The New Funding Landscape - <AUTHOR> http://paulgraham.com/superangels.html

<comment><USER2> Angel investing is kind of a fad right now. Everyone's doing it. My gut instinct is that it's at least a mini bubble. In 3-5 years a lot of angels are going to be unhappy about negative returns, the stock market is going to be looking stronger, and they'll shift their money back to stocks and bonds.

Surely this huge influx of angel investors has contributed to the much higher valuations early stage startups have been exacting in recent months. When many of these new angel investors wind up losing money and angel investing is no longer the cool thing to do, those sky high valuations will probably return to normalcy.

These are just my personal predictions, and I could be completely wrong. During his talk, pg said he'd wondered if we might be seeing a bubble and decided that we're not. Who knows? Either way, I think that we, as entrepreneurs, should take advantage of the current situation.

<comment><USER3> I asked PG to clarify his thoughts on why this isn't a bubble - he was referring to the SV landscape in general. His definition of a bubble, IIRC: when people overpay with the expectation that others will overpay _even more_. He doesn't think that's happening here.

(PG, feel free to correct me if I misinterpreted your answer)

<comment><USER4> Yeah... in my opinion there is clearly more money floating around startup investment than is strictly rational but it's a long way from a systemic bubble.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> To Paul G: What's the ETA on the model convertible note you said <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1655585> you guys were releasing soon?

<comment><USER6> Oops, yes, I should talk to someone about that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> > _So if some of the super-angels were looking for companies that could get > acquired quickly, that would explain why they'd care about valuations. But > why would they be looking for those? Because depending on the meaning of > "quickly," it could actually be very profitable. A company that gets > acquired for 30 million is a failure to a VC, but it could be a 10x return > for an angel, and moreover, a quick 10x return. Rate of return is what > matters in investing—not the multiple you get, but the multiple per year. If > a super-angel gets 10x in one year, that's a higher rate of return than a VC > could ever hope to get from a company that took 6 years to go public._

Very true, but this model doesn't seem sustainable to me, unless I greatly underestimate the number of companies that could provide that "quick 10x return" (or unless the amount of money invested remains small and constant year-to-year).

Imagine you start with $10M in investments this year and make 10x. To make the same return next year, you've gotta find enough companies capable of a 10x return to invest all $100M you now have. Should you succeed, the following year you'd have $1B to invest. In a very short amount of time, your limiting factor switches from the amount of money you have to invest to the number of quality companies you can find to invest in.

It seems their rate of return is going to significantly decrease, year after year, until they're forced to change their strategy to one more in line with what the VCs are doing.

<comment><USER6> You wouldn't reinvest all your returns. You'd distribute most of them to your limited partners (the people who supplied the money).

<comment><USER7> Right. I guess what I wanted to point out is that you may be overestimating the super angels' strategy and the returns VCs would have to get to compete ("10^6—one million x"). If the super angels can't reinvest all their returns, they won't actually make anywhere near that much. Even if they could reinvest it all, their returns would diminish each year.

So the question is, how much _will_ they make with their current strategy? I don't know enough about the relevant numbers to do anything more than speculate. But if I had to, I'd bet the super angels are better off focusing on finding big winners than they are worrying about valuations and quick returns.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Paul, I noticed some of the people posting edits/fixes (spelling, line break) got down-voted, and others wanted to argue/disagree about it. Silly. Personally, I like having others point out my mistakes; it's the best way for me to know about and fix them. With this in mind...

s/accomodating/accommodating/

I hope no offense is taken. ;)

And now, the more important stuff...

As you know, the terms often control the discussion, so kudos for your notes listing the various terms, i.e. "Super Angels" "Mini-VCs" and "Micro-VCs." Some have balked at the use of the adjective/term "super" as misleading, but the terms typically used, and their corresponding definitions don't have distinct lines. A potential resolution might be using the term "archangel" for the investments/investors beyond the typical "angel" round? Anyone fluent enough in English to know the term "archangel" will understand the implication of it being greater than "angel." --It's just a thought.

Another thought would be to break down the classifications by their most defining aspect, namely amount of capital. The lines will still be imperfect, and you have a better grasp of the numbers than I do, but the language would be generally more clear. I was thinking something like this:

seed: < 30,000

angel: 30,000 - 150,000

archangel: 150,000 - 1,000,000

vc: > 1,000,000

That would classify YC pretty much as you describe it, namely, as a "seed fund," or better said, specializing in "seed round funding." At present, I still not convinced my little idea above is any better than the currently confusing status quo, but at least it's an attempt.

EDIT: Uggh! Fix line breaks ;)

</comment><comment><USER9> There's a startup idea in here. It sounds like super angels can be given a pitch and make a decision quickly. So, why not provide a website that can coordinate these pitches. Hell, maybe some angels would be willing to invest some small amount of money by just doing a live pitch over the web. Whatever the minimal barrier to closing a deal is, a startup should come along and automate to make it as fast and painless as possible. One could imagine a Groupon like model being applied here as well, with one super angel really going all out and meeting with the founders multiple times, and the others hopping on board with a click of their mouse after watching a less impactful pitch like a pre-recorded one or just reading the feedback from the "head" super angel.

<comment><USER10> AngelList (<http://angel.co/>) is innovating a lot in this arena.

<comment><USER9> Welp, there ya go. Wish this was around about 18 months ago :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This recent discussion of angels vs. VCs is just like the debate of hedge funds vs. proprietary trading firms. What's happened in New York (and Chicago) is that they've gone after after completely different strategies.

Hedge funds have a lot of investor capital and must hold positions overnight, so they concentrate on portfolio construction. Prop shops don't have a lot of capital, so they can dabble in high-frequency trading where the concern is taking single positions as fast as possible, and often earning rebates from the exchange to provide liquidity.

Having worked for both types of firms, I can say that "quant trading" is a pretty broad term. I suspect "investing in start-ups" will come to mean different things. (PG hints at acquisitions vs. IPOs as a differentiating investing goal.)

</comment><comment><USER12> What occurs to me reading this is that there's a big untapped market for super-angels in areas _outside_ of Silicon Valley. Sure, there's fewer investment opportunities (to put it mildly), but the super-angels in these areas simply don't exist, and the VCs in these areas are often buffoons.

Is this a legitimate opportunity, or would it simply not be worth the effort to find the few needles in all those haystacks?

<comment><USER13> Dave's 500Startups seems to invest pretty much everywhere, including Asia and Europe.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> s/hoplessly/hopelessly/

Edit: If someone who downmodded feels like explaining, please do, because I thought it was a nice thing to do to correct typos in someone's essay.

<comment><USER15> correcting typos should be reserved for when it causes confusion. in this case, no one thought he was describing a rabbit with no legs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> BTW, a lot of what he writes is covered in a recent presentation he did: <http://www.justin.tv/c3oorg/b/272030715>

</comment><comment><USER17> I think some discussion of the changing economics of web startups would have been in order. The reason why smaller investments are becoming more common is because people can do more with less. So perhaps VC's will simply focus on other industries like biotech, which don't seem to have that "problem" just yet.

Also:

s/risk depends/Risk depends/

</comment><comment><USER18> > _Since angels generally don't take board seats, they don't have this > constraint. They're happy to buy only a few percent of you. And although the > super-angels are in most respects mini VC funds, they've retained this > critical property of angels. They don't take board seats, so they don't need > a big percentage of your company.

Though that means you'll get correspondingly less attention from them, it's good news in other respects._

Do many founders consider the additional attention given and influence wielded by VCs as an advantage of taking funding from them?

</comment><comment><USER19> Wow, that was great. I think every entrepreneur even thinking about raising money should read this whole article. Twice.

This distills the current situation (as I've spent months piecing together through various means) as well as could be desired.

If you're at all concerned about raising money in the near future, get the scoop here and then spend your time building a great company instead of trying to figure out what the deal is with fundraising at the moment.

</comment><comment><USER20> \- Can the market really decide whether the VC value-add is worth it? Seems like it would be hard to measure, and that a lot of the information would not be public.

\- If the bottleneck for VCs is board seats, why hadn't VCs already stopped taking board seats? Surely they thought of this. Implicit collusion? Entrepreneur ignorance?

\- What, would the "mouse skins" analogy from the SS talk have been too distracting? Alas.

</comment><comment><USER21> >Who will win, the super-angels or the VCs? I see the start-up companies and entrepreneurs the winners here for now. Question is how long this new arrangement with with super angels is sustainable.

</comment><comment><USER22> > As of now, few of the startups that take money from super-angels are ruling > out taking VC money. They're just postponing it. But that's still a problem > for VCs. Some of the startups that postpone raising VC money may do so well > on the angel money they raise that they never bother to raise more.

I'm excited that this is the case. The way I see it, a small, focused group of people can get an extraordinary amount of good work done in a short period. The constraints of lean funding, to the tune of the $600,000 Paul describes, seem like the perfect way to keep focused for the first couple of years. Maybe they're an aberration, but my hat is off to 280 North for pursuing just this strategy. Raise a bit of cash, work hard, build cool stuff, stay focused. They got quite an exit out of it, (from any reasonable founder's perspective) but that's almost beside the point that they got to do their own thing without outside meddling. But maybe there are war stories I should hear before I commit to that position.

