Run tracking liberates ML teams - <AUTHOR> https://dotscience.com/blog/run-tracking/ <comment><USER3> I 100% agree with the premise of this, I certainly attest to run tracking being a critical component of my own personal model development/training/tuning pipeline. Not sure how I feel about using yet another 3rd party data science platform though - it'd be nice if the run tracking piece was just a component I could import into my notebook, and have it automagically track things for me (like... how seamless tqdm is for showing progress bars while iterating over loops).

Regardless of my uncertainty around trying another 3rd party platform, the premise is spot on.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! I am very interested in finding open source and/or non-platform ways to deliver the solution to the community. I know how off-putting 3rd party platforms can be. That's why I put the word "tooling" on the product page, not "platform" :)

Please reach out to me on email@example.com if you'd be up for finding a way to work on that together.

<comment><USER4> For sure! I'm emailing you now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is an ad, but they're not wrong.

At my work, we use Azure ML Studio. I think the solution for deployment is to run some scripts to save the model information to git and automatically deploy from there. It will take a little bit of effort to set up, but I think it should work.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, sorry for the ad but us startup founders have to launch our products somehow :)

That makes sense about saving the model info to git, but how do you track the provenance of the data? Do you see that as being important? (e.g. to track back from a model to which data it was trained on, when later updating or fixing issues on the models?)

Feel free to get in touch directly - firstname.lastname@example.com if you'd be willing to try our stuff.

<comment><USER6> Maybe you should pay for advertising.

<comment><USER7> Jesus, give them a break. Someone who's practically a mega-corp like Stripe can launch a new product with a flashy landing page on HN and everyone discusses it without issue.

There's a bit of a double standard.

<comment><USER6> Not from me, I hate that stuff too. Unless something is really game changing or a step forward it isn't news.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I totally agree with this and I built wandb (wandb.com) to solve this problem. We try to do this in as lightweight a way as possible - for example we can do keras tracking with a single line ([https://www.wandb.com/articles/visualize- keras-models-with-o...](https://www.wandb.com/articles/visualize-keras-models- with-one-line-of-code)) and pytorch with just a couple lines ([https://www.wandb.com/articles/monitor-your-pytorch- models-w...](https://www.wandb.com/articles/monitor-your-pytorch-models-with- five-extra-lines-of-code)). Would love any feedback on it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey Lukas! Love your work on wandb and very keen to find ways to integrate/collaborate :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I understand that for some people this might help, but frankly I find all of these "reproducibility" frameworks fall flat as soon as truly big data enters the picture. Data versioning is not sufficient, because I typically cannot roll back my datasets to a previous version (and we moved forward for a reason).

Also, we are deliberately not using Databricks for this to avoid vendor lockin for something that will almost certainly be open-source soon.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree that there should be open source solutions and the core of Dotscience is a project called Dotmesh ([https://github.com/dotmesh- io/dotmesh](https://github.com/dotmesh-io/dotmesh)) which is an open source wrapper around ZFS. You can see more info about how this works and integrates with Dotscience at [https://dotscience.com/technology/](https://dotscience.com/technology/).

However I don't quite understand your point that "data versioning is not sufficient" because "I cannot roll back my datasets to a previous version". Surely data versioning would _solve_ the ability to roll your datasets back to a previous version? Or, are you not convinced of the need for reproducibility in data science? My rationale for this is the following: if you are building ML models that are going to make important decisions in production, it's imperative for debuggability that you're able to re-run that model training run later. If a model makes a bad decision in production, you need to know what dataset it was trained on, which means needing to be able to retrieve that dataset. That's because you can't isolate and fix the problem without being able to re-run it.

Yes, data changes and marches forwards, and that's why you should retrain models. But you also need to be able to go backwards to do robust ML. My 2 cents.

I also wrote a DevOps for ML Manifesto: [https://dotscience.com/manifesto/](https://dotscience.com/manifesto/)

To summarize:

1\. All models must be reproducible by someone else 6 months later.

2\. All models must be accountable, that means you must be able to justify the basis on which they made their decision, in particular you need to know which data version was used and where it came from (provenance).

3\. Model development must be collaborative. That means I need to be able fork a copy of your project and maintain all the metadata about which runs you did, with their respective provenance history.

4\. Models must have a continuous lifecycle. You're not done when you ship - because models are about finding patterns in data, and the world is constantly changing, you need statistical monitoring and retraining to compensate for model drift.

Do you disagree? Did I miss anything? Let me know your thoughts!

<comment><USER8> No, data versioning typically does not solve this problem unless you are completely isolated from everything else. Consider the case where you're pulling data from a database to use for training a model. Typically DS teams have no control over the backup schedule for that database, how long those backups are maintained, etc. For large systems, if you try to restore a backup 3 or 6 months down the road, you may only have a weekly snapshot (if even that frequent) to use. Certainly that won't give you the same data that you originally had. Admittedly, a team that was strongly focused on reproducibility could _try really hard_ to ensure that their queries are reproducible, but if you want to be productive you typically delegate most of that work to other libraries which may or may not generate reproducible queries.

It seems to me that people working on really large-scale problems always have these external dependencies that they just can't control and subsequently data versioning only goes so far when you cannot make a full-copy of the data for each version.

I agree with you in general that we should strive for reproducibility.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hmm interesting, what if you had database snapshots that could be driven by ML workflows? The primitive behind Dotscience can support lightweight database snapshots quite easily...

<comment><AUTHOR> To be clear, that primitive is dotmesh and ZFS - <USER2> [https://dotscience.com/technology/](https://dotscience.com/technology/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> So run tracking as described here is about tracking every "variable" which comes into play when training your model?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, exactly. And in particular, capturing those variables _at the point of the run_ , not just some time before/after when you remember to record it manually.

Lots more detail here: [https://dotscience.com/product/](https://dotscience.com/product/) and a super long deep dive demo wih lots of examples (I would have made it shorter if I'd had more time ;))

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Seems like there's been an explosions of startups trying to win B2B dollars for this.

There is an excellent open source project that nails this called sacred. It's not perfect, but it works, and as far as I can tell it has won the popularity contest.

Please join me in using and contributing back to sacred!

<comment><AUTHOR> I will take a look at that and whether we can integrate with it, thanks for the tip! What do you like about it?

<comment><USER10> Mostly that it exists. It neatly solves a common gripe. It might not be the best possible version of this tool, but for better or worse it is currently the dominant open source effort in this space, and we all benefit from jumping on the bandwagon.

Probably google will pull a tensorflow soon and sacred will go the way of theano but until then...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Does it also do hyper-parameter search? It's usually something you usually want to have.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's an environment for tracking runs of data engineering and ML training code in, so you can use tools like H2O and sklearn grid search within Dotscience. But we could also build on the run mechanism to automate kicking off a lot of runs in parallel over a search space of parameters.

What are you using at the moment?</comment></comment>


In Japan, small children take the subway and run errands alone (2015) - <AUTHOR> https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2015/09/why-are-little-kids-in-japan-so-independent/407590/ <comment><USER2> > Japan has a very low crime rate, which is surely a key reason parents feel > confident about sending their kids out alone.

I grew up in a relatively high crime area but still walked to school and sometimes took public transport. The only thing that made it somewhat unsafe was the bullying by other school kids. Of course there is an overlap there as yesterday's bullies are tomorrow's criminals, but still it wasn't enough to have parents escort me. Sometimes strangers intervened to save me from a few attacks by groups of older kids. So maybe there is an element there as well of people not minding asking kids what's happening, why are they pushing this one kid to the ground.

Now living in US in a much safer area I would think very well before sending my kids to school by themselves at the age when I was going to school by myself. The reason is neighbors who could report me to the police for "child endangerment or neglect". It happened to a co-worker. One of the neighbors reported them to the police while kids were playing out in the front by themselves. It issue was resolved but not without embarrassing calls to work and home visits.

<comment><USER3> There was one case where the mother was arrested for letting the kids play outside.

So, the obvious first step to fixing this problem in the U.S. would be to make it explicitly legal.

Something like "letting children unsupervised in public space for less than 5 hours shall not, by itself, be construed as child abuse or neglect."

Plausible? Any downsides?

Can any town do it by itself, or is an act of Congress needed?

<comment><USER4> The problem here is not the law, it is the people who think the fact that one person (out of over 100 million families in America) got arrested for doing a thing that sounds reasonable is a reason to change your behavior.

We need a reasonable threshold below which we do not worry about an event. Figuratively speaking: "If it makes front page news, it's not how I'm gonna die."

The threshold is going to vary from person to person; for me? if it's less likely than me dying or becoming disabled in a transport accident today, then the effort to prevent that thing is most likely better spent preventing transport accidents.

I mean, my point here is that you want the best return possible on your "prevent bad things from happening to me and mine" efforts, and there are a lot of low-hanging fruit that you can grab in the area where there is the most danger. Transportation and health are huge killers, much bigger than terrorist and crazies.

