Random Search Wired into Animals May Help Them Hunt - <AUTHOR> https://www.quantamagazine.org/random-search-wired-into-animals-may-help-them-hunt-20200611/ <comment><USER2> In "The Secret of Our Success" (aside: everytime I write that title I cringe a little at how self-help-y it sounds), Joseph Henrich conjectures that human divination rituals might have evolved as a way to randomize hunting behavior so as not to become predictable to the animals being hunted for. Not sure how plausible to find it, but I found the thought pretty intriguing.

<comment><USER3> Not sure if this is from the same book but I've heard something similar about "lunacy" being linked to the full moon.

The reason there is more crime and wild behavior during a full moon is not because of any gravitational effects of the moon etc. Rather, we are descended from tribal peoples who celebrated the full moon with wild parties. Said parties led to intercourse which led to children etc.

Not sure how valid that is but I've always liked the idea.

<comment><USER4> Isn't a simpler explanation that it's brighter at night during a full moon, making it easier for opportunistic nighttime shenanigans?

<comment><USER3> Thank you for explaining this more simply!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is interesting from an optimization perspective too.

The intermittent big jumps are what you need to get out of local optima. You can use gradient ascent locally, but once you stop improving, a big change is needed.

</comment><comment><USER6> Note:

>Ironically, their paper arrived only months after a study co-authored by Viswanathan, da Luz and Raposo showed a catastrophic error in Viswanathan's original albatross study. The wet/dry sensors they had relied on weren't dry only when the birds flew: They were also dry when the albatrosses sat on their nests. Some of the longest "flights" in the data set might have actually been protracted visits to the birds' nests. The study also criticized certain analytical techniques and claimed that albatrosses don't do Lévy walks after all, and that it was unclear whether many species did.

<comment><USER7> The answer is immediately in the paragraphs following.

> Sims acknowledges that the conflicting papers "put people on edge." But his > work used more up-to-date mathematical methods to demonstrate that a whole > menagerie of marine predators take Lévy walks.

> These improved methods quashed doubts over whether animals ever do Lévy > walks. "The amount of data is overwhelming," said da Luz.

> Sims and Humphries even revisited albatrosses in a subsequent study in 2012. > Working with more sophisticated GPS tracking devices, they found that > albatrosses did not perform Lévy walks while searching for food above > shallow water, where they might have more visual or olfactory information to > guide them. But when they flew out over deeper water, the birds did in fact > adopt Lévy searches.

So the original work had the right conclusion (Albatrosses do adopt Levy searches) for totally flawed reasons (the data didn't actually support the conclusion, the Levy walks weren't being used for the time periods originally predicted).

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Considering the variety of animals that seem to show this behavior, isn't it possible that mammals, specifically humans, are "encoded" with that same random search pattern? I'm not sure how you'd test for it though.

<comment><USER9> I instantly thought about eye tracking experiments, in which we see lots of small movements around an area, then big jumps across the screen. I guess others have thought about it too.

[https://journals.aps.org/pre/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevE.79.05...](https://journals.aps.org/pre/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevE.79.056114)

[https://www.academia.edu/1112368/Modelling_gaze_shift_as_a_c...](https://www.academia.edu/1112368/Modelling_gaze_shift_as_a_constrained_random_walk)

I'm intrigued.

<comment><USER8> > Specifically, we use comparisons of maximum-likelihood fit as well as > standard deviation analysis and diffusion entropy analysis to show that > visual search during language comprehension exhibits Lévy-like rather than > Gaussian diffusion.

That is _fascinating_. Thanks for that.

> However, one could argue, from an evolutionary standpoint, that spe-ciÿc > search mechanisms could have been learned and "wired" in order to improve > theexploration eciency (e.g., if a salient point is located within a direct > vision distance,maximize the probability of straightforwardly moving to that > site)

</comment></comment></comment><comment> dr-ando Relatedly, a paper was posted to bioRxiv a few days ago describing the results of large scale fruit fly release-and-recapture experiments. They conclude the abstract with "Our field data do not support a Lévy flight model of dispersal, despite the fact that our experimental conditions almost perfectly match the core assumptions of that theory."

[https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.10.145169v1](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.10.145169v1)

Also, Viswanathan's 1996 Nature paper was stupendously wrong due to the key measurements being in error, but instead of retracting it, he and colleagues published a followup - in Nature 2007 - in which they say the albatross flight times are gamma distributed.

</comment><comment><USER10> Is it possible that it's actually scarce resources are randomly allocated via power law distributions and that the search isn't what's random?

<comment><USER11> The article covers this. Fruit flies still did Levi walks when not able to sense anything.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Extension to highlight and tag users on Hacker News - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/veggiedefender/hn-friends <comment><USER2> Funny, I just made something like this today (but more primitive), mostly so that I won't miss Walter Bright's comments.

        // ==UserScript==
        // @name     Hacker News VIP highlighter
        // @version  1
        // @grant    none
        // @match    https://news.ycombinator.com/*
        // ==/UserScript==

        function highlightVIPs() {
          'use strict';

          const VIPs = [
            "WalterBright"
          ];

          const userTags = Array.from(document.getElementsByClassName("hnuser"));

          userTags.forEach(tag => {
            const username = tag.href.split("=")[1];
            if (VIPs.includes(username)) {
              tag.style.fontWeight = 'bold';
            }
          });
        }

        highlightVIPs();

(I'm not much of a JavaScript programmer, but it seems to work.)

<comment><AUTHOR> Pretty cool! If you want to speed your script up, consider implementing VIPs as a Set() so lookups are approx. O(1) rather than O(n).

[https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...](https://developer.mozilla.org/en- US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Set)

<comment><USER3> Probably won't see much speedup with _one_ VIP? b^)

<comment><USER4> What exactly is the b^) face? Smily staring cyclops? If it's an emotion, it escapes me.

<comment><USER5> Looks like a side profile, with glasses

<comment><USER6> Could be a misspelled B^) which looks more like a smiley with a nose.

[http://symbolhound.com/?q=b%5E%29](http://symbolhound.com/?q=b%5E%29)

<comment><USER4> That seems possible. I'm not so up on my smileys as I might be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'd like an extension to remove usernames entirely. I would rather my opinions about commentary be less biased, not more.

<comment><AUTHOR> in that case, just add .hnuser to your ad-blocking rules.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> If you're the kind of person who wants this, you may also be interested in my RSS feed of good HN commenters: [http://hnblogs.thume.net/](http://hnblogs.thume.net/)

<comment><USER9> [http://hnblogs.thume.net/feed.xml](http://hnblogs.thume.net/feed.xml) returns 500 for me :(

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Very cool! I think it's especially great that this is a browser plugin instead of a separate website. It's great when developers make things as easy as possible on users. Nice job, I'll be giving it a try!

<comment><USER11> Agree! I am an app developer, and I like to think about how to make app developers jobs (and onboarding) easier, and the next thing I will write on that vein I think, already decided with the idea and design mostly formulated, will be a Chrome extension (for Pivotal Tracker users that also connect Bitbucket to a CI, to aid in merge request management)

This example is great, as it is open source and supports Firefox too. Maybe I'll do both browsers as well! This HN friends extension does most if not all of the primitive things that I will need to do, so I'm being sincere and I think it's a great publish.

<comment><AUTHOR> Luckily, both Chrome and Firefox use the webextensions API, so supporting both is pretty simple.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is super! I was able to understand how to use it right away, installed and upvoted. I don't know how much I will use it, but I have often noticed the same insightful people popping up in discussions I am interested in, and so I will get some value out of it, and I guess I love the logo, too.

</comment><comment><USER12> I have noticed that sites like reddit and HN feel implicitly anonymous. it'd be interesting to see how this helps reduce some of that. I've been trying my own ways of improving how I interact with people on reddit, maybe I'll try this.

</comment><comment><USER13> added it to my slowly growing list of HN ( and related ) resources [https://github.com/keithn/HackerNewsCommunity](https://github.com/keithn/HackerNewsCommunity)

</comment><comment><USER14> this is just like reddit RES that's pretty cool

I was meaning to write my own userscript / chrome extension to show a button if there's a reddit-thread with same URL trending in hackernews, so you can click and go to those comments. It would say how many comments there are, and pull up the one with the most upvotes/comments within a 6 month timespan.

Haven't gotten around to it yet unless someone else wants to make it

I made one for my favorite notetaking app though, that I use fairly often. I made a write up of things I learned to write it

[http://vincentmtang.com/2018/06/29/adventures-in-writing- a-t...](http://vincentmtang.com/2018/06/29/adventures-in-writing-a- tampermonkey-script-extension/)

<comment><USER15> There is actually a HNES[0] with both firefox[1] and chrome[2] support. I use it primarily because it highlights new comments from the last time I visited a submission.

[0] [https://github.com/etcet/HNES](https://github.com/etcet/HNES)

[1] [https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/hnes/](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/hnes/)

[2] [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bappiabcodbpphnojd...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/bappiabcodbpphnojdiaddhnilfnjmpm)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Would be neat if you could tag people with different colors, to indicate like/dislike, or to indicate the primary topic that you have encountered them talking about in the past.

<comment><USER17> I would think that would be generally harmful for the point of thoughtful discussion as you are essentially labeling a person from the get-go with a certain bias.

