New 3D printers that cost less than $500 - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/design/2012/11/portabee-printrbot/

<comment><USER2> Interesting attempt to capture the low end of the market. As a Replicator owner (and a "Cupcake" user) the things that make for a good 3D extrusion printer are rigidity, flow control on the extruder, a heated build platform, and most importantly _moderated air flow_. All of the 'open air' printers suffer from print failures when a cool breeze causes the plastic to freeze to quickly, shrink and then warp off the platform.

Bottom line is that you can build your own Reprap for less than $500, get to know it very well, and have a lot of fun. But if you want to buy a 'tool' and start doing 3D prints with it, you probably won't be satisfied with the < $1000 printers out there.

<comment><USER3> Totally agree. I have a TOM and unless I surround it with lamps that produce enough heat to keep the "build chamber" warm, it's unable to print anything other than coins or very small dimensional objects. I'd even go as far to say the Formlabs Form 1 is the only "Real" 3-D printer worth considering. All the extrusion based systems are more expensive geek toy than too.

<comment><USER4> I disagree. The proprietary resins used in printers like formlabs are expensive. The plastic items produced in this manner often lack structural integrity, and they are always small in the lower printer price ranges. So if you want figurines, formlabs is maybe the way to go, but that's about it.

Most of the fused deposition printers (like the MendelMax, AO-100, reprap Prusa (2 and 3) can print in more materials (ABS, PLA, even Polycarbonate), and produce larger functional parts than things like FormLabs. The main issue is the striping, which is less "pretty."

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZwjvZ79iYo>

<comment><USER3> I don't think striping is the main issue - It's the lack of repeatability. Because of patents on things like heated build chambers, it's hard to get consistent, dimensional parts off hobby machines. If you have access to one of the higher priced Stratasys systems, I agree that FDM is competitive.

Formlabs technology works much better at the low prices. While their resins are proprietary, when you factor in the cost of wasted plastic (and time) due to failed print jobs, it's not bad.

And Formlabs, and stereolithography based systems generally, have many benefits beyond figurines. Consumer electronics shells are much better suited to that format. As are most designs that have undercuts or voided internal geometries. They can also produce parts in a variety of materials, e.g. wax for jewelry castings.

I'm all for the experimentation and low cost machines, but they're far closer to toy than tool.

<comment><USER4> It depends what you are doing. Agreed, tuning does add work and makes repeatability more of a challenge, but that comes with tradeoffs--the ability to print in more mediums (chocolate!).

I'd be uncomfortable using formlabs type resin parts for anything with load or wear, using them within machines, joints for a table, replacements for dishwasher parts, etc. I can't print anything of size with formlabs type printers. If I want to make a quadcopter body, or a modern-art lamp, I'm SOL. You have valid points--just are valuing use-cases differently than I do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I was in the market for a 3D printer a while back, but I was really put off by how low quality, amateur-esque the entry-level 3D printers were (Reprap and co) at the < $1000 price mark; while on the other hand, how freakishly expensive the professional 3D printers were ($15,000+). I was surprised at the lack of options in the middle. Replicator 2 seems to be a step in the right direction, but it's not quite there yet IMHO.

Does anyone have any recommendations in the $5k range? A larger chamber size is an absolute must.

<comment><USER6> I'm not sure what you consider a "large" chamber, but formlabs is supposed to start shipping in April.

<http://formlabs.com/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm surprised they didn't mention the Solidoodle. $499 for the base model. I've ordered it ... hope to get it before the end of the year.

The main reason I'm getting it is to explore the software tools for 3D printing. I don't expect professional grade prints from the device. When I was in grad school, we had access to one of the 10K+ 3D printers. However, it was a big hassle using those (required chemical baths to remove filler material, etc.).

What I am very surprised by is the number of companies trying to make 3D printers. While competition is usually good for customers, I am concerned that the large number of offerings will fragment the user base.

<comment><USER8> Yep. A Solidoodle 2 user here. Used two printers, one of the earlier serial numbers, and a very recent built. Can recommend it. Pretty neat design. No troubles, comes ready to print...

Disclaimer: I'm not in any way associated with Solidoodle, aside from being a customer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think the more interesting segment of the 3D printer market is the slightly higher end printers that are much easier to use than the cheapest ones. A really cheap 3D printer takes a lot of effort to keep running well (calibration, etc).

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm not so much worried about the cost of the printer, it's $50/lb price of the plastic that's bothering me.

<comment> daniel-cussen If printer ink is unicorn blood, printer plastic is made of its pulped horn, or maybe even its stem cells.

<comment><USER11> Actually printer ink is very similar in price to human blood:

<http://www.cockeyed.com/science/gallon/liquid.html></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is your company (job) family friendly? - <AUTHOR> The other day I talked with a friend who is searching for a new job. His expenses got higher when he got a second child. He went to some interviews and he got an impression that he wouldn't handle new job, because he doesn't have free time like he used to for studying new frameworks and languages and work hours were from 9 to 6 (or 7). And he would love to spend some time with his family.
Is your company family friendly? If it is, please help me build a list of companies who offer family friendly jobs.<p>https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WcwFlqppHmLZ1kIqinqPedYjQpsfcGjCXTDF_4tuQEE/edit?usp=sharing <comment><USER2> I was working for a company that was moving from remote work to full-time in the office. My former co-worker and I decided to start our own company so we could stay remote and close to our families. I have 7 kids, he has 8 and we both homeschool.

That was almost 6 years ago and I've never regretted it. If you value time with your family, nobody is a better boss than you. It's not unusual for me to shoot an IM over to my business partner that goes something like "Really nice weather today. We're headed to the park for an hour or two."

<comment><USER3> How do your kids adapt to social interactions with kids of their age, spending 24/7 with your family might be tiring and in young age there is a big difference between 3 and 5 year olds, I think they need to interact with kids of their age and different cultures to be better adapt in future life, that's just my opinion, I might be wrong?

<comment><USER4> I am a former homeschool parent whose oldest will soon be 30.

You are entirely wrong. Homeschooled kids typically have stronger relationships and better social skills.

<comment><USER5> I'll need to make the decision about homeschooling in a few years. Do you have any studies you can share that support that conclusion?

At face value, it seems more difficult to socialize children than at traditional school with hundreds of daily social interactions from a wide variety of backgrounds, personalities, and teamwork opportunities.

<comment><USER4> No, I do not have studies. Tokenadult [https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=tokenadult](https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=tokenadult) might have something like that. He worked in public schools for many years and ran/runs the website Learn in Freedom, one of the early pro homeschooling sites ([http://learninfreedom.org/](http://learninfreedom.org/)).

My knowledge of this is rooted in having been involved in the online gifted homeschoolers community. I was briefly Director of Community Life for The Tag Project. [http://www.tagfam.org/](http://www.tagfam.org/) So, you can take my word for it as a SME or you can contact Tokenadult and see if he can hook you up.

I do think your assumptions are in error. Good socialization is not about a wide variety of superficial relationships. It is about having positive interactions that teach one what one needs to know. I do know that studies show that kids who go off to boarding school do best if they figure out how to artificially replace the natural family unit with a close group of caring friends. But I don't have links to anything. That is just remembered off the top of my head.

Best.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I once declined a job as it wasn't a good fit.

The company that I did go with had some great childcare attached with the position; Anyhow, upon declining i mentioned that we were planning on having a kid in the future and this childcare was a nice bonus.

The response from the company that I declined? 'If we had known you were going to have a child then we would not have made an offer'.

Bullet dodged.

<comment><USER7> I can't believe anyone would be dumb enough to say something like that, after you already declined. This is an Uber HR-tier response.

<comment><USER6> Not HR; CEO.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> My anecdotal experience: companies are much more "family friendly" when the CEO and senior managers themselves have families.

Stated differently, paraphrasing the CEO that just had their first kid: "holy crap, this is a lot of work!!!!" You have not truly experienced sleep deprivation until you have had sustained, parental sleep deprivation.

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure having a family by itself is a good indicator that the company will be family friendly. Marissa Mayer might be a good example. She has twins, so she should understand. But...

 _" If you go in on a Saturday afternoon, I can tell you which startups will succeed...Being there on the weekend is a huge indicator of success, mostly because these companies don't just happen. They happen because of really hard work."_

<comment><USER10> Well, Marissa Mayer can afford to pay someone to take care of her twins. The typical small company or early stage startup exec, not so much.

<comment><USER9> Not unusual, though, for a lower end CEO to foist off all parenting on their spouse.

<comment><USER10> Good point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Created a throwaway to name my company: Castlight Health. Our company is definitely family friendly. Our CEO threw a birthday party for his son and invited the company and all their family members; it was essentially a party for company kids. Most of our social events are during company hours so you don't feel the pressure of having to hang out with coworkers during your free time. Many company events are family friendly.