I think this might be the biggest problem with America today; this idea that systemic action needs to be taken for a 1 in 100 million chance seems like the systemic problem with our society. Systemic action should be reserved for things that happen frequently.

Even in America, the biggest danger to children is transport accidents; the chances of getting killed or disfigured are so much higher in a car than in a train that it almost certainly makes up for any "stranger danger" on the train.

<comment><USER5>
      The problem here is not the law, it is the people who think the fact that one person (out of over 100 million families in America) got arrested for doing a thing that sounds reasonable is a reason to change your behavior.

actually it is the law. We can't expect parents to gamble their parenthood and their lives - even if the odds are 1 in 100 million. And i suspect the odds are not that small, just in this thread there are multiple stories of social services being called for what used to be common place attitudes towards children and their autonomy. There's even a person fully admitting they would also put in a report if they witnessed such a thing.

I'm not saying your arguments are bad. In fact, they are on point. But perceived danger vs Actual danger is, from looking at the whole anti-vaccer movement, the big contributor here. But if parents are getting put in handcuffs for having their kids play outside then yeah, they need to be protected from a systemic standpoint.

<comment><USER4> >We can't expect parents to gamble their parenthood and their lives - even if the odds are 1 in 100 million

Every day when you strap your kid into your car seat, you are rolling those dice, at odds considerably worse than 1 in 100 million.

You can't face risk by saying "we need to stamp it out, no matter how small the chance or how great the cost" It doesn't help me if you protect me from meteors if I'm millions of times more likely to be killed by a traffic accident, and the same resources could drastically reduce the chance of that death.

You need to look at what resources you are willing to spend on risk mitigation, and then look at where you can spend those resources to most effectively mitigate risk.

<comment><USER6> It's pointless to discuss if it makes sense mathematically because humans don't function that way, we're just not very good in probability. Everyone is looking at eliminating the risks with the simplest possible solution. When you strap kids in your car seat you use special kid seats to insure that they'll be protected as much as possible. If there's a chance that you loose your kid because you've let it go play on its own outside, you will not let it go anymore. It's as simple as that, perfectly normal human reasoning.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I had a somewhat unique childhood, in that I spent my early years (before the age of about 10) living in many different places around the world. My parents always made me walk or ride a bike to school, although sometimes I would go together with my 2 older sisters (who were only a few years older than me). Specifically, we lived in places like Caracas (Venezuela), Kuala Lumpur (Malaysia), and Africa (Nigeria, Ghana). Eventually my family settled in Canada where I mostly grew up, and I continued to transport myself to/from school every day without an escort.

Not only was I never harmed whilst traveling to/from school (except for one time when I fell off my bike while riding to school when I was 6 or 7 years old in Venezuela and I had to get stitches on my knee—I've still got the scar to prove it), but today I live mostly without fear and don't subscribe to most of the BS that fear-driven people do. Depending on how you look at it, I seem to have turned out fine. I also spent most of my childhood playing outside eating dirt, and go figure, I have no allergies or immune problems.

American parents today who coddle their children are robbing them of learning and growth experiences they deserve. Experiences which, in my opinion, would help make them better people. More tolerant, more empathetic, more intelligent, and healthier.

<comment><USER8> America used to be like this also. I remember playing with fire ants and rattle snakes when I was 5-6 years old (had to go to the hospital for the former, hyperbole on the latter), I climbed the mountain in front of our house (Red Mountain before it became vineyards). Later we moved to Toledo, not known for being the safest city, and we still roamed the neighborhood at will.

As the newish father of a baby, I really worry that my son won't be able to experience that unless we move to China or some other country. Heck, it's even better today since you can send them out with a cellphone.

<comment><USER9> Fascinating. I mean just the general American nuclear family values from 1950s, 60s are still being actively replicated in other predominantly homogeneous countries with strong patriarchy: ex. South Korea where men are the breadwinner, soldiers on command, women are expected to follow and take care of children.

Japan and Korea have highly homogeneous on the confucius spectrum....I believe this uniting values is what allowed people to stay in lanes so to speak..... Honestly, I think it will be a long time before these countries open up their doors to "outsiders". Italian Koreans or French Japanese? I'm disgressing but I'd argue in those European countries you probably won't see kids walking to school alone and for strong safety reasons.

Still, even in conservative places like Korea, liberal changes like those seen in American societies of the 70s mixed with credit fueled bubble frenzy of the late 1980s have begun to appear.

Anyways these are just my crazy theories, like seeing the parallel rise of GDP & scantily clad women in mainstream TV in 1980s (focus on legs) Japan, similar to S. Korea's hyper-sexual K-pop movement (once again legs are in) similar to America's craze for legs during the 80s, 90s. Now it's all about big butts, an economic indicator a new bull run?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemline_index](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemline_index)

Anyways, I don't know how I arrived at this subject but I'm always fascinated by America 70 years ago especially when described from older HN users vs today, and it's echoing impact on the world.

<comment><USER10> > I'm disgressing but I'd argue in those European countries you probably won't > see kids walking to school alone and for strong safety reasons.

I don't know for sure about Italy or France (though I'd be very surprised if they were not basically the same), but in Germany, I walked to school alone starting in first grade, and from fourth grade onwards I in fact had a 40min public transport commute to the neighbouring city that involved several interchanges; from what I can tell, this was normal at least from fifth grade onwards (since you choose secondary schools fairly carefully based on subject specialisation). Also, as far as I can tell, very little changed about this even in the face of recent paranoia about refugees.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'd often seen kids on the tram in Melbourne. Rarely on their own though, almost always in groups. In Wellington, you'd see them occasionally too in the mornings. They had dedicated school buses (city buses with the "School" sign on the front), but if kids were running late and missed their bus, you'd often see them on regular public transport.

One of the big problems is the lack of public transport in the US. Even with cities with good transit, the minimum age for kids on buses/trains is usually 12 (wasn't there an article on HN earlier about a New York man who's kids rode the bus in a group of three and how social services said he couldn't do that any more until one of them turned 13? I can't seem to find it now..)

Crime is more perception then a real issue. You're always most likely to be a victim of a crime by a family member at home. Actual child abductions are more hollywood and rarely real life. When it does happens, it's usually someone who knows the child via family.

I feel like this is yet another problem that could be solved via real transit and which will just be made worse by self-driving cars.

<comment><USER12> I don't know if this is the article you're thinking of - it is a similar situation with a family in Vancouver, BC that I believe was discussed here recently:

[http://5kids1condo.com/very-superstitious-how-fact-free- pare...](http://5kids1condo.com/very-superstitious-how-fact-free-parenting- policies-rob-our-kids-of-independence/)

<comment><USER13> The minimum age for a child to be home alone in Ontario is 16? How did that become law?

<comment><USER14> I've seen this reported on several occasions but it's not clear whether it's actually true. See, e.g. [https://www.thestar.com/life/parent/2014/08/28/when_can_kids...](https://www.thestar.com/life/parent/2014/08/28/when_can_kids_stay_home_alone.html)

Certainly, it would be pretty ridiculous in general if it were. That would have been a problem with my going off to college :-)

<comment><USER13> The source seems to be 79 (3) of the Child and Family Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.11 [1]. I'm not a lawyer, but from my reading, it seems like specifying an age actually narrows the law. It's more like a maximum than a minimum:

\---

 _Leaving child unattended

(3) No person having charge of a child less than sixteen years of age shall leave the child without making provision for his or her supervision and care that is reasonable in the circumstances._

\----

Having read through a bunch of this stuff to find the law in question, things actually look pretty reasonable. If there's a problem, it seems it would be with the application or interpretation of the law by the bureaucracy or the courts. Legislation can correct those things, but I guess my point is that it _looks_ reasonable, so there's no obvious easy fix.

[1] [https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90c11](https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90c11)

<comment><USER14> That seems like a rational reading.

"that is reasonable in the circumstances" may be ambiguous and in the eye of the beholder. But it certainly suggests that a normal 16 year old doesn't need to be automatically under constant adult supervision at all times.

ADDED: This may or may not be the correct reading, but I take that as saying you can't kick your 15 year old out of the house and tell them you're on your own.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I walked to school at 5 in New Zealand, took the bus to town at 10 to go to the library or the pool.

My son at 11 took the BART to and from school from Berkeley/Oakland to El Cerito, other parents were horrified - we moved back to NZ a couple of years later, handed both kids a bus timetable and a phone and sent them off to town to explore.

One of our main goals as a parent is to create independent kids who can function alone in the world - we don't want them still living in the basement at 30

<comment><USER16> > One of our main goals as a parent is to create independent kids who can > function alone in the world - we don't want them still living in the > basement at 30

FYI this is a cultural thing. Not every culture's parents kicks out their children when they turn 18. So if it doesn't work out this way for whatever reason, don't view it as right or wrong unless you feel it's wrong to go against the culture (which also isn't inherently wrong either).

