.

I always liked this Baudrillard quote: "The modern ideal is to make your life what you want it to be. In reality, that is what you do when there's no other solution."

<comment><USER31> Could I ask what path you ended up making for yourself, and any insights you had on the way to discovering that particular direction?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> The conflation of doing well in school and brilliance is amusing.

Don't most people figure out the distinction in HS?

<comment><USER5> It depends on how "brilliant" they are!

This whole thread is an endless font for quip abuse, mod me down quickly so I learn my lesson...

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> See: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarter-life_crisis>

<comment><USER33> There's a crisis brewing every quarter year of your life, if you let them be your crisis. There are some crisis that need intervention and help but whatever happened to a simple kick on the butt to move ahead and go do something useful?

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> When asked them what they want to become, a number of nerdy boys I know (cousins, nephews, etc.) have answered "I want to make video games!". Knowing that it is a competitive subfield of an already-competitive IT industry, I always encouraged them to look for alternatives.

The guy should get a physical. He may have low thyroid, anemia, etc. The cure may be as simple as taking an iron tablet occasionally.

</comment><comment><USER35> I think one can't say to himself he is brilliant, this is so dangerous.

My father tells me how much surprised it is when he sees back their school mates,now that he is retired, they expected the brilliant people in class to success.

This is what really happened:

The brilliant people(3 hipersmart guys) took a normal job and lived a normal live. People that had enormous problems in school, became presidents of big companies, made their own restaurants chains,got political power, became famous as scientific researchers...

Wow: Nobody would have expected that!!

I think those brilliant people were very good at learning and memorizing when the answer is known, but not so good facing risk and failure, fighting against unknown.

PS: There was a time I got 10 over 10 score in some exams like math when a lot of people didn't pass. I felt great(and superior) about being considered intelligent, but at the same I felt frightened about losing my position, so I stooped asking stupid questions (what would they think about me).

Later I discovered I love asking stupid questions, and I love testing new things, often it goes bad, so I felt liberated making enough grades and not being ultrasmart, but feeling this stupid man can kick some smart asses if I work hard.

<comment><USER36> "People that had enormous problems in school, became presidents of big companies, made their own restaurants chains,got political power, became famous as scientific researchers..."

I doubt this very much.

<comment><USER35> Well, maybe it sounds like when I say "had enormous problems" that they didn't pass courses, or were stupid, they passed(with great pain through) and they were not, but I'm talking about boarding school with military discipline(and physical punishments) in Europe.

I think is difficult to understand this, specially for american people.

The fact that some people don't quite understand is that making a successful restaurant or company is as difficult or more difficult that study and fill an exam.

<comment><USER36> Americans understand your last line. In America, money is far more important to the vast majority of people than education. I'm pretty sure that's one of the reasons Euros use to feel above Americans. Education starts becoming important to how people perceive you when you're near upper middle class or above. And even then your success is more important.

When you say all these people have done all those successful things, are you talking about the entire history of your school? I couldn't understand if that is what you were talking about or if you were saying all those accomplishments happened with people who were in school as the same time as you (this is what I doubt).

<comment><USER35> No, it was not my schoolmates, it was my father's ones, as I wrote before.

Yeah, american people are different to european, here and in asia education (and specially memorization) is very important. Some american people will find it difficult to understand that in Spain you could get to be public worker(and can't be fired) just making an exam.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Given society's strict schedule for youth, the timing of getting lost is key. Around college graduation time is a great time to get lost. Your drive has carried you through 17 years of education and you are free to find yourself at that point. Getting lost in junior high, like I did, is just bad timing. High School and college become a holding pattern in which you get lazier and lazier. Luckily it doesn't last forever.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> This guy writes a weekly-ish advice column for Salon. I'm not usually an advice column reader (nor a salon one), but the dude has a way with words and interesting perspective (ex-rocker alcoholic turned writer recovering addict)

</comment><comment><USER38> Having gone through a similar phase recently, I can relate a lot to this guy. In my case, I was just plain lazy and irresponsible. For me, sitting about and wondering about 'the purpose' was a way of justifying not working in my grad courses. How many people really do manage to find their purpose in life? I would take SamAtt's insurmountable odds and extend them to every second of life. In all the moments that you have till death, you can do so many things, sitting and moping should just feel wrong. (I wish I followed my own advice.) I don't know the guy, but I feel such thoughts arise from an easy-going and leisurely life. People growing up with uncertain futures and/or troubled circumstances/times (in the so-called Third World) seem to be much clearer about what to do. Making meaning of your life is much easier when you have a hungry family to feed back home. You can't be bothered about your 'true calling' then. I don't know which case is better for an individual's peace of mind. Being more aware of one's mortality can help, perhaps.

</comment><comment><USER39> It would seem to me this young man has already set the gears into motion by knowing he doesn't have the answers and by making an effort to question his life. Many of the responses in here speak so matter-of-fact-ly that one person's opinion is right or wrong, but the truth is, no one knows the secrets behind what makes for a good life.

Life happens and it's all about how to take it in. Be it thrusting yourself into hard, difficult situations or taking it easy to learn and enjoy the subtle nuances of life. There is a particular equifinality in life where the same solution can be derived through different approaches. No one here is in the right or the wrong.

My personal opinion is that "getting lost" is less the solution, but rather the gentleman should "stay open," if you will. Wandering is merely one action that tends to incur openness, but it may or may not be the correct approach for any one person in particular. Learning to appreciate life is what he's learning "the hard way" currently and I would venture to say he'll experience that 'click' in his head sooner than his doomsday-ridden mind is anticipating.