More importantly I have seen many colleagues and managers take the 4 pm BART home to deal with kids issues. We also have a much more diverse age set of engineers - half of the engineers in my seating area are over 50. If you've experience Silicon Valley ageism please check us out because we definitely like to hire experienced engineers.

I linger around hacker news and it's weird hearing about toxic company cultures around this area as I've started to take for granted my perks. While I'm somewhat young (30) and without a family, I'm used to (and appreciate) working with folks who started coding before PCs even existed. I like that I can easily take the day off when I have a friend visiting and my colleagues can do the same for a school activity. I appreciate that my free time isn't monopolized through forced company social events and I can have a clear separation between work and play.

I can't imagine ever working at a place where every one looked exactly like me, drank the cool aid, and embraced "work hard play hard" (which usually means just work hard).

</comment><comment><USER12> I'm working at the most family friendly company I've ever worked for right now ([http://planning.center](http://planning.center)).

We're very remote friendly, which is a big plus. They pay for my whole family's healthcare (even though it's just my wife and I right now). We have a "family week" every year where they pay for our S.O. to come with us to an in- office week (and we're welcome to bring kiddos) for a week in town where they keep them entertained during the work day and do some special events for the whole fam at night. The best thing though is that during the summer we get every Friday off. Paid. So that's a whole day a week for the entire course of the summer to spend with your family (and that's what it's meant for).

There are other companies that offer different benefits that we don't (due to size or whatever), but I feel like we offer an incredible set of benefits for someone with a family.

<comment><USER13> Can confirm. My cousin started working onsite, but transitioned to remote at Planning Center. Seems like a nice setup.

PS, I'm Kin's cousin!

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Probably depends on your friend's location and the number of companies he's interviewing with.

I'm single, but at my company (at least on my team) the start and end hours are pretty flexible as long as you're getting work done. For instance, I generally get in about 10-15 minutes before 9AM, and then I can usually leave either around 4:25PM or 5PM (depending on which train I'm taking back home) and I'll take a 30-60 minute lunch break.

I know not all companies are so flexible, but I'm sure there are still quite a few that are.

<comment><USER15> You are doing 9 to 5 and being allowed to eat. Where is the flexibility? That's normal office hours. As a manager I considre flexible to allow people in or out or WFH as long as they put some solid hours every day and deliver. If it works for the project and the company allows it I have no problem with WFH. I've met too many managers who say they have flexible schedules when they mean "sure, go home an hour early today, you can go one hour later tomorrow". Man hour accountants.

<comment><USER14> Well, not really? A full time day is typically 9 hours with one hour of unpaid lunch and maybe two 15 minute breaks (at least I think that's the California law). What I described is basically an 8 hour day including a lunch break. As far as WFH, I mean, the poster didn't mention that explicitly.

If it comes to that, for my team we can WFH if needed without advance notice and if anything comes up during work hours we're able to leave for the errand or need, even for an hour or two, without being required to "make up" the time per se. As long as we are getting work done, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Not sure what you mean by additional time off, so not sure how to answer that.

While my company doesn't strictly fit several of those things, I do think it's generally pretty good for people with families. Most people in my department are raising families (including the management), and there is some flexibility. But really we're just one office in part of a much larger company too.

It's 8-5, where it's rare that people work overtime (unless they're architects or higher, they tend to work about 45-50 hours), if you need to take a couple hours off here and there it's not usually a problem if you let them know ahead of time. There is a remote work program but it's not a remote culture company, yet. There are a few employees that work remotely, though, including the CTO.

Oh, the healthcare benefits aren't very good though (used to be, until we got swallowed up by the larger company and were forced to switch to their plans). Several people have left because of it. Yeah, nevermind. I'll leave it off this list.

</comment><comment><USER17> It would be helpful to add a maternity/paternity leave column to your great spreadsheet.

Staggeringly, the United States still lacks a national unpaid leave policy. Plus companies in other countries on your spreadsheet might offer additional leave than what is required.

<comment><USER18> No, we have a national unpaid leave policy (FMLA). What we don't have, and desperately need, is a paid leave policy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've been lucky that most of companies (all startups) I've worked for, while not explicitly stating its family-friendly policy, have been very family friendly even without them explicitly saying they are.

First one was 7 people when I first started and grew to ~150 while I was still there. Normal 9-5 work hours, but flexible if I needed to take off early or head in late because of traffic. I ended up working the last 3 years at the company remotely because HQ moved to a different city. At that time, I had a baby, took ~ 3 months maternity leave, come back at 3 days a week remotely, then full time remotely, and as long as I got my job done and was there during 'core hours,' had a pretty flexible day. Yes, it helps that the CEO also had young children at the time, but I think it also helps that he was a decent person and we had decent people as managers who understand work-life balance.

My startup job after that was for a smaller team, still a startup, but still pretty flexible in terms of taking off early to beat traffic, pick up kids, coming in late b/c of drop-offs, etc.

My current company is more traditional, but I still leave at a decent time, WFH a few days a week, and is generally very family friendly.

In general, I think being able to stick up for myself in terms of carving out personal time and setting boundaries or expectations of when I'm working is what's been successful for me. Also, making it clear that if they don't respect that I want to be home to have dinner with my family, I'm not gonna be a happy camper. It also helps that I'm good at my job and IMO a valuable player on the team.

</comment><comment> nommm-nommm I work as a mid-sized company. My job is family friendly. I have flex time (which is really, really great!!) and my bosses and coworkers understand if personal or family issues come up and don't get upset if you have to leave early to pick up your kids (or friend from the airport, whatever) as long as you get your hours in and work done. Individual accommodations, when reasonable, are met. In general its acknowledged we are humans, not machines, and we have life outside of work. The majority of my coworkers have some sort of family, though we skew older, we only have a handful of people under 30 right now, maybe 6-7. There's also a few people who have moved to 30 hours a week (which reduces your pay proportionately) and two that are part time/semi retired.

I value this over salary.

In general, call me lazy, but I don't want to do unpaid work outside of work. Sorry, but I spend 40 hours a week coding, that's plenty enough. I want to spend my free time doing other things. I don't know the details of what my coworkers do in their spare time but, honestly, I can't think of a single one who I could see going home and spending any significant amount of time free time writing code. Our office talk is usually stuff about video games, vacations, TV shows, family, local businesses, the weather, and weekend actives, not frameworks.

That's not to say they/we aren't smart or good at our job. I am good at my job, I like my job, I like writing code, I get good performance reviews, I have pride in my work, and I do care about the success of our product and our company. I am just not one dimensional. I like doing other things, I like spending time with friends and family, I like traveling, and there's just not unlimited time in my life. Nor do I have unlimited attention span.

I sometimes look at job boards to see if there's an interesting position open. I'm not really actively looking for a new job but if I find a better deal I'll take it.

I haven't.

I am interested in remote work because I live in a fairly small-ish quiet-ish town and I'd like to keep using Java as my primary language. We have industry, large employers, and jobs here in my town but not as much as a big city, and I'd like to expand my options. Remote work I see seems to lean sorta-kind startup-ish. Sometimes their job application/about us makes it clear I'm expected to make work the only thing in my life and I don't apply. Sometimes I get to the application and they are like "give us links to your LinkedIn and Github." I leave these blank, as I don't have a LinkedIn or Github, and I never get a call back. One didn't even get asked for a resume or what my work experience was, just a Github link.

Oh well, I don't want to work somewhere that expects me to do work after work. I'd rather take a non-software job with a massive paycut than spend 90% of my waking hours writing code.

I wonder if they know what they are losing out on by excluding an entire demographic? I mean, my coworkers are, for the most part, bright and good at their jobs. Certainly your life doesn't have to be your job to be good at your job or to be productive?

<comment><USER20> I think by not at least having some github / remote competence, you are showing remote employers that your aren't in the right mindset.

I'm sure you'd be great at it. But if you want to work remotely, showing you can collaborate on an online interface would probably help!

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I work in Sweden and struggle to consider working elsewhere. The paternity leave was amazing and really allowed time to form a strong bond with the kids and didn't affect seniority at work. Flexible hours mean that I start early but can dive away at 15:00 to pick up the kids from day care. If the kids are unwell, I can take care of them without any problem. All the meanwhile having a challenging rewarding tech job. The thing is that the company I work for is just like all the other companies in the area, so it makes for nice work life balance and a pretty happy family :)

</comment><comment><USER22> I am single but most of my co-workers have kids. I work at a small startup and work hour flexibility is huge for me. Generally, as long as my work gets done and I don't miss meetings I am free to work my own hours within reason. For example, if I know there is a big snow storm coming I'll take a day or two off work with just a day's notice to ski. But then I'll work over the weekend. I think this only works because all of our employees are very dedicated and motivated. Once we grow think might need to change a little.

</comment><comment><USER23> 9-6 is 40 hours/week with unpaid lunch, and pretty standard in US tech jobs as far as I know. Asking the team to sometimes work 45 hours during busy times seems reasonable to me.