<comment><USER15> Oh we didn't kick them out, they left when they wanted to go, and have come back at times when it has made sense (after college for a while to save money for example).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> How children lost the right to roam in four generations - highly related article and previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13547089](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13547089)

From the comments there it seems that it's not about (perceived) risks at all, it's more about peer pressure. If no other parents in your group would let their kids go about on their own, you surely won't want to be the only one.

<comment><USER18> See [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15945543](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15945543) about the German situation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> The other day I accidentally left my son at a busy station in Tokyo. He was more annoyed than upset. He just found the right platform to go home and planned to email me when he got back to say where he was.

We underestimate children's ability to navigate, which is silly because if they were really bad at it our species would have died out long ago.

<comment><USER20> How do you accidentally leave your son at a train station in Tokyo ?

<comment><USER19> There were 8 of us because my daughter's old school friend's family was here on holidays. They speak a Chinese dialect that I don't speak well.

Anyway it was like herding sheep to get them anywhere. In the rush to get them onboard a train where we taking them back to their hotel from a shopping trip... well... I kinda left my youngest on the platform.

<comment><USER21> I know it looks ridiculous but if you are in charge of a gang of kids put them in the brightest eye-burning tee shirts you can find.

You won't even have to look at their dirty, disgusting faces, just count them like cattle.

In a large city like NYC, neon-green would stands out very nicely.

<comment><USER22> Sounds foolproof, right? Well, let me introduce you to _my_ town, where _each_ of the tourist groups had this very same bright (sorry) idea. As the textile is mass-produced and apparently highly standardized, this results in streets being awash in ~8 hues of nigh-identical neon t-shirts (yellow, green, orange x2 each, red, blue). Now, which one, out of the sea of identical SCREAMING colors was yours? Yup, Red Queen Principle - back to square 1.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> A study from 2015, "Children's Independent Mobility: An International Comparison" [1] and the actual report [2]. Report covers 16 countries, US was not included.

Unfortunately I could not find any summary articles (except in Finnish). The charts summarizing the results seem to start on the report page 14.

[1] [http://www.psi.org.uk/children_mobility](http://www.psi.org.uk/children_mobility) [2] [http://www.psi.org.uk/docs/7350_PSI_Report_CIM_final.pdf](http://www.psi.org.uk/docs/7350_PSI_Report_CIM_final.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER24> Living in Germany, I've walked to the kindergarten alone (I think when I was four years old) and after knowing the way to school, I was walking there with my friends and without parents. We spent hours outside without our parents knowing where we are because we knew where we were allowed to go and what we where allowed to do (This didn't mean we listened, though).

<comment><USER25> Same in Brazil in the 80's.

The same parents that were okay with me going to kindergarten by myself and sometimes cooking partial meals alone, now are horrified that such things happened (with their consent).

I think it speaks a lot to how much society has changed, their current mindset would not accept the same behavior they themselves had a few decades ago.

I remember being stopped by strangers asking "where are you going? School? Ok, watch out when crossing the streets". Nowadays nobody would intervene directly... They would probably call the police and take me into custody.

"Practical Wisdom" (Barry Schwartz) is a good book about this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> In Germany, we had cycling safety classes in primary school (and you got a badge at the end, yay!), so we could cycle to school (or anywhere else, really).

In many countries in Asia, kids with parents can just go to a restaurant (for example) and let the kids roam - everyone else (waiters, other patrons) will take care of the kids collectively.

<comment><USER27> We had this in the US as well in elementary school. They had it every year, and I think all kids could participate (grades 1-6). It was a combination of safety instruction and some skills tests (riding in a figure 8, using turn signals properly etc.)

<comment><USER26> Oh, cool! So, parents let kids cycle, but not take public transport? Is that it?

In Germany, public transport would be considered even somewhat safer than cycling (which has its risks, even with bicycle paths etc.), I'd think.

<comment><USER28> Elementary schools are usually within walking distance and not well served by public transport. In this case, biking is nice.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> "What accounts for this unusual degree of independence? Not self-sufficiency, in fact, but "group reliance," according to Dwayne Dixon, a cultural anthropologist who wrote his doctoral dissertation on Japanese youth. "[Japanese] kids learn early on that, ideally, any member of the community can be called on to serve or help others," he says."

<comment><USER30> Probably the same pretty much anywhere in the world. I have a hard time imagining a kid asking an adult for help and the adult refusing, even if it's a stranger.

<comment><USER31> I have a hard time imagining a kid asking an adult for help. "Never talk to strangers," was the takeaway I got from elementary school. "Never tell an adult who you don't know where you live unless they know your codeword your parents shared with you" (in this case, the password was 'skateboard'.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Live in Burundi (Africa) which has been plagued by insecurity since 90s. We used to go by public transport even at age of 10. My little bro and sisters still doing so.

I personally think it's related to culture. How the community like to make kids mature earlier.

I've also lived in Tanzania where communism had made in the 90s, pupils not pay public transportation. So even little kids were riding buses.

</comment><comment><USER33> In Finland, kids walk to school by themselves from age 7. Depends on the distance of course.

<comment><USER34> In Poland, when I was 7 years old, by the time I had to go to school my parents have already gone to work,so I had to make myself some food, lock the door behind me, and walk for 15 minutes to school. But we also had kids taking buses to school, and they were normal public buses, not a dedicated school bus(never heard of such concept in Poland to be honest).

<comment><USER35> To comment on this - also living in Poland. The concept exists in Poland, but only in a few private schools, mainly those marked as "American schools".

I think the main reason is that public transit is magnitudes better and more widespread here, than in the US.

<comment><USER36> School buses are the real thing in Poland, my father has been driving one for the last 15 years :) It's just that they are more popular in rural areas (you know, grabbing kids from all those small villages and driving them to school in the nearby town).

In big cities, like Warsaw there actually aren't any, as schools are usually within walking distance, and if they aren't then the normal public transport is supposed to fill in.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I'm also letting my 10 year old daughter use the MRT in Singapore on her own, but also really only in Singapore, any other country I'd be worried too much. There is MRT staff everywhere who help everyone and after I explained to her that the police helps everyone here, so she asked a patrol when she wanted to try a new route. The streets might be cleaner in Tokyo, but I think the sense of community is similar

<comment><USER38> Japan also has something called the "Kids 911 home" (こども110の家) which are signs on police stations, convenience stores, shops, taxis etc that show where children can go for help if they feel threatened

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> I'm raising kids in Switzerland. Here it will be more-or-less required for them to walk to school (kindergarten) themselves from age 5.

<comment><USER40> Yes, it's completely normal and expected (and indeed charming) to walk around children as they go about their day going to schools and other activities in Zürich. It's a very safe city, of course, but also must be something in the culture. Another thing I noticed is that playgrounds are not "safe" \- the kids can climb tall structures, play with animals, etc. Kids are expected to progressively develop the ability to independently take care of themselves and of each other. I have not heard of any catastrophes.

<comment><USER41> > Another thing I noticed is that playgrounds are not "safe" \- the kids can > climb tall structures, play with animals, etc. Kids are expected to > progressively develop the ability to independently take care of themselves

My sister talked to a playground designer in Germany once.

He explained that they deliberately make the toys slightly dangerous -- if you fell off a structure, you wouldn't need to go to hospital, but it would hurt enough to teach a lesson.

They explicitly want to school kids' sense of risk, and at the same time, self-reliance. And offer a sense of achievement if you dare and master, say, a "dangerous" climb.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> It's a change in culture. When I was a kid, it was pretty normal for a 9-year- old to take the public bus to school alone and then the subway to an after- school program. In New York City. In the 1980s (aka the "bad old days").

The level of parental paranoia and of cultural concern has skyrocketed. We're so concerned about actual neglectful parenting and so paranoid about infinitesimally low-probability events that we are afraid to give our children what would once have been considered age-appropriate levels of autonomy and responsibility; and parents who do attempt to are under threat from a safety net originally intended to prevent qualitatively different behaviors.

<comment><USER43> In Japan, the culture of safety, trust, and respect is greater than anything we ever had here. You need only take one subway trip through Tokyo to realize this.

<comment><USER44> Unless you're a woman.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> I know a lot of parents in the US who would like for their kids to go out and play, and go places on their own. What prevents them:

\- Stories of overzealous Child Protection Services agents, child neglect and abuse laws being used to punish parents.

\- Stories of neighbors, teachers, and other overly concerned people, sometimes with malicious intent calling CPS.

\- Stories of lawsuits because children trespassed, caused noise in the neighborhood.

\- Stories of child rapists and serial murderers.

When you live in an litigious, social-media and 24-hour news addicted society, some of the side-effects are ugly. Even if a parent wants to raise their children like "when I grew up", it is very difficult not to get either swept up or cut out.

</comment><comment><USER46> I worry that american culture has gotten so paranoid that kids don't get to roam free any more.

I remember growing up in the 80's I could bus/walk all around town and do whatever as long as I got back by night or called.

Remember, none of those cheating cell phones!