Realizing how fortunate we all are to be here in this cultivated "world" of intellectualism--of the attitude we all have developed through our own stories similar to this boy's--discussing the merits of self-realization (who I am) the requisites of self-actualization (what I can do) is what is important here. It's quite the privilege.

</comment><comment><USER40> I think his advice is: find facts. You can't make decisions without facts - <USER3> least, not well-informed ones. Facts about the world and facts about you. Facts that aren't written anywhere. Things you can only learn by experiencing them. Know thyself.

</comment><comment><USER41> "You cannot catch what you do not drop."

I'd never seen that before, what a great quote.

<comment><USER42> What if someone threw you something?

<comment><USER41> Sorry, I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

But obviously the quote's saying that if you're handed everything it means nothing. But if you lose it and have to fight to regain it, you learn its true value.

<comment><USER40> ah, like the prodigal son.

(I used to wonder if "prodigal" was a biblical term; but it's just related to the word "prodigious". However, I don't know which came first.)

<comment><USER43> Well, it's a biblical reference. 'Roast the fatted calf when the prodigal son returns.' At least, that's what Ringo and Weber's "We Few" claims... ah, I love me my MilSciFic :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I find that having a quality is inversely proportional to how often you talk about it.

<comment><USER45> I hate to be pedantic, but I think "negatively correlated" would be more correct. Even though people know what you mean, it gives the phrase less meaning in case you meant to use the technical definition.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> You need something to propel you forward. Declaring that you're brilliant after you accomplish something is sometimes fun, but feeling that you're brilliant 24/7 is like putting a brick wall in front of you.

People don't often realize that most experiences, and feelings, are common; but, it is the lack of skill to communicate that makes us feel lonely.

I say, learn to communicate well. And be around people who know how to communicate well. I think this is very important to a person's happiness. Especially people who are, indeed, above average -- perhaps even for their sanity.

</comment><comment><USER47> Not to be too literal, but to answer the kid's question, "What are games good for?" Raph Koster's A Theory of Fun for Game Design sets out to answer just this. Essentially his argument boils down to that games are made to teach us things, that they can be used for amusement, and that they allow us to have experiences that paintings, film, or music don't have the capacity to deliver.

<comment><USER48> Actually games are at least as useful as movies. And when a talented guy wants to be a director or actor, nobody tells him that it's nonsense and he should do something useful instead. So this was not fair from the teacher.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> "I'm learning to play the guitar, I draw, I read, I think, but I don't feel I exist.As if my biggest priority in life were enjoying it, learning to live it. But I want to do something else, man. I want to have a voice."

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohemianism>

</comment><comment><USER50> There's no such thing as being brilliant. You can _do_ brilliant things. If you feel you have a talent that other people don't then pursue that talent. That's what 'brilliant' people do.

If all you have is good grades and no ambition, you're not brilliant, you're an idiot. Now start doing something about it.

</comment><comment><USER51> Its time to say "Hello World".

</comment><comment><USER52> The cause of this acquired imbalance, the woman. :D

</comment><comment><USER53> my advice would have been: think harder

<comment><USER53> I wasn't being flip. His head is full of mush and delusions. He is unsatisfied with his academic success, girls, and hobbies because they do not cast him as some kind of mythic hero. He needs to get rid of that illusion. Throwing himself into the army or a startup company would just be feeding it. Once he stops doing things only to aggrandize his self-concept, he might find something he actually finds interesting or beautiful and from that will spring endless energy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> The 'I want to make video games' for a living is like hearing a teen girl enthusiastically brag about having great style sense and wanting to be a fashion designer or a poet because the things she writes are 'deep'(depressed with loaded words). These statements are so common it can feel disgusting. The counterstrike neckbeards of my generation would always go into CS half assed, learn java and usually not do it as a hobby. The new WOW generation are doing the same thing now. If someone wants to be a game programmer I think it's better to have a passion for programming and math first rather than a passion of games. As far as programming the internet is a better resource than any school could be. As far as game companies hiring people I think there's a better chance in getting a job if you're really great at art and creating environments. People have always been full of shit, but the only one you can blame for letting it affect you is you.

<comment><USER55> Your analogy falls short at the end there...

A teenage girl bragging about her fashion sense or poetic style does not directly equate to the statement 'I want to make video games'. Unless, of course, you are implying that anyone who makes that statement has already tried and failed at creating successful video games and are now doomed and hopeless before they even hit the campus floor (as I am assuming that teenage girl is because, well...her poems suck).

I wanted to make video games. I went to a school specifically for that. I made it halfway through. The reality (to me, at least) was that the industry was just not worth it. The average lifespan of a game developer is 5 years...before total burnout ensues, and you are left entirely drained, hopefully with some bank though. But above all that, I decided to drop out because of a very simple and fundamental reason: It took all the mystery out of games...the X-factor, if you will.

This is not just refined to games of course...I feel that this happens all over the place, and the simplest answer as to why could just be that we as humans LOVE to learn. Just the prospect of learning some new language or about a new technology can spike a persons motivation to new heights, even if it is short-lived...we keep going.

<comment><USER56> I'm 32. I still want to make videogames but I don't want to work for Shit-A. I want to hole up in a log cabin somewhere and code till my eyes ache. Like Jeff Minter. (I seem to recall a comment from John Carmack along similar lines when he wanted to try a rendering technique: something like "I did what I normally do. I locked myself in a hotel room for three days and coded it up.")

Oh well. Until I have that log cabin in the woods my day job involves robot submarines, which is as awesome as it sounds.