I give my team time to learn new stuff on the job. Obviously I strive to hire smart people so that doesn't take forever.

I am not sure exactly what you are asking for. Companies OK with working 35 hour weeks?

<comment><USER24> As a consultant who works from home with two (young) kids, it's hard to imagine working these kinds of hours. It seems sort of inhumane.

<comment><USER25> That's why you have one stay at home parent.

<comment><USER26> I agree, which is why I upboated you. My wife is a stay at home mom. Makes life way better for all of us, much less stressful for the children and she enjoys it. I wish more women would consider it, especially if their husbands make a living wage. Life isn't all about money.

<comment><USER10> Fuck that. I make a living wage too, tyvm, and I like my career. Why shouldn't the dad be the stay at home parent?

<comment><USER27> I used my winnings in the dot com explosion to be a stay at home Dad while my less financially successful wife worked. It was awesome; I think men in general need to try harder than women to forge a really strong connection as parents, so stay at home Dad => parenting equality, all else being equal. I was part time for few years also. Work of course hated it and it was hard to re-enter. I don't regret it of course, and kids are older and my time at work is creeping back up. Now I can do tech work sitting next to them doing homework. The kids tell me their problems and at least listen to my arguments for being the person that knows the most math in the room, regardless of career.

There were sacrifices but a lot of the worries I see expressed about work life balance don't really worry me. With the strong connection to the kids, I can feel how they are doing: I have that mother's sense of can I work late tonight or do I need to focus on the people. I feel the parenting skills also have made me more effective at work, both in cutting out useless activities because my time is sacred and in seeing the non-verbal emotional sides of people. The idea of how people can have trouble saying certain important things and how to respond to that happening is essential when dealing with kids and useful when dealing with engineers. So I highly recommend staying at home for men that have the capacity for it. (It is hard and you have to be almost totally self driven; no one will thank or notice what you do).

<comment><USER4> You qualify for my personal Real Manly Man Award (TM). ;)

My father was a two time veteran and purple heart winner who never changed the diapers of any of his own kids, but stayed home to care for his first born grandchild when my brother got divorced and got custody.

My family of origin is really, really big on the idea that kids need a full time caregiver. Not so much on the "it needs to be the mother," which is humorous because my parents' marriage was so very old fashioned for so long that no one would have predicted that grandpa would stay home while grandma kept working.

#yougoguy #fistbump

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I worked at Aflac for over five years. I was not in the IT department, but they do have one. From what I gather, they are pretty cutting edge, tech-wise, for the insurance industry. They have a good track for being family-friendly and generally diverse.

</comment><comment><USER28> I don't work there or have a ton of details, but twitter has paternity leave and I was unofficially told that "untracked PTO" was more like "5-6 weeks". Which as an american seems perfectly generous.

</comment><comment><USER29> Add Splunk. Super friendly.

</comment><comment><USER30> When the company is sitting on pile of cash

</comment><comment><USER31> What does "family friendly" mean? It's unclear from your post. Does he want to work fewer hours but get paid more money, or does he just want more flexibility to schedule his hours?

<comment><USER32> I interpreted to mean that the company's policies take into account the needs of people with families, i.e. husband/wife/partner and potentially children.

Generally I would expect this to translate to a meaningful commitment to work/life balance, flexible hours, adequate paternity/maternity leave, the ability to occasionally (or primarily) work-from-home, and some benefits and incentives that make sense for people with families (such as employer contributions to life insurance and disability insurance).

the way you phrased your question "Does he want to work fewer hours but get paid more money" includes a lot of implicit hostility, by the way. I'm not sure if you meant it that way but that's how it reads.</comment></comment>


The Placebo Effect Doesn't Apply Just to Pills - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/07/upshot/the-placebo-effect-doesnt-apply-just-to-pills.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&abt=0002&abg=1&_r=0 <comment><USER2> > For a drug to be approved by the Food and Drug Administration, it must prove > itself better than a placebo, or fake drug.

False, the FDA doesn't actually have any requirement to prove that a treatment is better than placebo. Many trials don't even include a placebo arm, they only compare themselves against existing drugs that were grandfathered into the system without any efficacy testing. Or they compare themselves to inert placebos rather than active ones, even if they are psychoactive drugs. Or they only compare themselves against placebos for a few weeks, even if they are meant to be used for long periods of time.

This is how we have drugs like antidepressants and ADHD drugs on the market even the though research shows they are actually _worse_ than taking no drug at all.

<comment><USER3> > inert placebos rather than active ones

Isn't "active placebo" a contradiction in terms?

<comment><USER4> No.

Because people know they could be taking a placebo, then having undeniable effect (psychoactive, redness, soreness, etc.) tells them that they are not using the placebo. Conversely, having no undeniable side effects lets them know that they are using the placebo. Thus, placebo usage is undermined.

"Active placebo" has an undeniable effect, but not the compound being tested, so that the test subjects cannot tell if they have the placebo or the real things.

<comment><USER5> Couldn't that raise the question of if the side effects themselves are a source of benefit?

<comment><USER2> This is what the book The Emperor's New Drugs is about. The idea of the book is that there was some well-known research showing that anti-depressants are effective for severe depression, but not mild or moderate cases. But if you actually only look at studies that used active placebos as controls, then there is no evidence clinical efficacy even for severe depression. Meaning that the nominal benefit for anti-depressants for severe depression that's seen in many studies is in fact probably due to people thinking they are better due to the side effects of the drug, rather than due to true drug benefits.

<comment><USER6> It could also be that participating in the study addresses sources of depression by giving the subject a way that they are 'helping out' society, or are 'cared about' etc.

There are probably many factors to depression which may include chemical or structural causes; however the human brain is a complex self adapting analog computer. It would be foolish to think that such a system can be reduced a single or even simple set of controlled variables.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It strikes me that for something like knee surgery, at least, the recovery routine might be what provides the benefit. What if you took a group and did not pretend to give them surgery but made them rest and go through physical therapy as if you had?

<comment><USER8> _" Less than a year ago, many were shocked when arthroscopic surgery for meniscal tears performed no better than sham surgery. This procedure was the most common orthopedic procedure performed in the United States."_

Earlier this year I re-injured the meniscus in my knee and was about to undergo surgery when a radiologist in the family mentioned this study. I cancelled the surgery and followed the alternative recovery method of ice, ibuprofen and rest. It took a long three weeks for me knee to feel normal again, but it would've been much longer had I undergone the surgery.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Try it yourself: [http://placebobutton.com/](http://placebobutton.com/)

<comment><USER10> I pressed the comforting, blue button and my chronic gullibility was cured instantly! Thank you Placebo Button!

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Perhaps we could create a placebo bureaucracy, say an FDA like agency which just approved anything that came through it. And then we could compare the end results of that agency with the FDA to see which one approved the most 'actually useful' medicines and the one which had the most 'later found to be harmful' medicines.

<comment><USER12> Chuck, that's already done. That's the "natural supplements" industry[1] as it has been regulated since the mid-1990s in the United States.

[1] "Dietary supplement industry says 'no' to more information for consumers (again)" [http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/big-supp-resists- giving-...](http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/big-supp-resists-giving- consumers-safety-and-effectiveness-information/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Very old news. Surgery for "Gastroesophageal reflux disease" was an famous example: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo#cite_note-198](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placebo#cite_note-198) . If I remember correctly in one study symptoms dissipated in 50% of patients, who got sham surgery - just skin incisions.

</comment><comment><USER14> Anyone interested in the Placebo Effect, I recommend Josh & Chuck's Stuff You Should Know episode about it.

[http://www.stuffyoushouldknow.com/podcasts/how-the- placebo-e...](http://www.stuffyoushouldknow.com/podcasts/how-the-placebo- effect-works/)

</comment><comment><USER15> I thought that was kind of obvious.

A friend of mine who repairs PCs occasionally finds nothing wrong with them and does the usual "I'll run some maintenance on it" and the client is always happier afterwards. He doesn't charge for stuff unless anything needs to be done.

<comment><USER16> Wouldn't your friend get happier clients if he charged them a little bit? It'd probably give them a stronger placebo effect.

<comment><USER15> People are shallow. The computer is their best friend 95% of the time, but they remember the last 5% and how much it cost them more than anything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Any idea how placebos work so well, what they are, and if we're doing anything to take advantage of the effect?

<comment><USER18> There is actually a discipline of medicine dedicated to researching and promoting the use of placebos to cure ailments called homeopathy.

<comment><USER19> I assume you mean this as a joke, but homeopathic remedies are so popular here in Germany -- the pharmacy shelves are loaded with them!! -- that I wonder whether use of the placebo effect is an official component of the national healthcare strategy.

<comment><USER20> Yeah, it's extremely weird to see homeopathic "medicine" all over in a country with an otherwise excellent, modern medical system.