<comment><USER16> I think it could actually have the opposite effect — that someone you've tagged at one point as someone you disagree with later posts something that you agree with (or vice versa).

<comment><USER18> More pessimistically, it could make you disagree posts because they're made by someone you disagree with.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Seems useful, does anyone know of a similar thing for Safari or as a userscript that works in Tampermonkey (across all browsers) or Stylish?

<comment><USER20> With Stylish or similar, you can do the username highlight like so:

a.hnuser[href*="id=dewey"] { background-color: orange !important; color: white !important; }

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Love it. Thanks. Even better if tag is visible btw.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll work on it!

<comment><USER10> Also I would personally prefer for the "tag" box to have a save button next to it. It wasn't clear to me whether it autosaves or if I was supposed to type the name before clicking "add friend". Could just be me though, but I would like this feature. Added this issue so that if people agree or disagree, they can vote on it through thumbs up/down in the Github interface: [https://github.com/veggiedefender/hn- friends/issues/1](https://github.com/veggiedefender/hn-friends/issues/1)</comment></comment></comment>


How to Hire When Everyone Wants to Found Their Own Startup - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/12/02/the-talent-dilution-cycle/ <comment><USER2> There's a way through this mess.

First, focus on people that want to be hired. There's lots of people out there who tried to roll their own and realized it's a lot harder than it looks. Plenty just want to focus on the fun tech stuff and leave client communications, marketing, and all the other small-business drudge work for others.

Second, be willing to build people up. Promote from within and let people grow into the role they want to have. Fuck a foosball table, I want room to grow. Convey this clearly in the interview. Leave off the X number of years in technology Y nonsense, and, if you're feeling particularly froggy, the demand for a four-year degree. Nothing about having one makes you any better at technology work, it's function is purely signaling. You can get a much better feel for who someone is just by listening to them talk about their pet projects or what inspires them or what they want to do.

Third, drop the pretentious bullshit. It's a seller's market for talent, you're courting them, do what you have to to minimize HR's influence on the process. Be responsive, don't ask stupid questions, do whiteboard exercises, all that tech interview bullshit that just skews the signal-to-noise ratio rather than increases it. You can get away with that shit if you're Facebook, but even there it's a dick move and it doesn't really help.

<comment><USER3> > _...be willing to build people up. Promote from within and let people grow > into the role they want to have..._

I think this is one of the missing pieces in modern companies. Very few places _really_ want to train you up and all the procedures and processes either expect that (1) your school/course should have taught you or (2) you should have already taught yourself.

<comment><USER4> We certainly don't help the problem. I have a few friends who switch jobs every 9 months or so, which almost certainly makes companies wary of investing years of training.

<comment><USER5> For myself, the desire to change jobs comes from the observation that the companies trying to poach me away are offering more money than my current salary even considering the foreseeable future of raises. I happen to like the people I'm working with, so I continue to stick around but at some point those numbers are going to get too far apart and I'll make a move. In my current company (very large), the prospect of raises and promotions are slow, small and far in-between. Maybe I'm in a weird place, but that's been my experience thus far.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> How about: give them a little bit more equity than just scraps?

Everyone want to found their company because they know it's the only way for them to be rewarded if the company is successful.

Right now it's more like: "the company got bought, the founder is a millionnaire, you get some pocket money and the awesome opportunity to be a cog in Google Adwords!"

<comment><USER7> Anyone who's founded a startup knows just how much risk is involved, and how significantly it's de-risked by the time they're hiring employee #1, #10, or #100.

Basically, 50% of an idea is worth less than 0.05% of a startup with traction.

<comment><USER8> There's something weird about the structure of your comment. How much traction do you assume a startup has when they hire #1?

Personally I think startups are too stingy with equity, 2% is considered generous, but this is not enough to compensate for the risk for employees 1-10, which is part of the reason the savvy ones want to be a founder rather than employee. I think the stinginess persists partly because of ignorance of the average prospective employee on stock option plans, so they're not getting the level of pushback they will about salaries. But more importantly from the granting side, it's very hard for founders to tell if a prospective employee has the all-out intelligence, hustle and tenacity to be a part of the critical core group that literally builds a money-making machine from scratch. It's true that hiring is a huge risk, but this is what the vesting schedule is for. Companies need to bet bigger on individuals, because the risk profile does not decline as precipitously as the equity grants, there's a discontinuity there that is keeping savvy employees out. If you are selecting only for people who can afford to work for free then you're leaving talent on the table.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> How about "realize there is a whole big world outside of the Bay Area"?

I have no interest in founding my own company. I'm a software developer and a pretty good one. I want to continue to develop software (it is what I truly love to do), not manage a business.

I also have zero interest is moving to the Bay Area. Been there, done that (prior to the first dot com implosion), nice place to visit but won't ever live there again. I get pings fairly regularly from friends and/or ex- coworkers asking me if I'd like to work in the Bay Area (remote not an option). The answer is and always will be "no, not unless you open up an office in San Diego (or allow remote work, without expecting me to constantly be travelling to the Bay Area)".

Surely there are more than enough people like me in places that aren't the Bay Area to hire to start successful businesses -- San Diego, Austin, Portland, Boston, etc, these places exist and have tech talent!

<comment><USER10> we're based in santa monica and have or have had full time remote employees in all the areas you mentioned. portland is my favorite.

in fact, when interviewing, we kind of look at bay area residency as a contra- indication. it's at least 25% more expensive to hire someone there.

so, if you flip that assertion on its head - for the same price, we can hire someone 25% better, that lives in austin, or portland, or whatever. _and, in fact_ \- our salary then becomes significantly _above market_ for the area, and we get exceptional talent.

if you extend this philosophy to hiring more experienced (i.e. 'older') people, you get a triple-threat: above market salary, smart/good people, maturity/experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> >Recruit Outside Of Central Casting

Good idea, start by being open to remote developers. I'm not going to relocate to SF, regardless of salary, equity, or how exciting the project is. I've worked remotely successfully for the better part of a decade, so I know it works. Slack, HipChat, Skype, etc. make the lack of physical presence nearly irrelevant.

<comment><USER3> Companies that can figure out _how_ to create and manage a distributed team will have disproportionate advantages if the product is successful and they suddenly need to scale. Open-source projects are a good example of this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Seems to me that only those who are in the start up culture echo chamber could hold this view.

Its just not realistic that the vast majority of talents people are not joining your start up because they have their own start up. The numbers do not make sense.

Also the graphic that shows the paypal talent diaspora also is off, early employees who make a couple million in a start up are not going to want to WORK for a salary cause they have a couple million. They may want to join as founders if you can sell them the dream I guess.

<comment><USER13> _early employees who make a couple million in a start up are not going to want to WORK for a salary cause they have a couple million_

This is empirically false.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Note that the suggested approaches do not include "offer them equity" or "pay lots of money".

Most startups fail.

<comment><USER15> Even equity isn't especially compelling. Unless I'm a founding team member, I will always take higher pay in lieu of equity. After being with a company for a year or two and having a solid idea of where it's going, I'd probably consider it, but until that point equity is worthless to me.

<comment><USER16> Also, even with the best equity agreement, you can still get royally screwed when it comes down to the wire.

<comment><USER17> Alas, employee equity holders are last on the list of winners.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The problem is that everyone is trying to hire the best, partly because they know how good that looks when fundraising, partly because that's how you win in winner take all tournament type economies.

This ends up similar to NFL Quarterbacks. Even the worst quarterback in the NFL is exceptional, but everyone wants the best one because it's hard to win a Super Bowl with the worst quarterback in the NFL.

So it's not that talent is hard to find. There are 1,000s of of people that are very good quarterbacks. It's that the best talent is hard to find. And this is because there can only be a couple of bests at anything.

<comment><USER19> People also try to hire the best because the value of a team in an acquihire scenario is basically the sum of their "ranking scores"—if you're the #1 most- wanted developer in the whole talent pool, the acquirer will pay exponentially more than they will for the #2 most-wanted, and so forth.

If you want to succeed as a startup, recruit by setting a bar and hiring anyone who passes it, not by comparing people to other people. "Good in an absolute sense" is much more useful knowledge than "better than X."

<comment><USER5> Where are these rankings kept? I honestly never had a clue that there were rankings for developers. I've never once seen that or heard it talked about.

<comment><USER19> I didn't mean that there are literal rankings; to be the "#1 most-wanted" developer is just to be more well-known and sought-after (and thus to have higher social status and clout in the industry) than the "#2 most-wanted."

Google collects highly-ranked developers (e.g. Rob Pike)—for no other reason than their high rank—and calls them Fellows. Heroku hired Ruby's creator Matz, and let him continue working on Ruby itself in an open-source fashion, just to say they had him. It's like collecting baseball cards, basically.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> As I get more senior, I get less tolerant of exploitive cultures.

You hire me by giving great benefits[1], an office next to transit in a city I want to live in, good salary, a nice office for me alone, and hands-off management who will support me, along with a commitment to free software.

Generally those axes are how I rank companies, the scaling parameters vary depending on my life situation at the time.

I also want to note that lots of Bay Area companies seem to have a thing for recruiting from top 10 schools. Get over themselves, go out to the Mid-/Mountain West and scour those students. There are good students outside of the top 10.

[1] A compelling benefit would be fully funding a PhD in the US for a fully furloughed duration. No one ever has that as a benefit afaik. I'd like to see it offered.

