Time To Get Past Facebook And Invent A New Future - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/04/the-jig-is-up-time-to-get-past-facebook-and-invent-a-new-future/256046/

<comment><USER5> This article is spot on in its thesis, though not always in its arguments.

Everyone is convinced -- because the people who work in marketing are happy because they can sell ads -- that social media is an important thing. It is not.

Social media is people doing what they were already doing, only more often and anywhere. Flirting with girls, talking with friends, etc. Making these activities digital is not changing society or improving lives. It is the same society and the same lives, with more time spent on these activities. Never has anyone gone to bed thinking "Gosh, I wish I had spent more time looking at funny pictures of strangers today." People often go to bed regretting not doing what they could have done when instead they were on Facebook and Twitter and [insert the names of 90% of the startups you have heard of].

Every founder will go on and on about "changing the world" if you let him. This is as if changing the world were something worth doing for its own sake. If you see a problem that is worth fixing and you fix it, then the change effected is important and even virtuous. But the key is that problem must be worth solving. Just because a petulant and spoiled American wants his iced mocha faster does not mean that speeding up sales of mocha is a worthy problem. Can you make money doing it? Probably.

I went to school to become an engineer (I'm 24) because I thought that computers and the internet were going to make invention and innovation possible even for people who did not work for industrial laboratories. Maybe the hugely reduced barriers to entry into the technology sector that resulted from cheap computers and good programming tools would lead young and eager people of brilliance to found ambitious companies to finally -- aren't we all sick of being exasperated by the mediocrity of culture and politics in the past 20 years? -- steer human life into better modes of existence and a new frontier of boldness. Sure, the internet cannot do this all on its own, but is such a powerful and promising tool, that maybe it would start things.

This has not happened. There are a few gems like SpaceX and Willow Garage that seek out challenge in this way, but they are doing it independent of the cheapness and openness that computers now allow. Worse, many of the companies that have been founded are dedicated to aggressively ruining the internet by making it a place for sucking up private information, showing ads, and selling the same old useless junk.

What it seems to me this article is about is that innovation in technology right now is about money, not about betterment. A billion dollars was just spent on Instagram. To do what? If you are so in the bubble of the "startup world" that you do not see the self-evident absurdity of a situation in which that is a possible and reasonable event, you are become blinded.

Stop thinking like a marketer and think like an inventor with balls. Stop trying to get rich unless you are getting rich by doing something that is worth doing.

I write this as someone who honestly loves technology, hacking, the hacker ethic, and HN, but I walk around Palo Alto every day being slowly crushed by disappointment. The problem is not that the good hackers are being spread across too many companies, it is that too many companies are not doing things worthy of hackers.

<comment><USER6> >People often go to bed regretting not doing what they could have done when instead they were on Facebook and Twitter and [insert the names of 90% of the startups you have heard of].

I know I have. Many more times than I care to admit.

>it is that too many companies are not doing things worthy of hackers.

Excellent. And since I always ask this question of people who lament the status quo:

What _did_ you have in mind?

<comment><USER7> Make ubiquitous computing a reality (Raspberry PI is a step in this direction).

Make personal analytics useful (something like [http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/09/stephen-wolfram- reveals-t...](http://www.engadget.com/2012/03/09/stephen-wolfram-reveals-the- personal-analytics-of-his-life/), but in a way that is actually useful to normal people).

Link the offline and online into one seamless reality (google glass)

If I had to dream about the future and what it should be we're aiming for, it'd be joint universal augmented network access. I want to live in a world like this one --> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denno_Coil>

<comment><USER8> Add Google self-driving car to that list. Reducing alcohol and speed related deaths to zero within our lifetime, getting rid of car parks (fleets of autonomous vehicles move onto the next customer), cheaper delivery of any physical product currently delivered by road, reduced CO2 emissions (cars know when they need servicing), more productive workforces- you can sleep during your commute, the list of benefits is mind boggling. I would love a kit that I could snap onto my car today that could do this (laws notwithstanding). It's going to be a massive game changer for societies.

<comment><USER9> Subways/trains do this! You don't need self-driving cars to make this world a reality!

<comment><USER8> Subways/trains don't collect you from the front door of your house and deliver you to the exact spot that you want to go to.

Conceptually, I think this is similar to the last-mile broadband problem[1] - it's not economical to lay fiber to the customer's home unless the customer lives in an urban/reasonably densely populated area. Similarly, if you want to go from transport hub to transport hub (bus/rail station, airport etc.) that's no problem, but getting from the transport hub to your home ranges from expensive and awkward to impossible, depending on how far you live from the transport hub.

Self-driving cars solve this problem. Who cares if you have a 100 mile commute, if you can snooze all the way? Just order the car for a set time every morning to allow enough time for the drive and go back to sleep on the way.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_mile>

<comment><USER10> More particularly, subways drive up real-estate values, thus pushing people out of areas served by subways -- unless you convince the government to spread subway access universally throughout the entire sufficiently-populated area.

Compare Europe and New York's Tri-State-Area to Boston or BART.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Its very difficult for me to ascertain if its just me or the following is a growing sentiment... I'm not wowed by hardly anything that comes out of consumer internet tech anymore.

Before anyone gets out a pitchfork I have actively contributed and worked on products in the past that are part of the behemoth of services/apps/sites etc that have become mundane to me so I deserve my own criticism as well.

But the majority of launches especially for the past couple years in the media seems like the same deck chairs (mobile/social/photos/ads/etc) rearranged in a different order. Overtime Ive just lost interest in tech blogs in that I rarely see something that I'd consider genuinely interesting tech from a product or engineering or consumer perspective. Maybe I'm just getting old?

On the other hand if I'm not out of touch it seems like it could be a great time to step out of 'traditional' consumer tech and push on some of the 'new' things like 3D printing, robotics, computer vision, etc as well as seek out applications towards other industries (education, health, food, etc.)

<comment><USER12> I'm with you, to an extent. Interestingly it was the recent excitement around the Pebble watch that made me realize how indifferent I'd become to a lot of new consumer WEB products.

I guess I realized Pebble was exciting because it was a new platform with new opportunities and possibilities. I think that explains a lot of the excitement around the upcoming "SmartTV" frontier too. Even mobile is still young enough that new, exciting applications are still pushing boundaries and blowing minds - though it's maturing rapidly.

But as far as classic web products - the web is a much, much more mature canvas with much more solidified players. Of course it'll lose some of that excitement, naturally...

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I fail to understand this article because I think there are so many different topics the author touches on.. Innovation. Culture. Tech business and startups..

I think the author is conflating some of these concepts or just misunderstanding some. For instance, innovation. What does Facebook have to do with innovation? I'm sure there are a few innovative things they have done, but in my view the outline for the broad concept of what their social service accomplishes had been drawn clearly before their rise to dominance. They just did it better than most, and reached a critical mass in terms of user base.

If the author is simply bored of taking pictures on a phone and beaming them halfway around the world because it's now commonplace... I'm sorry, I don't know what to tell you. There will be another shiny new toy invented that will be another great extension or augmentation of the human experience for you to enjoy in a few years, doubtlessly. So cheer up.

One thing I know is true: All of these things that are being built on the internet and the internet itself.. They are just different vehicles for human expression; they are all extensions of the human thought, the human environment; all facets of ourselves as a species.

I think the author of this article flounders about in coming up with what is "next" because they don't really understand the reasons why the successful products appeared in the first place:

Nobody at Facebook invented the idea that humans like to be in contact with each other.

Nobody at Pinterest came up with the idea that humans collect things that they find interesting. Humans have been doing that for as long as we've been around.

Nobody at Instagram invented the idea that humans are creatures who crave artistic expression. When we didn't have canvas or quill or a camera, we painted on cave walls.

All of these companies just fascilitated a need that was already there, whether people were concious of it or not. I would argue that these products were inevitable, it was just a matter of who would get there first.

If you want to try to answer the obtuse question of "What is next", a question that comes from a confused origin.... You only have to study human nature. That would be my answer. If the author is soliciting advise about the next hot startup to invest in, that's a totally different ballgame.

<comment><USER14> tl;dr "Outside of iPhone, Kindle and mobile applications you nerds have invented absolutely nothing over past 10 years".

<comment><USER15> Don't forget all the mass surveillance and control that "we nerds" made possible.

The picture of the last 20 years is not rosy. Computer technology has advanced a lot, sure, but when I read things from the 70's it seems that there was a more enlightened society back then. I heartily agree with rohern's sentiment.