Germany generally does a good job on evidence-based herbal medicine (like standardizing St. John's wort extract), but I worry that the line can easily be blurred between them and homeopathic products in the eyes of most consumers. You really have to look carefully - they're not clearly marked.

So honestly, you're probably quite right about it being a deliberate exploitation of the placebo effect. Because otherwise, there's no reason not to ban them.

<comment><USER21> No kidding. I went to the doctor with sleeping problems one time and he suggested I look up a certain drug. He said I couldn't get a prescription for it and it was to be taken therapeutically (i.e. indefinitely) and at the normal dosage it would cost something like 50 bucks a month.

I went home and looked it up: a homeopathic panacea with only a single "study". Not double blind, not even single blind -- they literally just gave the drug to some participants and the self-reported symptoms "improved".

I'm still not sure whether the GP was just trolling me.

<comment><USER19> I've had similar experiences. I find it very strange. You make a good point: the homeopathic remedies aren't even cheap.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> BTW, if you haven't seen it already, you should check out his YT channel, Healthcare Triage:

[https://www.youtube.com/user/thehealthcaretriage](https://www.youtube.com/user/thehealthcaretriage)

He does a great job covering a variety of subjects & explaining research to the layman.

</comment><comment><USER23> > They had an incision, and a procedure was faked so that they didn't know > that they actually had nothing done.

Is it just me, or does this seem ethically dubious? A sugar pill placebo does no harm, but when you are cutting people open to "fake" surgery...just doesn't sit right.

<comment><USER24> The article, in fact, addresses your question.

> The ethical issues aren't easily dismissed. Theoretically, a sugar pill > carries no risk, and a sham procedure does. This is especially true if the > procedure requires anesthesia. The surgeon must go out of his or her way to > fool the patient. Many would have difficulty doing that.

> But we continue to ignore the real potential that many of our surgical > procedures and medical devices aren't doing much good — and might even be > doing harm, since real surgery has been shown to pose more risks than sham > surgery.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Here is one more recent interesting research result in area of placebos [http://www.coloradocollege.edu/newsevents/newsroom/the- power...](http://www.coloradocollege.edu/newsevents/newsroom/the-power-of- positive-sleeping)

</comment><comment><USER26> The Placebo Effect should be taught in grade school. We shouldn't have to wait until college to realize just how many products, drugs, professions, etc. are an absolute sham.

</comment><comment><USER27> I clicked on this thinking "surely this is some NY Times article from their archives." Nope.

</comment><comment><USER28> The prevalence of the Placebo Effect across many medicinal domains seems like evidence that there is an underlying cause. Perhaps emotional well being has an impact on health?

</comment><comment><USER12> This article brings up a very important point, and I'm grateful that it was submitted here. The professor of pediatrics who wrote the article is onto some important issues, and I was especially glad he cited some of the research literature with direct links. Reading a review he cited,[1] I see that one of the problems here is the vagueness of what he calls "improvement" in many medical studies. Is the treatment endpoint of a knee operation patients moving better than they used to, as measured by trained observers watching the patients do standardized movements? Or is "improvement" a patient self-report of less pain? Several of the examples the author writes about are examples of treatments indicated to relieve pain (angina, which is chest pain, or lower back pain, and it looks like most of the knee surgery he mainly focuses on was also done to relieve patient-reported pain). Patient self-reported pain is a symptom, a matter important to the patient, but it is not a diagnostic sign that can be objectively observed by anyone else (as, for example, blood pressure or white cell count can be objectively observed).

Too many medical studies, and almost all "alternative medicine" testimonials, are based on soft endpoints (patient self-reports of improvement) rather than on "hard endpoints" (longer healthier life after reduction in all-cause mortality, or resuming walking after being paralyzed, or something observable objectively and lastingly important).

Pretty much all studies by all authors of whatever researcher background that appear to show a "placebo effect" show that only for patient-reported subjective symptoms that are usually temporary anyway like pain and nausea. Nobody asks for a placebo treatment for a broken leg or a life-threatening infection. The medical researchers who look at the issue with proper study designs and statistical controls know that placebos are essentially useless, as they at most have influence just on self-reported subjective symptoms, not on any sign that affects the progression of a disease or maintenance of good health.[2]

Findings on placebo effects by researchers who have considered the issue carefully include

"Despite the spin of the authors – these results put placebo medicine into crystal clear perspective, and I think they are generalizable and consistent with other placebo studies. For objective physiological outcomes, there is no significant placebo effect. Placebos are no better than no treatment at all."[3]

"We did not find that placebo interventions have important clinical effects in general. However, in certain settings placebo interventions can influence patient-reported outcomes, especially pain and nausea, though it is difficult to distinguish patient-reported effects of placebo from biased reporting. The effect on pain varied, even among trials with low risk of bias, from negligible to clinically important. Variations in the effect of placebo were partly explained by variations in how trials were conducted and how patients were informed."[4]

So, yes, let's make sure that studies of surgical techniques include studies of sham surgery. (Studies of acupuncture had better always have sham acupuncture arms in which "real" acupuncture points are disregarded or other aspects of supposedly ancient Chinese technique are intentionally omitted without the patient knowing that.) This will improve the evaluation of safety and effectiveness of new surgical techniques. Just don't assume that ANY placebo is ever good for ANYTHING that you couldn't achieve just by giving yourself a good pep talk.

[1] [http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3253](http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g3253)

[2] [http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/michael-specter-on- the-p...](http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/michael-specter-on-the-placebo- effect/)

[http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ted-kaptchuk-versus- plac...](http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/ted-kaptchuk-versus-placebo- effects-again/)

[3] [http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-rise-and- fa...](http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-rise-and-fall-of- placebo-medicine/)

[4] [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091554](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091554)

<comment><USER29> _" \- Administration of placebos should be considered when a patient is refractory to standard treatment, suffers from its side effects, or is in a situation where standard treatment does not exist."_

from: [http://jme.bmj.com/content/40/4/219.full](http://jme.bmj.com/content/40/4/219.full)

"The moral case for the clinical placebo"

<comment><USER12> Thanks for the link. I note that it reports, "Nevertheless, it is important to mention that according to an influential 2001 meta-analysis comparing placebo- treatment arms with no treatment, placebos make no clinical difference." The citation at that sentence is to an article that lives online in free full text[1] that we can all download and read.

The same team's updated Cochrane review[2] still sums up the evidence by saying, "We found an effect on patient-reported outcomes, especially on pain. Several trials of low risk of bias reported large effects of placebo on pain, but other similar trials reported negligible effect of placebo, indicating the importance of background factors." They add a caution about experimental methods consistent with the article submitted here on HN: "The use of placebos in blinded randomised trials is a precaution directed against many forms of bias, and not only against effects of placebo. Unblinded patients may differ from blinded ones in their way of reporting beneficial and harmful effects of treatment, in their tendency to seek additional treatment outside the study, and in their risk of dropping out of the study. Furthermore, unblinded staff may differ in their use of alternative forms of care and in their assessment of outcomes. Thus, even if there were no true effect of placebo, one would expect to record differences between placebo and no-treatment groups due to bias associated with lack of blinding."

[1] [https://math.dartmouth.edu/~doyle/docs/40/PlaceboArticle.pdf](https://math.dartmouth.edu/~doyle/docs/40/PlaceboArticle.pdf)

[2] [http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD003974/COMMUN_placebo- interv...](http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD003974/COMMUN_placebo- interventions-for-all-clinical-conditions)

<comment><USER29> placebo paradoxon- different teams - different conclusions :)

I agree with this:

 _" It is evident that placebo effects are real and that they have therapeutic potential. Laboratory evidence supports the existence of numerous placebo mechanisms and effects in both healthy volunteers and patients with a variety of medical conditions. Furthermore, clinically relevant evidence demonstrates that placebo effects can have meaningful therapeutic effects, by virtue of magnitude and duration, in different patient populations. Although substantial progress has been made in understanding placebo effects, considerable scientific work remains to be done in both laboratory experiments and translational clinical trial research, \---> with the ultimate aim of harnessing placebo effects to improve patient care."_

Damien G Finniss,corresponding author Ted J Kaptchuk, Franklin Miller, and Fabrizio Benedetti

"Placebo Effects: Biological, Clinical and Ethical Advances"

[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2832199/](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2832199/)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Apple's desktop Mac lineup: A showcase of old technology - <AUTHOR> http://www.macworld.com/article/3180477/macs/the-mac-lineup-is-a-showcase-of-old-technology.html <comment><USER2> Innovation for the sake of innovation is a losing strategy. Everyone I know that's on the MBP line is perfectly ok for the next few years with the existing line. I don't need thinner, lighter, less ports. Unless they come out with a battery that will last a week on a single charge, there's not much more innovation that's needed.

<comment><USER3> I agree with you, but at this point it's leaving people wondering if they're almost abandoning the Mac itself. It feels like an after thought instead of a product line.