As soon as someone is shoving several million dollars into your pockets, they're also commanding you to spend it, which always seems to mean hiring people, bloating your team and throttling your momentum. (see Digg vs. Reddit) That sounds terrible. It also lets you delay figuring out how your company is going to actually generate some money one day, which strikes me as counterproductive.

I'd rather retain a nimble position. Communication is easy, focus is non- negotiable.

</comment><comment><USER23> Whoever they are - send some to Australia!! The funding situation over here is a travesty for anything that doesn't have a patent attached to it (in my experience, anyway).

</comment><comment><USER24> He doesn't mention crowdfunding at all as model, though it's clearly generating enough funding for several businesses.

<comment><USER25> Really? Which businesses? And how do you avoid the obvious legal liability issues involved in crowdfunding?

<comment><USER24> The Gilf is a good example of something that needed investment to get started: [http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/danprovost/glif- iphone-4...](http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/danprovost/glif- iphone-4-tripod-mount-and-stand)

My understanding is that the people funding these sites do not own any part of the business. Clearly for that reason it's not interesting to investors but can be to business owners.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Ok. Negative points for my last comment justified.

Here is my dilemma:

Our company has created an online application we call "Supertrainer."

The reason we named it "Supertrainer" is because we are providing personal trainers with tools that allow them to separate themselves from all other personal trainers out there. There is a tangible and measurable difference between the average personal trainer and the "Supertrainer," and as we continue development, this concept will become even more so apparent.

My question is... what evidence actually supports the claim for "Super Angels" to call themselves "Super". What separates these guys from all the other Angel Investors I've met, and all the other VC's I've met?

It certainly isn't the amount of money they're investing and it certainly isn't the number of companies they're investing in. Are they "riskier", and if so, how on Earth could you possibly quantify such a thing?

I challenge the name. If I am provided evidence that truly separates a "Super Angel" from the other kinds of investors out there, I may be able to accept such a claim, but as of now, it seems more like an overly hyped PR move.

I love what groups like YC are doing, but calling them "Super Investors" loses credibility in my mind.

<comment><USER27> I don't normally downvote or harsh on comments because there are plenty of other people around here doing that, but in this case I'm going to apply the golden rule and give you some brutally honest feedback that I wish someone would give me if I were digging myself into a hole the way you are doing:

> I challenge the name.

If, as you say, you are trying to start a company then you should have twenty thousand more important things to do than to hang out here quibbling over some terminology that doesn't matter anyway. The "super angels" are what they are. What difference does it make if they aren't "super"? Or even "angels"? How is resolving this going to help you make your customers happier?

Those are rhetorical questions by the way.

<comment><USER19> >> Or even "angels"?

...Wait a minute, they're NOT supernatural beings?

That awesome observation made me laugh out loud :)</comment></comment></comment>


Managed Databases from DigitalOcean Are Generally Available - <AUTHOR> https://blog.digitalocean.com/managed-databases-is-generally-available-spaces-comes-to-frankfurt/ <comment><USER2> I'm glad to see they offer point-in-time recovery right of the gate. Its still galling to me that Google Cloud SQL doesn't offer that for Postgres. DO has really come a long way in terms of features. I can't speak to execution and reliability but the features + pricing alone is definitely enough to keep me interested, and I think it can probably make some really cool side projects work that otherwise wouldn't in terms of hosting cost.</comment>


Ask HN: Review My Prelaunch Page - eFolio.me - <AUTHOR>

Hello, I'm developing an early start-up called eFolio.
Not much information is available yet but, it's being developed to solve many problems pertaining to employment.
I think the launch page is straight to the point.
Any feedback is welcome.
[Repost, there was a bug that stopped the launch page of the site from working on certain versions of chrome and FF, thus it died in the vine]. <comment><AUTHOR> Clickable: <http://eFolio.me>

</comment><comment><USER2> All I get is a Namecheap default page.</comment>


Manjaro Linux Review: "Arch Linux for Human Beings" - <AUTHOR> https://itsfoss.com/manjaro-linux-review/ <comment><USER2> Will have to give this a try, one Arch derivative I've always been fond of has been BBQLinux ([https://bbqlinux.org/](https://bbqlinux.org/)) which still runs amazingly on my 3rd Gen i5? Laptop.</comment>


What Dads' Play Does for Kids - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/articles/what-dads-play-does-for-kids-1434476561 <comment><USER2> I have two boys and the biggest discussion my wife and I have is whether I tease them and push them too much. Especially the oldest one who was born 10 weeks to early and therefore we of course for a long time were being extra careful.

Both of our sons have bruises all over from play because we let them play and challenge themselves and each other.

It's a tough balance but I think it's doing them a favor also compared to later on in life.

<comment><USER3> If you teasing your sons is being raised as an issue by your wife then maybe you _are_ teasing them too much?

You are probably from a family with a few kids who all teased each other all the time so its one of your key relationship mechanisms, not only with children but adult teasing too. Am I right?

<comment><USER4> not necessarily. did you read the article?

<comment><USER3> I still think there is a healthy amount of teasing and there is too much teasing. People can tell when it is too much. Often people who were brought up in an environment with pervasive teasing (typically from siblings) do not have a sense of "how much is too much" when they become adults. The continue to tease beyond the point that is sensitive and healthy and fun - they are not tuned in to the impact of their teasing. Others notice it though - like wives. Typically though the over-teaser dismisses such concerns.

This guy says "biggest discussion my wife and I have is whether I tease them and push them too much". I read that as someone who is not in touch with the fact that he is over-teasing, and is not effective at putting himself in the shoes of others to see and feel what that teasing is like.

When adult tease, they are carrying on the behaviour they learned in the family situation as children. They have not learned that teasing is a behaviour either best left in childhood or strongly curtailed/regulated - it's not an effective way to relate to people if you are an adult, does not grow relationships. Except perhaps as described in the case of this article where a bit of teasing with the kids is fun. A bit.

<comment><USER4> i still can't agree with you. are you implying that playful office banter with my coworkers is childish and should not exist? are you stating that joking with friends is childish and should have been discarded in primary school?

what if his wife is overly sensitive to teasing because of a lack of its presence in her formative years and, as such, she never learned to cope with it and he's giving an appropriate amount of teasing? i just dont think that we have enough information to levy specific criticisms against this poster.

<comment><USER5> > are you implying that playful office banter with my coworkers is childish > and should not exist?

I think he's implying that most of the office teasing is done by people who don't understand the boundaries of teasing correctly -- which seems to be supported by the way HR policies frown on what you'd call "friendly", that many employees report being unhappy at work because of such things, the way in which many toxic workplace lawsuits come about, and that it is a way in which inter-department politics can become downright dysfunctional.

Most people who defend teasing as a default mode of social interaction -- particularly with coworkers instead of close friends -- sound like abuse victims (who internalized their abuse as a good thing as a coping mechanism) playing out their abuse over on new victims, and not people arguing for a functional social mechanic.

<comment><USER4> who said anything about a "default mode of social interaction" anywhere in this thread? additionally, i think you'd do well to cite your sources for the assertion in the last sentence because right now it sounds like you're both attempting to diagnose _me_ and misrepresenting my statements.

<comment><USER5> Who said anything about teasing being a default mode of social interaction?

You. You and everyone talking about teasing be a normal way that you interact and which is a non-trivial fraction of your interactions -- that's just a more wordy way of saying "a default mode of social interaction". A "default mode" is one of a handful of ways that something happens, which is regarded as a normal way for it to happen. So quite literally, I just used other words to describe what you were already talking about.

> additionally, i think you'd do well to cite your sources for the assertion > in the last sentence because right now it sounds like you're both attempting > to diagnose me and misrepresenting my statements

The source of my comment is partnering with a large corporation to review the HR comments by abusers fired for workplace harassment of coworkers.

Across thousands of cases, for the ones which didn't stem from a single incident (eg, calling your coworker a "fucking nigger" and going on a rant about how he should "go back to Africa" in front of the entire office (not an actual example)), the majority asserted that they were merely trying to be friendly and teasing their coworker, and they they should learn to not take themselves so seriously and lighten up, ie, that months of teasing someone after being asked to stop until they felt motivated to involve outside parties should be excused because they meant well.

I just find it interesting that no one seems able to point out a difference between their arguments and yours.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, sorry, there's a big gap between what was written and "default mode of social interaction".

Teasing can be a default mode of social interaction, but there's a vast gap between saying that teasing can be okay and saying that it should be a default mode of social interaction.

Your claim that they are the same is nonsense.

There's no doubt that some people try to excuse unacceptable behavior by claiming they were teasing.

There's also no doubt that teasing can be done in a way that does not have negative impacts.

The same is true of many things in the office. Asking someone to lunch can be a good way to form a positive bond with them or it can be a non-professional actionable move.

If a person asks you to stop talking to them in a certain manner or about a certain topic, you should, just like if someone asks you to stop inviting them to lunch, you should.

However, you'd never suggest that no one should ever ask a co-worker to join him/her for lunch, would you?

Thus, your position is only valid if you belief that all teasing is harmful. That's simply not supportable, regardless of your experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I am the father of a 4 years old girl (and a 2 months old baby girl) and I can relate to the study's results. In the family, I'm the one that pushes my daughter limits, sometime with a certain amount of risk.

One drawback of this playful approach to parenting, is that my daughter perceives the mother as the authority and the father as the "friend". I reckon this is a quite common scenario, but it leads to some unpleasant situations (such as, mum says no to ipad, kid runs to father and ask ipad to father - hence creating a conflict ).