It's a societal problem. Even though a lot of people would love to work on really new and bold and innovative things, it's impossible to do if society doesn't enable it. For example if your project is immediately shot down due to legal reasons, or not financed out of fear or conservatism.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Why can't the next area of innovation be in education? I'm not talking solely about the transition from print to digital, but rather a complete reset on education with technology at its core rather than at the periphery? Rethink the status quo, with no sacred cows (teachers, buses, grades, testing, - <USER2> classrooms all up for grabs).

Imagine tablet devices or similar technology that provide individualized, adaptive teaching programs that exhibit techniques that allowed students to progress each at their own pace, using highly innovative and entertaining forms of education.

Imagine all progress (and regress) made by the student as a form of continual testing and as gates to increasingly more complex subjects, with programs that adapt to a student's areas of weakness (and strengths), hitting at core concepts from different angles and in ways that appeal to that individuals ideal method of learning, until that student was able to progress to the next concept, or skip and then revisit once a complementary concepts is are understood that would augment that student's ability to master the concept they skipped earlier.

Imagine technological innovation that allowed us to take a less linear approach to certain subjects, which is the only method today given the constraints of 1:* teacher:students and the invisible "bar" which forces certain students to move at the lowest common denominator pace, while taxing other students to keep, such as those that have difficulty learning in the cookie cutter way.

Imagine applications that blend multiple subjects (math, science, history), presenting the material not using your standard "preach at you" teaching technique, but instead using role-based or video game style interactive learning that makes the kid WANT to study, gets excited about the subject.

Envision a system where the best teachers become the product managers that formulate the logic and program flow for those innovative applications, and your run-of-the-mill teacher becomes a custodian for keeping things under control while the students interact with their devices, and of course, with each other, as social interaction is essential for their well-being as well.

Sure there would be many hurdles, not the least of these being teachers unions and the hurdle of changing centuries of preconceived notions of how education should be accomplished, but hey, the author asked for what the next revolutionary idea could be, and a transformation in education with technology at its core has my vote.

<comment><USER17> I have a lot of issues with what you just posted. Perhaps the biggest is enforcing a division between "best teachers" and "run-of-the-mill teachers" into a corporate project management of sorts. I'm not sure where you work, but just imagine if someone deemed you a "run-of-the-mill" employee and relegated you to watching people interact with tablets all day.

Some areas of life require a delicate moderation of technology, and education is one of them. Anyone who drools over education as a "start-up opportunity" likely hasn't done their research.

<comment><USER18> >Some areas of life require a delicate moderation of technology, and education is one of them.

Care to explain why? The GP had some valid points and your rebuttal is that he or she 'hasn't done their research,' without making a single valid point. The metaphor about 'watching people interact with tablets' is not at all what GP mentioned. He suggested that teachers design what interactions take place, and take a proactive role in ensuring that their interactions are effective, while still injecting 'human' aspects of teaching.

<comment><USER17> > "He suggested that teachers design what interactions take place..."

This is exactly my point. Those who work with software/tech/etc often trivialize the relationship between software and people who hold completely different societal roles. No matter how intuitive you make an application, no matter how effective you seem to think your application enhances learning, there will always be a vast number of people (in this case, teachers) who have not the time, nor the desire, to "design" a set of "interactions" for their student.

Are there effective teaching aids available for tablets? Yes. Does that translate to a need for technology-guided learning in more aspects of education? Absolutely not.

The OP talks about "a complete reset on education with technology at its core." I stand by my point; this is a dangerous idea. And you don't have to believe me, most any teacher will tell you this is a bad idea. Teacher flexibility and intuition is (usually) right; software isn't going to magically determine a child's academic strengths and weaknesses.

Education is not some cookie-cutter problem you can fix with a well-designed app.

<comment><USER19> Read Seymor Papert "mindstorms"

<comment><USER17> The publication date was August 4, 1993. Not to say it's irrelevant, but alot has changed since then.

We are all going to disagree about how much tech is too much in education. On the other hand, very few disagree that tech has no place in hospitals, the enterprise, supply chain management, etc. That alone illustrates to me how ridiculous it is to treat education as a space needing a "reset."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Maybe I'm missing the purpose of the article, but I am responding to how I interpreted it.

What will our future be like if we all focus our lives around little boxes in our hands rather than the vast open spaces around us?

Perhaps we should invent a future where the technology are the tools we use to enhance our life, not control our life. In Star Trek, people weren't addicted to PADDs or spend every living moment in the Holo Deck. In fact the episodes where technology controlled people, we recognized the technology as evil.

Invent something to enhance our lives, not control them.

<comment><USER21> If someone is 'addicted' to Facebook, is technology really controlling them, or is it more that they have lost control of themselves? Are they really addicted to technology or just addicted to hanging out with their friends (which technology -- e.g. smartphones + Facebook -- enables to happen anywhere, not just when you're able to schedule time to meet in person).

Also:

1\. Perhaps Star Trek is an unrealistic prediction of how man will interact with technology in the future.

2\. Perhaps your (and the author's) view of things is skewed by selection bias. I.e. you're around people that are more 'addicted' to technology than others.

3\. You're forgetting that in Star Trek the human race has had a sort of epiphany centered around first contact with an alien species.

<comment><USER22> Also remember that in Star Trek the most ubiquitous technology was the pin-on- walkie-talkie, during use of which people would look up at the ceiling.

It was a show defined by the 80's/90's _, with several plotlines that could have been resolved by someone having an iPhone in their pocket, or by the Enterprise having smart drones.

There were only a couple of episodes that dealt with holodeck addiction, and just one or two in which the holodeck was used to its full potential: as a reconfigurable-on-the-fly work space that can tie into ship-systems, and either show or replicate any hardware or display you describe verbally.

If the holodeck were a real thing, I would rarely come out of there. I'd just make real friends inside other holodecks, and we'd spend our lives learning and creating stuff. It would be an enormous social problem.

_ 60's StarTrek tech doesn't count. Although Kirk's stylus/pad for signatures is not unlike the UPS guy's… and I'll bet Uhura's metallic ear slab was bluetooth.

<comment><USER22> Sorry, apparently a single star makes everything after it italic… until a later star. Can't edit/delete. My bad.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I hope the author (Alexis Madrigal - usually writes on energy issues) is right. By now a "startup" is presumed to be more of the same first-world social-mobile navel-gazing. The world will be better off if/when such forays stop being the most profitable. (good sign in Bloomberg news today: US wireless contracts "may have shrunk for the first time ever in the first quarter.")

Its anyone's guess how much innovation the next decade will bring in energy and biotech. But as for IT, my money is on the opportunities that will come from bridging the digital divide (emerging markets).

The Wired article "Want to become an Internet billionaire? Move to Africa" didn't get much interest from HN[1] though it was also covered in Forbes. The informal economy (as written about in Stealth of Nations: The Global Rise of the Informal Economy by Robert Neuwirth) is an oft-overlooked angle which should be particularly interesting, as it intersects more and more with an expanding global internet.

1: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3210000>

</comment><comment><USER24> Most revolutionary things take some time before people realize that they are revolutionary.

\- Google launched in 1998, people realized how revolutionary it was by around 2000.

\- Facebook launched in 2004, it took till about 2007 for people to realize how game-changing its going to be.

\- IPhone launched in 2007, and within a year (after 3G + AppStore was launched) it was clear that this is game-changing.

My point is: It could very well be that the next game-changer is already out there and we just don't know it yet. What could it be? Well I don't know... Google self-driving car? Khan Academy? Square? Your guess is as good as mine.

<comment><USER12> The new hardware platforms are each going to give birth to their own frontiers of opportunity. Bezos' TED Talk on "The Next Web Innovation" alluded to how each innovation would allow for new innovations.

I'm looking at new hardware like watches (Pebble), SmartTVs, and maybe Google Glasses if can be accepted culturally (more so than bluetooth headsets have been) as all potentially amazing new canvasses for creation.

Highly recommend this TED talk. It's amazingly optimistic and paints a beautiful future for technology innovation: [http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovati...](http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Web apps are cheap to build, easy to learn _how_ to build, fall into a predictable model for investors, and are equipped with lots of social institutions (like YC) encouraging people to build web startups.

So, all things being equal, we should expect more people to be creating web apps (compared to other kinds of technology) than their profitability or social value would warrant.

Framing makes a big difference. If there were an established culture and set of resources for engineering or biomedical startups, they might seem less daunting.

</comment><comment><USER26> I think Louis CK said it best, "Everything is amazing and nobody's happy."