Not every release needs to be a groundbreaking product, but I'd be pretty happy seeing at least some newer CPUs/GPUs across the product line. Keep up with what Intel has.</comment></comment>


Code folds: a fresh take on an old concept - <AUTHOR> http://blog.framerjs.com/posts/code-folds.html <comment><AUTHOR> Framer is a tool for quickly creating app prototypes from static designs, using code. Faced with our users creating increasingly bigger prototypes, we set out to find solutions to organise code without sacrificing the simplicity of having just a single code file.

We looked at classic code folding, but found that although it is a great way to hide larger blocks of code, it doesn't make for a great editing experience; for whenever something needs changing inside of a fold, it needs to be unfolded first.

So we decided to keep what's good about the concept, and improve the editing part by making a double click on a fold have the contents of the fold show in isolation, ready for editing. When done editing, the isolated mode can be escaped and the user returns to the main view.</comment>


Startup CEOs, stop acting like victims. - <AUTHOR> http://siberianfruit.com/post/24290966995/startup-ceos-stop-acting-like-victims

<comment><USER2> The reason that post has so many upvotes is because what he is describing is real, mental suffering and fatigue that most (not all, I guess) startup founders accrue. The end result of doing a startup is personal learning, growth, having had the opportunity to work with smart people, etc., but during the process you will forget those things because there are other things on your mind - at least I do.

I don't think any founder would take their role for granted or change their position with anyone else - but when you are in the hot seat and you feel the weight of so many people on your shoulders to do well by them and for them, there are days where you wonder if you should just go work for someone else and let them make the decisions for you.

I would venture that the worst feeling in the world is one of being trapped and not knowing what to do. When you are a startup founder, you are trapped all the time, and constantly between rocks and hard places. You need to learn everything but you don't know what exactly. You need to improve growth, improve product, improve retention, improve revenue, improve profitability, but you don't know how sometimes and you don't know who to ask, and a lot of the time you don't even know how to measure success when it does happen until well after the fact. Being a founder is not like anything else in the world, because it's the one societal role where up until you actually accomplish and build something of value and sustain it for a long period of time, there's nobody but your parents to say how proud they are of you.

<comment><USER3> _"... The reason that post has so many upvotes is because what ^he^ is describing is real, mental suffering and fatigue that most (not all, I guess) startup founders accrue. ..."_

He is a she, Deena Varshavskaya ~ <https://twitter.com/#!/siberianfruit>

<comment><USER4> The "he" is the guy who answered the Quora question that Deena's responding to: [http://www.quora.com/Startups/What-does-it-feel-like-to- be-t...](http://www.quora.com/Startups/What-does-it-feel-like-to-be-the-CEO- of-a-start-up)

<comment><USER3> _"... The "he" is the guy who answered the Quora question that Deena's responding ..."_

excellent, thanks for the correction.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've been a startup CEO full time for oh, about 2 months now. It has been the most phenomenal, educational experience of my life. I wouldn't trade it for anything. I skimmed the quora post, and boy... that guy's life sounds horrible.

I sleep well most nights, but I stress on others. The pressure is on since we've taken money and don't yet earn enough to curb the burn. I also have this belief (crazy?) that we're doing something awesome, and have the background to accomplish it. I've always felt that I (+ my cofounder) have the agency to be in control of our destiny. I've never been more responsible for the outcome of things than I am today.

I'm guessing that the people who don't sleep well are (too far) out of their depth and the weight of their impending doom unless they figure it out is crushing.

As the CEO, I've taken on the bulk of the shit work - like administrative stuff - getting a lawyer, accountant, bookkeeper, bank account (the list goes on). I spend less time than I'd like on the product. Maybe 10-15 hours a week in the code / learning. A lot of time emailing, organizing meetings and phone calls. Overall though, it's fun and rewarding work.

We are building something that doesn't exist in the world and providing it to other people in exchange for money. How cool is that!

<comment><USER6> You made me somewhat rethink my goals of fun being my top priority for projects. Now I have no idea as to whether I would continue working on something if it got big and i had to worry about legal and administrative issues.

I'm sure every experience starts different, but I would trade this off as soon as possible if I had to. Work on the stuff you want to work on! I hope you can soon!

Cheers

<comment><USER5> Fun is what gets me out of bed in the morning. Every day at work is a joy and brings new challenges. A project getting big is an awesome problem to have. The ideal project in my mind is one that is fun for you and solves a real need for someone else. You'll be able to figure out the legal and admin stuff as it pops up. So don't let that discourage you.

My contact info is in my profile. If you have questions about the admin stuff with setting up a company, I (or I'm sure many other HNers) would be happy to help.

<comment><USER7> My friend, the first few months are the easiest months - the ignorance is bliss months. Running a startup is enormous fun and an incredible learning experience. I have enumerated some of the stress inducing issues below. I do not mean to discourage, though everyone needs to know what they are getting into with eyes wide open,

\- Not having done enough research and received proper feedback before launch and the product not taking off.

\- Bending over backwards for major clients.

\- Feeling enormous responsibility to your investors to pay them back.

\- Making sure that you do not run out of money.

\- Responsibility to your employees that you do everything you can to make sure that you will be able to pay them, and that their efforts will prove fruitful.

\- Hiring the right people.

\- Firing the right people.

\- How you are taking a $60k/year salary, basically paycheck-to-paycheck and not being able to go to your closest friend's bachelor parties/weddings, and not being able to get your girlfriend a nice engagement ring or pay for a wedding.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> From my experience, this notion of martyrdom is only common among startup CEOs at companies that haven't yet gain traction or found their own success. Self- validation is easy to come by when your company is a success. When things aren't going well, it's much easier to justify if you can convince yourself (and others) that you're working on it as hard as you can.

The idea is that more work now == more success later. The martyr CEO who sacrifices every weekend and never sleeps a full eight hours is the extreme example of putting in more work. And until the company actually achieves success, the long hours of work are all the CEO really has to show other people (and themselves) that their company is worthwhile.

</comment><comment><USER9> I think the point of the original article was missed, but you still make a great point about the empowering/inspiring side of the process.

As someone who has advised hundreds of small business owners, the gritty, hard reality is exactly what most of them need to be educated about.

Most startups fail because founders are unprepared, underfunded, and have a tremendous optimism about what they can accomplish. They fail because they're 'super inspired' and 'totally passionate' and 'serial entrepreneurs'. They fail because they're not losing sleep over how well they execute their sales funnel.

Don't get me wrong, my favorite line in startups is that 'optimism builds companies, pessimism keeps them operating'. You need both to make it long term.

I didn't sense an ounce of complaining, martyrdom, or bitching in the article, just a welcome glimpse into a world that most observers glorify as a real life version of 'the social network'. More people need to see it, especially as we're in the era of celebrating entrepreneurs.

The ones that succeed are the one's fighting for every inch, every customer, and every success. If you're not, someone smarter, hungrier, and better funded is coming for your customers.

Finding a zen and a calm perspective is what the best leaders do to combat the anxiety and stress of solving big problems in global markets.

Once again I totally appreciate your take, I think it's bang on, just as the other is. You need both to make it....

<comment><USER10> _They fail because they're not losing sleep over how well they execute their sales funnel._

As someone who is losing sleep over the same issue, I appreaciate the fact that you understand it. I never get why so many startups focus on the minor things when the sales funnel is the most important part of the deal. Seems like people are just doing startups because its IN. Not because they want to build a profitable business.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The truth is that there is an observation bias at play where people that are negative about experiences go to do that and people that are positive go to other places to do that.

The truth is that as CEO the buck stops with you, for good or bad.

How you choose to experience that is a whole other story. I for one find it more empowering to take this view that you are in control as CEO and to be accountable for your actions.

I know that doing this is hard, but it is no different to everything else where you have to be the best of the best. Blackbelt in martial arts, number 1 hit in the music charts, award winning tattooist, academy award winning movie director. It's all hard work and you never know how hard until you DO it.

The closest thing I can think of to it is probably having a baby: does it change your life? Is it harder/different than you thought? would you do it again anyway?

If you answer no to any of these then you will probably make a bad parent/CEO :)

</comment><comment><USER12> _"If anyone is unhappy, remember that his unhappiness is his own fault... Nothing else is the cause of anxiety or loss of tranquility except our own opinion."_

\- Epictetus

<comment><USER13> He has a point. But clearly Epictetus did not have party-all-night upstairs neighbors with bad taste in music.

Just sayin'.

<comment><USER11> Epictetus was born into slavery, was lame, became a free man somehow, presumably from studying philosophy, then was banned from Rome for being a philosopher.

I'd say he argues the same point as this article in that he was happy regardless of the circumstances of his life.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I personally think that it's good for people to warn others about hardships, which the Quora answer could have been.

But I also think that complaining about something completely in your control, or something you started is silly. If you're the CEO and you don't like your schedule or your daily routine, then change it.

I may not have created anything of importance yet, but my goal is to do something on the side and part time while working, have fun with it, and stay true to to the fun point the entire time. When something you put on yourself stops being fun, you need to start asking questions.