Actually, I'm trying to be less playful with her to check if I can restore the authority balance.

<comment><USER8> Not sure that necessitates you being less playful - just back your wife up so that you come across as a team, rather than two individuals who can be played off as each other?

It's not a bad thing that your child has found a friend in you.

<comment><USER9> > It's not a bad thing that your child has found a friend in you.

I don't think children need us as their friends - they have plenty of these all over the place. Plus, friendship and authority don't mix. The way I see that kids need us to be their guides and that's quite a bit different.

<comment><USER10> Being a really good parent (in my view) is all about mixing authority and friendship/trust/empathy.

Kids have a lot of interesting ideas that (for various reasons) they can't act out, and sometimes you're the one preventing them. If it sucks (e.g., my daughter wants to pick every flower she sees... I have to stop her, because these are flowers other people bought & tend, to make their homes look nice), then I show her sympathy rather than anger. I still have to stop her from picking them -- it's part of my job as a parent, to keep my child's behavior from harming others -- but I tell her that in so many words. "I'm your dad, so this is part of my job, to stop you from doing things that will make other people really sad... but I'm sorry, it would be cool to bring all these flowers home!". And (because I'm sympathizing) I can think to go looking for wildflowers, or pick our own flowers. We're in the same boat -- there are also lots of things I want that I can't do, and I point them out when I can.

I don't ever say "because I said so" \-- that's something I don't want to teach them. I have to have a reason, and if I can't come up with one, then I re-think what I'm asking them to do (or not do). Okay, so we're running around out in a field, and it seems kinda wrong _to me_ for you to take off all your clothes; but honestly we'd see anyone coming a mile away, so _if_ you can get dressed again lightning-fast if someone comes... then go for it. And remember if the lightning-fast thing doesn't work, then _next_ time I'm going to say it's a bad idea.

There really seem to be a lot of parents who think they need to "discipline" their children, need to keep punishing them (often more & more severely) until the child learns to stop fighting back, stop challenging their authority, and will do what they're told. This is a painfully short-sighted view of parenting.

Think about it -- if my daughter doesn't pick flowers, ever, because she just knows I'll get mad, what has she learned? Nothing, just "here's another thing that makes Daddy mad" \-- and optionally "if I keep picking flowers, Daddy keeps getting angrier until he stops taking me on walks, or he slaps my hand", or however else I escalated my reaction until it finally "worked". I might be more or less smart about how I enforce my authority over her, but all I'm thinking about in that case is "how can I force this child to do X" \-- empathy is nowhere in sight, and it's just a struggle between us... which is going to carry over into our other interactions as well.

If I'm empathizing with her (and cheering her up, since neither of us can pick these flowers), the short-term end result is identical (flowers are not picked), but long-term is much better. She learns a bit more about the restrictions of living in a world with lots of other people in it (and can learn to apply the _reasons_ for not picking other people's flowers to other situations), she's a bit closer to me (esp. if I managed to cheer her up successfully), and she's a bit further on her way to being a responsible, thoughtful adult.

There are a lot of ways in which being a good parent is like being a really good tour guide, much more than being a policeman/judge.

[note: this is a long rant answering a little comment! sorry about that... this is a topic I feel strongly about.]

<comment><USER11> My parents used to have the same view when I was a single child. Then my brother was born.

There are only so many times you can empathize with someone who keeps trying to do the same thing, despite knowing why he can't.

They still believe that explaining why something is forbidden is the best course, but they stopped assuming the person on the street slapping his/her kid's bottom is just ignorant of the advantages of compassionate parenting.

<comment><USER10> I'm not at all saying that the same tactics work for all kids. But there are _tons_ of ways to influence kids' behavior that don't involve corporal punishment, and I've never had to go too far down the list, when I sit down and brainstorm ideas.

It's also essential to think longer-term. I don't know what your brother was doing, or what your parents tried. But part of raising kids is being aware that a child's behavior is going to keep changing, week to week, almost regardless of what you do. So if they're doing something you don't like (but that isn't risky), it's sometimes the best course to just endure it for a bit.

Personally, I'm pretty open about these things, so I remind my kids that yes, they have the power to make me miserable, any time they want. Sometimes they do. But they're clearly not enjoying those times either, so we work together to try to figure out what's going on, and how we can optimize for more fun.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> A lot of women, when asked what they're looking for in a male partner say they really desire someone who is funny. Obviously, it's generally more enjoyable to be around a funny person than a boring one, but could it also be that funnyness/humor, being an important trait in parenting, is being selected for that reason? Very fascinating.

<comment><USER13> That's not it. Being "funny" is actually a great screening test for being "happy". Try to be genuinely funny when you're miserable. You can't. Not let's crack a joke you read on the internet funny, but say something that's actually funny and in good humor when something isn't going right. That's genuine humor and that's what women are looking for. It's impossible to do it when you're miserable. Women are just screening for happy, successful men.

<comment><USER14> Anecdata and all, but I've dealt with depression since my teenage years, yet I was a successful improv actor in high school and often have friends telling me they think I'm funny. And in fact many comedians avow to dealing with depression in some way.

So I'm not too sure about the validity of your rationalization.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15>
      > many of their dads scored low on a standard yardstick her
      > research team was using to evaluate the parent-child bond.
      > ... The children described rich, warm relationships with
      > their fathers ... "My dad gives me encouragement to do
      > things," or, "My dad tells me he thinks I can do well."

What kind of yard stick are they traditionally using?

<comment><USER16> There were decades long trends in psychology that attempted to "undo the damage of male-dominated thinking and behaviors". It went too far and so now we're seeing lots of these combination "duh!"/"aha!" moments in the field.

See also the research showing that schools have become heavily biased against the success of boys.

<comment><USER17> School might be but life generally is very favorable to traditionally masculine characteristics.

Life favors thinking and creative problem solving, school favors regurgitation and submission to authority.

As an example my son doesn't do to well in math, however, he's been multiplying/dividing since Kindergarten. My daughter at least appears weaker (I think she's hiding her skills) but does much better on math at school.

Don't pay too much attention to statistics, bring your concerns to your administrators. They have a lot of work to do and don't need parents making complaints and creating extra work.

<comment><USER18> >My daughter at least appears weaker (I think she's hiding her skills

Note here (from a girl) remembering my childhood and maths: my interest in all things technical came to life when my father (figure) showed an interest in playing chess with me, and in building things like aerodynamically-interesting paper/card planes, rocket launchers and kites.

<comment><USER19> I just wanted to chime in and say that your talking about your dad playing chess sparked a bunch of warm memories. Mine played with me, too, and never pulled his punches - the day that I finally beat him was a tremendous triumph. I thought we were just playing a game - he was teaching me how to analyze a problem, and how to anticipate and evaluate my actions and their outcomes. What a gift!

I can't wait to teach my kids.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> My first reaction when I read this was that it's actually my wife who plays all the weird random games with our oldest son, whereas I often seem to be the serious parent who wants to explain stuff all the time and gets angry when he doesn't listen. But then I fortunately remembered that I often carry him upside down by his ankles when I take him to bed.

</comment><comment><USER21> Very exciting to see this. This book [1] argues for more play from both parents as it is how children learn and develop. If you are a parent, you will probably notice that when a child plays by himself, he will use phrases you use with him, pretend to be the parent in situations with his dolls / toys, act out situations he didn't understand previously. After reading this book, it gave both my wife and I new ideas on how to interact with our son (now 3). Is he afraid of something, have his dolls act it out and one of them is afraid of the same thing, for example.

The book has really helped us as well if anyone is looking for new avenues to teach, mentor, discipline their kids.

[1]([http://www.amazon.com/Playful-Parenting-Lawrence-J- Cohen/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/Playful-Parenting-Lawrence-J- Cohen/dp/0345442865/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1434641931&sr=8-1&keywords=playful+parenting))

</comment><comment><USER22> read half way through the article could not find anything useful. not going to read other half.</comment>


Etsy shut down Brendan Byrne's shop (Part 2) - <AUTHOR> http://wtfbyrne.tumblr.com/post/50437619970/etsy-accused-me-of-not-assembling-my-synths-by-hand

<comment><USER2> He says that he is making a large batch of units to sell and the representative suggests that he takes pictures of the process to prove he is assembling them himself.

Why is he refusing to comply? At first glance it sounds like Etsy is screwing the little guy, but he is being somewhat unreasonable if he is refusing to provide proof which would only require a couple minutes of his time.

<comment><USER3> He didn't refuse to comply. He stated he's losing the potential to increase his user base from daily follows due to the lack of his store being open. Also Etsy closed his entire store for one offending item. If he has other items in his store then they are denying him of his income. This could slow down the creation of the new items or halt them completely if he was dependent on the income for this.</comment></comment>


The Amazon-In-New York Lesson for Cities: Don't Be Arrogant - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-02-15/the-amazon-in-new-york-lesson-for-cities-don-t-be-arrogant <comment><USER2> If Amazon made a stadium part of the deal, there would have been no problem.</comment>


Ask HN: Jobs for an aspiring hacker - <AUTHOR> I'm fairly new to programming, having never fully learned a language to the point of making anything particularly useful. (My crowning achievement is a python script that lists prime numbers.) I am learning, and plan on becoming half-decent some day (I just finished Learn To Program, by Chris Pine). The thing is, I fear I may have started too late to make a career out of it. I recently graduated from college where I studied marketing and economics, to give you some idea of where I am in life.
My question is this: what sort of jobs are available to sub-hackers/aspiring hackers? Ideally, I would like to work somewhere that I can learn and use computer programming, but having no practical experience, I am at a loss.
What sort of work would you recommend for someone in his early 20's who is learning to program? Alternatively, what was your introduction to programming as a job or career?
Edit: I guess I should clarify a bit. I plan on continuing to learn and expand myself as a programmer. Where would you recommend I look for work while I learn? <comment><USER2> One way would be to get a job as an analyst, and just start trying to automate the tasks you perform, or any other inefficiencies you see in the workplace. I know atleast 2 or 3 people who have become "sufficient" in programming from this.