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1CZTLk-Gk>

Sorry but Social mobile local (or as people cooler than me are calling it, SoMoLo) is still pretty new. You're just going to have to "suffer" through a little more.

I get the author's point that it seems like the same things are getting made and funded over and over. But with only about 1/2 the U.S. pop. owning smartphones, you can't blame people too much for trying to stake their claim. Anything more innovative might be too early anyways.

</comment><comment><USER27> This guy is simply failing to see the forest for the trees.

Yes, the past 30 years have been an amazing whirlwind of development of consumer computing technology. Yes, things won't be jumping by leaps and bounds the way they were when the basic hardware and bandwidth were getting up to speed. The latest social app is not going to blow you away the same way, say, the invention of the Internet did when you first discovered it. But I'm sure it pales in comparison to the wow-factor of the telegraph when it was first invented.

We live in a time when computing technology has filtered out to the mass populace. It is an interesting time to be sure. But we are just scratching the surface of what is possible with computers. There is tons of work to be done to refine the art of computation, which I believe ends with creating AI that can do things we are incapable of doing as humans. That is still a very long way off.

And assuming all goes smoothly without any major natural disasters or self- destruction, after that, there will be a new chapter in human existence where I believe we will have to come to grips with having automated everything and no longer having to employee people en masse. Where will we find meaning once the struggle to survive is pushed so far from our daily concerns?

The point is things are constantly evolving, and there is no chance that things are about to get boring. "Web", "Social", and "Mobile" are only "done" if you are tech pundit looking to summarize the state of the world in a tidy 800 words. The reality is that these things are just building blocks whose novelty has worn off, but whose ultimate utility is far from being realized.

</comment><comment><USER28> | The question is, as it has always been: now what?

| Decades ago, the answer was, "Build the Internet." Fifteen years ago, it was, "Build the Web." Five years ago, the answers were probably, "Build the social network"

In other words, when you read near future sci fi and think, "that's a cool piece of plausible tech that I really want right now!" what is it?

"We are prosthetic gods." That quote dates back farther than you might think. Printing, telecom, radio, the internet, the web, the social network, the smart phone... all of these take the sum of human knowledge/experience and inch it slightly closer to my brain.

The next step is to have it rest right against my temple while we debate whether or not to break out the scalpel.

Hate to jump on the bandwagon, but I'm ready for the Goggles. Google's commercials don't scrape the surface of what it could mean to have internet- enabled constant-on cameras on everyone's face, for better and worse. But that's the next space I want to explore.

</comment><comment><USER29> Sure there are a lot of smart people wasting away figuring out how to sell ads more efficiently. But I think we're still fairly reliably being wowed several times a year. Right now Kickstarter is the big wow for a lot of people, they're doing some real revolutionary work on the future of business and work. With Etsy being a good wow along the same lines before that. Obviously the iPad is making explosive entries into all kinds of industries which are being revolutionized for the 2nd or 3rd time in the last 20 years. And this guy talks like the iPhone happened ages ago, it was only 5 years ago, 4 years since the amazements started emanating from the app store.

I'm not too worried, change is accelerating and the wows will keep on coming. Five years from now should look more different from today then today looks compared to 2007. The main dangers are monopolistic predator companies, walled gardens, and government intrusion. Other than that, we will continue being blown away for years to come.

</comment><comment><USER30> I'm really sick of hearing all of the hatred that facebook gets.

It's a useful tool that I use every day for organizing meetups and, in my opinion, is superior to a mailing list in pretty much every single way.

My local reddit users group has almost 1000 members in it, and has no branched into several "sub groups" [a book club, a film club, a music club, a workout club, and a hacker club]. Just now before reading this, I found a movie to go to tonight with somebody, committed to start reading a book with somebody else, and got invited to an event this Friday.

Oh, and somebody who is planning an event for this _Saturday_ asked me to RSVP.

Last weekend our group had a nearly 100-person strong "masquerade" at a bar in Phoenix. We pretty-much took over the bar.

None of this stuff would happen if not for facebook, and I know this because there have been active attempts within our community to push stuff back onto reddit, all of which have failed.

Facebook is a useful tool to me, and a useful tool to a lot of other people. If it disappeared tomorrow, it would effect me in a very negative way.

<comment><USER31> People react negatively to FB because they are abusing their usefulness. Want to easily find someone to go to a movie with? Fine, give us your web browsing history, your friends list, your email addresses, your phone numbers, your social calendar, your location history, where you lived, worked, and went to school, many full-text conversations with your close friends, and... oh yeah any pictures of you that all your friends on FB take, plus you should tag your friends in pictures that you take. That way we can correlate your location retroactively even if you don't personally "check-in" with us.

Did I mention that your friends list isn't private, law enforcement can get all this data at any time, and we're using all this data for business purposes?

<comment><USER32> But they're not doing it for nefarious reasons. Having all this information together is genuinely useful for users. That's why they do it! People _want_ it, and for good reason.

The side-effect that all this information provides an unsettlingly complete snapshot of your life, trusted to a single entity, is an inevitable byproduct. Facebook has certainly made a few mistakes, but the things people complain about aren't specific to Facebook -- they're inherent to any useful, complete social network.

Is there a consumer-friendly solution to this dilemma? I'm not sure. Privacy- wise, you can't have your cake (super-connected with your friends) and eat it too (keep the site from knowing about all those connections).

<comment><USER31> If this were for my benefit, they would either stop tracking me across the web, or somehow make that data available or useful to be. It's currently opaque, so whatever their reason is, it's not for my best interests. Also, I think keeping my friends list more private would be nice. And being able to pay money instead of being shown ads would benefit _both_ me and FB.

<comment><USER33> Making the data available to you probably would be interesting but _using_ it to 'improve' your experience probably drives more engagement.

Also, having you paying money would probably be _less_ beneficial to Facebook, as I'm sure they can make more money from advertising.

I'm not trying to defend FB here but it _is_ worth remembering that they've reached 800million people so they've obviously got something right. The question people should consider is at what cost to themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Here is one simple attempt to explain the value of many of the startups that are otherwise dismissed by such naysayers, although coming from a heavy tech background I am the first to admit that some of these startups are incremental and featurettes at best.

We are in the age of sensors and A/D conversion. Many (not all) startups today do operate at the app layer... they are web / mobile apps etc. They produce tools that enable us to consume and produce info... at scale... we're talking millions of people are slowly but surely doing the analog-to-digital conversion for a future. At a mass scale, the result will be x,y,z,t,status,interest,social,connection connections/graphs for many things across many verticals. Privacy issues aside (they cannot be ignored, but bare with me for a second), the end result is a real-time layer on the world that exists in the digital domain, not the analog one. We are creating a world of installing "sensors" through market forces.

There is a step function in innovation (a new S-curve, if you will) that will occur at some point, that will be dependent on the world where things are digitized (the one we are creating now) in order to unlock innovation further. Not just technically, but from an adoption/diffusion/comfort level in society. We are going through that now... so the outcome ain't so bleak. At the end of this particular journey (call it a bubble, call it something else), we will have 1 billion+ people who a) are comfortable with sensors / digitizing their stuff and themselves b) and are doing it.

We are converging on a dominant design of what a digitized world looks like, through market forces! And in more recent years, the big data techniques emerging that will also be pushed by market forces. The best way to think about that is the following: In the ABSENCE of the incremental innovation (instagram of x, pinterest for y), I can imagine many future business and technology plans saying: we would like to build this technology, but it is not feasible because it requires a world where everyone is a sensor. Or even better, our new technology can change the world, but it assumes that people / things are digitized.

tl;dr: current crop of startups are creating sensors for big data and other processes. This can create future innovation opps that leverage this big data in new and profound ways. The absence of such startups is a blocker for that future class of innovation.

Hope not too incoherent... typing this at 30,000 feet in a cramped seat.

</comment><comment><USER35> This type of "whatever's new is old" complaining is pretty cliche. I mean, of course people are going to try to innovate in evolutionary ways more than revolutionary ways.

Revolutionary innovation is at least partially random and obviously much higher risk. It often comes as a result of many people iterating many times on the same-old-same-old.

This article really seems to do nothing other than state the obvious and offers no real suggestions or directions for where to go or what to do next. Oh right, biotech, cure for cancer, end hunger, solve the energy crisis, etc. Because no one has tried or is trying to solve those, and they are clearly as easy as figuring out how to get people to share photos of themselves.