Cheers

<comment><USER14> Most people interpret the job of CEO backward. When you are a CEO with employees, investors, etc your job is to balance the needs and wants of all those people ahead of whatever you might want. It is really the exact opposite of being a dictator. You can change your schedule if you do not like it only to the extent it does not significantly impact everyone else associated with the company.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> People are fascinated by the trials and tribulations of startup CEOs to the point of romanticism. It's certainly an ambitious and stressful job, but so are the jobs of all the people who are deeply invested in the companies those CEOs run.

A bit of human balance goes a long way to creating a culture for long-term success.

</comment><comment><USER16> Yea, stop acting like you have a high stress job and large uncertainty about if you will be successful. Ignore the fact that most startups fail.

<comment><USER6> I agree. People put stress onto themselves, and my first failure was because I didn't prepare enough financially so I'd like to add to your point and say any financial uncertainty is because you didn't prepare for it.

"It's better to be prepared and not have an opportunity than to be given one and not be prepared." - My grandfather

<comment><USER17> I don't understand your point. If you're preparing for an opportunity that never comes, that preparation is wasted. Better to find as many opportunities to succeed as you can and try to seize them when they present themselves, even if you're not 100% ready.

For example, we are currently in a fantastic economic environment to found a startup. Raising money, recruiting talent, finding partners,etc is easier than ever before(at least in startup hotspots). People who are working on a project on the side part time and are waiting to take the leap into a startup until they're more prepared will likely miss out on the opportunity and will regret it later.

<comment><USER18> One set of preparation can be good for more than one opportunity. E.g. Saving up $100k, which can be used for the following opportunities: Housing crisis, stock crash, initial investment in a startup, travel. It can also be used for the following unfavourable circumstances: sickness, accident, personal reason for travelling. A more narrow form of preparation could be learning a skill, e.g. programming, which sets you up for possible startup ventures as well as a full-time job.

He's not saying that you shouldn't try to seize opportunities when you may not be fully prepared; He's saying when opportunities are available, you will be more able to seize it if you're more prepared.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Hey buddy. Try this for a couple years. That post is dead on.

</comment><comment><USER20> As The Eagles said in Hotel California: "We are all just prisoners here of our own device."

<comment><USER21> yep yep :)</comment></comment>


PayPal Drops Out of Facebook's Libra Payments Network - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/paypal-drops-out-of-facebooks-libra-payments-network-11570218306?mod=rsswn <comment><USER2> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21161233](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21161233)</comment>


Ask HN: Quick and Dirty DevOps/SRE Salary? - just-juan-post There is a lot of data when it comes to SWE/software dev but not as much when it comes to DevOps/SRE.
This HN user is getting compensated so well that he doesn't look at jobs that pay under $350k. [1]  This Reddit user is currently making $340k with 5 years of experience.[2]
$180k+ DevOps jobs are easy to find.  What about things beyond that?
- Annual total TC
 - Location including work from home or travel
My current comp is $190k in Portland.
Is anyone else breaking $250k without living in NYC or SF?  What's your experience with high-end DevOps/SRE jobs?
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20848770
[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/ITCareerQuestions/comments/cxiprc/experienced_200k_technical_jobs_nonmanagement_low/ez0hug9/ <comment><AUTHOR> My total comp is ~250k, in DevOps.

My HQ is in a tech hub, but I work remotely from the Midwest.

They are out there, you just have to find them. Truly talented DevOps engineers have a niche mix of skills, and are in high enough demand they can ask for(and get) these types of salaries and work arrangements.

<comment><USER2> If you are not in NYC, SF, SEA, etc you will have a much harder time getting those numbers. There are some remote roles at that level, but not too many. As above, the jobs are out there, but you need to be in the right location and have the right mix of skills and experience. Levels.fyi and Blind are useful resources for uncovering information on what companies are paying.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Question: are people really making $200k+ with 5 years experience?

Or is it simply that high-earner outliers are more vocal online about their salary than average earners, creating a false appearance that $200k+ salaries are more common than they actually are in real life?

<comment><USER4> At FAANG companies, it's not unheard of for new SWE grads to command $200k+ starting compensation. For someone with 5 years experience at the company it would actually be unusual for them to make less than $200k, in the US at least.

This resource is pretty accurate for the lower levels, in my experience: [https://www.levels.fyi/](https://www.levels.fyi/)

<comment><USER5> I wish levels.fyi did a better job with locations. You can filter individual salaries by location but it doesn't seem like you can do anything else by location (e.g. filtering the charts or the ranges or anything else). Even with the big tech companies location has a big impact. Google is not paying SF salaries to people in Pittsburgh.

<comment><USER6> I'm from Levels.fyi. This is in the works right now. It's been our number 1 request so far. Stay tuned :)

P.S. We announce new features on our Twitter handle fairly often: [https://twitter.com/Levelsfyi](https://twitter.com/Levelsfyi)

<comment><USER5> Cool, thanks for being responsive!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Cries with €30K in South Italy

<comment><USER8> yeah, the EU sucks for tech salaries

<comment><USER9> I think it's wrong to say that in general for EU. There is a huge difference on salaries depending on where in the EU you are.

<comment><USER10> There is almost nowhere in the EU that $200K is normal. Maybe Zurich - I don't know.

<comment><USER9> 200k might be normal but 30k would be below a entry level graduate many places.

<comment><USER8> where exactly?

I did some googling and the results suggest the average IT grad salary in London (which is very expensive and features some of the highest salaries) is around 30k.

<comment><USER9> scandinavia at least (the markets I have most experience with)

But [https://www.cwjobs.co.uk/salary-checker/average-computer- sci...](https://www.cwjobs.co.uk/salary-checker/average-computer-science- salary) shows much higher salaries than 30k in london and germany too ([https://www.statista.com/statistics/584759/average-gross- sta...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/584759/average-gross-starting- salary-university-graduates-germany/))

<comment><USER8> the first source does not show grad salaries and the average is 57.5k, which is still a lot lower. the second source is paywalled and I can't open it at all.

<comment><USER9> May comment was not directed at the 200k but the 30 and 35k quoted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> How hard would it be for a fullstack dev to transition to devops? 8+ years experience laravel, 3 years with vue/react, 4 with angular.

I've been using linux since 2012 as my dev machine. I can configure nginx by hand or build bash scripts to do it for me.

I can build cli applications using js, laravel-zero, and/or bash. I also know how to use docker, jenkins, etc...

I haven't really worked much on apps in scale, but I'm feeling a bit burned out in crud-development. Thinking of maybe giving devops a try. That or product manager or something.

</comment><comment><USER12> How do you guys transition into newer technologies and gain enough experience to land a position in that new area?

</comment><comment><USER6> We have some DevOps salary data at: [https://www.levels.fyi/comp.html?track=Software%20Engineer&s...](https://www.levels.fyi/comp.html?track=Software%20Engineer&search=DevOps)

Lmk if you have any questions or feedback!

</comment><comment><USER13> Similar lamentation about EU salaries, since those are not often aggregated.

FWIW I was offered $200k in NYC in 2012 (with 5yrs XP at that point and they offered visa sponsorship) if it helps.

</comment><comment><USER14> Wow, i need to start charging more :(</comment>


A failed entrepreneur   - <AUTHOR> http://www.growthology.org/growthology/2010/06/a-failed-entrepreneur.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+typepad/1210088963s1218/growthology+(Growthology)

<comment><USER2> I wouldn't say the father failed at all. Nothing lasts forever and companies are no exception. Growing and leading a company for 20 years is a huge accomplishment, no matter what happens after that. Companies are not meant to last forever. We've had companies since the middle ages, and none of them exist now. Surely they're not all failed companies whose leaders all failed them?

Besides, there's no way bankruptcy wipes away all the value that has been created. If a company can support three dozen families over 20 years (figures from the story) that's a tremendous amount of value. The few million dollar the company was worth before it went bankrupt pales in comparison.

I understand why the father in the story would blame himself, it's only natural. It's a very human thing to second guess and blame yourself. My point is that people always find a way to blame themselves so I don't think somebody who successfully leads a business for 19 years is any more of a failed entrepreneur than a writer who writes bestsellers for 19 years or professor who does research and manages his group for 19 years or an actor who has 19 years worth of television and movies to his name.

Failed? Pheh.

<comment><USER3> > We've had companies since the middle ages, and none of them exist now.

I totally agree, but it's not strictly true that none of them exist anymore: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoshi_Ryokan>

<comment><USER4> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_companies>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Seems like he was quite a champ. Far more precious if you can teach your kids to think for themselves and use their wings, than leave them a multi-million dollar company, me thinks.

</comment><comment><USER6> It's a very moving story. It's well worth the read.

</comment><comment><USER7> Very well written, a thank you to the author (and his father!)

</comment><comment><USER8> Well that's going on my wall.