</comment><comment><USER47> I did this too at those ages in Eastern Europe and even in the US. This is hardly unique at all. It's hardly newsworthy. Keeping kids locked up at home under supervision until they become adults is a neuroticism seemingly unique to American (and possibly Canadian) culture. I wonder if parents really think through the consequences of their actions in these cases. Do they weigh the high likelihood of their children suffering and not developing into adults properly because of the parents' actions against the tiny chance they might be harmed if they were allowed on their own? Clearly, as a society, we have adopted the paranoid, scared point of view, a point of view that has defined culture in the US for the last two decades. It makes sense that the culture would appeal to the lowest common denominator, the most paranoid of the paranoid. Unfortunately, these people have codified their paranoid delusional culture into laws that now affect everyone else.

I simply cannot see myself raising children in the US. Just like my parents gave up everything to bring me here, I will give up everything to bring them to a society that respects them, where they have the opportunity to grow into adults without them or me getting arrested for being independent human beings. The way we treat children in the US at the moment is sick, disgusting, and simply unacceptable to me. Children are human beings too.

</comment><comment><USER48> Might as well replace the title with "In <not the US>, small children take the subway and run errands alone (2015)". Children are expected to get to school and to go to whatever by themselves from age 6-7 in pretty much all of Europe.

</comment><comment><USER49> I grew up in Zambia, in the capital city in the 80's and to this day this is still a fairly common thing.

No subways of course, but small children will walk to the store or school unaccompanied all the time.

I live in South Africa now where it's probably not a great idea.

Pretty sad.

</comment><comment><USER50> >Kaito, a 12-year-old in Tokyo, has been riding the train by himself between the homes of his parents, who share his custody, since he was nine.

Normal thing here in Russia. Why would 9-10 year old need a guardian on his way to school anyways? Same for some shopping.

<comment><USER51> Fear. When i grew up this was pretty common, but over time it got less and less frequent.

<comment><USER50> I was growing up during the 90s. In Russia.

        "I must not fear.
        Fear is the mind-killer.
        Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
        I will face my fear.
        I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
        And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
        Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> I think children, 7 years or even younger, move about on their own almost everywhere in the world, except North America.

</comment><comment><USER53> Welcome to my world in Germany :)

</comment><comment><USER54> This used to be far more common in Ireland a few decades ago than it is today, though you certainly still see it. Funnily enough, the crime rate was much higher back then; it's not a risk thing.

</comment><comment><USER55> Reminds me of the Scandinavian woman prosecuted in 1980s/90s NYC for leaving her child in a pram outside a cafe. In Scandinavia this is (or at least was) extremely common, you get a cluster of prams outside cafes with babies still in them.

I was in Berlin last week and was amazed to see bikes being locked to bollards on the street only waist high, so you only had to lift it a foot if you wanted to steal it.

<comment><USER56> > you only had to lift it a foot if you wanted to steal it.

Which is exactly what happens.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> In Sweden kids are taught how to navigate by public transportation while they are at kindergarten. 7-9-ish might still be considered too young to travel alone (probably because kids are easily distracted), but it's not uncommon for a 9-10 yo to take care of a 6yo and take him home by commuter train.

Traveling long distances by commuter train and then switching to bus is not uncommon for kids ages 11 and up.

</comment><comment><USER58> This is even more common and ubiquitous in India. From reading the article, I would say way more common.

<comment><USER58> I started using the public buses alone at the age of 5/6\. Usually, to go visit my grandparents who lived about 20 minutes away. I started cycling alone at the age of about 8/10\. And not short pleasure rides but to actually go from one place to another. School, gymnastics classes etc. etc.

And getting groceries (from the corner or kirana store) wasn't even considered "going out alone". Everyone did that as soon as we learnt to properly count money. Mostly even before that, since the kirana stores could be trusted not to give incorrect change and steal from a kid. I'd have a list of items from my parents, hand it over to the storekeeper with the money, and he'd give me the stuff in a bag along with the change.

There's another interesting story from when I was 4/5\. I wanted a new toy and refused to sleep until my parents agreed to buy it for me the next day. They kept refusing so I threatened my parents that I'd run away from home if they didn't buy it for me. Their response was to simply tell me that I could runaway if I wanted, but I wasn't getting that toy (and remember, I'd been throwing this tantrum past bedtime, sonit was about 10/11 at night). I packed a little bag with some toys and clothes and left home. My parents idea of keeping me safe at this time was to ask my 6/7 year old brother to secretly follow me, which he did, but I had no idea about. Getting back to me, I left my apartment, walked out to the main road, walked for a bit, didn't know where to go, so I caught a bus and went to my grandparents house. They were quite happy to get a surprise visit from me. Though I asked them not to tell my parents I was there (I was 5, but didn't want my parents to think I was an idiot) they called my parents and let them know I would be staying over at their place. The next day I found out my brother had caught a cab and followed the bus, saw I went to my grandparents place and returned home in that same cab.

Lastly, in India, every public transport service, offers a half price ticket for children. Even if travelling alone. Also, kids studying in government schools, get a card which allows them to travel from home to school by bus/train for free. It's actually very common to see kids traveling via public transport alone. In trains and buses it's also quite common to offer or see others offering their seats to small kids that can't reach the over head handles while standing.

<comment><USER59> This is very interesting. I can't imagine a 6/7 yo following on cab much less a 4/5 year old catching a bus late night anywhere in New Delhi! Which city was this in?

<comment><USER58> Bombay. More than 20 years ago when the city was much safer. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> The safety that allows a child to travel alone should be a defining factor of a "first world" region.

</comment><comment><USER61> Related: [http://web.kitsapsun.com/archive/1998/06-20/0063_world_cup_s...](http://web.kitsapsun.com/archive/1998/06-20/0063_world_cup_soccer__japanese_cleani.html)

</comment><comment><USER62> In Singapore my kids take the school bus. They could technically take the MRT / Bus by themselves, but I don't trust Singapore's traffic. When I grew up, I walked to school. But German drivers are really well educated (mostly).

</comment><comment><USER63> Not only Japan, everywhere. I believe the US is the only country which would be worried of kids go to school by themselves. Sick.

But the most trust into their kids I saw amongst Africans.

</comment><comment><USER64> There's a great article on the topic (for USA) by Michael Ventura of Austin Chronicle:

A little clause set between commas in a missive from a reader about a recent column ["Hero vs. Superhero," July 25] -- in that piece I wondered about the effect of today's movie superheroes on little children as opposed to what children saw, say, in John Ford's 1956 The Searchers. The reader was intelligently critical of the piece, but in that clause he doubted that many 7-year-olds ever went to movies like The Searchers. A natural mistake -- he was clearly too young to remember, and how else would he know? But, for me, his error brought back a lost world.

In today's America, where parents chauffeur kids to "play dates," only on the poorest streets do 7-year-olds still roam free ... but they don't go to movies much because tickets are so pricey ... the concession stand is even more expensive ... and you can't just walk into any movie (it might not be rated for kids) ... and you have to know the exact time a film starts ... and shopping-mall movie theatres are rarely within walking distance. Today you're blitzed by TV ad campaigns and product tie-ins in fast-food joints, so you know all about a Hollywood film before it starts ... and today's urban parents panic if their grade-school children disappear, unaccounted for, for hours on end.

Fifty years ago, none of that was so. In the larger cities, two or three movie theatres were in walking distance of most neighborhoods. Each had but one screen. The program began with a newsreel, a few cartoons, and brief "coming attractions" (not today's compilations that tell the whole story). Then the "features" began -- plural, features, for all neighborhood theatres played double, sometimes triple, features, two or three movies for the price of one ticket. Nothing was rated, there were no sex scenes or obscenities; anyone could go to any movie. Admission price for a kid was rarely more than a quarter. Popcorn for a dime, a Coke for a nickel. They weren't supposed to sell kids tickets during school hours, but they did. As for kids roaming about -- "Go play in traffic," our parents would say, and they wouldn't be surprised if we didn't walk in 'til dinnertime, which in our immigrant neighborhood wasn't until after 7. ("Go play in traffic" wasn't so harsh a phrase as it sounds. Where else could we play?)

And you didn't go to a movie, you went to "the movies." You rarely knew the title of the film you were going to see until you saw the marquee -- and even then you might not recognize the title. Big productions were advertised on billboards, but there weren't so many billboards. No ads on the sides of buses, and none in supermarkets (and there weren't that many supermarkets). Second features were never advertised. TV ads for movies? Very rare in the early Fifties, and not so common by the end of the decade. Except for Davy Crockett's "coonskin" hats (and that was for television), massive product tie- ins were decades away. So adults and kids alike went to the movies, to see whatever was playing -- especially during the hot months, because in those days the big pull was to go to "an air-conditioned movie," as the phrase went. Into the early Sixties, movie theatres were among the only air-conditioned public buildings, and nothing was more rare for working-class people (on the East Coast anyway) than an air-conditioned residence. (I didn't live in one until I was 29.)