I'd also suggest reading O'Reilly Books, and actually programming the examples. Then when you have a cool idea try to build it. Don't tell yourself you're too busy, or its too hard, just do it.

</comment><comment><USER3> In my experience you should challenge yourself to build scripts that "do" something. Like, create an image with a watermark, or a multi-step script like scrape images from a website and repost them to another. Try tutorials as well. Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your response. At this point I know that I need to keep learning. I wanted to know what sort of work would be a good "stepping stone" job for someone who can't yet program.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> You'll need to self-study to a level a little higher than "a python script that lists prime numbers" before anyone will consider giving you a job.

<comment><AUTHOR> I know I can't (or shouldn't) get a programming job with my abysmal experience, and continuing to learn (in several respects) is important for me now that I'm out of school. But what sort of work would you recommend for someone like me, who can't yet program, but is learning?</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you deal with papers behind paywalls? - <AUTHOR> I'm beginning a self-study quest on computer vision. Unfortunately, I've learned that a lot of the less popular papers are not available for free download online, and can only be bought from say IEEE. For anyone else doing a self-study, did you find a way to deal with this? <comment><USER2> you might be able to get access through a local library. A friendly e-mail to the authors can help. And there's always sci-hub, which even academics with "proper" access use because it's so easy.

<comment><AUTHOR> > sci-hub

Sweet, thanks a lot!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I usually give up, being an idiot isn't so bad once you get used to it.

</comment><comment><USER4> Give up. What is needed is a single monthly fee that costs about the same as a single newspaper delivery subscription that allows readers through paywalls for all the local papers, maybe another for NYT, WSJ type papers. But it's unreasonable for the newspaper industry to expect readers to buy subscriptions to a 100 different papers we never heard of so we can read one mediocre article from the Dirtwater Republicrat.</comment>


Coolest College Courses - <AUTHOR> http://www.rasmussen.edu/articles/the-coolest-college-courses.asp

<comment><USER2> One class I actually took was called "Women, Witches and Healing" which was about the history of healing practitioners in Europe. [http://www.fau.edu/academic/registrar/09-10_catalog/nursingD...](http://www.fau.edu/academic/registrar/09-10_catalog/nursingDES.html)

While this list sounds moderately interesting, very few of the classes appeal to me. Heck, there's a community college in KS that offers a class in welding with thermite. That sounds way cool, even though I'd never do it (it was part of their railroad curriculum). And dozens of land grant colleges offer classes in beekeeping, Another thing that this city dweller would never be able to do.

</comment><comment><USER3> For decades, I've heard "underwater basket weaving" used as a metonym for useless, transcript-padding courses; I hadn't realized it actually existed. Perhaps if the title were taught more literally, and combined with SCUBA certification, it would catch on among hackers.</comment>


IKEA Electric Standing Desk - <AUTHOR> https://ebalsa.org/ebalsa/hacks/ikea-electric-standing-desk/ <comment><USER2> Can you explain why the need for the desk to be electric type? There are much cheaper standing desk that's manually adjustable, like this MultiTable one: [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006269Y4E](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006269Y4E)

They've been around for several years and always been cheap for less than 600$, I've seen 300-500$ that works as well.

I have this table for more than 2 years now and it has never failed for me. It's also very quiet, no motor running the desk.

<comment><USER3> I actually answer that on the blog post - I'm LAZYYYY - I would never have the patience to crank the desk up and down multiple times a day. That's why I actually intend to automate the movement.

<comment><USER4> You don't crank it up and down all day. You put it up and get a tall chair. Problem solved. ;)

<comment><USER3> Then you don't even need a crank - you just get a tall desk. I want something where I can sit comfortably and stand comfortably :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've had the Bekant desk since March and have been really pleased with it. It's quite stable with a 27" monitor and all my office stuff. The only thing I wish it had is presets for the potion.

I don't stand at it for the whole day, usually just for the morning.

</comment><comment><USER6> I've tried Bekant and Galant in Ikea and by try I meant I added my laptop bag, extension cord and a 15" MacBook Pro on the table. I also put a full glass of water on it. Essentially I tried to simulate real world use.

Kinda disappointed. The ones I got try were wobbly. Not sure if there is a setting to do but I couldn't type without shaking my screen. Didn't have that experience with the more expensive electronic stand up desks in other offices. Just a heads up. Might just be some config issue or something.

<comment><USER7> I was looking into the Jarvis legs (similar price point, $490 that has programmable heights) and using a cheap Ikea top. Don't know about sturdiness...but the reviews look good.

[http://www.ergodepot.com/Jarvis_Frame_p/jrv- fr.htm](http://www.ergodepot.com/Jarvis_Frame_p/jrv-fr.htm)

<comment><USER8> We bought these for our coders at my previous company and I still own one at home. Works great still after 3 years. I bought an IKEA bekant tabletop for it [http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/40253236/](http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/40253236/) which was _plenty_ of space.

I find a monitor riser is required as well for actually standing up and not craning my neck.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Not sure why you'd go with ikea. You can get one that has presets for not much more/less (depending on the size you want.

[http://www.geekdesk.com/](http://www.geekdesk.com/)

<comment><USER3> This might come as a surprise but not everyone lives in the same country, and as stated on the blogpost alternatives where I live are more than double the price.

<comment><USER9> This might come as a surprise, but most companies are willing to ship internationally. Including the one I linked.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Just updated the post with a video of the table going up and down (exciting ! :P )</comment>


Norman C. Pickering, Who Refined the Record Player, Dies at 99 - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/business/norman-c-pickering-refined-the-record-player-dies-at-99.html <comment><USER2> Sad to see no mention of him in the wikipedia article. IIRC Pickering was purchased by Stanton sometime in the 80s(?) and was rolled into the Stanton group. Sounds like Norman was a true renaissance man.

<comment><USER3> You could always update Wikipedia using this article as a citation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I can identify a lot with his unsupportive parents. Mine, his, and bad parents around the world have strengthened my resolve to break my family tree's cycle of not celebrating and advancing it's children's interests.</comment>


Ericsson is reportedly planning to cut 25,000 jobs in response to crisis - <AUTHOR> http://nordic.businessinsider.com/ericsson-is-reportedly-planning-to-cut-25000-jobs-in-brutal-response-to-crisis-2017-8/ <comment><USER2> I used to work for Ericsson R&D, so I am sad to see this, especially for my previous colleagues. There are some very sharp and dedicated engineers there.

At least this cut seems to mostly affect Managed Services. That is the division that basically manages telcos networks for them. It was a big growth area a couple of years ago, but turned out to be very low margin.

Ericssons fundamental problem is that their only customers are the telecom operators, and the telcos aren't going to invest in infrastructure unless they have to. 4G rollout is mostly done in developed nations, and 5G is just a buzzword at the moment. Even if Ericsson invents some amazing technology that improves the end users experience, it doesn't mean they will make much money from it.

Of course the price pressure from Chinese competitors has not helped, even if Ericsson has held on to its marketshare.

<comment><USER3> This is kinda distressing. I'm mostly all for free trade, but the impression I have is that Chinese competitors undercut Ericcson by not paying for patents. If that is the case, would it make sense to sanction those Chinese companies that do it, and thus take their products off the market in the developed countries? (Please correct me if my assumptions are wrong)

<comment><USER4> I don't disagree with China playing fast and loose with IP, but those actions wouldn't happen in a vaccuum.

China has WTO trade laws that protect them until a court case makes the connection between intentional IP violations and the unfair trade competition. Even after that is established (which can take many years), China can assert a counter-action using WTO rules to find whatever trade laws those same western+developed countries are violating.

Steve Bannon just talked about this in an unscripted interview for a newspaper. If it happens, pain will ratchet up for everyone involved. It will take a decade or more for all of the ripples of this type of trade war to calm. Until then, ratcheting up of tariffs will make it far more expensive to live in any country involved.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> As the article mentions European employees are mostly safe, in north America they have already cut 7000. So the upcoming layoffs will mostly be in Asia. I guess competition with Samsung/Huawei is brutal and it is losing market share.

<comment><USER6> Ericsson are pumping money into the Valley to have a presence there - [https://www.ericsson.com/thinkingahead/the-networked- society...](https://www.ericsson.com/thinkingahead/the-networked-society- blog/2016/10/11/ericsson-experience-center-opens-in-santa-clara-in-the-heart- of-silicon-valley/)

Engineers cost twice what they cost here in Stockholm. Then the Sponsorships in the Valley - Berkeley AmpLab. IMO, much of that is wasted. They want to build a halo effect, but are failing miserably. You can survive (and even thrive) outside the valley.