</comment><comment><USER9> for every success in life there are always a long list of glorious failures that precede it.</comment>


Investigation into EU institutions' use of Microsoft products and services - <AUTHOR> https://edps.europa.eu/sites/edp/files/publication/20-07-02_edps_euis_microsoft_contract_investigation_en.html <comment><USER2> Really, this all boils down to the age-old question of "buy versus build".

The only way to completely control every aspect of your computing ecosystem is to build your own. Open source offers a convenient starting point but there is still a lot of work to be done to produce and maintain a fully comparable, equally integrated ecosystem.

In other words, cost and compatibility are the typical sticking points to rolling your own. Do the benefits justify the expense? This is the ultimate value judgment to be answered. If nothing less than full control is acceptable, the answer should be obvious.

<comment><USER3> Buy ? They not even negotiated contracts ! This just boils down to utter stupidity. Even China negotiated theirs contracts with same company.

Build ? I wonder: why Dijkstra and rest just moved to US ? Looks like since 60's nothing substantial was build on Old Continent.

O, btw: EU announced EU's own CPU - they just licensed ARM from UK :>>>>

Seriously there is need for even better "investigation", looks like all that 4-years plans/projects are just pure scam. Last one: EU own cloud, where it is ?</comment></comment>


How did this man land a $4 million contract on LinkedIn? - <AUTHOR> http://www.theage.com.au/small-business/growing/how-did-this-man-land-a-4-million-contract-on-linkedin-20130925-2uczd.html <comment><USER2> Maybe corporate damage control..</comment>


NAD+ could regulate aging, may explain rejuvenation - <AUTHOR> http://science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6331/1312 <comment><AUTHOR> The high-dosage NMN (boosting production of NAD+) fed to mice via drinking water appears to be 300 mg/kg of bodyweight/day.

How much would it cost to produce 5 grams per day (adjusted for a couple of humans)? and how could a regular, motivated (software) engineer learn to do it?

Edit: adjusted the dose to 1/12th for mice-to-human adjustment, we're looking at 5g NMN/day for a couple (not 50g).

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Here is the description via Harvard: "Critical step found in DNA repair, cellular aging" [1]

[1] [http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2017/03/harvard- scient...](http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2017/03/harvard-scientists- pinpoint-critical-step-in-dna-repair-cellular-aging/)

</comment><comment><USER2> Related: [https://www.elysiumhealth.com](https://www.elysiumhealth.com)

I've been taking this for about 6 months. Haven't noticed much other than better sleep, easier to wake upon time feeling refreshed.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's NR, not NMN. Also, the daily Elysium dose of NR is 500mg, much less in proportion to body weight than what was fed to the mice in this Harvard study.

Added: Thanks to jclos below. The human-mouse-equivalent NMN dose would be 1/12th, 25mg/kg of bodyweight/day.

<comment><USER3> Keep in mind that there is no 1:1 mapping between mg/kg/day for mice and for humans due to difference in metabolism. [http://www.ergo- log.com/calculatethehumandosage.html](http://www.ergo- log.com/calculatethehumandosage.html) gives a couple of useful formulas to calculate the actual dosage for humans and it's much more reasonable.

<comment><USER4> Having done some ECLSS stuff it takes about 13 mice to equal metabolic load of a human. This does not add up if you use mass alone, but comes out pretty close using volume/surface area metric.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> that being said, NAD is so ubiquitous that I can't imagine it is the only factor. It's may be more akin to saying if you use Chevron gas with techron vs. Arco gas, that your engine may last another 5,000 miles or something. But it doesn't address primary causes of engine failure based on design, engineering, etc.

<comment><USER6> I don't think a car analogy is apt because a car isn't self-repairing like many biological processes.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Good languages for closed-source desktop apps - <AUTHOR> Just wanted to get some opinions on this - if your goal is to write closed source, cross platform desktop apps, what are some good languages to consider?<p>I'm looking for a high-level, efficient language, but it needs to be able to compile to machine code. For example, while I love Python, I would eliminate it here because an app "frozen" by cx_freeze or py2exe can be decompiled into source without too much effort. <comment><USER2> I would give up on "cross platform" desktop apps and use whatever the native language is for the platform. For Windows, that's C#/.NET. For Mac, Objective C/Cocoa. For Linux, probably C/Gtk or C++/Qt.

The problem with cross-platform apps is that you end up programming to the least common denominator of the platforms you support, and your app never has the performance or look & feel that users expect. Contrast: uTorrent vs. Azureus, iChat vs. Pidgin, TextMate vs. jEdit, etc. In a hyper-competitive desktop space, that often means death. Giant companies like IBM (Eclipse) or Mozilla (Firefox) can get away with it because the scale of what they're doing is very difficult for a small startup to replicate, but most micro-ISVs can't.

Yes, this is one reason why developing desktop apps sucks.

<comment><USER3> I agree with everything nostrademons is saying, cross platfrom apps are bad. I did some java desktop apps about 4 or 5 years ago and the ui was awful. i think it's gotten a little better... but still, native app is going to look far superior.

<comment><USER4> And that might even matter for some audiences. It doesn't for all of them: BCC had 2x the conversion for installations on Mac (where it is, ahem, distinctly non-native) relative to Windows.

<comment><USER2> Whether it matters depends a lot on how competitive the market is. If your app is head and shoulders above the competition in functionality, users will put up with a little UI ugliness. If most of the apps in your market basically do everything the user wants, they're going to decide based on what is prettiest/most responsive, which is usually the native app.

I still remember discovering uTorrent. I'd tried about 4-5 Bittorrent apps before then, including 3 wxPython-based ones and Azureus. They also basically did what I needed - they let me download, they let me keep track of existing transfers, and they let me throttle bandwidth. The difference was that uTorrent didn't take up a few hundred megs of RAM and didn't peg my CPU. The developer accomplished this by doing an end-run around all the layers of abstraction and keeping an eye on performance; it's much harder to do this with a cross-platform library in the way.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> If you put a gun to my head and told me "Write another desktop app", I'd tell you "Java", but you'd have to put a gun to my head. Balsamiq has also sold me on AIR. Unless you have a specific business requirement for it being on the desktop, though, the web _overwhelmingly_ favors your interests as a businessman.

Thoughts on this at length are on my blog -- and if anything, a year later I believe everything here more strongly: [http://www.kalzumeus.com/2009/09/05/desktop-aps-versus- web-a...](http://www.kalzumeus.com/2009/09/05/desktop-aps-versus-web-apps/)

With specific reference to decompiling your source code: it doesn't matter, because a) your application will be pirated anyhow and b) there is no difference to the end user the mechanism by which the pirated version works. Also, you shouldn't be worried about piracy unless you're selling to twenty- something white and Asian males, in which case piracy is one of many business- sinking problems you have. (If you're really worried about piracy, can I recommend web apps again, or at the least an integrated server component? Pirating the client lets you pirate the application like downloading Firefox lets you pirate Basecamp.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Your article was an excellent read, so thanks for the link. I generally agree with a lot of what you're saying.

My potential audience is pretty targeted - mainly research scientists and possibly some government workers. They'll likely be more computer savvy than the average user (on average, at least - some scientists I know are just as bad as Grandma.) What I worry about in considering a web app is:

1 - People want to be able to run the software anywhere, any time, without a connection to the internet.

2 - When entering large amounts of data, which is potentially sensitive, into an application, it seems like people would trust a desktop app more.

Number 2 is subjective, but as a scientist myself, I would feel better about a program running on my own machine.

Any thoughts?

<comment><USER5> The latest version of HTML has the ability to do offline apps. i.e. you write your application in Javascript as a webapp, and it can run offline. You can store data locally in the browser and get javascript notifications when you are back online so you can sync.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Machine code can be decompiled too, even if not as cleanly. It would slow down efforts to make an unauthorized fork of the software as a whole, but anyone curious enough about individual bits and pieces could still see exactly what's happening. Closed source is really more of a legal block than a technical one.

Given that and the lack of popular, high-level languages that compile to machine code (C++ is the best I can come up with), I'd reconsider whether that's really a priority.

<comment><AUTHOR> True that any program can be reverse engineered. But for example with Python, you're not just handing them the program, but also the bytecode, which can be turned into source without spending much time. This gives a lot more information much faster.

I would prefer something like C++ which is about as obfuscated as you're going to get, but I'm curious if there are any higher level options that would save programming time.

<comment><USER7> Some, they are usually more obscure, e.g.:

\- D

\- Haskell

\- OCaml

\- Various Scheme/Common Lisp compilers

Some of them have Qt bindings (e.g. QtD and QtHaskell). Though it may be harder to hire programmers for any of these languages.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I personally like C#.

If you use Gtk for the GUI, it's cross platform using Mono. Lots of closed and open source widgets, easy to write your own, and runs very quickly.