And there was this, a fact that can't be overestimated: Almost all movies (with Disney the major exception) were made for adults. Kids went to the movies, but few movies were calibrated for kids. Yet no ticket-seller I ever encountered thought it strange for a 7-year-old alone, or a group of three or four, to show up. I went every time I could scrounge the change, and I don't remember ever being turned away.

My birthday is late in October, so I was still 7 in 1953 when I saw my first film without "parental guidance" \-- or parental presence. Frankly, it kind of shocks me to write that, for I can't imagine the parents of 7-year-olds today allowing their children to go to the movies alone. In fact, I doubt a lone 7-year-old would be sold a ticket now anywhere in this country. But once upon a time, it was no big deal. (All of which makes urban parents of 50 years ago sound permissive. They weren't. We would never have dreamed of speaking to our parents, or to any adult, as I now hear so many minutely supervised kids speak to theirs. Disrespect was not tolerated. Neither was whining. I know that sounds like an exaggeration. It's not.)

So, at the age of 7, three or four other urchins and I saw Vincent Price in House of Wax -- in 3-D, no less. It was deliciously scary in a harmless sort of way. But that same year I felt true horror at seeing (alone) The Robe; the Jesus I prayed to -- I watched him be crucified, watched the nails entering his hands, and it was among the more shattering experiences of my little life. And then, a different kind of shattering, that same year: The War of the Worlds -- the scene where the crazed mob throws the scientists out of their truck, destroys their work, and so (seemingly) ends all hope that mankind might survive the martian invasion. When later I became an obsessive reader of history, I had occasion to think of that scene many times.

In the spring of the next year, when I was 8, my 6-year-old cousin Tony and I "went to the movies," and what was playing was what I now know to be one of the rarest films by a major director and major star: William Wellman's The High and the Mighty, my first John Wayne film. Tony and I sat through it twice -- that is, we sat through The High and the Mighty, a second feature that I've forgotten, and The High and the Mighty again. For in those days once you bought a ticket you could sit there till the theatre closed. Also, since you just "went," you almost always walked in the middle of whatever picture it was, stayed through the second feature, and watched the first feature until the scene you walked in on. That's the origin of the saying, "This is where I came in" \-- people would often leave at that point, with those words on their lips. Not me. I always stayed 'til the end, even if I didn't like the picture. I was (and am) stubborn that way. The High and the Mighty was about a haunted, limping co-pilot (John Wayne) who'd survived the crash that killed his wife and child. He redeems himself by managing to land a (propeller-driven) airliner that otherwise would have been destroyed. Tony and I walked out whistling the haunting theme music. We went back the next day. Which was the first time I ever went to a movie. I can still whistle that theme, but I've never seen that film again -- to my knowledge it has yet to appear on TV, VHS, or DVD. What happened to it? In any case, I kind of fell in love with John Wayne. He was the man my 8-year-old wanted to be.

Other movies I saw solo or with buddy-urchins: The Blackboard Jungle, East of Eden, Rebel Without a Cause when I was 9 ... The Searchers when I was 10 ... age 11, I saw Edge of the City (the complex friendship between John Cassavetes and Sidney Poitier turned my young head around about race). Eleven, too, when I saw A Face in the Crowd and The Three Faces of Eve. Face left me absolutely stunned -- so much so that I couldn't stand to see the film again until I was well into my 40s. I know this will sound incredibly naive to a modern ear, but Face taught me that those smiling faces on TV were laughing at me. Baby, that changed me. I stopped believing a lot of things that year -- and stopped calling myself a Catholic. I didn't trust a priestly smile anymore. As for The Three Faces of Eve -- my mother had been in and out of mental hospitals, so Eve taught me more than I wanted to know, earlier than I could absorb it, and to this day I've not been able to watch it again.

All of which is to say ... there are good arguments for and against a child seeing such things, though I'm glad I did. Good arguments for and against children roaming dangerously, freely. Yes, disasters happened. You had to learn how to handle men who sat next to you and groped (that was rare, but once was plenty); I'd always grab an aisle seat, and I took to the trick of spilling Coke and popcorn on the seat next to me. But, as W.D. Snodgrass said when asked why he didn't write poems about A-bombs: "I've seen more people killed in their living rooms." It isn't much of an exaggeration to say "the movies," as an entity, raised me. It was like listening in to the conversations of the grownups. Which, we now forget, is how children have been raised for eons. So, reader, yes -- 7-year-olds did see The Searchers, in another world, and in a freer, riskier, more exciting, and inviting country.

[https://www.austinchronicle.com/columns/2003-08-22/174046/](https://www.austinchronicle.com/columns/2003-08-22/174046/)

</comment><comment><USER65> In suburbia there are no subways to use, although parents do let their 15 year old kids take their cars and run erands alone.

</comment><comment><USER66> when I was 9-10, while living in Munich around 1989-1990, I rode the U-bahn (subway) to school with 2 other kids around the same age everyday. Had to do a transfer in between also....

</comment><comment><USER67> This is not surprising: Japan is a high trust, low crime ethnostate.

</comment><comment><USER68> In Germany too

</comment><comment><USER69> and u can eat off the subway floor's its that clean there

</comment><comment><USER70> Is there any nation in which kids are less independent than in the U.S.?

<comment><USER71> I'm observing a massive decline in children independence in Russia as well compared to the "good old Soviet times" and early (pretty violent though) 90s.

It is a helpless feeling that emerged is the age of kidnappers, organ harvesting etc. Or has nothing really changed since then and it is just that we're exposed to massive amounts of FUD in the new era of mass media?

<comment><USER11> I think it's a lot more fear, uncertainty/doubt. Kids are most likely to be a victim of crime at home by family members. That's where most abuse happens. The random kidnapping is more in the movies that reality.

<comment><USER72> That's a fact. Doug Stanhope has a great bit about how your kid can go his entire life without being raped by a man in a van.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER73> I used to do this in Australia many years back when I was six and seven. It never even occurred to anyone that it was an issue.

<comment><USER74> These days, in Queensland, it's illegal for children under 12 to walk to school on their own. (Although, for better or worse, both the letter of the law and its enforcement are unclear.)

[http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-09/how-long-is-too- long-t...](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-09/how-long-is-too-long-to- leave-a-child-unattended/8335692)

<comment><USER73> Yes, I remember when that law was introduced. I vaguely remember that it was in response to a child being murdered after being picked up while waiting for a bus.

It's certainly a different world now. But I have a 10-year-old, and he goes to the shops around the corner to buy milk and/or bread. There'd be no way I could trust him to make public transport decisions at this stage though. Maybe a year or two more.

<comment><USER75> > _It 's certainly a different world now._

What do you see as the relevant differences?

<comment><USER8> My sister said the same thing, but I pointed out that the crime rates are actually lower vs. when we were kids.

<comment><USER75> And most people don't seem to know it: [http://www.pewresearch.org/fact- tank/2016/11/16/voters-perce...](http://www.pewresearch.org/fact- tank/2016/11/16/voters-perceptions-of-crime-continue-to-conflict-with- reality/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER76> Is this news worthy? This is also the case in NYC and probably every city around the world. Kids take the subway, bus, etc all by themselves to go to school, malls, theaters, friends' homes, etc. My siblings and I did. All my friends did.

</comment><comment><USER77> Did you know they still hang people in Japan? Anyway, America has more freedoms and also more crime.

[http://www.nationmaster.com/country- info/compare/Japan/Unite...](http://www.nationmaster.com/country- info/compare/Japan/United-States/Crime)

Not sure why this is newsworthy, seems like they are just trying to stir the pot up.

</comment><comment><USER78> Good, but too bad Japan does not let kids be as free to think for themselves at school a little more. If you limit autonomy to walking to school, it won't bring much benefits in the end.</comment>


Ask HN: Outsourcing marketing - <AUTHOR> I'm handling the business and tech side of my new company. Zero experience in marketing, and my current efforts have shown to be mediocre at best. I have been looking at bringing in a contractor for part time stuff, but was also considering going with an outsourced marketing firm. Would love to hear feedback from how others have managed the situation. And if you found a particularly helpful marketing team, if you could share a link I would appreciate it. Thanks <3 <comment><USER2> I think of outsourcing marketing as a competitive process. The goal is to find the marketer that can get you the lowest customer acquisition cost per marketing dollar spent. That is the only thing that matters.

So I typically get a group of prospective marketers and ask each one how they'd spend (eg. $1000), de-duplicate and then do what they suggest. I give the business to the one who's campaign gave the best results.

This doesn't guarantee you will get the marketer that will get you the best results. It does guarantee you will find the one with the best intuition for the next step in your marketing process improvement. Rinse repeat every few months.

As an aside, for DIYers, I think Google is back on top. Their AI efforts are having a huge impact on their ability to surface relevant ads. A DIYer can approximate what the big brands are doing with Smart Goals and Automated Insights.

The process I described above is kind of like a single step in an ai type optimization process to find the global maximum of your marketing spend.