<comment><USER57> I want a robot submarine. That runs Linux. That I can script in Python. Would your day job by any chance involve making/selling those? :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> Relax, all the really painful things starts after 35 for a man afrer 25 for a woman =)

</comment><comment><USER59> The women did it to him, I've said it before, and i'm going to say it again. If you want to be king of productivity, avoid girls.

<comment><USER11> Procreation isn't productive?

<comment><USER60> <http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1240>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> The dude is not nearly as brilliant as he thinks he is. I've seen better.

<comment><USER11> You don't know him. Don't be an ass.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> Did that guy just complain about being able to own/drive a Ferrari?

</comment><comment><USER63> He doesn't sound all that brilliant to me. Anyone who gives up just because someone tells them that their ambition is worthless is certainly not a true visionary. People who really are brilliant are usually knocked back many times before they have their first success.

<comment><USER64> An interesting argument, but one with which I don't agree. To give up on something because someone else says its undoable is certainly un-brilliant; but I can understand being demotivated by someone's argument that your goal is worthless.

Recall that the guy is in South America, where many millions of people still live in the most grinding poverty; I can understand why a teacher would argue that since videogames are toys for rich kids, it's self-indulgent to devote oneself to such a thing when only a day's journey from the university (or maybe less) there are people with no clean water, access to medicine, etc. Now, I actually think a South American videogame compny would be a fine thing in the bigger context: it would create jobs, diversify the economy, could lead to new educational tools and so on. Videogames certainly stimulated my interest in computers and technology and still do. But while he may be brilliant enough to become a fine game programmer/designer/businessman, I can't blame him for being socially and economically immature enough that he's not able to see how it all fits together.

so my answer would be 'you love video games? Then make some, the world needs better games, because games can be powerful learning tools'.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> The advice given is probably worthless. The student obviously has issues with authority, his goals being dependent on the validation of others etc yet that isn't even discussed. It's basically a generic "feeling lost is good for a while" answer, which every smart 20-year old should be able to give himself.</comment>


Facebook to open-source AI hardware design - <AUTHOR> https://code.facebook.com/posts/1687861518126048/facebook-to-open-source-ai-hardware-design/ <comment><USER2> I'm glad they're open-sourcing this, but I have to say that making 8 GPUs work together is not that big of a deal. Companies like Cirrascale are making up to 16 GPUs scale linearly with a blade.

<comment><USER3> It's irrelevant if you can't balance the cost, CPU, shared DRAM, and - possibly most importantly - PCIe and network connectivity in and out of it. A typical mid-range Intel Xeon has 40 PCIe lanes. A high-end GPU requires 16. You can do the math. Facebook has decided upon a balance that works for them and their workloads; it's quite likely that going to 16 GPUs in the chassis resulted in overall worse utilization because of PCIe bandwidth limits, or socket and QPI count, etc. What's a big deal is someone having gone and done a lot of work to calculate and experiment with finding a balanced design that's also cost-effective and easy to maintain.

<comment><USER4> Actually the PCI express topology is configurable, which is one of the innovations. You can put all 8 gpus on a single CPU bus or have 4 on each CPU (but have to use QPI between them)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _Big Sur is twice as fast as our previous generation, which means we can train twice as fast and explore networks twice as large._

Can a machine learning expert comment on this claim? There are many domains in computing where doubling your compute power does _not_ halve your execution time, or allow you to double the size of your input. (For example, your algorithms are worse than O(n), or you have hardware communication bottlenecks.)

<comment><USER4> Author here - in this case we are talking mostly about ~halving the time of a single minibatch in training a variety of standard neural networks. That type of training tends to be very hard to distribute. The servers also have 8 gpus in a single host, which is an additional performance boost and isn't included in the 2x above.

<comment><USER6> I'm curious why this claim (distributed minibatch is hard) continues to be repeated. Am I misreading the state-of-the-art? There was a paper at Interspeech this year [0] where Amazon showed excellent scaling (54X speed up when distributed across 80 nodes) without loss of accuracy.

[0] [http://www.nikkostrom.com/publications/interspeech2015/strom...](http://www.nikkostrom.com/publications/interspeech2015/strom_interspeech2015.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Can we please not call open sourcing a build plan of off the shelf components, open-source "hardware design". I don't think backblaze called their case designs open source hardware. It just doesn't fit when we have open source circuit board designs. How about open-source build specification instead?

<comment><USER8> I think you are completely underestimating (or misunderstanding) what this is.

The Open Compute designs (which is where this will end up) aren't just a list of parts. They include things like blueprints for custom chassis, circuit boards for power supplies and even designs for solid state storage devices[1][2][3]. The also include the source code for custom management software[4].

While it is true that they don't generally design their own logic boards, it is quite a long way from a list of parts.

 _I don 't think backblaze called their case designs open source hardware._

You'd be wrong about that: _This new Storage Pod performs four times faster, is simpler to assemble, and delivers our lowest cost per gigabyte of data storage yet. And, once again, it's open source._ [5]

I think "open source" is completely appropriate here, and to be honest I don't quite understand your objection.

[1] [http://www.opencompute.org/wiki/Server/SpecsAndDesigns](http://www.opencompute.org/wiki/Server/SpecsAndDesigns)

[2] [http://www.opencompute.org/projects/chassis/](http://www.opencompute.org/projects/chassis/)

[3] [http://www.opencompute.org/projects/power- supply/](http://www.opencompute.org/projects/power-supply/)

[4] [http://www.opencompute.org/projects/hardware- management/](http://www.opencompute.org/projects/hardware-management/)

[5] [https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-storage- pod-4/](https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-storage-pod-4/)

<comment><USER7> I wasn't saying it shouldn't be called "open source". I was saying it shouldn't be called open source "hardware design".