<comment><USER36> I agree... but I'd like to phrase it the way I thought of it. The evolution the article made me think of is not really innovation but rather integration. Things like Google Wallet, mobile apps, etc... they aren't new technologies, they're current or old technologies applied in different ways. If the article's author wants innovation on the scale of the electronic computer or space flight, you've got to understand that that kind of innovation is far more difficult to create, as you pointed out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> From the previously-posted thread on this that got no other replies:

an astute article. One thing not addressed here is the failure of the Smantic Web paradigm to really take off; I don't know whether this is because of a lack of critical mass in the quantity of semantically coded data or the immaturity of ontology frameworks or something else - my best guess being that the browser is no more suitable to traversal of the semantic web than FTP/ Archie/ Veronica/ Gopher were suitable browsing tools for hyperterxt - although each solved 'part of the puzzle.'

<comment><USER38> The semantic web has one huge problem imo: There was/is typically zero incentive to semantically encode data. As shown by things like IBMs Watson, you're better off extracting sentence semantics with NLP than by hoping someone has encoded the data for you.

Another thing is that huge ontological databases actually exist, it's just that no one seems to be able to use them for anything useful. Knowledge bases and formal reasoning over them used to be a big deal in AI.

This comes from someone who tried to do a startup that essentially tried to incentivize creating semantic data. It's a hard earned lesson, but I now have zero belief that manual formalization of data is ever going to take off. Even if lots of cool things would be possible if it did.

<comment><USER37> Largely agree. What saddens me is that the extracted semantics are not apparently being shared or exchanged automatically, which is holding us back. On the upside, I remember the view that mass internet usage couldn't take off because open protocols didn't provide sufficient economic incentives for private actors, but that turned out OK.

would be quite interested in hearing more about your startup if you want to post to HN or correspond via gmail.

<comment><USER38> No prob, I'll send you an email when I get home from work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I think it's the way evolution works. Sometimes it's slow for a while - <USER3> things click into place and there is rapid progress.

The Khan Academy (and other free online, high quality education) is probably the most revolutionary thing that has come out of the internet in the past few years.

I don't know how much effect it has at the moment in the developing world - whether resources like that are used in the classroom and by students - <USER4> the potential for transformation is huge. There is an enormous amount of people in the world with untapped talent because of lack of access to high quality education.

Biotech, synthetic biology etc aside, I think the next thing to facilitate change in computing is portable display technology - for personal use maybe it will be Google Glass once it's a mature product. For shared use I think low cost, lightweight high res laser/LED pico projectors will take off in the next couple of years. The computer itself will be a tablet/mobile phone, either with its own display or hooked up to one of these new display devices.

Battery tech is another interesting one - once we work out how to produce cheap, high energy density, long life batteries from a natural resource that is abundant, we'll see a lot of accelerated progress in several areas.

Of course the 1st world problems of not having enough cool gadgets and software will be put into perspective when the Earth's limited food/energy resources vs growing population starts playing out for real.

</comment><comment><USER40> I don't like these "where's the innovation" posts, too negative. There's lots of exciting software being built. I will however admit that, in general, the Glass Project was the most exciting thing I've seen in a while. So maybe this is really about the lack of innovation in the hardware space

<comment><USER41> If it _is_ the case that innovation in HW is lagging behind innovation in SW at this time, then it would seem that _investors_ have something to do with the phenomenon, not just the entrepreneurs. When I read the line below today, it was alarming to me:

 _> Then he hit a roadblock. A big one. Migicovsky couldn't raise more money. Few investors were interested in betting on a hardware startup, or dealing with the headaches that often come with manufacturing goods [1]_

Perhaps the bulk of entrepreneurs and investors are after the "quick money". I know some pure finance types currently at Tristate area hedge funds contemplating a switch to Venture Capital (I urged him to reconsider, for a variety of reasons). If hypothetically, investors pat the entrepreneur on the back for the quick flip web startup, and the entrepreneur pats the investor on the back for financing his quick flip web startup, then is it any wonder that perhaps, HW entrepreneurs get lost in the fervor?

Hypothetically.

[1][http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-deals/2012-04-17-rejected-by- vc...](http://go.bloomberg.com/tech-deals/2012-04-17-rejected-by-vcs-pebble- watch-raises-3-8m-on-kickstarter/)

<comment><USER40> Totally agree. Not sure if that's the case across the board with VC's but it does make sense.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> > More money has got to change hands.

No, quite the opposite. If you really want to be bold about inventing the future, money is one of the things that needs to be replaced.

The internet is, in a general sense, a technology for cooperation -- for organising collective activities through shared information. Money is really just an information channel for doing that too, but it is now comparatively obsolete.

<comment><USER43> Money is a receipt given for value created. I think you mean to say that dollars and pesos should be replaced, which I agree with to a point. However, giving up money, to a government, is like giving up sovereignty. How could a government fund wars or welfare if they couldn't print money.

<comment><USER10> No, money is a receipt given for rivalrous, excludable property owned, and then sold off, or for excludable services rendered.

We thus have an economic system that hugely neglects the provision of commons and public goods.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Is the new future offline?

We have grown attached to our electronic devices and online friends. Maybe we need to step back and think about going back?

<comment><USER45> Why?

<comment><USER46> We're so enthusiastic about the possibilities the internet offers us that we want to do _everything_ online now, even things we're hardwired to do irl. Inane chatter in real life causes your body to release hormones that make you feel good. Inane chatter on facebook not so much. So maybe the future is indeed that we learn to take the internet for what it is: a fantastic tool for disseminating information and doing business, but nothing more. So the challenge will be to give people meaningful ways to interact with each other in real life now that the human component has been taken out of things like education and shopping.

<comment><USER45> _We're so enthusiastic about the possibilities the internet offers us that we want to do everything online now, even things we're hardwired to do irl._

We're "hardwired" to do _everything_ IRL, simply because we couldn't have evoved to adapt to it in such a small period of time.

But here's others technologies that we weren't "hardwired" for, and which actually "re-wired" us: Language and Agriculture. I'm having an hard time figuring out how doesn't your argument apply to them too.

 _Inane chatter in real life causes your body to release hormones that make you feel good. Inane chatter on facebook not so much._

Well, I actually find inane chatter to be painful anywhere, but; the Internet is just Facebook now? I'm not hardwired to play online games, but they do make our bodies release dopamine and cortisol, even though we're not hardwired for it.

 _So maybe the future is indeed that we learn to take the internet for what it is: a fantastic tool for disseminating information and doing business, but nothing more._

But we're not hardwired for that either. How is _that_ application good? Shouldn't we be transmitting information in form of songs, as it's natural?

 _So the challenge will be to give people meaningful ways to interact with each other in real life now that the human component has been taken out of things like education and shopping._

When was the human component taken out of things like education? And did the introduction of the web really remove a meaningful interaction, or did it just free up time that can now be spent with e.g. your family instead of with salespeople? Because that's my (anecdotal) experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> I think there's a new paradigm in the making, many people are talking about it... but it's young.

The internet of stuff is next!

A lot of the building blocks are in place, personally I think Arduino is a really big component that is driving the revolution and Kickstarter is providing a surprisingly good platform for funding it. However there's still a few missing components. One of the goals of LTE is to power this new network, but existing carrier business models don't seem appropriate. As a consumer I'm really not interested in paying $20 (or more!) a month for each my fridge, and toaster, and television, and door to be connected. Light Squared was a promising push in the right direction, which unfortunately failed.

Along the same lines of networking though, I think there's a lot of really good opportunities for low end hardware. Qualcomm dominates the market in LTE chipsets, but good luck getting access to the developer stuff as an indie user. API's tying all these components together will be essential.

<comment><USER46> I'd love for this to be true, but I think it isn't. An internet of stuff depends on raw materials being dirt cheap. Unfortunately, during the last five years or so the price of raw materials has started to increase, not decrease, and for reasons so fundamental it's unlikely this process will end soon.

So rather than an internet of stuff the new paradigm in the making will probably have something to with scarcity. No idea what, exactly, but my bet would definitely on a future of scarcity rather than a future of abundance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> Social media does contribute to communications and economic growth, in the same way automobiles have. Social media also has real downsides, in much the same way.

That said, reading about SpaceX excites me much more than reading about Instagram.

</comment><comment><USER49> There is lots of stuff happening which I hope we'll probably see integrated soon in our mobile phones.

The top two things which I'm waiting to see in my mobile is 1) The lightfield camera and 2) a device like the "sixth sense".