</comment><comment><USER3> Marketing is a broad field and disciplines have different involvement/relationships to how work is done. Plus your company situations etc... so broad caveat that this is limited information answer.

I'd be inclined to recommend someone part-time/contract if you have a reasonably narrow or marketing skillets required. Mainly for 1) You'll probably get better rates going direct vs a company that has to layer a margin on-top. 2) If your company grows its easier to bring in a person contributing to your success than if they are contracted to a larger company.

If you need broad marketing skill-sets, then a agency may be better. They can co-ordinate work across the many people within their agency. If you do go a firm/agency I would really recommend being careful you dont get their talent pitching you, then the work is handed to the cheap drone. This is a problem in many agencies.

Most importantly, do you know what marketing work you need?

</comment><comment><USER4> Hire a contractor to help you learn the ropes/make a plan. I don't recommend an oursourced firm until you have a firm product market fit.

</comment><comment><USER5> I can send you my recommendation but would prefer dm. You can ping me via email (in my profile), or just lmk how can I reach you.

</comment><comment><USER6> Are you sure you need marketing and not sales help?</comment>


Meet Imzy--the Not-Reddit of the Social Web - <AUTHOR> http://www.inc.com/christine-lagorio/imzy-launches-with-new-investment.html <comment><USER2> Not-Reddit indeed.

Just signed into it. It's busy as hell. Horrible layout.

I doubt many will make the jump.</comment>


Chicago BARCamp 2008 -- August 15th-17th - <AUTHOR> http://barcampchicago.com/ BARcamp Chicago - 2008 is happening August 15th weekend! Sign up to attend and/or if you want to help out. <comment><USER2> Sounds interesting. I'll see if I can drive up from St. Louis for the weekend.

</comment><comment><USER3> Barcamp is _this_ weekend! Be there or be square.

</comment><comment><USER4> Are these any good? I'd go if they are.

<comment><AUTHOR> BARCamp Chicago is great, probably the best BARCamp! Lots of interesting talks on a wide set of topics. Plus, there's music, great beer and lots of people to talk to.</comment></comment>


Bryan Cantrill interviews Arthur Whitney (2009) - <AUTHOR> https://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1531242 <comment><USER2> So, one interesting detail about this interview: audio was recorded. The version in print is abridged, and I would love for the ACM to release the audio -- if only for the incredibly long (and mind-blown) pause after Arthur told me that he felt that the closest analogue to software is poetry...

<comment><USER3> ...which explains his language design choices.

Stronger contenders for the "software analogue" remain film, theater, music, and architecture.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The pdf is easier to read and contains photos: [https://dl.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=1531242&ftid=316753&dwn...](https://dl.acm.org/ft_gateway.cfm?id=1531242&ftid=316753&dwn=1)

</comment><comment><USER4> A thread from 2014: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8476120](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8476120)

A couple from 2009: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=650149](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=650149)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=561443](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=561443)

I remember seeing that at the time but didn't notice who was the interviewer!

<comment><USER5> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=561443#562884](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=561443#562884)

Does anybody know how array languages handle pointers and trees?

<comment><USER6> I believe Aaron Hsu's work on tree processing for Co-dfns [0] is a novel example of tree handling - a data parallel compiler for efficient compilation on a GPU using extensive tree-oriented "nanopass" transformations [1].

[0] [https://github.com/Co-dfns/Co-dfns](https://github.com/Co-dfns/Co-dfns)

[1] [https://dyalog.tv/Dyalog18/?v=hzPd3umu78g](https://dyalog.tv/Dyalog18/?v=hzPd3umu78g)

<comment><USER5> Holy crap, that video is mind-blowing. Thank you! I was vaguely aware of Co- dfns before, but now it's squarely on my radar.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "In C I never learned to use the debugger so I used to never make mistakes,"

<comment><USER8> I can sort of sympathize with that sentiment. I'm not a C guy, but I've become so tired of setting up the stack for a new freelance project and/or running the log-and-debug dance, that it's often easier to just read through the code carefully, 'running' it in my head―the problem might jump out at me and I'll know where to dig. (Also helps with estimates before anything is done, and with filtering questionable projects.)

As they say, "It's one dollar for hitting it with the hammer, a hundred for knowing where to hit."</comment></comment>


Life's too short to build stuff nobody wants - <AUTHOR> http://www.mymotivation.com/2011/05/24/lifes-to-short-to-build-stuff-nobody-want/

<comment><USER2> Some people build stuff for themselves and don't care if others "want" or "like" it.

<comment><USER3> Exactly. Why would you always have to build something that other people want?

If you need it yourself, you can build it for yourself ("scratch your own itch"). If it turns out other people need it too, that's great, but it doesn't have to be the aim.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Life is too short to build stuff you don't enjoy building.

</comment><comment><USER5> Good content. I'll be back to read more. Keep up the good work.</comment>


Edward Snowden is Almost Broke - <AUTHOR> http://world.time.com/2013/11/12/edward-snowden-is-almost-broke/ <comment><USER2> I'm actually surprised he has any access to his money at all. I assumed all of his assets would have been frozen under some sort of murky fugitive/terrorist/organized crime laws.

Or maybe he took proactive steps to keep this from happening?

<comment><USER3> If you blow the whistle on something then all of your resources are put into getting to the whistleblowing stage. The dedication is entirely devoted to the act, not the aftermath. All that is expected of the aftermath is a bumpy ride, the possibility of being universally despised, ostracised from society and so on. Money and the means to get by is not perceived to be such a big problem when one is fully prepared to end up in Guantanamo Bay. To some extent that is the end goal, in that respect Chelsea Manning succeeded. Snowden did pretty well getting to Russia, getting some hangers on to provide support and getting a job. The fact that he is broke is mere mortal stuff, he is waiting for his pay check to come through.

As any ex-cat-1 prisoner can tell you, life on the run is the most expensive way to live. With Snowden he has had many agencies after him, all with their different approaches. Obviously the U.S. have been on his case, they tend to be good at the sigint stuff but not so good at actual spy trade craft. I would not be at all surprised if there was a British team on his case too, better able to watch him pop to the shops for a pint of milk. Then the Russians will be monitoring everything, on their home turf and able to keep watch on who is keeping watch. Not all watchers will be hostile to him, after all we are all human (Tony Blair excepted), however, none of the many folks observing him will be able to assist him. They will watch him starve rather than intervene.

Presumably he is not as on-the-run as he has had to be, however, the practical implications of being completely on-the-run are more than you might think. Imagine he wants to be able to do things like sleep without being observed. That means he has to move every day, and at extremely short notice so anyone watching him does not get a head start, e.g. to bug a hotel room before he gets in there. He also has to pay cash up front just on the off chance he has lost his tail. Then the same again the next day and the day after that.

Eventually he will realise that trying to escape his watchers is a fruitless task and decide it is better to take a disinformation approach. At this stage he could try to convince those behind the bugs that he has gone mad. Claiming to be the messiah, pretending to have narrowly avoided being poisoned, hearing voices - standard lunatic stuff. He might also want to go the extra mile on proving that he is no longer an existential threat to the American Way of Life, taking up a pastime such as computer gaming, putting in marathon Playstation sessions and completely ignoring the news. After a year or so of doing this he will be able to convince himself that he has his privacy back and live the normal life.

Snowden probably also has had the problem of living off a good pay cheque and then having to adapt to a normal pay check, or no money at all. If you are used to paying thousands a month on accommodation, buying nice food and doing things like driving a car then it can take a while to adapt to barely having enough money to afford groceries for the next day. A mental attitude has to change, from being generous with tips to actually living off what that tip would be. That change does not happen so easily, even if circumstance forces that change to be necessary.

Anyway...

This talk of sending the guy a few bitcoins is far off from the reality of his situation. Sounds to me that he actually does have everything that he needs to live, i.e. a job and a few close friends. He has sorted himself out. He does not need to be beholden to charity handouts.

<comment><USER4> Hey,

Your description of a life on the run was quite interesting and I was wondering if I could ask a few questions - would it be possible to do that? (your profile does not have an email ID)

<comment><USER3> Sure, what's wrong with keeping the conversation here?

I have no special insight gained from first hand experience, however, if I meet someone that has a criminal record I make friends rather than run away from them. There can be many benefits in doing this, e.g. you have someone that appreciates and respects your advice, they can possibly do a better job than the police in retrieving your belongings if they get stolen, you can obtain unobtainable 'black market' items, get to the best parties, find out information not in the public domain and so on. You also get the best stories. I merely presented a composite, abbreviated version of things I have learned along the way. I am sure the same stuff could be found in films and books. I am also sure that the spies know what cycle to expect from those they take care of.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'll reach out in the morning to people/orgs in touch with him and see if taskforce.is can set up some way of getting money to him without a big legal risk.

<comment><USER6> Good idea! Keep us informed if it worked, I would be very happy to donate!

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> He could get Bitcoin address and ask for donations. I would be surprised if he didn't think about this already. He might not want to give the Government a excuse to ban Bitcoin.