Note, Foosball is not a benefit. Nor is having a video game station. Nor is gourmet food, happy hours, or senior devs with 3 years of experience (that's an anti benefit).

</comment><comment><USER21> The _everyone_ in the title is clear hyperbole, but obviously one meant to convey _most_ or maybe even _very nearly all_. That's probably a belief held by TechCrunch writers and Startup School attendees but most likely far from realistic.

My previous job was at a small nonprofit and we worked in a large co-working space that had _hundreds_ of startups[1]. Many of the people I had conversations with (or overheard) in the kitchen/common-areas were _heavy_ into the startup-scene (serial-founders or engineers who would _only_ work at startups). I'm now at a large tech company and not one of my co-workers has ever expressed interest in founding a startup (or even working for one). This is probably because startups tend to attract people who want to work for a startup and larger companies tend to attract those that would rather not.

If startups feel they are having a harder problem filling vacancies than large companies maybe that's a sign that talent pool is larger and they should ask what they can do to appeal more to that crowd, instead of what they could do to get potential founders to work for them instead of founding their own.

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Innovation_Center](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Innovation_Center)

</comment><comment><USER22> Some other folks have hinted around this, but I think the best way to look at this is by rephrasing the title:

"How to Hire When Everyone Who Wants to Work for a Startup Wants Their Own"

By that I don't really mean "work for a startup" so much as "work in the stereotype of startup culture." If you're starting with a very small team and trying to build with no profitability while you try to attract a major buyer, then yeah you're going to have to work within that culture of young people willing to take on the attendant risks.

If you're trying to build a viable business that happens to be a startup, perhaps you need to look beyond that initial group - because if you're only looking at 20-somethings with Macbook Airs working in coffeeshops, you're going to get a disproportionate number of people who want not just a startup but their own startup.

</comment><comment><USER23> You can't put lipstick on a pig.

What's largely missing in the article is a notion that you want to find candidates who are _mutually good matches_ for your company. Your position should have enough opportunity and value to the specific candidate to not require much sales effort. Selling harder up front just sets your management up for a big commitment on top of everything else. Good engineers with multiple offers will bounce inside of a month when they join and see all the sophistry you fed them.

Put that salesman energy into 1. differentiating your opportunity or better 2. developing your current team and hierarchy to actually support the competitive talent you seek. Be /less/ greedy for hires. A mindset focused on talent is poisonous in the long term: [http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2002/07/22/the- talent-myth](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2002/07/22/the-talent-myth)

The suggestions in this article are somewhat reasonable, but the article does much more to whitewash and promote the Paypal mafia (and especially Keith as a new VC) as competent. The recommendations for creating 'mentorship' and 'founder culture' have value, but that often translates into just fixing obvious management problems. To start, don't let your management burn too much money on recruiting.

<comment><USER24> Sorry to nitpick, but I think you're getting your metaphors mixed:

You can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipstick_on_a_pig](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipstick_on_a_pig)

You cant polish a turd [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you_can%27t_polish_a_turd](http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/you_can%27t_polish_a_turd)

<comment><USER23> lol

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I could imagine the biggest fear of a "founder type" might be a company they work for attempting to claim ownership of his or her work at some point. I don't know if there's a good common solution to concerns like that. If there is, it might be good to advertise that those concerns would be addressed right up front.

</comment><comment><USER26> Um, everybody wanting to start a startup is a simple signal that salaries are too low.

Better to be employee single digit at a startup and get bought out by Google 3-5 years from now than to work for Google for those 3-5 years.

<comment><USER27> You start by mentioning everyone wanting to start a startup, then switch to saying how it's better to be an early employee at a start up.

Being the founder of a start up acquired by Google in 3-5 years may be better than working there for those years, however that is not necessarily the case for being an employee at one. Other comments in this thread point to equity in startups often being too low, so I wont repeat the same stuff.

<comment><USER26> The parent article is "How To Hire When Everyone Wants To Found Their Own Startup". Not be an employee of a startup, _FOUND_ their own startup.

And, while equity distribution still stinks, it's _still_ better to be part of a startup doing something interesting than being a drone at Google. Generally, your salary is probably comparable (being more than 80% from the going rate will be an issue), you're doing something important if not interesting, and there is upside.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> > Recruit Outside Of Central Casting--

This is a big idea, worthy of more discussion. Where/How do you find a hidden talent? For example, there's a founder I know, who has been unusually successful finding & training up former Theater/Drama majors. He says they're creative, quick learners, and appreciative the chance to start a new career.

</comment><comment><USER29> "Everyone good wants to be a founder" is ludicrous.

1\. Most people don't have the connections to become founders without an incredible amount of work (that could be better spent in, say, finance where the long hours bring 20-40% annual pay increases). For every one person who has the connections to deliver Sequoia on an idea, there are 9,999 equally talented people who don't. If you can't find one of those other 9,999, then you're without hope.

2\. The problem is that non-founder equity is generally quite pathetic. If the founders each get 20% and the first engineer gets 1%, then you're never going to see a "founder-quality" first engineer. It simply won't happen.

To a large extent, hiring in the Valley is about exploiting the Winner's Curse regarding the unknown value of the equity. As it were, the more talented and seasoned people tend to assign it a low value (perhaps 0.25x price-at- valuation, meaning it'd take $160k of equity on a 4-year-schedule to offset a $10k salary drop) while the clueless and young ones who haven't made their (business and technical) mistakes yet tend to overvalue it (sometimes 1+... which makes no sense because why would one pay a higher price than the VCs are paying?)

Talented people would gladly take non-founder positions if the terms (equity, autonomy, introduction into the investor class) weren't so terrible. It's not like being a founder in the VC-funded world is great; it's that everything else is worse.

<comment><USER5> I'm one of those non-connected people working non-stop nights and weekends on "startups". Switching to an industry that actually pays out according to the amount of work I would put in is interesting. I either haven't considered it or never really thought that type of industry existed (outside of something like sales).

Also, I 100% agree. Employee equity is so small it's kind of insulting. The only time I took equity was b/c I was able to work with some semi-"famous" founders and hoped to at least to grow my network. I did grow it a little, and I might be able to tap into it at some point but the equity returned me exactly zilch.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> If you are a founder, you are a genius. If you are a genius, you can spot talent instantly or can otherwise overcome obstacles. Either way you don't need tips from TC, do you? If you need TC to tell you how to hire, then you're not really a genius and should just walk into the nearest bonfire or otherwise stop breathing my air.</comment>


Calculate n + 1 without using + or - or * or / - <AUTHOR>

As the title asks! My buddy came across this while preparing for an interview.<p>All I could think of is implementing a full adder in software but I'm thinking there has to be a better solution...help! <comment><USER2> Arbitrary addition, subtraction and multiplication without arithmetic signs.

int add( int a, int b ) { while ( a ) { int c = a & b; b ^= a; a = c << 1; } return b; }

int sub( int a, int b ) { return add( a, add( ~b, 1 ) ); }

int mul( int a, int b ) { int c = 0; while ( a ) { if ( a & 1 ) c = add( c, b ); a >>= 1; b <<= 1; } return c; }

</comment><comment><USER3> I have the proper Enterprise version:

        def increment(a):
            import urllib2
            url = "http://www.html2xml.nl/Services/Calculator/Version1/Calculator.asmx/Add?a=%d&b=1" % a
            result = urllib2.urlopen(url).read()
            from xml.dom.minidom import parseString
            result = parseString(result)
            return int(result.getElementsByTagName('int')[0].childNodes[0].data)

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm pretty sure that's not a valid solution. Its the same as using Math.sum(). While it evaluates your resourcefulness, the point of the question, I think, is to figure out your knowledge and creative thinking

</comment></comment><comment><USER4>
      int inc(int a) {
        int mask = ~a;
        /* Assuming a is 32-bit. If 64-bit, add 32-bit shift. */
        mask |= mask << 1;
        mask |= mask << 2;
        mask |= mask << 4;
        mask |= mask << 8;
        mask |= mask << 16;
        /* Take the longest run of 1s from the right of a.
         * mask has 0s there and 1s everywhere else. We want
         * to set the next bit to 1 and set the ones after
         * to 0. */
        return (a | ~(mask << 1)) & mask;
      }

</comment><comment><USER5> Could do lookup tables like the old CADET system did. [http://www.websters- online-dictionary.org/definitions/IBM+16...](http://www.websters-online- dictionary.org/definitions/IBM+1620?cx=partner- pub-0939450753529744%3Av0qd01-tdlq&cof=FORID%3A9&ie=UTF-8&q=IBM+1620&sa=Search#922)

In some situations you may be data rich but function poor. Like embedded devices where you have a limited instruction set, 128bytes of RAM, but access to megs of ROM for program/data.