<comment><USER9> Hardware design isn't limited to gates, PCB traces and ASICs. This seems remarkably like hardware design to me.

As much as you might not agree, plans for building a birdhouse constitute hardware design too.

<comment><USER10> Plans for building a birdhouse are completely incomparable to what the parent is talking about. This would be like me having an "open source" birdhouse design where the birdhouse is made of glued-together Intel™ processors.

Sure I've opened the schematics, but unlike a birdhouse made from wood you have zero chance of being able to build one from scratch on your own, or sourcing the Intel™ processors from another vendor.

This is the same reason for why if I release the binary of a program produced with a secret compiler as "open source" I'll be laughed at, it completely goes against the spirit of the thing, which is that anyone should be able to change any part of the thing I've released.

It's good that they're doing this. But it's completely incomparable to actual fully open source hardware.

<comment><USER8> Open source gives you the ability to fork the design. An Open Source birdhouse made of Intel processors could be forked and made from AMD ones.

 _Sure I 've opened the schematics, but unlike a birdhouse made from wood you have zero chance of being able to build one from scratch on your own, or sourcing the Intel™ processors from another vendor._

This is some kind of confluence of the values of FSF captial-F "Free" style software with the more pragmatic goals associated with open source.

<comment><USER10> We've eclipsed the usefulness of this birdhouse analogy, but suffice to say being able to replace one proprietary commercial vendor with another doesn't make something open source.

        > This is some kind of confluence of the values of
        > FSF captial-F "Free" style software with the more
        > pragmatic goals associated with open source.

Well, pragmatically, if you needed to alter the hardware of this "open source" hardware what percentage of the total electronic complexity would you be working with? I'm going to aim for a conservative one-digit percentile.

There's a real and unambiguous line to be drawn in the sand here. If you get "open source" plans for hardware that you can't replicate with third-party fabrication & your own materials it's not open source. It's just a recipe for assembling commercial proprietary components.

It's awesome that people publish those recipes, but don't call it open source hardware and dilute the meaning of hardware that is genuinely open.

<comment><USER8> Don't conflate 'electonic' with being the only valuable thing here.

Some of the most active areas of research in data center design are around the mechanical design to maximize cooling.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> More at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10712195](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10712195).

</comment><comment><USER12> How come they aim for GPU technology rather than for neuromorphic computing ASICs?

<comment><USER13> Contrary to what you might read in puff pieces from IBM PR, all existing "neuromorphic" hardware is terrible. The neural nets that work don't look anything like the brain, and neural nets that look like the brain don't work.

People constructing neural nets that look like the brain are engaged in cargo cult science, because the truth is we have no idea yet how the brain works and attempting to imitate it without knowing that is doomed to failure.

<comment><USER14> I'm curious to hear your opinions on Numenta's work on emulating parts of the neocortex.

<comment><USER15> A good measure of any of the techniques are the results. We see record object recognition and speech recognition results. How many of these results are from Numenta or IBM neomorphic chips? Most successes have been on deep learning architectures over GPUs (and large datasets). While these fancy architectures may have their applications, they have nothing to do with recent advancements in last 3 years.

<comment><USER16> To be fair, the goal of those new computing architectures is not to advance algorithms. That at best is a side benefit.

Those algorithmic performance improvements seen in DNN have come from improved datasets and training. Numenta and IBM arent focusing on training AFAIK. Google's Quantum Annealing [0] is the only hardware I'm aware of focused on training, although there are rumors Nervana Systems may produce something [1]. I'm sure there are others; accelerating training of DNN isnt a particularly new idea.

The goal of these other computing architectures is typically to provide lower power, higher frequency/lower latency, or smaller form factor execution of trained models, but there is a question of how much value they can provide over more conventional chips to be worth the chip design costs.

However without these architectures becoming as mainstream as say a GPU, I think we will continue to see advances come from the typical everyday computer. The ML community seems to be much more democratic than others.

[0] [http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2015/12/when-can- quantum-...](http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2015/12/when-can-quantum- annealing-win.html)

[1] [http://www.nervanasys.com/about/](http://www.nervanasys.com/about/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Is this a machine with GPUs? You can order a similar looking design from acmemicro since last 4 years atleast?

<comment><USER17> Do you think there might be a reason that Facebook invested time and money in to producing this design, rather than buying from acmemicro?

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Good work FB on another great deliverable for open HW configurations and improved datacenter design! :)

</comment><comment><USER19> I was hoping it was the AI that was designing the hardware.</comment>


Emacs Power: remote servers and shell commands - <AUTHOR> http://gregorygrubbs.com/wordpress/emacs-power-remote-servers-and-shell-commands/

<comment><USER2> I have never gotten TRAMP to work. I just use sshfs, which is much easier to use. ("sshfs user@host:~ my_home_at_host")

I will also point out that eshell and ansi-term are much better shells for use inside emacs. I used ansi-term for a long time, but gradually weaned myself off bash and into eshell. Now I can write "shell commands" as (loop) invocations. :)

<comment><USER3> That's strange. I never had problems with tramp!

<comment><USER2> Yeah, it is strange. I have seen other people use it successfully... but there must be something about my config that is strange... it connects OK, but opening files often times out or they show up truncated.

sshfs just works better. (+1 for abstraction.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> In my experience, TRAMP is unbearably slow.