<comment><USER8> You can send Bitcoins to this address if you want to support him: [https://blockchain.info/address/1snowqQP5VmZgU47i5AWwz9fsgHQ...](https://blockchain.info/address/1snowqQP5VmZgU47i5AWwz9fsgHQg94Fa)

Source: [https://wikileaks.org/freesnowden](https://wikileaks.org/freesnowden)

He already received 141 Bitcoins (over 50'000 USD) on that address.

<comment><USER9> This is specifically "for the legal defence campaign of Mr Edward Snowden". The page doesn't mention any of it going to support Snowden himself.

And that might be an important distinction -- IANAL, but contributing to someone's defense fund seems like a perfectly legal thing to do; financially supporting someone on the run from the US government, I'm not sure quite how legal that is. I'm curious if anyone knows more.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> What would be the legality of sending Snowden money? He's been charged with a crime and donations would enable him to live outside the country. Isn't that aiding and abetting a fugitive?

<comment><USER11> The bare truth is "almost certainly."

<comment><USER12> Would that be relevant to people outside the US, though? I guess they cannot legally go around, charging people with aiding a fugitive, all over the world. (Or maybe that's just overly naïve on my part)

<comment><USER13> I do not think the US government would bother to try to prosecute that. It is just not worth the resulting diplomatic drama.

I think right now the Obama administration is happy that people are starting to forget about the whole affair. The NSA's mass surveillance program is still on and it seems now accepted as the new normal.

Ultimately Snowden has failed. He exposed the program but the resulting outrage was not strong enough to bring it down. In fact, now that the US government got away with this they will probably get even more extreme in future..

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> We should help him. How we the HN community could? I'd love to hear ideas from all of you.

<comment><USER5> We at [https://taskforce.is](https://taskforce.is) (mostly HNers) can help set something up,. I'll reach out to ACLU and his lawyers in the morning.

<comment><USER14> Taskforce looks seriously cool. It deserves more attention on Hacker News and elsewhere.

Does Taskforce have badges or support banners for webmasters and bloggers to put on their sites and link to you?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> What I want to know, is Snowden going to do his tax return this year in the US?

<comment><USER16> As a US citizen the answer is always 'yes' even if you lived on the moon.

<comment><USER17> Since he can never return to the US anyway, there are charges against him, it is kind of pointless.

<comment><USER18> But on the off chance there's some loophole in Russian law (or the laws of some country he passes through in the future) that makes extradition to the US for tax evasion particularly easy, filing and paying his taxes may be worth the cost and effort.

Or if by some long shot some future president pardons him, he'll be glad he paid his taxes.

<comment><USER19> I'm not sure if Russia has a "double taxation" agreement with the US and a quick google doesn't immediately prsent an answer. If so, expats who pay taxes in Russia won't have to pay those same taxes in the US. As long as Snowden files his taxes, he won't be under a tax obligation or legal liability.

I am not a lawyer!

<comment><USER20> There is a US-Russia double taxation treaty.[0]

He'll be eligible for the foreign earned income exclusion by filing time. That protects US persons from double taxation up to about $100k of earned income, even without a tax treaty.

And he needs to remember to file his FBARs, too.

[0][http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/International- Businesses/Russi...](http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/International- Businesses/Russia---Tax-Treaty-Documents)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> [https://wikileaks.org/freesnowden](https://wikileaks.org/freesnowden)

<comment><USER22> > Roland Tscheinig gave $4,000

> Thanks so much, Mr. Snowden,

> Your sense of initiative is commendable and should serve as a guiding light > for all of us.

> Your contribution to our common future has been absolutely invaluable!

Holy crap, this guy puts his money where his mouth is.

<comment><USER23> Many of us here can afford to do the same. A very close friend and business partner gave a similar amount to help Star Simpson with her situation because he believed very strongly that she was a victim of the War on Dignity.

Star Simpson: [http://boingboing.net/2008/09/22/star-simpson-one- yea.html](http://boingboing.net/2008/09/22/star-simpson-one-yea.html)

<comment><USER24> Wow, I remember that. Did you know that she's the one who did that Taco Copter thing they were talking about on here a few months ago?? Cool.

<comment><USER25> Even better, she does things that aren't pranks!

[http://canidu.com/](http://canidu.com/)

Don't get me wrong. Taco Copter is an excellent prank, and both of the pranksters involved are worth keeping an eye on.

Especially if they can get into your home, laptop, or vehicle ;-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Surely there must be news organisations willing to pay for interviews?

<comment><USER27> He may have to, but it will be a desperate move. Think about the risks involved.

The US government:

\- spends billions on illicit surveillance tech

\- officially sanctions kidnapping ("extraordinary rendition") as a tool of security policy

\- brought down an Ecuadorian diplomatic flight over European airspace, on the mere possibility that he might be on it

\- fully intends to lock him up in a cage forever and ever and ever

<comment><USER28> You pretty much just described Batman.

<comment><USER27> Interesting point. Which side do you think the Caped Crusader would take?

<comment><USER29> based on the fact that he gave Fox control to destroy his cell phone surveillance. I think he would be pro snowden

<comment><USER30> Based on the fact that he _had_ a cell phone surveillance system, he'd probably be pro-NSA.

<comment><USER31> Didn't he decide that the thing he set up was too powerful for anyone to have though?

(in at least one version, iirc, etc. etc.)

<comment><USER32> Sure, but that didn't stop him from using it, did it?

<comment><USER30> We like our superheroes to kick some villain's butt without pesky 'due process' getting in the way.

Kinda like the NSA, if you think about it.

<comment><USER33> Batman prefers due process.

<comment><USER32> "I'd like you to meet the bastions of justice, my right jab _Due_ and my left hook _Process_. Say hello!"

\-- Batman

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Don't have to help for now, says in the fourth paragraph he's got a new job.

<comment><USER35> yes, that is an odd contradiction between the paragraph and the title.

<comment><USER36> The need to put a tidbit of information out like that from his lawyer seems more to me to be a bid to counter the claims that he is being run by a foreign intel service who some might assume would have given him large sums of cash for his continuing to stay in Russia in public silence.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> His parents could set up a kickstarter/indiegogo/paypal. They wouldn't have to name Snowden in the plea for funds, could be named the "Freedom Fund". So, donators wouldn't be charged with aiding a felon.

<comment><USER38> If the donors know it's for Snowden, the courts would as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Would a contribution be tax deductible?

<comment><USER40> Probably not! Donations are only tax deductible if they're to registered charities, and usually only if the charity is in the same country in which you're a taxpayer.

<comment><USER39> Darn! The irony would be incomparable!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> So what you're telling us is that being a whistleblower and fleeing to Russia turns out to be a poor career move?

</comment><comment><USER42> Let this be a warning to all you crazy kids out there thinking you can take on the man and not get busted.

<comment><USER43> Right, don't bother exposing the biggest Constitutional violation of this century, because you might have to take on a part-time job while you're in exile...

(If you weren't serious, I apologize!)

<comment><USER42> I wasn't. Anyway, poor bugger. He will never work for anyone remotely connected to any government institution or any multinational in any country. The US is so omnipotent and omnipresent that even the Chinese, Ecuadorians and earlier on, the Russians, were seemingly afraid to touch him.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> "The American fugitive, who revealed troves of classified information as he fled the country in May and is now living under temporary asylum in Russia, reportedly started at a job at an unnamed Russian website earlier this month."

How do computer industry salaries in Russia compare with government contractor salaries in the United States? And how much of whatever money people send to Snowden will end up with Snowden, and how much with Snowden's lawyer? (Another issue is whether the one-year asylum offered by Russia will be extended later or not. What will Snowden do if Russia decides not to continue to grant him permission to be in Russia and work there?)

</comment><comment><USER45> What would happen if he ran out of money? Wouldn't Russia just... give him some? I can hardly think it would be in the diplomatic interest of Russia for Snowden to become unable to pay his lawyer.

<comment><USER46> Having the government pay for your lawyer and being broke are not mutually exclusive (and that's assuming Russia sees some benefit to providing him counsel). Not sure why Russia would give him any money, what does the money buy them? They could probably put a roof over his head if they really wanted but that's still a far cry from not being broke.

<comment><USER47> Also, I think that "putting a roof over someone's head" and "putting a roof over someone who US government really wants to get" cost slightly different.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> So what punishment would be he experience if he was to return?

It sounds like he is not "free" now. He would be a high profile prisoner. How bad would the government treat him?

<comment> atom-morgan I imagine he'd be tortured.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> At least he is free.

<comment><USER50> How the world changed...

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> We could set something up to donate to him? I think we owe him a hell of a lot. Allowing him to live comfortably is the least we can do. Do you think if a fund was set up it would be hijacked by the U.S?

</comment><comment><USER52> i thought he got a job??