<comment><USER50> Pick up this magnetic wedding ring and you can feel electro magnetic fields. The massive field microwave puts out is the most amusing one I have found so far. <http://www.supermagnetman.net/index.php?cPath=61>

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> An inovation incentive from consumers would probably work better then the current system.

</comment><comment><USER52> Shame so much talent is wasted creating so much shit all with the ultimate object of dumbing down the populous to a bunch of media consumers.</comment>


Ask HN: A friend has a plan to get a job in UK, worried about legal implications - <AUTHOR>

Hi, I'm asking on behalf of a good friend and fellow programmer who is looking for a job in London, UK after being made redundant recently.
She told me that virtually every offer in job boards are posted by recruiters, who liaise with the companies to help them get candidates.
She used recruiters in the past to get her previous job and told me of the ordeal that was to deal with most of them, who conducted themselves with a remarkable lack of morals, taking advantage of her naivety. She was threatened, harassed, verbally abused, lied, etc. She went once to an office were the first thing they did was to ask for her passport to make a photocopy without asking her first and much much more.
So she wants to avoid them now, the problem is that they are few offers of employment that aren't advertised through them and most of them are in boards like this that are used by start ups while she prefers working in medium or "big co" where her experience can command a higher salary.
To the point: her plan is to create a fake cv with a different name, talk to the recruiters, get the companies name out of them and apply to those companies on her own. I'm concerned about her because she doesn't know for sure whether she would be breaking the law or not doing this, and she could end in a bad position being in legal trouble, possible blacklisted and unemployed.
Can someone offer some insight here. What would you do in her situation? She would really loathe to deal with those people again.
Thanks.
Otherwise if you want to write to her directly send me a pm for her email address.
PD: I'm mainly a lurker but decided to ask for help here today for the first time, as it was the first place I could think of for this purpose. I know there are many people from UK here too. <comment><USER3> She sounds a bit paranoid to me: checking passports is in theory part of a UK employment agency's legal obligations. If that's the sort of thing she's inclined to make a fuss about, it's not surprising if they were less than polite and helpful afterwards. Sure, recruiters also exaggerate how good some positions are, claim advertised jobs are filled and offer alternatives you're not interested in or suitable for, but employers do that too. Recruiters don't have a great reputation, but that's more down to them being expensive for employers and annoyingly persistent than dangerously immoral.

There probably aren't any legal issues with sticking up a fake CV if you get hired on the basis of a real one, but rest assured it's not going to look good with employers if she applies for positions they haven't got round to advertising yet or if they end up with a copy of two suspiciously similar CVs with similar names, or if it turns out the third party recruiter is actually being retained to do the initial screening interview (it happens!)

If she's worried about having her passport photocopied she doesn't sound savvy enough to be doing what the recruiter will consider to be cheating them out of commission, and even an employer that's quietly pleased not to be paying commissions will worry about dishonesty if she gets found out.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm a Slovenian currently looking for a job in London. As far as I can tell there are many "direct" job postings. You just have to look a bit:

<http://www.cwjobs.co.uk/> <http://roundabout.io/> <http://workinstartups.com/> <http://www.gumtree.com/> [https://jobs.github.com/positions?description=&location=...](https://jobs.github.com/positions?description=&location=london) <http://www.3-beards.com/jobs> <http://careers.stackoverflow.com/> ...

I've also had good experience with recruiters so far. Haven't gotten a offer yet, but I did get a face-to-face interview for next friday :)

</comment><comment><USER5> It's certainly not difficult to apply directly to the big tech players - <USER2> can find these pretty easily with '<company name> uk careers' Google searches:

<http://www.google.co.uk/about/jobs/locations/london/> <https://www.facebook.com/careers/locations/london> [https://jobs.apple.com/uk/search?jobFunction=SFWEG#&t=0&...](https://jobs.apple.com/uk/search?jobFunction=SFWEG#&t=0&sb=req_open_dt&so=1&j=SFWEG&lo=0*GBR&pN=0) <http://careers.microsoft.com/careers/en/gb/home.aspx> <http://www.ibm.com/employment/uk/>

I don't really have any experience applying to mid-range companies, but intuitively it doesn't feel right that anyone should feel the need to conceal their identity when searching for a developer role, especially if your friend is experienced enough to be optimising salary rather than worrying about getting a job at all. Are you sure there hasn't been a misunderstanding?

</comment><comment><USER6> Being a web developer in London who has dealt with many agencies, I call bullshit on this. Not one recruiter who I have dealt with has been a problem for me, quite the opposite, in fact. There is something wrong with your friend's perception of reality; that is to say, she is delusional and paranoid.

<comment><AUTHOR> Dunno, I believe her. As I said it might be the fact that she was foreigner, just arrived and not assertive. (if I may add, I'm even surprised someone has a positive or even neutral opinion of recruiters! I'm pretty pretty sure that that view is not the common consensus, whether her case is extreme or not)

<comment><USER6> Seriously? They're a blessing - I'm rarely unemployed for more than a week thanks to them.

<comment><USER5> This may be the difference between being a contractor and being after a permanent position. For the latter, with the exception of very senior roles, you don't often hear people talk about them as anything better than a necessary evil.

<comment><USER6> Ah, that explains it. I didn't use agencies when I was a junior and aim for lead dev/senior positions these days.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Not sure in which field your friend works but I'd say things are no longer like this, most medium to large firm resent paying for agents so put their jobs up on their websites and encourage applicants.

Pretty much go to any major firms homepage and they'll have a list of open positions that you can apply directly for.

Personally I've never had an issue with using recruiters and have used them in conjunction with applying myself. I prefer the buffer of using them but you can't beat your own research.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the advice, she is a web dev. She might have had problem because she is a foreigner, maybe just bad luck... no idea.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm a UK based Web developer, and about three years ago I was looking for a job in the London area. While some of the recruiters I spoke to were a little bit pushy, they were nothing like the experience your friend previously had. So I think the fake cv thing is probably unnecessary.</comment>


Five Men Agree To Stand Directly Under An Exploding Nuclear Bomb - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/blogs/krulwich/2012/07/16/156851175/five-men-agree-to-stand-directly-under-an-exploding-nuclear-bomb

<comment><USER2> Agree _d_ , NPR blog editors. It was 1957. Pretty sure the past tense is warranted here.

You got me to click. Congratulations. Still, I'd expect that tactic from Gawker, not NPR.

</comment><comment><USER3> Are there any details about the actual fate (in the long run) for these men?

<comment><USER4> A quick skim of the related NYTimes article [1] indicates that the cameraman was alive at 82 in 2010.

[1] [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/14/science/14atom.html?pagewa...](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/14/science/14atom.html?pagewanted=all)

<comment><USER5> Just don't make him angry. You wouldn't like him when he's angry.</comment></comment></comment>


Disney World to ban smoking in all parks, reduce stroller size - <AUTHOR> http://www.tampabay.com/theme-parks/disney-world-to-ban-smoking-in-all-parks-reduce-stroller-size-20190328/ <comment><USER2> Good luck to the poor park employees who are going to have to enforce this.

I worked at an amusement park when I was in high school that decided to ban smoking in the park one season and move the designated smoking area outside to the parking lot. I took so much abuse that summer trying to enforce the rules, dealing with upset guests coming in and out of the gates to have a smoke, forgetting items in their lockers and having to walk back, etc. Far more abuse than I took from guests in previous seasons over people smoking in the isolated smoking areas that already existed.

<comment><USER3> Thank you for taking one for the team. Worth it in regards to its effect on public health.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Went to Disneyland in February with my wife.

The size of these strollers is incredibly out of hand, to the point there are now these wagon-like things parents take around that are 2x4+ feet for one kid. They were absurd, and the whole "stroller parking" phenomenon at disney is a great example of how out of hand it is.

It's silly that somehow I think removing smoking sections is more frustrating, considering smoking actively harms the public's health - but that's probably showing my own bias as a former regular smoker.

<comment><USER5> > _I think removing smoking sections is more frustrating, as it actively harms > the public 's health_

This sentence reads (to me) like removing the smoking sections actively harms the public's health. Did you mean that, or did you mean smoking actively harms the public's health? Or am I somehow reading this wrong?

<comment><USER4> Poorly written - I just meant that it's silly that I dislike it, considering smoking harms the public's health (and thus removing areas for smoking around others is good for the public)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I wonder to what degree the decrease in smoking rates is caused by education and health awareness and to what degree the decrease in smoking rates is caused by making it inconvenient and socially discouraged to be a smoker.