<comment><USER3> my experience tells that over ftp it can be very slow, but over ssh it is fine.

<comment><USER4> I was referring to ssh.</comment></comment></comment>


Carol Dweck Revisits the 'Growth Mindset' - <AUTHOR> http://qz.com/587811/stanford-professor-who-pioneered-praising-effort-sees-false-praise-everywhere/ <comment><USER2> Thanks for posting this follow-up on Dweck's research. I had earlier read the Education Week version of this report (but that is now behind a paywall for most readers), so I'm glad to see that Quartz is also publishing about Dweck's follow-up research.

As a teacher, I find that the number-one thing that too many learners in school settings need to learn is that just because a learning task feels hard, that doesn't mean that they should stop trying to learn. That's especially important in mathematics.[1] "Problems worthy of attack, prove their worth by hitting back,"[2] so anyone who is still learning-problem-solving will have to show courage while feeling stupid many times along the way. Most school lessons (especially in mathematics, these days) are appallingly easy, and don't help learners learn how to deal with the frustration of being stuck while solving a problem.

As a parent, I've learned how hard it can be to get this message through to children. It works best if you start VERY young. My oldest son, a hacker, told me during his last visit to see us at the home where he grew up that he just recently finished reading Dweck's original 2006 book _Mindset: The New Psychology of Success_.[3] He remarked that he could have saved himself a lot of learning by crashing and burning repeatedly if he had read it sooner. I smiled, because I remember recommending the book to him soon after it was published, but the fact that he tried again after the first few dozen times that he crashed and burned and never gave up showed that he picked up the key part of the book's message years ago. By contrast, growth mindset thinking is second nature to our daughter, eleven years younger than he is. She has heard about it literally for as long as she can remember.

[1] [https://www.facebook.com/MathCircles/posts/171401072987768](https://www.facebook.com/MathCircles/posts/171401072987768)

[2] [https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Piet_Hein](https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Piet_Hein)

[3] [http://mindsetonline.com/](http://mindsetonline.com/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Interesting read, but I got to say that getting it right isn't easy. I do struggle with my kids to find the right approach. Sometimes I can see my kids keep trying but with no effort because I just told them to not give up. There is a sort of defiance. Then you know it is a failure.

I think effort usually works best when it comes with inspiration and want. People who do something a lot because they enjoy it will advance faster than people who do something a lot because they are just told to do it a lot.

But what I think the growth mindset can help with is to make kids not so afraid of failing and not getting stuff or make them seek bigger challenges.

My son was given 3 texts of different difficulty level at school. He didn't get why he should pick the longer more complicated one. We read through the simple one and I told him, "You made no mistakes reading this. That isn't really good. That means this is TOO EASY for you. You are not learning anything reading this. You are only learning when it is a bit difficult and you make mistakes. I think you should read the harder text. Don't worry about making mistakes. You are supposed to do that. That is what learning is about."

That "speech" did seem to have some effect. It took down a sort of mental barrier where he felt secure and comfortable about texts he found easy to read.

I also try to point out to him when other kids are good at something. I tell him, Peter is really good at that. He must have practiced a lot to get that good.

Although I am very well aware of many skills being inherent, I don't want him to think that skills are completely intrinsic to people.

Ultimately there is only so much you can do. You can make kids not afraid of trying, but you can't make them enjoy something they really aren't interested in.

<comment><USER4>
        I also try to point out to him when other kids are good
        at something. I tell him, Peter is really good at that.
        He must have practiced a lot to get that good.

I think this can backfire (with them hearing "why are you not as good as Peter?").

Aside from trying to encourage productive mindsets, I think it's _also_ important that they know that they have intrinsic value _as people_ , regardless of what they accomplish.

<comment><USER5> As someone who works with youth, _everything_ can backfire depending on you kid, circumstance, tone, and so on. This is one of those sometimes inscrutable skills that parents/youth workers develop over time. I wish we had a better way to teach these soft 'people skills' as so many have no idea the effects they can/do have on those around them.

Saying the right thing, at the right time, can have an amazing effect on a kid.

OTOH, it's so frustrating and sad to see that some insidious/self-destructive idea has been beaten into a kid's head. Hard to break those things, particularly when they become self-reinforcing (e.g. dad calls me an idiot > I do poorly in class > I must be an idiot > I do even worse in class ...)

<comment><USER6> > As someone who works with youth, everything can backfire depending on you > kid, circumstance, tone, and so on.

Amen.

Dweck's thesis is alright in that there are worst things you could teach a kid. But the overwhelming support that she receives for her work imho rather stems from what our capitalistic society currently wants to hear then a magnificent scientific breakthrough.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This article points to [http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/09/23/carol- dweck-rev...](http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/09/23/carol-dweck- revisits-the-growth-mindset.html), but also includes an original interview, so we haven't changed the URL. We have taken the title of the other article, though, because it's more informative.

</comment><comment><USER8> Summary of the follow-up: the heart of the 'Growth Mindset' is believing that one's intelligence is changeable; the other aspects of the theory are consequences of that central proposition. So, while the choice to praise effort (rather than immediate ability) is a natural consequence of believing that intelligence can improve, it's not enough to skip over the point about changeable intelligence, and only praise effort, for example.

This makes a lot of sense: if people believe their intelligence is changeable, they'll understand the value of effort on their own. More than anything, praising effort is just another way of getting across the point that one's intelligence can be improved.

</comment><comment><USER9> Can someone explain to me what claim Professor Dweck has demonstrated that is both novel and true? I've heard a lot about growth mindset but I still don't know what claim she has proven that is not already pretty obvious.