</comment><comment><USER6> Basically replicate the carry process in the form of bit ops:

        def inc(n):
            x = 1
            while n & 1 == 1:
                n = n >> 1
                x = x << 1
            n = n | 1
            while not x == 1:
                x = x >> 1
                n = n << 1
            return n

</comment><comment><USER7> If it is just about not using +,-,* or / operators, we can do it by using "++" operator.

x=n++;

</comment><comment><USER8> how about this (example in ruby): def plus_1(x); arr = []; arr[x] = true; return arr.size; end

<comment><USER9> Funny, this is the first thing I thought of, but then realized it would only work if x>0

<comment><USER8> oops! good catch!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Google quickly reveals this - [http://nscraps.com/C/892-c-program-add-two- numbers-without-u...](http://nscraps.com/C/892-c-program-add-two-numbers- without-using-plus-symbol.htm)

<comment><USER10> I don't think this counts; it _is_ using the sum operation, even if the operator doesn't look like +

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> php solution provided number is a positive int :

round($n.'.9')

</comment><comment><USER12> data Nat = Zero | Succ n

plus1 = Succ

Probably not the answer they were looking for, but it was the first thing that came into my head.

</comment><comment><USER13> def add_1(x): return sum([1,x])

Python.

Too simple? I didn't use any of the signs, and it demonstrates knowledge of the python standard library!

EDIT: Whoops, seems the idea of using the sum() function (or operator) has been dismissed elsewhere. Time to study some more languages, I think.

</comment><comment><USER14> if n is an integer, I believe this works:

<https://gist.github.com/1063990>

uses only bit shits, bitwise XOR, and bitwise AND

I would imagine they meant not to use the operations, not just the symbols.</comment>


Ask HN: What becomes of Anthony Lewandowski and Uber if Google Wins? - <AUTHOR> Uber's entire timetable towards a profitable business model depends on being (among the) first to market with a competitive A to B self-driving solution. If Waymo err.. Google err.. Alphabet gets the victory in District court, what becomes of one of the fastest growing businesses in the world? <comment><USER2> IANAL. But Levandowski tried to "plead the Fifth" on testimony that he was not giving, on a case that he is not a party to. That should not fly, and did not. (Uber went along with it because it could help them in the case, and because they have some kind of obligation to try to defend Levandowski.)

Nobody seems to be contesting that Levandowski took a bunch of documents from Google (Waymo). If they want to, they can almost certainly make Uber choose between stopping working on self-driving cars, and firing or transferring Levandowski.

There's also the possibility that Levandowski goes to jail over this (I don't think his trying to plead the Fifth was just gamesmanship).

Bottom line: My best guess is that Uber is able to continue, but they have to throw Levandowski under the bus to do so. I don't know to what degree that will hurt them.

</comment><comment><USER3> History is written by the winners. Court battles are dragged out by the losers.

My point is that, IMO, these kind of "IP" cases, never impede an actually successful business. And that if a business fails, and also has IP suits against it, it is for other business reasons that it failed.

I'm no IP lawyer ( that's probably helpful here ), but looking at Oracle vs Google, Samsung v Apple, IIRC, that actually more legitimate business didn't get impeded and just kept going.

My prediction is that if Uber falls it won't be IP suits that deal the fatal blow.

I think this is generally because courts move slower than the world, and both sides are, usually, "essentially matched" since they can both afford solid legal teams.

All this sort of leads to the conclusion that IP has mostly defensive, and capital benefits ( owning IP can deter people entering market or suing, and IP can add to value of transactions ), but it doesn't have the power to prevent other people using your invention ( as I think the intent of patents originally was, exclusive use ).</comment>


Ask HN: 99designs or crowdspring for large-format illustration work? - <AUTHOR>

I'm working on an MVP, and have an idea for a large illustration to surround the site's introduction and a survey that will help to complement the message.  However, I'm a decent web designer with fair sense of color, proportion, &c, but have zero illustration skills.
This seems like the perfect place for 99designs or crowdspring.  From browsing the contests on each site now, it seems like 99designs has more high-quality stuff in their "other" category vs. crowdspring's "illustration" category, but that might be a transient situation.
I'd love to hear any words of advice as to which site I should use for a project like this, which seems like it's not quite in the mainstream of "crowdsourcing" projects.  Alternatively, maybe there's another similar site that I'm not aware of that is more appropriate for illustration work, rather than e.g. logos, web design, etc.  FWIW, my budget is probably going to land in the $500 area. <comment><USER3> I co-founded crowdSPRING. Illustration projects are perfectly appropriate crowdsourcing projects (we've done many for startups, big Brands and some of the world's best agencies). Let me offer a few suggestions that should help you get a good result regardless of where you post your project:

1\. Be sensitive to your budget if the illustration is complex. Many people forget that illustrations can be rather complex - and you're talking about a large illustration (which might have many components and may need to interface with other on-page elements). You'll attract better illustrators if you can stretch your budget a bit (depending on complexity, of course).

2\. Limit initial scope. If you ultimately need a full page illustration, you might initially ask for an illustration of a portion and then narrow your selections and ask a few people to show you more complete illustrations. Asking everyone to do full page illustrations - especially if your budget is modest - might limit the number of participants.

3\. Identify styles you like. Even more important than sketching your idea is a reference for the types of illustrations you like. Many illustrators have a particular style and if you can be clear at the beginning, you'll help them focus on showing examples of work that you're more likely to like - <USER2> than just take stabs in the dark submitting random illustration styles.

I hope these are helpful and wish you luck with the illustration (and your MVP!)

Ross

</comment><comment><USER4> Check out <http://upstack.com> for illustrations, we have some stellar illustrators looking for work. Everything is done without spec work and the designers have to be approved to work so the quality is great.

</comment><comment><USER5> I once paid Inkd.com for logos, and they did a great job, so I hired them for a 3rd. The person responsible for making my logo good in the past, had left to go solo, and I ended up with shitty logos that I had to send back.

Lesson learned: use them, and sometimes you'll have success and the name of a designer that you can count on. In most other cases, you'll be wasting your cash.

There's a lot of talent to be found on freelance sites like Elance or oDesk if you know how to look.

</comment><comment><USER6> I've heard some bad things about 99designs too. While I've not done this, it may be worth looking through dribbble.com to find a few designers that have done something you like, and get in touch with them. They're generally excellent designers - I have no idea how much they'd charge, but could be worth asking.

<comment><USER7> Hi,

Matt Mickiewicz here, co-founder of 99designs.

I would highly encourage you to give us a try... the key to success with our model is engagement & feedback with the designers. We're never the absolute cheapest option (we charge minimimum $295 for a logo and there's sites like 20dollarlogos and 50dollarlogos.com out there) but what you get is the viewpoints, interpretations, and skills from a wide variety of designers.

We've done over 55,000 projects, including some awesome work for Mashable (<http://mashable.99designs.com>), SxSW (<http://99designs.com/sxsw>), the logo for StackOverflow.com, official t-shirts for the San Francisco & LA Marathons and tons of other cool projects. Even took home a Webby Award for Best Web Service in 2010.

Heck - we even did the original CrowdSPRING logo: <http://99designs.com/contests/321> .

Feel free to drop us an email or call our office if you have any questions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> As a designer I hate 99designs and similar sites. They completely rip off designers. Instead, find a designer you like, or post a job offer, here even, and pay them. If you can, stay away from 99designs.

<comment><USER9> How would you, as a designer, recommend people get low-budget work done?

Is it that most of the designers don't get paid at all or the lowish price that the winner gets that offends?

There is a huge appeal in having a designer "try out" - I've been burned by designers who couldn't get the work done to my satisfaction. It was a waste of my time and money. It would have been very easy to weed them out with a simple "audition". This seems entirely legitimate to me. I've ben asked to write code prior to getting a job, for example.

As for price, I've been quoted $3k-5k for a logo and $15k for 4 pages of html. That is _never_ going to happen. I might pay $2-300 for a very good logo, and maybe $1500-2000 for a very good set of HTML pages. That is simply the value I place on the services.

I hate to be the guy who doesn't respect creative talent, but I can't ignore what the marketplace is telling me. Designers really seem to hate the crowdsourcing model, and I want to work on terms that they like, but how? Saying "pay me more and take the risk that I won't work out" is not good enough - as evidenced by the success of 99 designs, et al. If designers want people to abandon crowdsourcing, they need to come up with a better low-budget alternative.

<comment><USER10> I think there's a lot of range within design work so a smaller step up gets you exponentially better work. For example, $250 logo may be 10 times better than a $25 logo but a $2,500 logo might only be 1.5 or 2 times as good as the $250 one.

$15,000 for 4 pages of HTML is ridiculous, as is $150 for 4 pages. $1,500 should get you amazing work. I do a lot of work coding design to HTML/CSS and without being over-confident, I'd classify my skill in HTML and CSS as expert level. I charge around $200-$250 a page if coding directly from a PSD or image to HTML/CSS. Charging 15 to 20 times as much? I struggle to understand it.

If you want a designer on a mid-low budget, you can try Elance or oDesk, but set the hourly price you're looking for at $30-$50. There are good designers using those services but you need to get their attention.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: RPG(/400) remake viable? - <AUTHOR>

Hey everyone. I recently started working for a company that uses RPG with their customers. Me and the language have a love hate relationship. I could only use it at my workplace, and not at home on my Windows machine.
I was wondering if I should take my spare time to make a Windows version of the language, just for fun.
I'd love some input on this, lets talk. :) <comment><USER2> RPG as in RPG III as on system 32/34/AS400?

Regarding the love/hate part, I must admit that I don't have the love part.

I spent about a year programming a system 34 for my first ever consulting client. In previous gigs, I spoke loudly and often against COBOL, but when they installed COBOL on that set of machines, I was ecstatic.