<comment><USER7> Wasn't this a Friends episode? Rachel pretends to be a smoker to get 1:1 time with some cool executive?

I suspect smoking, like any hobby, has a social component and making it a PITA will push people to chat at the espresso machine or gluten free granola bar dispenser instead.

<comment><USER8> I remember reading a paper years and years ago that apparently found that smokers at companies where several of the senior bosses smoked got faster promotions and higher raises than non-smokers.

 _push people to chat at the espresso machine or gluten free granola bar dispenser instead_

The difference is that there is no reason for me to hang around the espresso machine while drinking my espresso and also my office has something like 3 espresso machines on each floor, while all the smokers go to the same spot, so it unlikely that I'll use the same espresso machine as the CEO. And even if I do he has no reason hang around and talk to me. Being 'forced' to stand outside in the cold for 5-10 minutes several times a day causes a different bonding experience,

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I have a kid, but I had never known some of these strollers existed before until I went to Disneyland. I'm talking about the wagons and other giant strollers.

I don't think the large stroller ban will be controversial, since large strollers are inconvenient anyway to the person pushing the stroller.

</comment><comment><USER10> "...a ban on strollers over a certain size."

You're not allowed to walk if you're too big? Explain this one for me.

<comment><USER11> It is probably to have no more of those six-wide seats across type strollers.

Okay, probably really only three, I've never seen six across actually. But when you encounter them, they take up multiple pedestrian lanes and are difficult to get around.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I wish they'd ban all those scooters. It's like a cottage industry renting out scooters at MCO, hotels and even at the park itself for a bunch of self- entitled weirdo's to ride around in. It's clear they have never need one before in their LIFE b/c they keep running into you at the park or cruising 6 wide down main street (I know some have a legit need, but not that many!). Strollers at DW never bothered me, those scooters however....grrrrr. Oh yea im sure you really need that I see you hop right out of it to get on a ride.

<comment><USER13> To be fair, walking around 10 miles a day in 95+ degree heat is exhausting for a young healthy person like me. I am frustrated by people's laziness too but they're likely physically incapable of walking that much</comment></comment>


Show HN: AI QLearning Robot Simulation in JavaScript and WebGL - <AUTHOR> http://qlearning.4ck5.com/

<comment><USER2> Very Cool.

I did a similar project using a Neural Network instead of a look up table, similar to how deepmind did their Atari game system. The neural network adds some overhead to the training time because of backprop, so for small state spaces which the table can handle easily it is a bit overkill. But the neural network can scale up to much more complex state spaces that would be impractical to use a table for.

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you have a library for your project? It sounds really interesting. I think this space is interesting enough that would benefit from a GutHub project to collaborate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> It looks based on this repo: [https://github.com/nrox/q-learning.js](https://github.com/nrox/q-learning.js) and this example: [http://nrox.github.io/q-learning.js/test2.html](http://nrox.github.io/q-learning.js/test2.html)

<comment><USER3> that makes me proud :) do you have suggestions to improve this library ?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Food / Poison break even was at 88. A chart would be interesting.

However - since R2D2 seems like a slow learner it would be nice to speed up the time a little bit.

<comment><USER5> Warning: I only glanced through the code real quickly, so I haven't checked to see if this has unintended side effects to the game logic, or to make sure it's a complete solution.

It looks like there's a variable that controls how quickly the board itself is updated:

      var boardGameUpdateInterval = 10;

And a function deciding how quickly the visual representation gets updated:

      var render = function () {
          setTimeout( function() {
              requestAnimationFrame(render);
          }, 1000 / 15);

          if (gameTicks % boardGameUpdateInterval == 0) {
              updateBoard();
          }

          animateBoard();

          gameTicks++;
          renderer.render(scene, camera);
      };

They're global variables so it's pretty easy to just drop into the developer console and overwrite them.

I just changed the denominator of the setTimeout to 30 instead of 15, and the boardGameUpdateInterval to 5 instead of 10. Of course, you don't have to change the render speed to get the logic speedup, but I figured I'd do both.

This appears to have sped the simulation speed up by a factor of two.

ymmv

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Looks very nice, I have one question:

How does R2D2 "see" the blocks? Is it by pixels or is the game hard-coded in this sense?

<comment><AUTHOR> Currently, it sees a board of 3x3 states, as in:

_ _ G

G B B

_ _ G

A next step would be to use real computer vision over a 3D camera in the environment aligned to R2D@ and a deep neural network to interpret pixels instead of states. DeepMind has a paper describing this approach: [http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.5602.pdf](http://arxiv.org/pdf/1312.5602.pdf)</comment></comment>


Serializing Python Requests' Session Objects (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://sharats.me/serializing-python-requests-session-objects-for-fun-and-profit.html

<comment><USER2> Session objects have been pickle-able since 2013:

[https://github.com/kennethreitz/requests/pull/1243](https://github.com/kennethreitz/requests/pull/1243)</comment>


Balsamiq, a bootstrapped startup featured here some time ago, makes $10k in 6 weeks - <AUTHOR> http://www.balsamiq.com/blog/?p=184

<comment><USER2> Thanks for posting news about Balsamiq here on HN ph0rque. I am quite excited by the RWW review, it's incredible to read about my own company on the #1 blog I read every morning...I still can't quite believe it.

<comment><USER3> thanks for your detailed blogging about the whole process of going from idea to quitting your job to launch. i spent about 30min going through all your blog posts. very encouraging and real. a great resource for others who are in the same boat.

<comment><USER4> +3.14

<comment><USER5> why the pi?

<comment><USER4> Balsamiq has come full circle (concept, dev, launch, business).

<comment><USER6> Then wouldn't it be 2 _pi_ r, ~6.28 if we assume a unit circle?

<comment><USER4> I wasn't actually talking about the circumference per se, just that Balsamiq has come "full circle" which I represented using _pi_.

<comment><USER6> I know it's just a saying, but taken literally, "coming full circle" would mean the circumference. That is, going around in a circle.

<comment><USER5> actually, when a circle's diameter is 1, its circumference is π

<comment><USER6> I think "unit circle" means a circle with a radius of 1, not a diameter of 1: [http://everobotics.org/projects/roboMagellan/img/UnitCircle....](http://everobotics.org/projects/roboMagellan/img/UnitCircle.gif)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> When will you startups learn? Single founder companies can't succeed.

badness=true

<comment><USER2> Hi there. I don't intend to stay a one-person-company for long, but right now I can't afford to hire anyone and I don't want to get external funding. Care to elavorate on why I won't be able to succeed?

<comment><AUTHOR> I think he was being sarcastic...?

<comment><USER2> Oh, oops. Why is sarcasm the hardest thing to convey via email/IM/simple text? Hey maybe a one-person startup could takle _that_ problem! :)

<comment><USER7> The author of this site, Paul Graham (pg), is an essayist who listed single founders as number one on his startup mistakes list. It's not an opinion I share, so yes, sarcasm intended. :-) Agreed 100% about sarcasm being hard to see in text. While an extra person can be an advantage, I think he overestimates the advantages and underestimates the disadvantages.

Nice work on the site and app! Congrats!

<http://www.paulgraham.com/startupmistakes.html>

<comment><USER8> It's merely a difference of approach. Balsamiq seems to be a very nice business...but it's not a startup according to pg's definition. The goal does not seem to be "get acquired or have an IPO". Building a lifestyle business as a solo founder is entirely feasible...if a little exhausting after a while (I ran a solo founder business for seven years before starting my current business).

<comment><USER7> I guess, to me, maybe that's a part of the issue. I define a third route for a startup. Make money. So I have trouble with that lesser definition. I'd have called 37 Signals a startup (still might, when does being a startup end--I don't know how to draw the line).

I worked at a software company which has 5 buildings it owns outright, employs thousands of people, and has 300 million+ in annual revenue. In the 70's it was started by one person. I'd have called it a "startup" at the time. It is still private.

The difference perhaps revolves around "startup appropriate for Y Combinator" vs "startup."

<comment><USER8> _The difference perhaps revolves around "startup appropriate for Y Combinator" vs "startup."_

Actually, it would be "startup appropriate for any investor". If there is no exit planned, then it's not something an investor wants to be involved in.

It's purely semantics, which is why I specifically said, "according to pg's definition". Your definition may be different...but if you're talking about pg's rules of thumb for "startups", you have to accept his definition of "startup" for the purpose of context.

<comment><USER7> It's a good point, and those may be his definitions, but I don't see the rules mentioned in the essay in particular.