IMHO, the networking stack in C# is much more robust and provides better performance than in Java, and you can static link the runtimes to the app, making deployment of installer-free apps relatively easy using embedded resources.

Cheers! Randy

</comment><comment><USER9> High-level languages are hard to obfuscate. If you're going for difficulty in decompilation, you're pretty much stuck to low-level, non-interpreted languages.

.NET and Java are your best bets for relatively high-level desktop languages that are hard to decompile because since they're so widely used, obfuscation techniques are more advanced. But really if you want to create a difficult-to- decompile program, I think you're pretty much stuck with C or other non- interpreted, low-level languages (maybe try D?).

</comment><comment><USER10> C++ and QT

<http://qt.nokia.com/>

</comment><comment><USER11> LispWorks with CAPI, here is some software written with it: <http://weitz.de/regex-coach/> <http://www.netfonds.no/manual_pt_eng.php> <http://lisp.ystok.ru/ygrid/index.html> or check on their page - <http://www.lispworks.com/success-stories/index.html> I've started doing some small Perforce p4win clone in it - github.com/malkia/p4bee - it contains source code and binaries.

<comment><USER12> He might need to take a year off to master Common Lisp though.

Dunno, a year off sounds nice, but you don't need to wait that long to be competitive. Better find a GUI and an obfuscation solution for a language you _already_ know now, than to dick around with new languages when you have a product to finish and ship.

If I must. I would do the app in Python or whatever, then spend 2-3 weeks designing my own custom loader. Some C-based stub code packer that load a python interpreter as a shared library then my code. Wrap everything up with some compression and verify integrity with some crypto.

Nearly every embedded scripting language can be shoe-horned with custom packer like this that looks a lot like Java's ClassLoader. If you want to take this to its engineering extreme, you might even be able to get remote binary update functionality, by fetching packed tarballs of new code from your server, after the necessary key exchange.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sounds cool. Any examples of people who have done something similar?

<comment><USER12> I used to crack sharewares and commercial apps as a kid. Of course I _haven't_ seen anything like that, nope, no sah!

[Edit:

Ok, I have started hacking something up as proof of concept. Leave an email in your profile or shoot me one.

]

<comment><AUTHOR> Put my email in my profile - I'm interested to see it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Why not use cython and do only the sensitive stuff in c?

It is really interesting that the gui problem still isn't solved after so many years. Personally i think microsoft made the right thing by really decoupling design from code. I'm not using windows tough...

</comment><comment><USER14> Freepascal + Lazarus for win/mac/linux desktop apps, if you dig pascal language.

</comment><comment><USER15> Haskell is high-level, fast, and its optimized machine code would be nigh impossible to decompile in my opinion. Unfortunately it'd be a bit of a stretch to write a large GUI app in Haskell at this point...

<comment><USER16> I know there's GTk+ bindings for Haskell. I don't know if there's any others.

Can anyone comment on the quality of the GTk+ bindings, or the existence of any other bindings?

I have enough experience with GTk+ from C and Python to say that it creates really nice, snappy UIs under Linux, but it's really hard to make it "feel right" under Windows, and pretty much impossible to make it "feel right" under OS X. On those platforms, it will almost always stand out the same way that Java apps do.

I'll also say that Haskell, while awesome, is a PITA to learn.

<comment><USER17> I believe the Haskell interface to wxWidgets is reasonably mature and widely- used (as Haskell libraries go).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> If it's for Windows only WPF/Silverlight in C# is probably the most productive platform.

</comment><comment><USER3> if you do go with the java desktop app, use the absolute layout. those complex layouts were very difficult to change.

</comment><comment><USER19> Python + Titanium from Appcelerator

Air

Python + QT

<comment><USER12> PyQt is nice, but damn, the other two are ugly slow dogs.

I just removed Air yesterday, and Appcelerator needs a bit more work.

<comment><USER19> Air isn't the snappiest, but it works, and you can easily hire programmers to continue developing in it.

Appcelerator I'm less certain on, but they do seem to keep tossing effort at things.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> _> I'm a Linux guy at heart_

If you are going to use GTK+, take a look at Vala [1]. It's a C#-like language which is compiled into C. Much saner than coding in C. You can easily port your app to Windows/OSX, but, as others noted, non-native UI will be far from perfect.

I'm using this approach in an open-source project of mine [2], feel free to borrow the ideas.

[1] <http://live.gnome.org/Vala>

[2] <http://www.spek-project.org/></comment>


Habitat (video game) - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat_(video_game) <comment><USER2> Super cool to see this on the front page!

I'm part of the Neohabitat project, started by the creators of Habitat and dedicated to bringing it back to life. We've got the original launch world back up and running (over 5000 regions!), and you can play it directly in the browser over at our exhibit site:

[http://exhibit-demo.spi.ne](http://exhibit-demo.spi.ne)

If you're handy with Java or JavaScript, we've also got an open source project you can check out too:

[https://github.com/frandallfarmer/neohabitat](https://github.com/frandallfarmer/neohabitat) [http://neohabitat.org](http://neohabitat.org)

See y'all in world!

<comment><USER3> Would love to join, but I get as far as "press cmd-n or alt-n then any key to continue" (or similar) and cant get any further. Using chrome on a mac.

<comment><USER2> Ohh, Macs are a bit weird there, you'll want to use Option-N then press Enter. If it works, you'll see a "Version 1.0" string come up followed by a lot of disk sounds as all the imagery loads.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The Digital Antiquarian has an article that goes quite in-depth on the history and context of this game:

[https://www.filfre.net/2015/07/a-new-force-in-games- part-2-a...](https://www.filfre.net/2015/07/a-new-force-in-games- part-2-a-habitat-in-cyberspace/)

<comment><USER5> This author is impressive.

I value their work highly enough to savor, not rush it. Just wanted that quality recognized here, should they read HN.

(Thank you)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Ah, it looks like this is what the graphical version of Community in Halt and Catch Fire was based on!

<comment><USER7> It is one of the inspirations according to someone on the project...

[https://www.fastcompany.com/3063135/welcome- to-1986-inside-h...](https://www.fastcompany.com/3063135/welcome- to-1986-inside-halt-and-catch-fires-high-tech-time-machine)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Promo: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVpulhO3jyc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVpulhO3jyc)

</comment><comment><USER9> The source for Habitat is available on GitHub these days:

[https://github.com/Museum-of-Art-and-Digital- Entertainment/h...](https://github.com/Museum-of-Art-and-Digital- Entertainment/habitat)

<comment><USER10> This is one of the first "old" codebases, made public for historical purposes that I've seen with really a really good README. It seems possible to actually compile, if not run Habitat?

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Not too long ago I was one of the contributors for this project. Despite my mediocre programming skills, everyone was extremely supportive and gave me a lot of constructive feedback. Hell, I even got a personalized note from one of the original developers in-game, which was pretty awesome.

If you're looking for some fun, then I'd also recommend checking out some of the dev docs.

[https://github.com/frandallfarmer/neohabitat- doc/blob/master...](https://github.com/frandallfarmer/neohabitat- doc/blob/master/docs/devdocs/ethics.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER12> Be sure to look at F. Randall Farmer's articles under "Literature", really fascinating and entertaining!

[http://www.crockford.com/ec/anecdotes.html](http://www.crockford.com/ec/anecdotes.html)

<comment><USER13> Was just about to link this! My favorite excerpt:

"Would anyone actually go to the trouble of disassembling and studying 100K or so of incredibly tight and bizarrely threaded 6502 machine code just to tinker? As it turns out, the answer is yes. People did. We were not 100% rigorous in following our own rule. It turned out that there were a few features whose implementation was greatly eased by breaking the rule in situations where, in our judgment, the consequences would not be material if some people "cheated" by hacking their own systems. Darned if some people didn't hack their systems to cheat in exactly these ways."

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Jeff Atwood had an article titled "The Organism Will Do Whatever It Damn Well Pleases".

He summarized how some of the lessons learned from Habitat applied to StackOverflow/StackExchange, or had to be relearned.

[https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-organism-will-do-what- it-d...](https://blog.codinghorror.com/the-organism-will-do-what-it-damn-well- pleases/)

</comment><comment><USER15> You can actually play this at the videogame museum in oakland, ca. [https://frandallfarmer.github.io/neohabitat- doc/docs//](https://frandallfarmer.github.io/neohabitat-doc/docs//)

I got to play with it, it's cool.</comment>


Why Do Some Nations Have Lower IQ Scores? - <AUTHOR> http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/26/why-do-iq-scores-vary-by-nation.html <comment><USER2> _some theorists have proposed that lower temperatures may evolutionarily select for higher intelligence_

Is that because for early humans to survive in cold climates they would have to have the intelligence to create fire and clothing?

It seems hard to control for climate in a study like this since it seems so closely linked to rates of infectious disease. Parasites like malaria are carried by mosquitoes that only survive in tropical climates. Also, water shortages and food-borne illnesses would be more prevalent in warmer climates.</comment>