I wish you well in your endeavor, but this is one I will not join. It would not be pretty.

But follow your bliss, and good luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, AS400 to be precise.

I shall delve into it, not sure how it will turn out though myself. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> It's not a viable product people would pay for, but I think it would be interesting as an education/academic language. There is a niche I would like to see filled for a language with data storage built-into it, but at a lower level than your SQL database's query planner. WINRPG is too expensive for a hobbiest.

I appreciate what I learned from RPG-IV (never had to deal with "the cycle") and the "i" environment. If upcoming programmers had to learn to deal with their data using only loops, READ, and CHAIN commands, we'd see much better designed and optimized databases. This could fill a missing link in some CS education between building a file based index and designing a database in a RDBMS.

I gave thought to starting something similar. My starting point would have been trying to hook into the Sqlite Virtual Databse Engine ([http://www.sqlite.org/vdbe.html](http://www.sqlite.org/vdbe.html)) or the Postgres equivalent since those seemed the closest open source equivalents to an RPG program running on LUW systems.

</comment><comment><USER4> It seems that this already exists: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RPG#Platforms](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_RPG#Platforms). The company may or may not be dead; consider sending them an e-mail.

(Of course, you're free to reimplement "for fun"; just thought you might be interested in a faster path to working? software.)

<comment><AUTHOR> I need to find a download for that compiler though.</comment></comment>


3ds Brought to Life Pokémon X and Y - <AUTHOR> http://www.junglevoy.com/3ds-brought-to-life-pokemon-x-and-y/

<comment><USER2> Nintendo needs to start developing Pokemon games for mobile already. I would pick up a $20 copy of X/Y for android/iOS in a heart beat.</comment>


X-Ray scans your Android device for unpatched vulnerabilities - <AUTHOR> http://www.xray.io

<comment><USER2> Ran it on Verizon Galaxy Nexus (4.0.4) and it appears everything is patched. Now if they would just get me Jellybean, I would be a really happy camper...

</comment><comment><USER3> Just ran it on my Nexus S with 4.1 and everything is patched. Currious to see how the HTC / Samsung's that are not Nexus devices fare.

<comment><USER4> 4.1 is definitely the most secure Android you can be running currently.

We posted about some of the security improvements in Jelly Bean 4.1 last week:

[https://blog.duosecurity.com/2012/07/exploit-mitigations- in-...](https://blog.duosecurity.com/2012/07/exploit-mitigations-in-android- jelly-bean-4-1/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Samsung S2 here (running latest update to ICS). All patched, no vulns. I'm actually a little disappointed in a way :-P

</comment><comment><USER6> Motorola Droid Bionic, running latest official carrier update, vulnerable to Gingerbreak :-\

</comment><comment><USER7> Running an older CM7 build on my evo4g, vulnerable to ZurgRush :(

<comment><USER8> Grab the latest of JMZTaylor's unofficial CM9 nightlies! They are very stable and a huge upgrade from CM7 on my original Evo.

<comment><USER7> I'll check that out after work today. I was hoping I wouldn't have to ditch CM to get ICS

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> X-Ray author here, happy to answer any questions folks have!

<comment><USER9> Why haven't you published this to the Google Play store?

<comment><USER4> We'd love to be able to publish it in the Play Store, but we were informed by Google that the terms of service disallow any apps that check for vulnerabilities, despite X-Ray's good intentions.

It's a weird distinction that they allow AV-like apps, but not vulnerability assessment apps.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Galaxy Nexus running CM9 RC1 is vulnerable to Mempodroid :(

<comment><USER2> CM9 RC1 is supposed to be running 4.0.4, right? Shouldn't that have been patched already? Though it also appears they have some bigger issues, like everything you type going out to the debug logs, passwords included.

You should report this on their issue tracker: <http://code.google.com/p/cyanogenmod/issues/list>

<comment><USER4> If anyone can quickly point me at the CM9 kernel source, I can verify whether or not this is actually patched.

The vulnerability is looking checking to see if the mem_write() function is functional (where the vulnerability was present), which was removed/disabled by upstream AOSP.</comment></comment></comment>


Does WINE-like emulator for OSX (Core API, OpenGL) make sense for games? - <AUTHOR>

The WINE project has been the only way people can play games on Linux.
Yes there are other "windows software" that leverages WINE to be usable on Linux,  but a significant (if not the majority) number of users run games with it.
With Valve declaring support for the OSX platform, you have a unique proposition - arguably, the most popular medium for games (1000 games, 25 million active users) is now available on a Unix based OS and one of the most popular engines (Source - HL2, TF2, Portal) is now available as OpenGL.
Does it make sense then to target the OSX platform APIs for playing games in Linux ? IMHO, the biggest challenges for WINE is the Direct3D versions it has to support. Currently, it support D3D10, but it will soon have to support D3D 11 (Win7).
Is targetting the OSX platform, easier and more achievable for games ? I am asking from a pure technical standpoint (w.r.t graphics, mouse and sound APIs) and not whether WINE should be dumped. <comment><USER2> I second this, but I've been saying the same thing for a while for the Adobe CS Suite. No one listened.</comment>


Pharmaceutical Freedom - <AUTHOR> https://www.libertarianism.org/media/free-thoughts/pharmaceutical-freedom-jessica-flanigan <comment><USER2> "Against medical advice Danny wishes to try to manage his diabetes with insulin. However, Danny cannot legally access diabetes medication without a prescription from his physician."

The option of changing one's physician never came up.

The question of so-called "pharmaceutical freedom" isn't so strawman as that.

"I say, typically or in general people are gonna be experts about their own interest."

If someone has 6 months to live, do you think they have the time to be an expert in cancer treatments, and an expert about the many ways to fleece dying people hoping for a hail-mary treatment option? I don't.

"The first way is just that people suffer and die waiting for access to a drug that could potentially benefit them and that they judge could potentially benefit them because they can't qualify to participate in the approval process."

This is unbalanced logic. People could also suffer and die from taking an unapproved drug which causes more harm than good. People could have their life savings sucked dry for treatments which are worse than doing nothing.

The things is, we know the FDA has had problems. AIDS activists pushed changes to make it easier for HIV drugs to come on the market. But there needs to be evidence, and a balancing of the factors.

Like most articles on this topic, the focus is on the FDA. But the FDA isn't the only organization which regulates drugs.

If fewer regulations lead to better drug development, why isn't these treatments appearing in other countries with more lax standards?</comment>


London Olympics could 'crash the internet', Cabinet Office warns - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/feb/05/london-olympics-crash-internet

<comment><USER2> Would something comparable happen to New York or Chicago?</comment>


IRS Seized $107,000 from Him. He's Fighting to Get It Back - <AUTHOR> http://dailysignal.com/2015/05/11/the-irs-seized-107000-from-this-north-carolina-mans-bank-account-now-hes-fighting-to-get-it-back/ <comment><USER2> [http://nypost.com/2015/02/11/irs-apologizes-after- seizures-h...](http://nypost.com/2015/02/11/irs-apologizes-after-seizures- hammer-small-businesses/)

[http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/us/law-lets-irs-seize- acco...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/us/law-lets-irs-seize-accounts-on- suspicion-no-crime-required.html?_r=0)

The IRS claims they've stopped: [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/us/statement-of-richard- we...](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/26/us/statement-of-richard-weber-chief- of-irs-criminal-investigation.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> Can he sue his bank for advising his niece to commit a crime?

<comment><USER4> He can try.

I think it's a lot more likely that the teller was lazy than than it is the bank had an official policy of making such recommendations (which is probably what it would take to hold the bank responsible).

It's also possible his flabbergast is manufactured and that he was indeed trying to avoid the reporting regulations.</comment></comment>


Google Names Five Winners Of Project 10^100, Awards $10 Million Total - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/24/google-project-10-100/ <comment><USER2> I'm so thrilled that Carl Malamud/Law.gov got $1 million. His tireless devotion to using technology to shine sunlight on the government over the past 20(!) years literally has changed the way interact with our government. (ex. his skunkworks project turned into SEC EDGAR, the database of all SEC filings that's sliceable and diceable) It's a goddamn shame he has to live on a shoestring personal budget.

EDIT: If you'd like to donate, go to <http://public.resource.org> and scroll down to the PayPal Donate button. I just gave another $100.

</comment><comment><USER3> Glad to hear that the Khan Academy was awarded $2m! Completely well-deserved imo.

<comment><USER4> Having personally used it to brush up on my calculus and differential equation skills, I have to agree that it's money well deserved. Google is saying that the $2m will go towards translating the core videos into other languages, which I think is an excellent move. If this can help students in English speaking countries, why not others?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Glad to see FIRST on that list. That organization is largely responsible for my (and many of my friends') interest in engineering and product development.

</comment><comment><USER6> Related discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1724070></comment>


The dumbing-down of programming (1998) - <AUTHOR> http://archive.salon.com/21st/feature/1998/05/cov_12feature.html <comment><USER2> She beautifully explained what draws people like myself to GNU/Linux. I have tried to convey some of these ideas to colleagues who are serious about Windows programming, to no avail.

It's not about Microsoft either. In my industry (flight simulation) there are some machines and systems where you can go deep and acquire design-level knowledge, and other systems where you're dealing with black boxes.