<comment><USER7> We see this in the Midwestern part of the US too. I've worked at several large Midwestern companies who created a Silicon Valley presence so they could "innovate" or "disrupt", or whatever. None of those satellite offices have worked out, and were all a huge waste of money.

It turns out that unless you're one of the big tech giants, or a super cool startup, you will not be hiring the best in SV. And you'll be paying for the privilege.

Most of these companies are now learning that Midwest based employees are just as good as their SV counterparts, and cost a whole lot less.

<comment><USER8> The other side to that is that people in tech who know they're good come to the Valley because they can get 2-5x the pay. It doesn't hurt that California is beautiful and has a lot of other nice qualities (weather, being the epicenter of the tech scene, close to the ocean and the mountains). Sure, it's true that we don't have a monopoly on good engineers, but for many, once they realize that they're undervalued in their current position (so, a "good deal" for companies), they might try to get a huge raise, get denied, then move to the valley. That's generally how it works, and it works pretty well. Despite the stupidly high cost of living and salaries, companies in the valley still manage to do alright. For employees, layoffs at one company aren't really a problem, since every other company is always hiring. It only becomes a problem when the whole sector is in trouble, which we haven't seen in a while. Hopefully things are diversified enough by now that e.g. AdTech failing wouldn't mean layoffs like the dot-com bust. Given how many areas rely on technology and the internet these days, I see another dot-com bust as decreasingly likely -- not that it couldn't happen, but I think it's more tied to the overall economy vs one sector in the corner. If biotech runs into trouble, VR/AR probably wouldn't be affected much. If payment tech gets disrupted, silicon design shouldn't dip much, etc etc.

<comment><USER9> Your first point rings extremely true from my own experience. It's of course the case that there are bright, talented, and experienced engineers in places other than the Bay Area, but it's hard to counter the brain drain that occurs. The best engineers who remain become comparatively rarer and so it becomes progressively more difficult to build a _team_ of seasoned engineers as opposed to having a single veteran try and mentor six or seven inexperienced coworkers.

And in that scenario, you're extremely vulnerable to that senior employee getting burnt out from spending most of their time doing code reviews and putting out fires rather than building things themselves. You're also vulnerable to that person getting an enticing offer from a big-name company in the valley or an exciting-sounding startup in SF. Many of these opportunities are even remote, so this can happen even when your best employees don't have any desire to move.

So yeah, it's possible to find good talent in other locales. But there's a lot more competition for that talent, it's hard to build a critical mass of it when the best employees are constantly moving away, and there are a ton of challenges you have to deal with as a result.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Well, I just started learning Erlang... hopefully this doesn't affect that D;

<comment><USER11> if you look at the latest release[0] there seems to be 33 contributors. While a bunch of the commits is made by Erlang/OTP(I assume this is Ericsson) it is not the 1990 anymore and a lot of tech like rabbitmq and couchdb uses erlang to reach "webscale" deployments.

[0]: [https://github.com/erlang/otp/compare/OTP-20.0...master](https://github.com/erlang/otp/compare/OTP-20.0...master)

<comment><USER12> Almost all these commits are from Ericsson employees. The community did start contributing bigger things in later years (the improved unicode support is a good example), but the core team is still very central to the development, and their main bug tracker is not open.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> >"Right now, Ericsson is hiring engineers to repair the damage that earlier saving packages caused. It's crucial that most of all the Swedish R&D department remains somewhat protected. They are the ones who will come up with the new solutions that will drive sales in the long term," said a person with insight into the process.

This is something I have seen at prior companies. Still hiring to fix issues from previous overly-ambitious cutbacks. Seems like execs could learn from this...

</comment><comment><USER14> Is Ericsson going to eventually lose to the Chinese competition? What is Ericsson's advantage over Chinese firms?

<comment><USER3> Patents, R&D and not being at risk of being spied upon by back doors installed by the Chinese Govt.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Dagbladet!</comment>


Spawnfest (Erlang 48 hour coding competition) winners announced - <AUTHOR> http://spawnfest.com/winners/

<comment><USER2> Note to organizers of such competitions: please make it easy to browse the results. The current descriptions don't tell me what these projects really do, and frankly, clicking on every single one to find out is rather tedious.

</comment><comment><USER3> Are the apps online somewhere?

<comment><USER4> This is the best list of submissions I've seen:

<http://si14.livejournal.com/8266.html> (mine is the "mortimer" one)

That said, spawnfest has said they'll be open sourcing all submissions on github by default unless the contestants request otherwise by Aug 27th.

My submission's code is online at <https://github.com/choptastic/LobsterDraw></comment></comment>


A Proof About Where Symmetries Can't Exist - <AUTHOR> https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-proof-about-where-symmetries-cant-exist-20181023/ <comment><USER2> If you know a bit of math, you'll probably get a better understanding by just reading the first page of the paper[1] rather than reading this article.

[1] [https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.02735](https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.02735)

<comment><USER3> I definitely think I know "a bit of math" (including group theory and topology) and the first page was beyond my grasp, although not by a large margin.

<comment><USER4> [Comment number 2, describing what this theorem says for people with patience but not necessarily much mathematical expertise. Read comment number 1 first. There isn't a number 3.]

OK, time for _ingredient number 2_ which is the idea of a _manifold_. Roughly, an n-dimensional manifold is a geometrical object which, whenever you look at it closely enough, looks like "ordinary" n-dimensional "Euclidean" space. Once again, let's begin in dimension 2. "Ordinary" 2-dimensional space is something mathematicians write as R^2: jus as Z^2 consisted of _pairs of integers_ , R^2 consists of _pairs of real numbers_. (Real numbers are what you probably think of just as "numbers".) We can think of this as an infinite plane; the two numbers are coordinates. Now, for a fairly typical example of a 2-dimensional manifold, consider a sphere -- the surface of the earth, say, if you smooth that out a bit. Any small portion of it looks just like a small portion of the plane, which is why there is a Flat Earth Society. But the whole thing has a different structure -- e.g., the sphere is finite in extent in a way the plane isn't. Another example is the surface of a ring do(ugh)nut. This is also finite in extent, but it turns out to be genuinely different from the sphere, and there's a whole lot of interesting mathematics around that, which I am going to ignore here.

Now, just as we considered those very special transformations acting on Z^2 before, we are going to consider transformations acting on a manifold: things that pair up each point on the manifold "before" the transformation with some point "after" it. For instance, suppose we take the (idealized) surface of the earth; one example of a transformation would be what you get by rotating the earth about its axis through 10 degrees so that every point moves west (and e.g. Kansas City lands more or less on top of Denver). But our transformations can be more complicated: imagine our sphere to be a thin sheet of very flexible rubber forced somehow to remain on the surface of a globe; we can then push things around however we like provided the sheet never tears or overlaps itself. These things (with some technical restrictions I won't go into) are called _diffeomorphisms_. And, though it's harder to visualize, we can do much the same thing with any manifold of any dimension. If M is our manifold then we call the set of all its diffeomorphisms Diff(M). And, just like SL(n,Z), this thing is a _group_ : we can compose two diffeomorphisms to get another diffeomorphisms, and because we insisted on no tearing or double- covering every diffeomorphism can be undone by another diffeomorphism.

All right, nearly there. _Ingredient number 3_ is the idea of a _group homomorphism_. Suppose we have two groups; call them G and H. Suppose that for each element of G we somehow pick out an element of H. We'll write f(g)=h to mean that element g in G yields element h in G; "f" is the name we're giving to our correspondence between G and H. Unlike the transformations considered above, we aren't going to insist on any sort of invertibility; f might map lots of different g to the same h, and there might be some h that aren't the "image" of any g. Here's a simple example: consider SL(2,Z) again, and consider a manifold M that's just ordinary 2-dimensional space, what we called R^2. Everything in SL(2,Z), remember, maps (x,y) to (ax+by,cx+dy) -- and we can do _that_ just as well when x,y are arbitrary real numbers as when they are integers, and the resulting thing is in fact a diffeomorphism. So everything in SL(2,Z) gives rise to a thing in Diff(R^2).

In this case, because these are "the same" transformation in some sense, composition of things in SL(2,Z) matches up nicely with composition of things in Diff(R^2). This sort of matching-up-nicely can happen even in less straightforward cases. If f(g1 compose g2) always equals f(g1) compose f(g2) then we call f a _group homomorphism_ between SL(n,Z) and Diff(M). The specific transformations in SL(n,Z) and in Diff(M) needn't have anything much to do with one another -- but the _relationships between them_ need to have compatible structures, in some sense.

So, we saw above that you can embed a copy of SL(2,Z) inside Diff(R^2). More generally, there's a copy of SL(n,Z) inside Diff(R^n). What these guys have done is to _put some limits on correspondences of this kind between SL(n,Z) and Diff(R^m) where m is smaller than n_ : the idea is that SL(n,Z) is an n-dimensional thing and that you can't squash it into something of much lower dimension without destroying its structure.