<comment><USER53> He probably did; but at this point you have to assume that any media you receive on the topic of Edward Snowden is a calculated ploy for someone's agenda. Whether it's Wikileaks trying to embarrass the US .gov or the Intelligence Community trying to discredit Snowden and by extension all whistleblowers. Anything you read about Snowden has been pushed or spun by by someone. The man himself may be miserable, or comfortable; we have no idea and I'd guess he likes his privacy. But the persona of Edward Snowden that is reenacted on blogs, television, etc.; that is a complete fabrication that is always already a lie in some direction or another.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> would it be considered treason to send him money as a US citizen? I could imagine he could fetch a pretty penny consulting on russian sites about security issues (even if he isn't the top guy in the field, he has a crazy name recognition right now).

<comment><USER55> Only "light treason"

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> No he isn't, he's the richest amongst us.

<comment><USER57> Care to expand on that?

<comment><USER56> Rich in Karma.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> Maybe he should ask Putin for some spare change.

</comment><comment><USER59> Snowden could write a book and make millions. This profit potential means he's not "broke" in the same sense a typical broke person is.

<comment><USER60> I'd imagine he'd have a hard time getting someone to publish & distribute that book (in the USA, at least)...

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> I was wondering about this the other day. I'm sure someone will help him out.

</comment><comment><USER62> What? Treason doesn't pay?

<comment><USER63> It paid off for our founding fathers.

I have too much respect for you, Marc, to think you're doing anything other than joking but it's still disappointing and not really funny.

Remember all the people in Germany during WWII (*sorry for the tired analogy) who could have spoken up and didn't. I guess they did the right thing. They certainly wouldn't want to commit treason -- it doesn't pay.

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> I have very little sympathy for his monetary plight. He made his bed, let him sleep in it.

Or rather, when your giant paycheck comes from the government, maybe torquing off that government in the most flamboyant way possible isn't the best of ideas.

<comment><USER65> Wow, you are a dick. Or completely clueless.

<comment><USER66> Sorry, the comment you're replying to makes an actual argument. Your reply of "wow, you're a dick" does not.

I find no objection that dead_phish should express this view if that's how he feels. It is a valid viewpoint even if it is not shared. I also commend him for expressing it in a community like HN which, let's be honest, does not tolerate dissenting views of Snowden.

It's kind of sad that his dissenting view is downvoted and your name-calling is not.

<comment><USER64> Thank you. I was a little disturbed by how quickly this turned to "you're an ass for not thinking this way." I expected disagreement, but not, well, so much rage.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


A.I. turns $20 into $11k in Kentucky Derby bet, wins "holy grail" of gambling - <AUTHOR> http://www.newsweek.com/artificial-intelligence-turns-20-11000-kentucky-derby-bet-457783 <comment><USER2> Bing Predict got 1 horse. It's pretty freakin' hard.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is actually kind of remarkable.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, but can they repeat it?

<comment><USER4> This was them repeating it... they already nailed the Oscars, College Bowl, Stanley Cup, and now the Kentucky Derby.</comment></comment></comment>


ASK HN: What cpus are used in IBM bluemix? - <AUTHOR> Everywhere I look IBM bluemix talks only about memory , you are charged by memory etc..., but it never says what kind of cpu (or vCpu) you are getting.
Does anyone know how fast are bluemix instances (I.E. the cpu's frequency), are there any guarantees about performance?
It's mind boggling to me that a vendor offering cloud computing services doesn't clearly mark what cpu you'll get. <comment><USER2> IBM Bluemix public PaaS is just a customized CloudFoundry which runs on IBM SoftLayer IaaS. One can also run Bluemix on his own servers, but I guess it's expensive.

You can check available instance types on SoftLayer website.

Even better solution: try to run something like `cat /proc/cpuinfo` in your code.

</comment><comment><USER3> That's how PaaS works. AFAIK Heroku and App Engine also don't specify much if anything about CPU.

Bluemix IaaS specifies what CPU you get similar to EC2.</comment>


Netflix Is Down - <AUTHOR> https://www.netflix.com/browse <comment><USER2> And then the murders began...</comment>


Ask HN: How can I improve my knowledge in Security - <AUTHOR>

Hi,
    I would like to defer to hacker news enthusiasts for some advice.  I have a fair introduction to the area of network/web security.  I have also been following hacker news and google alerts on security and hacking. I'm going to take the security class offered by stanford online.  Meanwhile I would like to make my learning more structured and deepen my knowledge further.I would like to know what are the best ways to achieve that.<p>1. What are the best texts to build sound knowledge from the ground up? 2. Who are the eminent people in this area? What are good blogs to follow? 3. What activities can I undertake to practise my skills and test my proficiency? 4. What are the magazines, conferences or other resources to keep abreast of the most recent developments? 5. Is there any active community that I can join? <comment><USER2> This class might be of interest to you <http://www.security-class.org/>

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you restofus, But as I had mentioned in the question above, I am already aware of the course and I'm going to take it. I'm just looking for more resources meanwhile to work on.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Rebuffed in promotion.. now what? - <AUTHOR>

Hi HN,
Entry-level engineer who's been here for 1.5 years + .5year as an intern. Here's the situation:

  * Old boss promised promotion at end of quarter.
  * Old boss leaves company at beginning of quarter.
  * New boss comes in at beginning of quarter.
  * I achieve top marks during the quarter the new boss is here.
 I get along with the new boss a lot better than my old boss. But when I raised my interest in moving up a level, he said he's not convinced that I deserve a promotion despite my years and great performance while he was here.
It's personally frustrating for me because many of my peers have already been promoted and I'm still entry-level. I know he's new and all, but I'm a bit annoyed at having to rebuild the respect my old boss had for my work ethic.
What should I do? It'll be another half year before promotions are considered again. I enjoy the work but I feel that I'm doing much more than what I'm getting paid/recognized for.
I could try talking to him again, but what would I say? Is it time for me to move on?
Thanks. <comment><USER2> If you are in the US, I would consider moving on to a small company or start- up where you can simultaneously have more impact and learn more. _Security is not where you work, it 's what you know._

</comment><comment><USER3> Look for another job. I've stayed at jobs way too long in your position and most likely, you won't get that promotion.

You can also ask for more money at your potential new job.

<comment><AUTHOR> >You can also ask for more money at your potential new job.

That's a good point. I really hate the idea of switching, but sounds like I don't have an alternative if I keep getting dealt a bad hand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Is your goal stability or climbing the ladder?

<comment><AUTHOR> Stability.. but are the two mutually exclusive?</comment></comment>


AWS announces web page redirects for Amazon S3 hosted websites - <AUTHOR> http://aws.amazon.com/about-aws/whats-new/2012/10/04/web-page-redirects-on-amazon-s3-hosted-websites/?ref_=pe_8050_26388930

<comment><AUTHOR> I thought this would be popular considering a large number of Hacker News readers use S3 for static hosting, especially given the rise in popularity of static site generators like Jekyll.

Lack of proper redirects has been a recurring issue, especially as if you do a HTML redirect (http-equiv="refresh") incorrectly it can negatively impact your search engine rankings. Github hosting still doesn't allow 301 redirects.</comment>


Ask HN: How do read it later sites make money? - <AUTHOR>

This came up in another post and I wanted to know how sites like pocket, read it later, readability and others make money?  Instapaper is the only service with a semiclear business model, they sell subscriptions and apps.  The others don't sell apps, their apps are free.  They don't sell a service their service is free.  This leads me to believe they are selling the users. <comment><USER2> I also was wondering this exact thing recently. Hopeful someone can provide some insight!</comment>


Radio FM broadcasting - <AUTHOR> I am looking at setting up FM radio broadcasting for educational programs . However, I have little knowledge of the right technology and cost. I have reached out to manufacturers and vendors but I can't make out much from their array of technologies: Digital and Analogue. I would like to know the best technology combination and the one that is reliable and pretty affordable. <comment><USER2> contact me

<comment><AUTHOR> Please pointer to your email...

<comment><USER2> email@example.com. are you online?</comment></comment></comment>


Hilariously bad startup ideas - <AUTHOR> http://www.shoestring.com.au/2013/08/5-hilariously-bad-startup-ideas/

<comment><USER2> People with OCD are not the same as germaphobes. They may overlap, but it's not the same group.</comment>


What I Learned from Wasabi Ventures Academy: Seven Easy Lessons (#1) - <AUTHOR> http://thedavidrees.blogspot.com/2015/07/what-i-learned-from-wasabi-ventures-academy.html

<comment><USER2> The Wasabi Ventures Academy is an incredible opportunity. You learn in depth basics on how startups operate and go from just an idea into a fast growing startup.

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Like the tone, the dynamic of your writing. Looking forward to your next insight. I am just starting at WV, not sure where this is going but always curious and eager to try new venture :)

</comment><comment><USER4> David, thanks for sharing your thoughts about your experience with WVA and the first two of your "Seven Easy Lessons". Looking forward to reading the others. I just started with a cohort in PHX this week...Pumped!

</comment><comment><USER5> Love the Article! Excited for Lesson #2!

</comment><comment><USER6> Just started with the one in FLG, AZ. Stoked.</comment>