<comment><USER10> Fixed mindset is the belief that qualities like intelligence are fixed and can't change. Growth mindset is the belief that these qualities can be grown through effort.

Dwecks research shows that a) kids with a growth mindset do better in school, especially in math, and b) kids can learn to have a growth mindset through relatively small interventions like reading and discussing a short article about the brain.

I think point a) is obvious, but point b) was not until Dwecks research.

<comment><USER11> (b) is not only not obvious, it also has some rather absurd implications due to the size of the effect and doesn't seem to replicate to the real world. Both of which imply it's bunk.</comment></comment></comment>


An Automatic CS Paper Generator - <AUTHOR> http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/

<comment><USER2> Looks like their papers have accepted for conferences. A link from the site following one made up submitter: [http://diehimmelistschoen.blogspot.com/](http://diehimmelistschoen.blogspot.com/)

</comment><comment><USER3> Ancient but always fun.</comment>


Task.li turns emails into shared task lists for you - <AUTHOR> http://www.task.li/

<comment><USER2> There seems to be a issue if you send the email to yourself (tried that and got the message that my email caused a server issue, uh oh). They are already looking into it.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, sorry for that, Thomas! Just for your information: The problem is not that you've sent the email to yourself, it's something else. I'll keep you posted.

<comment><USER3> Problem resolved, thanks for the support!

<comment><USER4> I also sent an email as a test and didn't get any response.

[update] Just arrived. Appears to be running a little slow is all.

<comment><USER5> Thanks for the update!

Yeah, we see some mails running a bit slow at the moment. That should improve soon. We are still fine tuning our architecture.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Very cool, I love how simple it works - especially since "action point" emails after meetings look almost exactly like your example.

The whole email thing reminds me of good old "I Want Sandy" <http://boingboing.net/2007/11/14/i-want-sandy-perfect.html>

<comment><USER3> Oh nice, I didn't know about Sandy yet!

But I thing it goes in a different direction: Sandy tried to be your personal assistant if I get it right, we rather try to help you and your collaborators to keep the oversight of tasks when email is the lowest common denominator.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I am not sure if the OP owns the site. But, just in case I will report this here: I suppose I am not the only one to notice this. But the email of lisa doesn't match in both images. From right to left: firstname.lastname@example.com to firstname.lastname@example.com.

I like this idea and I may even consider doing something like someday for my own private projects.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't own it, but I'm good friends with the three guys who did the app. I will notify them immediately. Thank you for the catch(;

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Have you considered another email address rather than firstname.lastname@example.com perhaps firstname.lastname@example.com so it's really easy to autofill?

Why Bcc rather than Cc? What do the collaborators see? How secure is this?

<comment><USER3> Hey Joshka, thanks for the feedback!

> Have you considered another email address rather than firstname.lastname@example.com perhaps > firstname.lastname@example.com so it's really easy to autofill

That's actually a great idea. I've just added email@example.com next to email@example.com, so both work now

> Why Bcc rather than Cc?

Both work, you can even use To if you want to send a task list to yourself

> What do the collaborators see

The collaborators do get your original email, and then the follow up email that you get as well.

> How secure is this?

As secure as email.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is cool but I'm wondering - has anyone ever found that the whole "bcc the system" thing works out in the long run?

<comment><USER3> We're here to stay ;-) Would you mind to share the other services that come to your mind but didn't make it in the long run? I'd be very interested, because I don't know any

<comment><USER9> sorry I didn't mean that the service didn't work out, just the use of the bcc format. Highrise and Basecamp are two things I've tried but which I just end up forgetting to bcc in the end

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> great idea. Can you please enable a couple of sub-task level to make it really useful, similar to Google Task? where does collaborators edit the list?

you're off to a great start. keep up the good work!

<comment><USER3> Thanks for the nice feedback & your suggestions, so encouraging!

> Can you please enable a couple of sub-task level to make it really useful, > similar to Google Task?

We do not plan to add sub tasks at the moment. In general, we do not try to outfeature other task apps out there. We try to be better than email at first, so we have to keep it as simple and natural as possible.

> where does collaborators edit the list?

Everyone who knows the secret URL of a task list can edit it

<comment><USER10> thanks for the decisive response. :) no subtasks is a no-go for me. i get your thoughts about features growth, just wouldn't work w/ my work flow so I'll wait 'til you guys come around. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Great idea! What do you use to handle the incoming emails?

<comment><USER5> Thanks, glad you like it! We're currently using <http://www.mailgun.com/>, but we also want to test the alternatives. It's all about the speed for us. If anyone has made experiences or could point us to a review, that'd be really great

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> fast, simple, gorgeous. well done

<comment><USER3> wow, thanks so much for the nice feedback! We really appreciate it!</comment></comment>


Show HN: Spotlist.TV – Play Spotify Playlists on YouTube - <AUTHOR> http://spotlist.tv <comment><USER2> This is a cool concept especially for anyone that enjoys music videos.

What was the toughest design/implementation issue you had to overcome for this project?

Nice Job!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for checking it out.

The app wasn't too difficult to implement since Youtube and Spotify have decent APIs I can use. However, I would like to get better accuracy on the music videos to exclude things such as song covers, lyric videos, etc... Still working on improving that part.

I suppose I could use something like imvdb.com, but I would still like to fallback to a song if the video doesn't exist.

<comment><USER2> I was wondering how you went about selecting specific videos, and clicking through it found mostly the "Official" Vevo releases and such.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Just sharing a side-project I've been hacking on lately while playing with the Spotify API.