Unfortunately there's one more bit of technical detail needed before stating their result. _Ingredient number 4_ is the idea of a _finite-index subgroup_. Zimmer's conjecture restricts not only group homomorphisms from SL(n,Z) itself, but also from certain smaller things that in some sense contain most of the structure of SL(n,Z). So, suppose you have some subset S of SL(n,Z) which is also a group: composites and inverses of things in S are always in S themselves. Then it turns out that SL(n,Z) can be partitioned into "copies" of S. One is S itself; if x is anything that isn't in S, then the compositions "x compose s", as s runs over everything in S, form another of these copies, and x itself is in that copy. Any two of these copies are either identical or disjoint, it turns out; so the whole of SL(n,Z) is made up of a bunch of these things. If there are only _finitely many_ of these disjoint copies, we say that S has "finite index"; so e.g., maybe there are 12 of them, meaning that S is in some sense 1/12 as big as all of SL(2,Z). (Just to be clear, SL(n,Z) is _infinite_.)

We can finally state the theorem properly: If S is a finite-index subgroup of SL(n,Z), and f : S -> Diff(M) is a group homomorphism, and the dimension of M is m where m < n-1, _then_ the image of f -- the set of things in Diff(M) corresponding to things in S -- is _finite_.

That is: you can't fit something with the same structure as "most of" SL(n,Z) into the diffeomorphisms of something with dimension < n-1, unless you collapse that structure "almost completely".

<comment><USER2> Sorry, just a posting note: If you want your comments to display in the right order, it would make more sense to have your second comment be a reply to your first, rather than having them as sibling comments.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


See Randomness -- by Charles Seife - <AUTHOR> http://edge.org/response-detail/809/what-scientific-concept-would-improve-everybodys-cognitive-toolkit

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm submitting this because of its similarity to Paul Graham's essay "See Randomness," <http://paulgraham.com/randomness.html>, and I think they came to the same conclusions independently of each other.</comment>


Show HN: A redesigned Wikipedia - <AUTHOR> https://wiki.shamdasani.org/ <comment><USER2> Doesn't work without javascript, real wikipedia does

your site: [https://s27.postimg.org/3pr86aehf/Screenshot_170117_05_27_35...](https://s27.postimg.org/3pr86aehf/Screenshot_170117_05_27_35.png)

wikipedia: [https://s23.postimg.org/476xr1lbf/Screenshot_170117_05_28_11...](https://s23.postimg.org/476xr1lbf/Screenshot_170117_05_28_11.png)

Wikipedia looks much better

<comment><AUTHOR> it relies on Wikipedia's API - and I am still working on the styling..Thanks for the input!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Just like the current one but without a functioning back button.

<comment><USER4> What does the back button do that you didn't expect? When I click on a different page it takes me to that page, when I click back I go back.

From what I understand, breaking the back button would mean only the URL changes when you move pages, and back takes you off the domain entirely.

<comment><USER3> It breaks the state of the previous page. Do a search for something ("rust") go to an article, click back and you're search results are gone. If I'd done the same on a normal html page my search results would be there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wikiwand is a similar project [1], although more polished.

[1] [http://www.wikiwand.com/](http://www.wikiwand.com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. This project was just for fun. I am still working on the design.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> No dice for me on iOS Safari: the input has no submit functionality.

</comment><comment><USER7> Wiki2 is a similar idea [1], but keeps the general feel of Wikipedia. IMO, it does a better job of managing media (images, video, etc.) than vanilla Wikipedia.

[1] [https://en.wiki2.org/](https://en.wiki2.org/)

</comment><comment><USER8> I typed 'c++', hit 'Enter', clicked on second article titled 'c++', and got the article for the letter 'c'.

</comment><comment><USER9> Centering longform text is a bit of a UX no-no.

</comment><comment><USER10> Looks very good! Nice job :)

The one thing I see myself missing off the bad from wiki proper is section collapsing. Would be a welcome addition.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER11> Left-align the text, please. Good luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> Done. Thanks

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Nice.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you!</comment></comment>


An Amaz-ing Resume - <AUTHOR> http://www.phildub.com/ <comment><USER2> One concern is this, in the footer:

> This website was made in Jan 2013 by Philippe Dubost for the sole purpose of > a playful and creative job search. No copyright infrigement intended.

"No copyright infringement intended" is not a thing. Also, right below that it then says:

> © 2013, Philippe Dubost

Seems a bit strange to me.

<comment><USER3> "No copyright infringement intended". Isn't the act of copying Amazon's style _intended_ copyright infringment?

<comment><USER4> Seems to be so. I've only seen similar disclaimers on (copied) Youtube music videos before. This might be the copyright version of "I am not a [racist|homophobe|...], but ...".

<comment><USER5> Those youtube disclaimers always make me laugh. "I don't own the copyright to this", so why are you posting it then?

<comment><USER6> Obviously it's because they are confused about copyright

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Hey, wait a minute! Where's the "Customers who viewed this also viewed" section? I want to know what my options are.

<comment><USER8> under progress ;-)

<comment><USER7> I'd suggest making them links to LinkedIn profiles of your friends. You know, the ones whose resumés make you look good by comparison ;). Even if you don't get hired, maybe you'll do one of them a favor.

<comment><USER8> Neat idea, thanks

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> My first thought was he'd managed to somehow list himself on Amazon. Now _that_ would be impressive.

<comment><USER10> Not really. You can create custom listings in Amazon as 3rd party vendor.

<comment><USER11> Yeah, really, nobody has ever done that before.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> As much as I like the new idea, I find it really hard to read. It's not that this page itself is bad - I have problems to find reasonable information on a typical Amazon page and his resume just reflects the same: lots of referals to other products and lots of noise. The typography is also very poor / hard to read unfortunately.

So - great idea... but I don't think it's going to be a success apart from creating a lot of social noise at the beginning.

<comment><USER13> > but I don't think it's going to be a success apart from creating a lot of > social noise at the beginning.

Isn't the biggest problem with resumes getting them noticed and making them stand out? If so, he's probably going to get way more eyeballs on this than your standard cv.

<comment><USER14> This idea has limits. Dumping glitter on your resume printed on pink paper and doing it in Comic Sans makes it stand out, but it is also obnoxious and gets in the way.

<comment><USER13> I think the site is a little more creative than glitter, pink paper & comic sans.

<comment><USER14> Did I say otherwise? I am rather addressing your claim that the game is to stand out.

<comment><USER15> I think he meant that the game is to stand out in a way that doesn't immediately get your CV placed in the shredder...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It's certainly an original and clever idea, but I don't think it makes the resume any more effective. In fact, I think being designed like an Amazon product page makes the resume less effective simply because most people have trained themselves to ignore much of what is displayed on an Amazon product page.

<comment><USER17> If a resume like this showed up on my desk, I'd show it to everyone nearby. It's unusual and carefully done, to the point that even if you don't like online shopping there's still this moment of wonder: Wow, what's going on with this guy?

Most resumes are a chore to read, reminiscent of those pamphlets your bank sends to notify you of changes to their policies.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Neat! However, here is some (hopefully helpful) criticism:

The stars bar chart bothers me because of its inconsistency, first it says 5 previous positions, and then you have 233 reviews, but the average is not quite 5/5.

You need to proofread this better. I have found a 'resent' in place of 'recent' and in the same section I'm not sure that 'Main Skills Rank' is the right title.

Other than that, very very nice idea and good luck!

</comment><comment><USER19> "16% of reviews have 1 stars" ...

<comment><USER8> Well, yeah, it's directly from the original product page I worked from. I didn't have a fun idea for that part, so I left it as-is with a blank link. If you have a good idea, I would totally do it :) Thanks! Philippe

<comment><USER20> I would link that a "review" to your answer to the common interview question: "What are your weaknesses"

"Phil Dub often works too hard and put in too many late night unbillable hours on projects as he is a perfectionist"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Excellent piece of whimsy. Good luck with it. I particularly enjoyed the rather brutal alert box when I clicked on "Add to wedding registry" :)

</comment><comment><USER22> So, Phil uses Amazon's design as a spoof for a resume. Aside from the is it copyright or not discussion, I am curios how this differs greatly from people leveraging the svbtle theme?

Every time someone does that, multiple people pop their heads up and talk about blatant ripoff (even when credit is given).

Sure, we have Amazon as e-commerce and this is a resume, where the other case are both essentially blogs. But, you have two cases of people using the design of someone (or something) else for their own purposes.

And, the argument that "people using the svbtle theme are trying to leverage the popularity of svbtle.com to gain legitimacy" is likely the minority. Most people like it for it's cleanliness/simplicity.

<comment><USER23> Copying a popular blog theme for your blog is obvious, and lacks creativity. Spoofing an actually-not-that-aesthetically-pleasing design intended for a completely different purpose, and filling it with quirky details is rather different.

It's the same reason why Android handset manufacturers got accused of "ripping off" the iconic design of the iPhone, whereas in an earlier era people thought Salvador Dali was being artistic when having the considerably more original idea of designing a telephone handset to look like a lobster.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> The 5 out of 5 stars (233) link sends you to Amazon "Mr. Coffee ECMP50" page. This is very confusing.

I think the idea is novel.

<comment><USER8> Fixed, thanks. This coffee machine is the product page I worked from ;-)

<comment><USER25> Outstanding idea! I've been in the industry of viewing resumes for a very long time and love to see someone take a risk and try something new. Well done.

<comment><USER8> Thank you, I really appreciate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Lucky you, you met Jamy Gourmaud ! My passion for science is largely due to _C'est pas sorcier_...

</comment><comment><USER27> It can't be cool to be hotlinking these resources straight from Amazon.