There are all sorts of investment that don't fit the Silicon Valley VC short- term mold, so appropriate for "any investor" might be over-stating things, even for startups. Investing in cash-cow businesses is not a bad strategy--I wish I could have invested in the private company I mentioned above in the 70's. Jeff Bezos thought 37 signals was interesting enough to invest in. Warren Buffett seems to like cash cow businesses as well.

<comment><USER9> Successful entrepreneurs are the ones who break the rules.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Congratulations on the write-up on RWW as well by the way.

</comment><comment><USER11> Inspirational blog and success story. Congratulations and thank you for sharing!

</comment><comment><USER12> Congrats.

May want to invest in some web design though, your site layout is pretty obviously copied from 37Signals' Basecamp...

<http://www.basecamphq.com/>

<comment><USER13> Give me a break.

Ya, the site could be designed better. Is it a Basecamp copy simply because he intelligently uses "above the fold" and then answers a few question in a two- column format below the fold? How many other sites do that? Many! Certainly those that want a modicum of success, and are aware of the home page "design patterns" that are in use today, do.

I plan on using the exact same design pattern for my projects.

I can't even say that 37Signals pioneered the pattern but they might be responsible for popularizing it. It works.

If anything Peldi deserves a little credit for utilizing a well known pattern to get his site up and saving his time for developing his app.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Interesting app.

Congrats! I think it's looking good!

</comment><comment><USER15> Congratulations on your success, I suppose minus the costs for an individual this would be a healthy income, it or depends on your driving vision for the site, if it is to maintain that traction then I must agree with other comments that doing this alone simply wont work. If youve got good numbers as youve showed theres every chance you can try for funding.

I must also note that while I am very glad you have succeded in your milestone and its obvious benefits from a marketing standpoint, I find the whole area of self promotion on such an early scale somewhat of a recipe of disaster. My own startup (Travel social networking / Commerce site) is in private until september time yet from friends, family and testers our turnover and profit in the last 4 weeks dwarfs this figure. I could easily push these figures for marketing purposes but until i have sustained traction in reaching our targets they add no real benefit to us.

Nonetheless good job, but go get some extra help with that money!!

<comment><USER16> wrigley "My own startup (Travel social networking / Commerce site) is in private until september time yet from friends, family and testers our turnover and profit in the last 4 weeks dwarfs this figure."

wrigley "At present I cannot personally fund this project and in order to get to demo phase need to bring a hacker on board to work in partnership, what resources or methods would anyone suggest in trying to attract a hacker on an equity only option at present?,"

whats the truth then?

<comment><USER17> Wow, I just looked at his comment history, and you're right. The guy is a bloody moron and is self contradictory more than once.

wrigley: "I think when the net goes to the IPv6 there will be many more domain options"

There's nothing wrong with not knowing what IPv6 is, it's relatively domain specific knowledge. I know next to nothing about organic chemistry functional groups - but I don't go spouting bullshit in organic chemistry forums.</comment></comment></comment>


Romney Contribution Page uses jQuery flipCounter with Hardcoded Values  - <AUTHOR> https://gist.github.com/4004142 https://www.mittromney.com/donate/seven-in-seven <comment><USER2> Who cares?

Maybe they look at the donation amounts every day and update a variable on that page. It's a simple solution that accomplishes their goal and doesn't require an expert to set up the JS socket needed to keep it live updated.

This link doesn't teach me anything interesting about startups, technology, or even the election for that matter. An elementary solution to a design problem on a politician's donation page doesn't impugn the politician in the slightest.

Whether or not your for or against a particular candidate isn't my concern, but this seems like you're trying to create a political scandal over nothing in an entirely inappropriate venue.

</comment><comment><USER3> It is common practice to separate server and client side code like this. The back end just outputs the result of the query into the javascript.</comment>


New iPhone Update Reveals Apple's Sneaky Secret - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2019/02/06/apple-iphone-xr-xs-5g-5ge-att-speed-leak-secret-surprise/#33435419588e <comment><USER2> What's the alternative? What can Apple do to lead to less customer confusion? Apple has no control over AT&T re-branding their mobile network as 5GE, but presumably there's going to be a HUGE marketing campaign behind it. Now imagine you're an AT&T mobile customer. AT&T's media blitz is telling you that you have 5GE available now, but you look at your iPhone and see you're only getting LTE. That customer is presumably going to go to the AT&T store or the Apple store to figure out what's wrong. If Apple were truly evil they'd only have the new phones display 5GE and tell that customer they need to purchase a new phone - which is something Apple would dearly love for you to do after this past quarter's numbers. But instead they're simply updating the network display for ALL iPhones to match AT&T nomenclature. I think this is Apple's most reasonable option.</comment>


Conta Pra Nós, Leonardo Santos:) - <AUTHOR> https://codewalkers.org/blog/conta-pra-nos-leonardo-santos/ <comment><USER2> This is an English speaking forum, so post in other languages are ignored of flagged unless the information is very interesting and it is not available in English.

This posts look borderline on topic if it were in English. Try to submit something with more technical details. And it would get more traction if it is in English.</comment>


Obama signs Monsanto protection act- sad day for Earth. - <AUTHOR> http://fooddemocracynow.org/blog/2013/mar/27/obama_signs_monsanto_protection_act/

<comment><USER2> Worthwhile (and complicating) read: <http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/mpa.asp>

Another take, maybe more slanted: [http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/03/28/conservatives- laugh-...](http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/03/28/conservatives-laugh-as- liberals-attack-president-over-non-existent-monsanto-protection-act/)

</comment><comment><USER3> I approve of this.</comment>


Microdosing with LSD for cognitive enhancement? - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.co.uk/article/lsd-microdosing-drugs-silicon-valley <comment><USER2> People interested in microdosing might want to take a look at [https://thethirdwave.co/](https://thethirdwave.co/) The site has a lot of good guides and there's a forum coming up in the near future.</comment>


'Net-Zero' Energy Store Being Built By Walgreens - <AUTHOR> http://singularityhub.com/2013/03/20/net-zero-energy-store-being-built-by-walgreens/ <comment><USER2> As a developer for a startup creating software that makes achieving net-zero easier than ever, it's good to see it being taken seriously by more and more.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hopefully they will share info about how not goes with the public. This is exactly what we need, pilot implementations so we can see what works an what doesn't, and innovate from there.

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm a big fan of Walgreens. 24x7, on the web. They seem to have everything I need for my toddler and family and now going green. Way cool.

Jason</comment>


Colleges and Universities that Offer Free Courses Online - <AUTHOR> http://education-portal.com/articles/Colleges_and_Universities_that_Offer_Free_Courses_Online.html <comment><USER2> Great link, thanks.</comment>


Studying generalists and specialists by mapping the universe of Reddit - <AUTHOR> http://csslab.cs.toronto.edu/gs/ <comment><USER2> > _There is no web site here. Perhaps you were looking for the website of the > [...]_

I'm not positive, but I believe this is the article the OP intended to post:

[https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~ashton/pubs/actdiv- www2019.pdf](https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~ashton/pubs/actdiv-www2019.pdf)

<comment><USER3> It's working for me, just takes a couple seconds to load

<comment><USER2> Strange, the OP link is taking me to:

[https://csslab.cs.toronto.edu/gs/](https://csslab.cs.toronto.edu/gs/)

Which I receive the message I posted above, reproduced fully below:

 _There is no web site here

Perhaps you were looking for the website of the Department of Computer Science. Otherwise, we are afraid that we do not know what you were looking for and cannot provide it. If you are coming through a link to an IP address, the content you are looking for may be present on our support website. _</comment></comment></comment>


I'll pay you $15 to use my free software - <AUTHOR> My first post didn't get as much attention as I'd like so I wanted to up the ante.
I lost trust in online budgeting services keeping my information safe, so I took this opportunity into my own hands and am writing free, open-source budgeting software with Electron. All of the information is stored locally on the file system, encrypted at-rest. I'm writing this software to use it myself, and want to share it with others because I feel everyone deserves tools to manage their finances.
The problem I am having is spreading the word, so I'd like to do something that's unheard of - pay you! Yes, pay you. I'd like to pay you a $15 amazon gift card to use my software (or at least test it). All you have to do is download the mac/win application at my github repo below, and after you've used it or tested it, send me (zachary) a slack message of your email and I can send the gift card over! The link to the slack is on the github page. (I don't have infinite money, but I hope to give away $100-$200 at the very least).
https://github.com/reZach/my-budget
Thanks all - I appreciate you! <comment><USER2> It might be nice to get a preview of the software before downloading and running it locally.