Some people prefer the latter; when things go wrong, you cycle the power switch and then contact the manufacturer if the problem still exists. I think some people take comfort in the notion that they are not ultimately responsible for whether the machines work or not. Sorry if that sounds terribly arrogant.

<comment><USER3> Really? I found the article moronic. Witness:

'Linux: home-brewed, hobbyist, group-hacked. UNIX-like operating system created in 1991 by Linus Torvalds then passed around from hand to hand like so much anti-Soviet samizdat. Noncommercial, sold on the cheap mainly for the cost of the documentation, impracticable except perhaps for the thrill of actually looking at the source code and utterly useless to my life as a software engineering consultant.'

<comment><AUTHOR> This /was/ written 11 years ago. The market for Linux consultants is a little different today.

<comment><USER3> 11 years ago it's still naive.

1\. GNU has been going for nearly a couple of decades - Linus didn't magic an OS out of thin air. The modern equivalent is the articles written about Safari that suggest Apple did the same.

2\. Nor was was Linux for home brews - Red Hat, the commercial distro, had emerged as the current leader for both businesses and nerds, with Apache (written by the ASF, which still had strong commercial roots) and to a lesser extent Samba (which I guess back then was still relatively uncommercial, so I give the article that).

3\. As a Linux consultant at the end of 1998, I started on 75 Australian dollars an hour, because I knew Unix despite having no access to RISC systems. Utterly useless? I think not.

<comment><USER4> Well I think it is naive, but that was the mainstream view back then, takes a long time to shift popular views of things...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _We build our computers the way we build our cities -- over time, without a plan, on top of ruins._

Yes, but didn't Christopher Alexander, the Pattern Language guy, praise the way we sometimes build (unplanned) things like villages?

</comment><comment><USER6> "But what if you're an experienced engineer? What if you've already learned the technology contained in the tool, and you're ready to stop worrying about it? Maybe letting the wizard do the work isn't a loss of knowledge but simply a form of storage: the tool as convenient information repository."

Right, and this is what a lot of code generation tools do. After understanding the problem, you write a tool which can write code to solve that problem in a more general sense.

Almost all the software we write can be thought of that way; they are information repositories for problems we already solved.

However, with a lot of things that require deep understanding, there are walls. These represent the places where a person can no longer fake understanding, and either have to stop immediately and develop some or give up. Before the days of wizards, users would encounter plenty of warning signs that their understanding was not enough well before hitting the wall. Example: your 100 line C program is segmentation faulting; time to better understand about pointers and memory allocation before you write a 20k line program depending on the same.

The problem is that wizards are very undiscriminating on who experiences the easing. The output is mostly the same for the experienced engineer as for the non-engineer. The brick wall for the non-engineer still remains, however warnings of danger ahead are hidden being a easy-to-use interface. There is no encouragement for them to go understand better before progressing, and instead they rush straight on into the wall. The still need all the understanding once they get there, but the encouragement to develop it comes later, and so the rate at which it needs to be learned comes faster.

The question this poses is really difficult: how do we abstract away the need to apply knowledge to the same problem repeatedly, yet avoid abstracting away the need to have that knowledge?

Otherwise, very worthwhile article. She captures the spirit of curiosity that drives the need for deep understanding in me, and probably most people here.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Part 2 here: <http://archive.salon.com/21st/feature/1998/05/13feature.html>

</comment><comment><USER7> Good article, but oh God, when she described the Visual C++ wizard I had these awful MFC flashbacks.

//TODO: Shower.

</comment><comment><USER8> That was beautiful.

Her point about code being incrementally forgotten and IBM having "no on left who understands" was well taken. I think this is where and why open source comes into play. Most programmers understand this basic fact about code that non-programmers don't.

If IBM's air traffic control system had been open source, it likely would have never gotten to the point of obsolescence it reached.

</comment><comment><USER9> "Run as the root user from the root directory, type in rm -r f * , and, at the stroke of the ENTER key, gone are all the files and directories. Recursively, each directory deleting itself once its files have been deleted, right down to the very directory from which you entered the command: the snake swallowing its tail."

Actually that would be rm -rf * and it wouldn't delete /, the directory from which you entered the command, since with * you've selected all the directories in /, not itself. To do that you'd have to invoke rm -rf . or /, I believe. Though I'm not sure if after deleting all files the system will let you delete / itself? (moot point though)

Sorry if that was obvious to everyone...

<comment><USER10> Actually, I don't think you can delete / at all on unix. It's its own parent.

<comment><USER11> I think they have disabled it in Ubuntu? But I believe it used to work, if it doesn't still, in other distros. I mean half the reason it's _verboten_ to run as root is that you might accidentally type "rm -rf pics /".

I am too afraid to find out, anyway.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> At first it looked like link bait, but was well worth the read. Very articulate and for some reason I found it quite comforting.

<comment><USER13> Agreed. I especially liked the use of "All the lovely graphical skins turned to so much bitwise detritus" I can visualize the 1's and 0's settling on the bottom.

Despite his discontent for "the wizards", he seems to realize their usefulness in his last sentence with "the tool as convenient information repository." Certainly, especially in their earlier incantations, the wizards can try to do too much, but a decade later I think they are hitting their intended mark as knowledge repositories.

<comment><USER14> Her. Her discontent.

<comment><USER13> Right, Realized that a bit later.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Wizards and GUIs (for the most part) only allow the user to perform operations that the developers have anticipated.

The beauty of interacting with the computer through the command line -- the shell or some other programmable interface -- is that you can do things that no one else has thought of before. You can write any program that is expressible in the language you use or string together the input and output of any program on your machine.

Buttons are nice, but sometimes you just need to be more expressive than that. When this mode of interaction is necessary, I find that the Unix way has a lot to offer.

</comment><comment><USER16> I like the idea of hard drive as palimpsest.

</comment><comment><USER17> Code generation is nearly always the Wrong Thing. Using the right abstractions is the Right Thing. The problem is it leads to a bunch of duplicated code... and they you have to change something.

The one exception might be scaffolding code, which isn't really intended to be kept.

<comment><USER18> The nice thing about Code Generation is that you can do it as often as you like. So if you change something, you just re-generate all the boilerplate and you're back in business.

This is the one instance where I'll argue in favor of duplicated code. When something breaks in one of your generated classes, you'll find yourself on a breakpoint at a single line that does a single thing, so you can quickly figure out what happened and why (and what changes you'll need to make to the Codesmith template so that it never happens again). When your "right abstraction" breaks, you might find yourself seven interfaces deep looking at a hash full of Objects, one of which is probably not supposed to be null, maybe, and it's not going to be any fun to debug.

<comment><USER17> I'm inclined to suggest that the right abstraction be implemented well so it's not so hard to debug.

Proper macros provide a nice way to blend the advantages of each. There are even some new languages that have them without looking like Lisp (Plot and Ioke come to mind).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Nice read.

I can't find any empathy with the author though. Her description of getting a cd-rom drive working in Linux embodies all the things I dislike about working with computers, and is the probably reason my dealing with Linux have been so painful.

I simply don't want another hobby. And even if I did, it wouldn't be "getting my computer to function at all." Linux seems to enforce this hobby on me, every step of the way. Granted it's a lot easier 10 year on from this article, but it's still just not fun for me.

I'd rather spend my time writing code.

</comment><comment><USER19> This is so true - all too often the problems encountered in a project were caused because someone didn't really understand what was going on under the surface.

<comment><USER20> While high-level languages and nice operating systems are a good thing, they often mask what's beyond them. If someone grows up in a world they can't look beyond the curtain, bad things happen.

Many times I have witnessed sysadmins banging their heads trying to tune parameters on a Linux server that ran under a virtual machine setting and wondering why some counters were off, without realizing the machine underneath their OS didn't really have hardware counters they could, forgive me, count on.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you handle user money that you have to return - <AUTHOR> I am thinking about building a system where customers would put money into their account and they can use there balance to purchase things. Whats the best way to store the money and keep track of who's is who's. I am planning on using stripe. Thanks for your help in advance. <comment><USER2> You'll essentially need to build a ledger, keeping track of customer accounts and how much balance they have left. When closing their account, refund whatever's left to the last payment method they used to fund the account.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you prioritise what to do daily/weekly? - <AUTHOR> Working at Earnest Capital (earnestcapital.com) our founders and mentors have been discussing ways to decide what to work on...
Between product features, customer support, help docs, admin, marketing etc etc.
What are your frameworks?
(One I saw from founder of Coderpad was it has to hit 2 out of three: be easy to do, make money, make customers lives better.) <comment><USER2> My framework is to just look at your metrics and ascribe certain metrics to the right areas of focus, if one metric is lagging/worse than the others, focus there. Not enough free trial signups? Switch focus to marketing. Good trial volume but % conversion to paid is too low, time for some product/onboarding work. Churn creeping up? Allocate more time to bigger product work, bug fixing. Customer support tickets too high? Bug fixes + documentation.

And invert it too. Even if you personally are annoyed at how bad your current state of help docs are, if support tickets and churn are low, save it for later

</comment><comment><USER3> I try to keep an eye on what's urgent (the current crises, whatever's currently on fire) and what's important (longer term objectives - features, code maintainability). You can't just do one kind or the other; you have to cover both.