</comment><comment><USER28> I don't like that. I don't want to be the asshole, but here it is :

1- No direct mention to Amazon, Really man? Not even a thanks? Not event saying if you are a fan boy (I am!)?

2- Spelling isn't a big deal, but in a resume, seriously?

3- Not humble at all, ie "...and maybe some creativity, who knows... ;-)" I don't want to hire or to work with someone who likes the smell of his own farts.

4- Finally, an Add on your resume... And no amazon doesn't put adsense on their pages... If you want to make some money that's okay, but just say it! Why lying? ... Epic Fail.

</comment><comment><USER29> I don't trust products that don't show the negative reviews :/

</comment><comment><USER30> Very clever. Had to check the URL after I arrived to see what was going on.

Doesn't have to be the most readable format since he has the same information in other places.

</comment><comment><USER31> For a second I thought someone had posted their resume as an eBook on Amazon.com and then used the product description options Amazon gives "publishers" very creatively.

Since it turns out that this is not what this is, I might do it, post a link on Hackernews, get lots of eyeballs that way, and subsequently receive a super-awesome job offer. Assuming the latter is also phildub's intention: Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER32> Indeed Amaz-ing work here Philippe; I'm impressed. I don't understand all of this copyright negativity. Perhaps I'm just naive in these matters, but so what if Amazon shoots you a cease and desist - BONUS! How great would that be for a follow-up blog post?

</comment><comment><USER33> I have to say, this shows a lot of skills in web development. It's creative, even if the look and feel were borrowed from Amazon. This shows someone who can make something that "Looks like this..."

If only I was hiring...

<comment><USER34> You can copy the source code of any amazon product page, it doesn't necesarily shows "a lot of skills in web development". (I am not saying he doesn't have the skills though).

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> This is really fun. I'm smiling and it made my morning. Well done! :)

</comment><comment><USER36> Hmm, as a recruiter who looks at hundreds of resumes a day, this kind of non- standard resume really annoys me. Just tell me who you are and what you do. Do so clearly and succinctly.

<comment><USER23> I get the feeling this sort of resume is aimed at companies that don't look at hundreds of resumes a day. Recruitment filters work both ways

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I do not think HR will like this resume... However, if bosses find this, they will be absolutely interesting in this resume. Whatever, good luck mate.

</comment><comment><USER38> Where is the painful Amazon checkout process?

<comment><USER39> What is painful Amazon checkout process? Did you mean painless one-click buy that makes me spend more money on Kindle books than I would want to?

<comment><USER38> You mean the process where I'm logged in, add some items to my cart and when I click checkout get asked to login again, get to the 3rd screen and I'm told they don't ship to my country? Yeah, painless.

<comment><USER40> You can now filter for international shipping on search results.

<comment><USER4> That doesn't cover everything though. For example, last I tried Amazon did not ship any storage media to Austria, even if it says "international shipping". But they only give indication of this at the end of the ordering process.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> 37 people only gave you one star? Why? ;-)

</comment><comment><USER42> He got me. I had to double-check the URL

</comment><comment><USER43> I love it, but there's a good chance Amazon will be contacting you to take this down at some point.

</comment><comment><USER44> Wonder if amazon prime works here.

</comment><comment><USER45> @phildub You should take it down, before Amazon sue your ass! IMO Unoriginal but creative

</comment><comment><USER46> does somebody have a coupon to avail the discount. I'd need 99.9 percent discount :-).

</comment><comment> simba-hiiipower pretty cool. took me a second of trying to click around, and a look at the url, to realize it was fake.

somewhat disapointed; was much more impressed when i thought it was an actual amazon product listing..

</comment><comment><USER47> This is such a clever resume! Great job! Cheers phildub!!

</comment><comment><USER48> first i though it was Amazon website , after clicking i saw url which is different . Really seeing 294+ upvotes in hackernews i can phished .

</comment><comment><USER49> "SEO > Most resent best practices"? Is that new?

</comment><comment><USER44> Wonder if amazon prime works with here.

</comment><comment><USER50> Great work ! Enjoy the fresh approach.

</comment><comment><USER51> Long trail -> long tail, I think?

</comment><comment><USER52> The only thing I get from this resume is that Philippe Dubost (the author) is selling himself like a product. Why would you want that?

</comment><comment><USER53> I choose simplicity, thank you.

</comment><comment><USER54> Amazon should hire this guy

</comment><comment><USER55> Can't AMazon grab his neck?

<comment><USER56> I'd rather grab him, really. Just sent a link to my Amazon HR contacts.

<comment><USER55> HR or legal? :)

<comment><USER56> HR =) he generated quite some interest among our Seattle folks, so most likely they already knew about him

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> this is great, but the arrow points from "p" to "u". that stinks.

</comment><comment><USER58> Taxes kill the deal

</comment><comment><USER59> impressive!!

</comment><comment><USER60> oh this is cool!

</comment><comment><USER61> Seriously, you'd rather go shopping? Ouch.

<comment><USER61> (I was referring to the Alert box you get when using the search dropdown....)</comment></comment>


Before Incorporating a Social Mission [in Your Startup], Consider These 5 Things - <AUTHOR> http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/237260

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting article from a small non-tech company out where I live, Cotopaxi. They're a SLC area outdoor-gear manufacturer with a fairly creative take on their social mission, and they're off to early success thus far. I thought this might be of interest to some of the more "social-responsibility" related startups around here.

As an aside from a skier/climber, their technical packs are of very high quality and priced attractively compared to established equivalents like Mountain Hardwear, Black Diamond Equipment, etc. Their technical outerwear is brand new so I can't rate it yet, but it's at least priced competitively.</comment>


Woz talk on the founding of Apple (.mp3) - <AUTHOR> http://ne.edgecastcdn.net/000210/podcasts/wozniak.mp3

<comment><AUTHOR> I think this is actually an abridged version - the original talk hosted by Science in the City was about an hour, IIRC, and still available through the Science in the City iTunes podcast feed.</comment>


Cisco confirms it's killing Intercloud public cloud in March 2017 - <AUTHOR> http://venturebeat.com/2016/12/13/cisco-confirms-its-killing-intercloud-public-cloud-in-march-2017/ <comment><USER2> I don't like the idea that the whole Internet is running on the servers of a single company. Can't we do something to increase the competition in the "cloud" area?

<comment><USER3> It's not. If any of the big three entirely disappeared there wouldn't be a tear shed. It'd be an inconvenience at most and people would suddenly be reminded about portability and lock in.

At a microscopic level it's pretty stupid, dangerous and short sighted building your product to conform to any of these providers' services past the PaaS level. I see people with whole business on AWS who are a billing dispute away from weeks of downtime.

<comment><USER4> Why is it stupid, dangerous and short sighted? People say those things about cloud vendor locking like it's a obvious truth. I really annoyed by this arrogance among my systems minded peer group.

I get where this comes from, but it's too simplistic. Even if your build close around the AWS primitives, why is it harder to migrate away from this _when necessary_ than building the alternative yourself from before you can proof your business or build any MVP.

I'd say use whatever service you helps to get your product out there fast and allows you to iterate quickly. This will also free time to consider your long term options.

The primitives and constraints imposed by a cloud provider often make your life easier even if you migrate to bare metal or another cloud.

I'd even go so far to argue the other way around: You get away with way shittier, less future proof design when running on bare metal and have a ops team taking care of your pets. Not being able to move that to a cloud, private or public, would concern me most.

<comment><USER3> I've build a couple of startups and sold out, worked for a couple of well known ones as early employees and now reside in an architecture position. This magical free time never appears, particularly when your business is suddenly return focused after your capital comes in. The low capital cost of the services your are integrating typically is used as a justification to utilise them more.

Then a client comes along dangling a few million quid/dollars etc who wants it somewhere else for regulatory compliance or wants to self host it and you have to turn them away.

It's not about making your life easier in the short term, it's about building a solid business foundation and continuation plan and a good DR strategy. A lot of people don't consider this and crash and burn and it's not pretty.

Edit: your approach is known among my circles as the "Ferengi badass" approach.

<comment><USER4> > This magical free time never appears, particularly when your business is > suddenly return focused after your capital comes in. The low capital cost of > the services your are integrating typically is used as a justification to > utilise them more.

Never talked about magical free time, I'm talking of not having to dedicate an ops team to maintain your bare metal infrastructure.

> Then a client comes along dangling a few million quid/dollars etc who wants > it somewhere else for regulatory compliance or wants to self host it and you > have to turn them away.

How do you imaging this being easier with a bare metal infrastructure than one on AWS? It really depends on the specifics: If you're using managed services and the customer wants a on-site solution, you need to find replacement for those. If your customer needs something geographically close, deploying to another region is trivial compared to building our a DC suite.

> It's not about making your life easier in the short term, it's about > building a solid business foundation and continuation plan and a good DR > strategy. A lot of people don't consider this and crash and burn and it's > not pretty.

Indeed, and depending on the specifics it might be much more reasonable to run in the cloud.

<comment><USER5> >I'm talking of not having to dedicate an ops team to maintain your bare metal infrastructure.

You can still build an architecture that works on any of the large feature rich cloud providers with minimal retooling, and that can be deployed on bare metal if needed (minus automatic scaling, load balancing etc.)

In the end the trick is to build infrastructure agnostic apps that work on AWS as well as on IBMs cloud

<comment><USER3> This. OpenStack seems to fit that role well.