Why not upload some screenshots of the application?

If this is an Electron Application, would it not be somewhat easy to upload a hosted version to a website? Even if this hosted version was "read-only", it would still be a good indicator of what I might be downloading.

<comment><USER3> > If this is an Electron Application, would it not be somewhat easy to upload > a hosted version to a website? Even if this hosted version was "read-only", > it would still be a good indicator of what I might be downloading.

That would be neat. I'd take a look at a web version, but an not really in need of a budgeting app so I'm not inclined to download anything.

Also there isn't a premade Linux version.

<comment><AUTHOR> The Linux version is now up on the repo:

[https://github.com/reZach/my- budget/releases/tag/v1.0.4-beta](https://github.com/reZach/my- budget/releases/tag/v1.0.4-beta)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Boy, what has the world come to? When I wrote my first program, people paid me to use it. I uploaded it to a couple local BBSes and soon it was everywhere.

</comment><comment><USER5> Because I'm too lazy to type I need a hyperlink

[https://github.com/reZach/my-budget](https://github.com/reZach/my-budget)

I'll have a look. No voucher required.

<comment><USER5> Hi, I've had a quick look. For background I am a long time YNAB classic user so I have some skin in the game. Some thoughts here:

1\. Looks like you have a decent build process and a .travis.yml so some kind of CI setup. Very nice for a side project.

2\. I love that it's open source, desktop, UI based. This has piqued my interest because the alternatives are either dated, proprietory and/or cloud or console based.

3\. Download is rather big - 157Mb takes a while to download on my average speed internet and this might put people off. If it is Electron doing that maybe moving to [https://nwjs.io/](https://nwjs.io/) would help?

4\. Minor point, but it is odd to have an msi in a zip file. Just direct link to an msi would be nicer. Just giving people an msi would reduce friction.

5\. The first screen says 'passphrase' but it is a bit confusing. What happens when I pick one. Am I locked out if I forget it. Can I continue without one? Would be nice to add a sentence explaining that.

6\. I'm out of space if I add 3 categories. No scroll bar to help me. So have a think about the UI for that.

7\. There is a bit of wasted space on the screen so have a think about:

        * reduce wasted whitespace
        * header fonts could be smaller
        * sub categories could be in expanders, e.g. click an arrow to expand and see them.

8\. It is not clear where the data is saved and how I back it up.

9\. This app does the basic budget thing of tracking expenses, but for people with multiple accounts, you want to have transactions across accounts, balances and reconciliation to make sure you haven't lost track of some expenditure. That is a lot of extra functionality and may not be for your target audience, so I leave that up to you.

10\. Readme.md could do with some screenshots.

11\. To finish on a positive - well done for making this and shipping it. It is not easy to make something like this alone. A lot of developers will have the grunt work of build pipelines and such things set up in their job and never think about setting it all up for themselves. Good stuff. I hope this project does well.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for our thoughts, my responses: 1\. Trying to, haven't figured it out but that's what I want to do.

2\. Thanks! My thoughts exactly.

3\. It's mostly Electron, I will look into ways to cut down on the size.

4\. It's something the electron-builder package is doing. I haven't yet fiddled with it yet so there's likely an option that just isn't there.

5\. The first time you use the app, you can either opt to not use a passphrase (just click 'go') or enter a passphrase. All subsequent loads of the app need the same (or no) password you initially chose. I'll add a tutorial as this isn't clear to anyone but me.

6\. I didn't want to lose sight of creating categories, but there is more room to use.

7\. I will. I like your expander idea!

8\. To your local user directory, ie. users/local/electron/... I'm also looking at making a button to do just that.

9\. I'm leaning right now on the side of no, but maybe that changes in the future. Thanks for the suggestion though.

10\. Yep, on my to-do list.

11\. Thank you very much!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Update 6:01AM CST (april 11, 2019) - I am out of money to give away, you have blown me out of proportion with the number of responses I've received. Thank you all, I'll continue to update this app for you all with your suggestions and my own. Head on over to the slack if you are interested in keeping up-to- date with this project.

</comment><comment><USER6> You could perhaps also try Reddit at /r/personalfinance or /r/pftools.

I'm actually quite interested in this since I've tried to use GNU Cash for budgeting, but it isn't exactly designed for budgeting (it can work). I actually started building a web UI for it, but I lost interest.

I hope you get good feedback, and I'll try to give it a good, solid try tomorrow. No need for the gift card.

<comment><USER7> Ha! Funny to read this. I've started work on about 3 budget tools before giving up or losing interest every time. Until I get a new idea and start again for however long I'm able to before putting it down again.

<comment><AUTHOR> Maybe this solution will be what you stick with?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Why don't you just spend that money on marketing/ads ? Setup campaigns on Google Search/FB, etc.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd like to reach people organically, and it means something more when you get to talk to the people who are using it. I'm not looking for downloads or upvotes.

<comment><USER8> Posting on HN and offering money isn't exactly the definition of organic traffic though. That said, good luck to you, I hope you find people who try it!

<comment><AUTHOR> You have me there!

It's hard to get volunteers, so I hope $15 incentivizes them. Thank you for your support!!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Just tested it out. You need to make it more feature complete before it's useful. E.g., adding a proper calendar, ability to search transactions, filter, etc.

If not, it's just a way to enter transactions and for exporting where you do your own analysis outside.

How do I get my amazon gift card?

<comment><AUTHOR> I hoped you were someone that commented in the slack channel, I mentioned to go there if you wanted the gift card. Alas, my budget is already maxed out and aren't giving any additional cards beyond the people I've already talked to.

Stay active in the slack and maybe I'll do it again later ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I like it! Can definitely see myself using it.

The only issue I am having inputting some test data is that the category scrolling doesn't seem to be working properly for me. If I go above 3 categories, things aren't properly visible/scrollable (13" MBP).

<comment><AUTHOR> That was intentional, but not good enough. I didn't want to lose the category input form, I'm thinking of a good way to solve this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Hello, are you looking for feedback, and if so is there a time-frame in mind? I am willing to download and use your software (indefinitely if it suits me). Thanks for sharing.

<comment><AUTHOR> You can offer your feedback at your time-line. Sooner the better, but I'm building this software in my free time for my own personal use. If there are features you'd like to see, please hit up the slack (found in the github repo in the post)!

Thanks for your interest!

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Besides being more feature complete, I'd love to see a way to import transactions from banks/credit card companies.

</comment><comment><USER13> How efficient do you find electron? Performance wise? I am not sure if its being used in industry that much other than few applications like VSCode, slack.

<comment><AUTHOR> The trade off to make applications cross-platform is worth it in my opinion.

Personally, still slower than I want, but it is a good compromise.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> You should really include some screenshots on the README of the UI. I'd give it a shot if I had a clear picture of what to expect.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'd add some screenshots and video recording in the readme.

It would really help "advertise" the product.

<comment><AUTHOR> Noted - it's on the list of to-do's. Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> hi, I tried it out, it feels very basic for my needs at the present. I would love to see integrations with common financial accounts like banks, brokerages, etc. Good luck with the project, I will check back in again!

</comment><comment><USER17> Nice works mate! I will download and use your software :) No need for the gift card ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> How kind of you! Thank you very much!

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Hello I am interested. Won't you make an android version for it?

<comment><USER5> Anyone can, the source code is there awaiting a PR

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> it will be nice if you could add screenshots in the readme.

<comment><AUTHOR> Readme has a screenshot now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> You need a screenshot in the readme, point blank.

<comment><AUTHOR> Got it - thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Have you considered the security and memory footprint implications of using electron? I totally carry your base concern for making this, but electron would not generally my first choice for making most apps.

[https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability- list/vendor_id-6765...](https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability- list/vendor_id-6765/product_id-33752/Atom-Electron.html)

[https://medium.com/commitlog/electron-is- cancer-b066108e6c32](https://medium.com/commitlog/electron-is- cancer-b066108e6c32)

<comment><AUTHOR> Not sure about that first link. Electron is now on version 5.0.0....

There is a trade-off when it comes to using languages I know better (web languages) to make apps. They are larger memory footprint than native apps.</comment></comment>


Linode hosting review - <AUTHOR> http://www.ryanaverill.com/2012/06/linode-hosting-review.html

<comment><USER2> Linode's not exactly new at this point. They've been more or less a market leader in non-AWS VMs for a while now.</comment>