I like viewing music video playlists on Youtube, but I prefer the content curation of Spotify. So hence the idea to mesh them together.

It's also open-source: [https://github.com/alfg/spotlistTV](https://github.com/alfg/spotlistTV)</comment>


Honda Doesn't Introduce Personal Asimo, Gives Us Lawn Mower Instead - <AUTHOR> http://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/home-robots/honda-doesnt-introduce-personal-asimo-gives-us-lawn-mower-instead#.UDZ4DzYyJ64.hackernews <comment><USER2> If these were comparabile in price to high end lawn mowers I think they would really catch on but $3000 is too much.

Also they really need anti-theft built in. Who is going to leave a portable $3000 machine in his yard all day and night?</comment>


Kraftwerk lawsuit in Germany rules artistic freedom trumps Copyright - <AUTHOR> http://pitchfork.com/news/65839-kraftwerk-lose-hip-hop-copyright-case/ <comment><AUTHOR> In case somebody thinks the title is misleading, here's text from the article that is important:

> _The court argued that composers should be able to create work without > financial risks or restrictions. Sampling is therefore allowed, as long as > the new work does not directly compete with the sampled work and does not > financially harm the patent holders, the court ruled._

That's a pretty clear change to the notion of Copyright and compensation.</comment>


Roast My Idea - <AUTHOR> Hey!
Existing e-commerce solutions are complicated and expensive for small businesses. At DotWorks, we want to simplify online store management. We want to leverage Google Sheets and Google Drive to manage your products and images.  Accept money through Stripe, Paypal, and Razorpay.
Please visit our site https://dotworks.io/?utm_source=hackernews&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=beta-invite and roast our idea.
Any feedback is appreciated and invaluable to us. <comment><USER2> Just a tip - might be worth putting "Show HN" in the title, and explaining the idea a bit better. I'd also get a demo on the site, it's hard to judge something you can't see.

Whilst I hope this is a success for you, I'd also argue that Shopify is neither complicated or expensive.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your feedback.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Didn't look at your site but Having handles 100s (honestly) ecom sites, simplicity is rarely a pain point.

Adding to that, if woo or Shopify isn't easy enough for a person, they sure as hell won't be savvy enough to manage a site through a spreadsheet.

You pain point and your solution don't match. Spreadsheet based things will be more accepted by the web savvy, if it hits a particular pain point. Simplicity isn't that.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'd argue Shopify is simple and pretty cost effective for small businesses. The most complicated part comes from initial technical setups like pointing to the right domain name and setting up payment gateways which not everyone knows how to do. Can your platform make it easy enough so that someone that's not tech savvy won't need any developer help?

<comment><AUTHOR> Noted. Thanks for your valuable input.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Might be good to compare against Shopify on your site, show why/if you're better. Also do a show hn

<comment><AUTHOR> Noted. Will add a section on how we compare against our competitors.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is platform simpler than eBay?

On eBay I can take a picture of merchandise within the app, get an auto generated description, buy postage, and get paid via Paypal.

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh. I never knew that. Thanks for the info. Will look into it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> WooCommerce and Shopify are pretty affordable and easy to use. Why is your platform better? Who is your target audience?

</comment><comment><USER8> bro utm source on a HackerNews "roast my idea" feels super dishonest tbh.

plus if you're at the idea stage I doubt you need Analytics.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi, We have posted on a couple of sites looking for feedback. We intend to analyze the source of our visitors and their feedbacks. We can filter the sites where we get valuable feedback and ignore the rest in the future.</comment></comment>


Get your own #dickbar - <AUTHOR> http://encodedrecords.com/dickbar/ <comment><USER2> In 2010 I wanted an iPhone Twitter client with a nice UI and no ads, so I paid $2.99 for Tweetie 2. This was after I bought Tweetie 1 for $2.99. Tweetie 2 wasn't a free upgrade.

In 2011, after acquiring Tweetie 2 and making it free, Twitter adds paid advertisements and wrecks the UI.

<comment><USER3> I would email Dick and ask for a special ad-free version that goes out to all paid Tweetie customers.

<comment><USER4> Unfortunately, that isn't possible in the AppStore, afaik. You can sell to everyone, or give away for free, but not to a limited group (beyond the 100 promo codes thing.)

<comment><USER5> The app is free for everyone, but previous Tweetie owners could have their ads disabled.

<comment><USER6> The Tweetie app "upgraded" to Twitter for iPhone; they're treated as the same app by the App Store. I don't think it's possible to tell apart upgraders from new users. (I paid for Tweetie)

<comment><USER7> I'm sure they have a list of email addresses that have paid for Tweetie (or the ability to acquire it). Given this, it seems possible that they could do something to disable it in the app.

<comment><USER8> No, they don't. Apple keeps all that information from developers. (By the way, that's the same information publishers are clamoring for).

<comment><USER7> I didn't realize Apple kept that from you, but OK. Alternative. Twitter clients normally send their user-agent as part of an API request. Twitter probably still has that data, and could check to see who sent a Tweet from Tweetie between a given period of time. Is there the possibility of false positives? Certainly, but it's better than nothing.

<comment><USER6> _but it's better than nothing_

Is it? I'd be afraid of a backlash caused by some minority of users who had e.g. bought tweetie but never actually tweeted using it (just for reading tweets or whatever), had changed twitter accounts since, etc., plus the people claiming to be part of this group in an attempt to get something for free or whatever.

Realistically, they're probably going to have to do something about this much- hated "feature" for _everyone_ anyway.