</comment><comment><USER4> A bit of a cliche, "low effort, high throughput" has been my mantra so far.</comment>


Is the NYT Fingerprinting iOS devices to enforce their paywall? - <AUTHOR> Once you read 5 articles/month the NYT begins to paywall its content.  Once blocked, a common workaround used to be opening your browser in incognito/private mode.  As cookies aren't carried over, the site believe it's your first article & you can proceed.
That no longer works on Safari on iOS.  Once you are blocked in "Non-Private" mode, you are also blocked in Private mode.
I tried on two phones to the same effect.  (Note: the behavior on OS X Safari is different.  You can proceed as expected.)
I'm not really concerned about reading the content.  Long story short, I actually have a subscription, just get lazy about signing in.
My curiosity is connecting a session in Private & Non-Private browser tabs.
I'm aware of browser fingerprinting.  I'd be surprised if the NYT was using it this way, but maybe I'm wrong? <comment><USER2> Is there a difference between WiFi and cellular data? Some carriers helpfully annotate their users' HTTP requests with unique identifiers.

<comment><USER3> I guess that's why we want to use https? So the content cannot be altered easily?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This may be feasible because all browsers on iOS are required to use Apple's rendering engine. A different browser may make a difference, but don't be surprised if it doesn't.

</comment><comment><USER5> If on the same iOS device you download and try Chrome do you hit the wall?

I'd be tempted to try that.

Change networks (from one wifi network to another, to cellular) and etc.

</comment><comment><USER6> Have you tried using a VPN and going through a different IP? Maybe they use multiple factors to "fingerprint."

</comment><comment><USER7> At times like these the Brave browser is your very best friend.</comment>


The Conversation Has Left the Blogosphere - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/the_conversation_has_left_the_blogosphere.php <comment><USER2> the conversation has left this posting :)</comment>


Google Geniuses at Work on Free Goodies - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/technology/personaltech/26pogue.html?em <comment><USER2> I just figured out the point of the Mail Goggles feature, form the perspective of Google: it gives the press some copy interesting enough that they can mention that Google Labs exists.

</comment><comment><USER3> A NY Times press release on GOOG...</comment>


Free EBooks- Learning Python, Object-Oriented JavaScript, R for Data Science - <AUTHOR> http://www.packtpub.com/promo/web-summit-2016 <comment><USER2> Stoyanov's "OO JavaScript" is probably one of the best books on advanced programming in JS. It packs quite a punch, includes lots of concise examples and incredibly well structured. It really emphasizes the flexibility and power of prototypes; Stoyanov shows there are dozens ways to skin the proverbial cat. I haven't read the second edition of the book though. But I really liked the first one.</comment>


UberMILITARY - Onboarding 50,000 members of the military community to Uber. - <AUTHOR> http://blog.uber.com/ubermilitary

<comment><USER2> Awesome, seeing as they make money from countries all over the world I assume they will be opening this to people who served time in militarys other than the USA?

...yeah right...

</comment><comment><USER3> Genius PR move.</comment>


How real is the insider threat? - <AUTHOR> http://rakkhi.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-real-is-insider-threat.html

<comment><USER2> This post was so long and so scattershot that I wasn't able to keep it in my head while I read it. So I skimmed and then jumped to the conclusion.

Backstory: do most companies suffer their worst exposure from outside attackers hitting them from the Internet, or inside attackers to whom they've given access?

While most of our business is software security, our backgrounds are all in general/network security and, when schedules allow, for clients we have good relationships with, we'll do the annual penetration test as well as applications. So: we do a fair number of internal and external network pentests every year.

Here's the deal: most large companies do O.K. --- often not great, but not horrific --- on the external pen. But the internal is always a bloodbath.

Add to that virtually ever major criminal case or incident report, where, whether or not external attackers were involved, the initial compromise was abetted by an insider.

People have been questioning these "insider threat" numbers for over a decade now. I'm sure the numbers are broken. Numbers always are. But the notion that the threat is somehow less "real" than the external threat is naive, at best.

I think people like questioning the severity of insider exposure for two reasons:

(1) Security vendors and service providers make most of their money on services that address external threats (PCI assessments, network pentests, scanning, perimeter security devices).

(2) Enterprise security personnel know they have no grip whatsoever on internal controls; the most basic defenses and controls would cost tens of millions of dollars to deploy correctly at an F-1000 company; so instead of coming to grips with the risk, they'd much prefer to recast internal incidents as "black swan" events outside of their purview.

</comment><comment><USER3> I can't comment as freely on this as I'd like, but here goes my best shot:

The conventional wisdom that "insiders" make up the majority of threats has been challenged for a few years now. I know our sales people used to love touting about it to prospective clients, but what data exists (and it's far from perfect) doesn't seem to hold that up.

In fact, the Verizon Data Breach Report for at least the last few years has shown the overwhelming number of attacks to be external. You can view it here: [http://www.verizonbusiness.com/resources/reports/rp_2010-dat...](http://www.verizonbusiness.com/resources/reports/rp_2010-data- breach-report_en_xg.pdf)

While that report isn't gospel (as an industry we still struggle with sharing data, even anonymized data), it's better than nothing.

My own personal experience in the industry isn't helpful, as although a good 95% of the forensic cases I've worked were insider-issues, they are a self- selecting sample (clients decision to pursue a forensics investigation is in many cases dependent on if the attack was insider vs. outsider).

Protecting from an internal threat is significantly more difficult than an external one, it's towards the top of Mazelow's Hierarchy when it comes to an organizations security posture.

The most famous case I worked on involved a group of accountants who embezzled around 10 million dollars from their company, which they were able to do by having one individual make the transaction and the other approve it (because the client has implemented a system which required stock purchases to be audited by an outside group).

Trust is a prickly thing, your internal security controls can only do so much.

I've spent the last ten years breaking web applications for customers, and the general expectation has been to work from the position of an outside attacker. That's what the client is generally worried about. Whether that's logical is up for debate, but it's been my experience.

</comment><comment><USER4> The insider threat is real, but it's not often the pervasive enemy. Many times, by empowering our users instead of making direct attempts to make things harder to use, we help the insiders -- our friends and peers at the office -- make better security decisions on their own. The moment they have to start working around our security solutions is the moment they go from being a good steward to doing things that may cause accidental data loss. We give our users access to the things they need to do their jobs. We really ought to trust them with that access and not make things harder than they must be.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I'm really interested in the opinions of those that read Hacker news. I'm challenging one of the highly accepted views in information security, please let me know if you agree or disagree and why. Thanks

<comment><USER4> I agree with you, and I've been into information security now for more than half of my life. I think there was a time where the insider threat held merit. Just yesterday, though, I was able to propose a solution for the developers in my company that will at once make their code deployments more efficient, make build-out of new worker nodes a lot easier and improve the overall security of our enterprise while earning us some major points for PCI compliance. That's what security should be about.

Note: Compliance and security aren't inclusive, so it's worth mentioning them separately.</comment></comment>


The Science Behind Concentration - <AUTHOR> http://howtogetfocused.com/chapters/8-things-everybody-ought-to-know-about-concentrating/

<comment><USER2> Don't wast your time. This is useless SPAM. No references to scientific sources, but a link to an e-book.

<comment><USER3> Spam? We often get similar articles about this sort of thing, and this was one of the few that I thought had useful advice.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I thought it was pretty good. Some useful techniques. For example do just one thing every day. Counterintuitive but powerful.</comment>


Critical iPhone 4 Issues and Complaints Are Mounting - <AUTHOR> http://mashable.com/2010/06/23/iphone-yellow-screen-tint/

<comment><USER2> What is perhaps most intriguing here, especially about the antenna problem is that in the field tests they were probably using that iPhone 3G disguise case that Gizmodo revealed Apple testers were using. What's interesting there is that that case would impede discovery of this hand contact problem because the hand wouldn't thus short the two side antenae together as a case would be over it. I'm hoping that these were thoroughly tested on Apple's campus without case because on the surface this looks like a deep flaw in what Jobs vaunted as a revolutionary product design, signaling that Apple was it's own worst enemy in providing inadequate testing conditions in pursuit of it's trademark secrecy.

<comment><USER3> I've tried every combination of fingers and hands on every part of the phone in every configuration I'm physically capable of, and I can't make it lose signal with a touch. Similarly, plenty of videos have been posted of people who can't make it happen.

Which suggests that... wait for it... there's not some huge fundamental design/manufacturing flaw in the iPhone's antennae that Apple didn't notice or wants to cover up. Instead, it's just another cell phone that's picky about signal strength, like pretty much every other cell phone ever manufactured. Hell, Macrumors published video from _2008_ showing an old iPhone doing exactly the same things people are now claiming to be a brand-new phenomenon unique to the iPhone 4:

[http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/23/iphone-4-signal- declines...](http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/23/iphone-4-signal-declines- while-being-held-an-old-issue/)

Add to this the fact that the "story" started at an outlet which has a pretty big and well-known axe to grind against Apple, and I feel like we need a whole lot more than some youtube videos and a bunch of "me too" posts in a forum to make a big issue out of this.

<comment><USER4> Just because a bug appears seemingly randomly does not mean it's not a bug.

When I was a kid watching tv with an indoor antenna, anytime there was poor reception I'd go and hold the antenna and reception would improve or get a lot worse.

So, I've no problems believing that this is an issue, that it affects different people differently at different times, and that Apple knew about it and made those shells as a fix (a trade-off in exchange for greater compactness of the device) for those who want it.