<comment><USER4> Introducing the complexity of OpenStack just because you might want to migrate off from AWS at some point?

<comment><USER3> No. Use ansible and run simultaneous infrastructure targets in rackspace on openstack and on AWS. Scale one up if the other shits a brick.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Does Cisco do anything innovative any more? Seems like a dinosaur that is trying to survive. Buying a bunch of acquisitions due to not being to innovate internally isn't a positive sign. Seems like they miss many market transitions. Probably explains their large yearly layoffs.

<comment><USER7> I remember them having some impressive demos of Telepresence and something called Cisco Spark (which probably is an acquesisiton like you said). You join a meeting on your phone, just like Lync(Skype) but if you walk into a meetingroom with video conference equipment it transfers to that.

<comment><USER8> Cisco spark was a knee jerk reaction to Slack. It's a very poor knockoff (much worse than Microsoft teams).

<comment><USER7> You're probably right. I was mostly referring to the integration with the Teleprecence technology that you get if you have their super expensive video conference setup.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> There's a famous quote, usually* attributed to Thomas J. Watson: "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers". This is usually trotted out as an example of expert predictions proving spectularly false. But in a roundabout way the consolidation in the cloud sector is proving a truth at the heart of it.

* wikipedia says there's no actual evidence that Watson himself said this.

<comment><USER10> We started by connecting multiple terminals to one computer. Then we moved on to the PC where 1 terminal was connected to one computer. Now we are in the age where 1 terminal is connected to many computers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I work for a big corp working on openstack, given the rate of companies dropping openstack makes me think I should look to move on

<comment><USER12> Have you looked into Apache CloudStack? I would be interested to hear your thoughts on it if you have given it an appraisal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> i didn't even know cisco had a cloud.

i wouldn't say amazon claimed another victim but rather cisco failed at advertising its services.

granted it'd been difficult, amazon already has a massive platform to advertise itself.

</comment><comment><USER14> How many other folks here had never even heard of Intercloud?

I think that if I _had_ heard of it, I'd have initially placed it as a middle- of-the-road choice. Cisco's no Amazon or Google, but it's also not a Microsoft[1], IBM or HP. It's certainly not an Oracle.

[1] I'd only _initially_ place Azure as bottom-of-the-stack; I've heard enough good things about it that in an actual greenfield cloud project I'd consider it a contender.

<comment><USER15> Just to clarify, Oracle has a cloud too, not just a database product: [https://cloud.oracle.com/home](https://cloud.oracle.com/home)

I think Cisco's and Oracle's cloud are both not heard of before?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I didn't even know Cisco had a cloud.

<comment><USER17> It's amazing how many cloud providers there are. Here is another one to add to your 'They have a cloud?' list. CenturyLink: [https://www.ctl.io/](https://www.ctl.io/).

Note: I am in no way affiliated with them; I just heard they had a cloud a month ago so they are the newest addition to my 'They have a cloud?' list.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Where does all the hardware go when one decides to shut down an operation that large? Can I buy it?

<comment><USER19> Cisco were not operating a public cloud, so there is no hardware to get rid of. Intercloud was a way for a network of smaller "Cisco Powered" cloud providers to interoperate and allow workload mobility to/from on-prem Cisco / OpenStack deployments.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> There are still investments in the Openstack space and I work on one of them(Managed openstack deployments). Intercloud was previously EOL'd 4 months ago, this is just the formal announcement.

</comment><comment><USER21> I have a few old colleagues that are(were?) working on IaaS powered by OpenStack stuff at Cisco. I can only assume they were working on this. I hope they get to move onto other projects :-(

<comment><USER22> If not, I'm sure there many companies building private cloud projects that would welcome OpenStack experts with open arms.

(My employer would hire such folks too, but you'd have to be willing to move to Germany).

<comment><USER23> What's the talent pool like in Germany? I looked at moving to Germany for a while and it seemed pretty strong. I'm in Ireland now but the companies I've worked for have all had German representation in engineering.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> saying "amazon claims another victim" is misleading, it's like saying the race leader in a Formula one race is responsible for one of it's rivals not finishing the race.

<comment><USER25> Not really. It is most like big box store chain claimed mom-n-pop store, which is quite common.

<comment><USER26> I wouldn't call Cisco a mom-n-pop store...

<comment><USER27> It IS a mom-n-pop store in front of Amazon as far as the 'cloud' is concerned.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ring Fired Employees for Watching Customer Videos - <AUTHOR> https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/y3mdvk/ring-fired-employees-abusing-video-data <comment><USER2> All digital services (like Office 365 for example) have a limited number of privileged employees that can access customer data for various reasons, such as resolving operational issues. The allowance for this access is baked into virtually every Terms and Conditions out there. Tight permissions and auditing capabilities are important, but people are exposed to this type of risk broadly, orthogonal to Ring specifically or video surveillance products as a category.

Per the article sounds like Ring took steps to tighten access in response to these reports. I don't really see a problem with this response. I don't own any Ring products but personally I think it is reasonable to expect that _someone_ at Ring would have some degree of access to customer content, and I think that it is a reasonable trade off in order to have the benefits of connected cameras, automatic backups, and their Neighbors feature.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is scapegoating. The employee worked for _Amazon_. _Amazon_ watched customer video. You shouldn't get to use employees for responsibility laundering. I don't care what your policies are anymore than I care whether any criminal "didn't mean to" hurt someone. Your policies are your internal details. I care about your behavior.

</comment><comment><USER4> I will never understand how it is that people are OK with installing surveillance equipment in their home that can be accessed by any strangers whatsoever.

<comment><USER5> Neither will I. Ring, Alexa & friends, "smart" devices made by mega corps, etc will never be welcome in my home. Any home automation will only be done with open-source or home-brew solutions.

<comment><USER6> I am in the same camp but we're assuming that the capabilities already present in our phones/laptops/TVs are turned off and stay that way.

<comment><USER5> Unfortunately, you are absolutely correct. Like most I have a smartphone (Android), use Chrome (technically chromium but close enough), and have a device or two infected with Windows 10. I do take measures to reduce the outflow of my personal data but with no real practical alternatives in some cases, I can only rely on blending into the background noise and avoiding flagrantly awful and thinly-veiled surveillance devices.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Is there a way to obfuscate client data so that employees can't view it?

<comment><USER8> I think the best thing is to avoid Ring products</comment></comment>


VR still a novelty, but Google light-field technology could make it serious art - <AUTHOR> https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610458/vr-is-still-a-novelty-but-googles-light-field-technology-could-make-it-serious-art/ <comment><USER3> If you have a compatible headset (Vive/Oculus/WinMR), check out the experience here: [http://store.steampowered.com/app/771310/Welcome_to_Light_Fi...](http://store.steampowered.com/app/771310/Welcome_to_Light_Fields/)

This approach is a pretty major step for creating believable VR experiences. You're still limited to a pretty small space (great for seated users), but the effect is very convincing and entirely unlike traditional photo-captured experiences previously available for VR. You can move your head around (but only within the sphere) and everything tracks the way you'd expect: parallax works, light rays through windows move, reflections change as your perspective changes, and people's eyes can track you as you move.

<comment><USER4> Seconded, they look absolutely gorgeous. Photogrammetry scenes are comparable but are still a touch behind these in realism.

<comment><USER5> They really do! I was impressed. (I'm the reporter who wrote that article.)

<comment><USER4> I've been following your AR/VR coverage for a couple of years now and have enjoyed it and have been enlightened by it since.

<comment><USER5> thank you so much!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "Surely _this_ will make VR mainstream!" \- journalists since 2012

<comment><USER7> I think you've misspelled 1992

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> You can't capture the actual light field with a usual camera, can you?

<comment><USER9> actually not even that spinning camera array can capture a decent approximation of it (assuming it wants to cover the entire volume of the sphere to account for head movement). Lightfields are not going to look very good until we get DeepRendering or something.

<comment><USER10> I think you're discounting something...

If you consider how Google Cardboard works, it exploits the fact that the camera has a field of view - the image is perspective. So when you hold the camera at 10 degrees left from center, it takes the right-most column of pixels... And when you hold the camera at 10 degrees right of center, it takes the left-most column of pixels. And these columns of pixels converge - <USER2> though your head were as wide as the distance between those two points where the camera was. (Something like that.)

Point being, if you move the camera through enough points, aimed in enough directions (even if it's on the surface of a sphere, always aimed out), you eventually capture rays of light as though they passed through every voxel in that space, from every direction.

And, just to highlight, they are doing a TON of compression. This is essentially inside-out tomography, or something like that, to derive what the color is, from every voxel, in every direction... And then doing a 5-dimensional compression on that data (2D surface of a sphere of pixels, at every position inside a 3d sphere.)

So, I think it's a much more "decent approximation" than you're giving it credit for.

Or at least, it has the potential to be, if the algorithms are good enough.

<comment><USER9> You're absolutely right. I was thinking in terms of a previous attempt by some people, using a planar camera array with no motion involved. In that case it was impossible to reconstruct the lightfield satisfactorily. You only got a small pyramidal volume and a lot of ugly interpolations because of the small number of cameras. In this case however you can reconstruct the real deal at an arbitrary precision by increasing the scan time. If they can render it properly in real time, it will be amazing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> (Site blocks ad-blockers)</comment>