<comment><USER7> > Realistically, they're probably going to have to do something about this > much-hated "feature" for everyone anyway.

The question is though, is it a feature for some? If so, how many? Twitter's audience is huge. A couple thousand vocal users _might_ be on the minority side.

Twitter is big enough now that it's not going to be able to do anything right in the eyes of everyone. But, they have a ton of data about usage patterns, and other data _we_ don't. I'm willing to bet that the decision to include such a "feature" was backed up by real data.

I'm sure they'll release an update to give you the ability to turn off the "feature" of course, and this whole discussion will be pointless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Startups make mistakes... I'm pretty surprised that Twitter is responding with "It's a feature, not a bug. This is something you WANT-- trust us!"

<http://twitter.com/#!/dickc/status/43500398450982912> <http://twitter.com/#!/dickc/status/44302983839756288>

Bummer.

<comment><USER10> Sounds like they'll be either changing or removing it: <http://twitter.com/twittermobile/status/43730986864885760>

<comment><USER11> Guess: they will make it hide-able but on by default. It'll stop the complaining while still giving advertisers more hits than they might have before the dickbar. Win win

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> What is a dickbar?

<http://dickbar.org>

<comment><USER12> that expander thing is weird.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Twitter's new business model may well be subscriptions to turn off #dickbar.

<comment><USER14> It seems that no one is interested in the model where subscribers pay for no ads. Look at Hulu. You can buy Hulu Plus and... still get ads. If Hulu Plus was ad free I would sign up immediately.

So why is that? There are several potential reasons:

1\. Those providing such services like advertising or, rather, they like the relationships they have with advertisers. Consider [1] (second time quoted this today!):

> Since the carriers had all the power, getting any distribution (which > usually meant getting on the handset "deck") meant doing a business > development deal with the carriers. Business development in this case meant > finding the right people at those companies, sending them iPods, taking them > to baseball games, and basically figuring out ways to convince them to work > with you instead of the 5,000 other people sending them iPods and baseball > tickets. The basis of competition was salesmanship and capital, not > innovation or quality.

Companies, and particularly sales guys, like having something to sell (being ad inventory). They like the perks this gets them (and the commissions of course).

2\. Subscribers aren't willing to pay what the advertising brings in. I'm curious about this but haven't seen any numbers. Take an episode of The Big Bang Theory. How much does each episode cost to produce? How much does each ad bring in? How much does the national network earn in affiliate fees? How much of the advertising revenue is product placement? If you had these numbers, you could calculate what each viewer is worth. I suspect it's a lot less than what such companies charge on iTunes and elsewhere;

3\. A correlation between the people willing to pay for no ads and being the target of those ads, which means if you're willing to pay for no ads, you need to pay higher than what ad revenue / viewers might otherwise suggest; and

4\. Lack of metrics in broadcast and print media. Sales guys are known to exaggerate (and basically just make up) conversion numbers on ad campaigns. The reality I'm sure is a lot less but there's no real way to tell. With online advertising, you can tell, which possibly explains it's lower cost/value compared to traditional advertising;

5\. Related to (4), people pay for broadcast and print advertising what they do, largely because that's what it's always cost; and

6\. Limited inventory drives up the cost. Inventory is not a problem online.

As for Twitter, I suspect they haven't done anything interesting with advertising (and monetization) because that's a hard problem to solve. I mean, people need to see ads for them to be ads right? At that point, how exactly are you going to advertise to people who mostly use an API, other than through their Twitter stream?

[1]: [http://cdixon.org/2010/06/06/steve-jobs-single-handedly- rest...](http://cdixon.org/2010/06/06/steve-jobs-single-handedly-restructured- the-mobile-industry/)

<comment><USER15> Spotify . You have a free plan with ads, one without ads, and the premium plan with mobile access and offline play.

<http://www.spotify.com/uk/get-spotify/overview/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> If the Dickbar annoys you as much as it annoys me and your phone is jailbroken, install the Twizzler package to remove it. Makes the new Twitter actually a quite nice upgrade.

</comment><comment><USER17> Am I the only who's not getting the purpose of this "Dickbar" ?

</comment><comment><USER18> The dickbar can be removed from iPhone Twitter with the jailbreak application Twizzler: [http://www.tipb.com/2011/03/03/twizzler-removes-trending- bar...](http://www.tipb.com/2011/03/03/twizzler-removes-trending-bar- twitter-33-jailbreak/)

</comment><comment><USER19> it's as if the founding product driving force at Twitter have left.

<comment><USER20> Most of them are gone.

</comment></comment><comment> X-Istence I would like to point out that there is an app called Twizzler, or more "patch" on Cydia that takes care of the problem:

[http://isource.com/2011/03/05/twizzler-the-jailbreak- answer-...](http://isource.com/2011/03/05/twizzler-the-jailbreak-answer-to- your-twitter-quickbar-blues/)

Courtesy of @chpwn.

</comment><comment><USER21> More free publicity for Twitter, great.

</comment><comment><USER22> This is the height of inanity.

</comment><comment><USER23> Mark Beeson (@m242), you, Sir, are #winning.</comment>


Europe vs Silicon Valley - <AUTHOR> http://www.whiteboardmag.com/vc-success-in-europe-versus-the-us-the-myths-and-facts

<comment><USER2> I don't know -- the data speaks for itself, but I still find it hard to accept that SV doesn't convey advantages to resident startups. The concentration of like-minded individuals and capital has to make for an easier go of it.

This study would be more interesting if it compared US, Europe, and SV, IMHO.</comment>