<comment><USER5> From my time at university doing electronics we observed that some people do cause this effect - one person in our department consistently shorted anything he touched. We never figured out why but I know a couple of other people who have the same problem.

<comment><USER6> Maybe depending on how "sweaty" people are, which would affect the contact resistance of their fingers?

<comment><USER7> It's something different. I used to tune in radios by waving my hands around the antenna like a theremin. Some people seem to throw off more of an electrical field than others. Yes, I am available for bizarre scientific experiments.

<comment><USER8> This comment made me smile - this is exactly what I did as a kid when my radio got static-y. Slightly changing _my_ position with relation to the radio, without touching it, sometimes fixed it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> You only hear people complaining about something on the internet when it doesn't work. So it always sounds like every product launch, ever, is a complete failure. Apple's especially, since they're high-profile.

So here's an opposing anecdote for you: my iPhone 4 is completely fine. No problems at all.

<comment><USER10> Perhaps complains sponsored by the competition?

<comment><USER11> Companies have attempted positive astro-turfing. The negative counterpart would seem to be easier, since people aften fear the worst, so FUD is an easier sell. This is probably going on all the time. I think it's only effective on marginal products, though. If something's going to succeed, then it makes no difference.

EDIT: I am something of a marginal case, though. I have a 1st generation 8GB iPhone. I keep wishing there was some way for me to have a carrier that's not AT&T, to have pre-paid calls & data, to be on Verizon's excellent network, to not have to deal with unlocking and jailbreaking and iTunes upgrade paranoia, to be able to put in a different SIM when I travel overseas, etc... Right now, I am figuring out a way to get my hands on a Canadian iPhone. The though occurs to me: why don't I just get an Android phone? I already own two perfectly good iOS test platforms.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The original iPhone had an aluminum backing, with a small black band that ran horizontally along the bottom of the back of the phone. If you covered this area while using the phone, you'd find that your EDGE speed would drop dramatically, and you would lose signal strength. Once you knew this, you had the choice between avoiding this area with your hands for maximum network performance, or holding the phone exactly how you liked and having reduced performance.

The iPhone 4 (mine, at least) has the exact same issue, and it's almost in the exact same place, the only difference being the reasoning behind why it happens (in this case, it seems to be about bridging two pieces of metal with your hands), and how it can be avoided (buying a case might help with the iPhone 4, whereas it didn't with the iPhone 2G).

I've owned many other phones that were sensitive to where you held them, in fact I think every phone I've ever owned without an antenna that sticks out is sensitive to this problem to some degree. I had to "train" myself not to cup my hand behind the top-backing of the Nokia I had before my iPhone. And now I'm already "trained" from holding my iPhone that I don't touch the bottom left of the phone when I talk anyway.

It's not a big deal, just something to get used to (and it might turn out that a case will resolve it, which can't be said about many other phones with this issue). It is a legitimate "con" when determining whether to buy the phone, but it doesn't deserve all the ridiculous comments about how the phone is somehow flawed because of this.

(And just to give some more specific details of how this affects my phone: if I put pressure on the bottom-left corner of the phone with my hand where the seam is, the signal strength drops: by 1-2 bars if I hold it normally, or all the way to 1 bar if I give it a death grip. In either case, the calls don't seem to drop).

<comment><USER13> If you use their Apple-branded case, the little rubber band that goes around the outside edge, does that fix the problem?

<comment><USER12> I don't know because it doesn't seem to be in stock anywhere yet. (An odd mistake on Apple's part, as you certainly want all the accessories to arrive on the day that people buy their phone, otherwise they're much less likely to buy them).

<comment><USER14> What happens if you just insulate the phone from your hand with any other non- conductive material?

<comment><USER12> Then it stays at 5 bars no matter how I hold it.

I took a ziploc bag folded in half (therefore 4-ply) and wrapped it around the metal, and no matter how hard I squeeze it or cover it, the signal doesn't drop below 5 bars.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Good video on Mac Rumors showing this issue:

<http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=948533>

Phone 4 Drops Calls when Left Corner is Touched

<comment><USER3> Tried it, can't reproduce it. Or any of the other "sure-fire" configurations people have claimed.

If it really is a hardware issue, it's probably due to a defect in some batches of phones. But for now I'm sticking to the most likely explanation, which is just that cell phones are finicky little beasties and people are quick to spot patterns where none exist.

<comment><USER16> I'm pretty sure large batches of phones that lose signal when held is a defect. I'm glad you can't reproduce it, it means that not all phones are defective. Many of the videos show the phones going from full bars to 1 or zero. This is not finicky but a defect.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> from the folks who could not reproduce the reception issue, i would be curious to know whether your body was grounded or not. for example, were you wearing sneakers with a rubber sole. did you have your free hand in your pocket or not touching something conductive? what would happen if you tried the same activity barefoot, or while you were touching a faucet or anything else that may be grounded. i'd be curious if individuals body's are, in-fact, changing the impedance of the antenna and rendering it less effective, or if its a combinaton of factors that contribute to the issue.

<comment><USER3> I stood up on a carpet floor, barefoot, holding the phone in my left hand in the "guaranteed to lose reception" position. And didn't lose reception. Repeated on tile, didn't lose reception. Repeated touching various conductive and non-conductive objects. Didn't lose reception.

As I've been saying since last night: if it's a defect, it's most likely a defect in some batches of phones and not fundamental to the design/present in all of them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> And now we know why other phone manufacturers haven't put the antenna on the outside.

</comment><comment><USER19> As for a circular yellow tint appearing on a retina, maybe we should nick the medical fraternity's term for that: retinitis pigmentosa!

<comment><USER20> I'm trying to think of an Apple IPS display that _hasn't_ had this issue to some extent. The iPhone4. The 27-inch iMac. The 24-inch LED display. My 2005-era 23" HD Cinema Display.

This is a manufacturing issue in which the multiple laminates which make up the display weren't perfectly sealed together. So it's possible for the display to pass initial quality control checks, but the reality is they're in the process of separating a bit. Odds are it'll slowly continue to separate over time, making the spot grow larger.

Apple has been hit or miss over replacing devices over the issue. On my Cinema Display - which was $1800 at the time - I received multiple (refurbished) replacements at the time, all of which exhibited the same issue. Eventually they gave up. Now the spot is about 2 square inches in size after 5 1/2 years. However there have been cases where replacement has been flatly denied and the customer was told there wasn't a problem.

<comment><USER21> The issue with iPhone 4's "yellow spots" may have a simple explanation. Users at Apple's forums have reported that the issue just "went away". Perhaps this post at the Apple Insider discussion forum sheds light on what's happening:

\-- quote -- by user: austingaijin The yellow blotches will disappear Apple is using a bonding agent called Organofunctional Silane Z-6011 to bond the layers of glass. Apparently, Apple (or more likely Foxconn) is shipping these products so quickly that the evaporation process is not complete. However, after one or two days of use, especially with the screen on, will complete the evaporation process and the yellow "blotches" will disappear.

How do I know? I was involved in pitching Z-6011 to Apple. \-- end quote--

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Another demo video, using a more stable, conductive test sample, a key: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvH-i7rKPJc>

</comment><comment><USER23> Wow. If this is a hardware issue, it will cost a bomb to fix and delay production by weeks. Ouch.

<comment><USER4> No, Apple will make even more money by selling those overpriced plastic shells.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> RF Happens

</comment><comment><USER25> So lots of reports of defective phones that haven't even been released to the general public? Let's wait at least a week for a few tens of thousands of people to have them in hand across the US and can report in.

<comment> matthew-wegner There were 600,000 pre-orders. Apple confirmed early delivery of online orders (July 23rd instead of 24th). I'd say there are a few number of iPhones in the wild now:

[http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/22/walmart-receives- iphone-...](http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/22/walmart-receives- iphone-4s-apple-confirms-early-iphone-4-deliveries-on-june-23rd/)

Your logic is backwards, anyway; I'd be _more_ worried if there were lots of reported problems with only a few iPhones in the market.

<comment><USER26> I'm assuming s/July/June/g ? Otherwise I'm confused. I'm not following the iPhone 4 coverage too closely.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I do not have this issue. In fact, I think it is a software problem. I made a call with perfectly clarity with 0 bars.

It's fine, people. Quit making a huge deal about nothing.

I bet more than 50 percent of the people voting on these answers are people without friggen iPhone 4s. Wanna know where the people with iPhone 4s are? They're playing with their new toys.

<comment><USER16> I have a blackberry - not a fanboy. I've watched multiple videos where data transfer rates dropped significantly when the antennae are touched in the same way making me think this is not just a software problem. Either way, software problems are big too - this is what tech blogs do.

edit: go check out Apple fanboy blogs/forums... you'll see panic there as well.

<comment><USER16> Why did I get down voted? Even IGM is having problems with their new iPhone and it does cause dropped calls:

<http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=11149>

<comment><USER28> If I were to venture a guess, I'd say that the constant fanboy angle on practically all Apple stories a) gets tiresome and b) takes away from the discussion of the article at hand.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Magic of C++ Unity Builds - <AUTHOR> http://buffered.io/posts/the-magic-of-unity-builds/ <comment><USER2> This is great and all, but it totally negates make's ability to only recompile source files that have changed.</comment>