The Reinvention of Black (2015) - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/63/horizons/the-reinvention-of-black-rp <comment><USER2> Saying black is the "absence of color" only makes sense when we talk about additive color. For subtractive color, black is a color like any other, just like white is.

The entire area of dyes and pigments is intensely fascinating. I went down this rabbit hole while trying to get a set of paints for a toddler that mimicked process color primaries rather than the traditional but inaccurate red/yellow/blue primaries.

Additive color is in a sense a solved problem -- we can create monochromatic light (or at least very narrowly band-limited light) in all possible wavelengths, and all human perception of color is based on a fixed set of wavelengths. It is possible to produce lights that will mimic any color that humans can perceive.

Subtractive colors, on the other hand, are dependent on finding physical substances with emission spectra that roughly map to the gamut of human perception. There are no magic substances that produce a monochromatic reflective baseline, instead, we are dependent on finding substances that have emission spectra that are simply close enough to the complements of the human visual primaries.

That's a hard enough problem, much less dealing with the fact that actually applying dye or pigment to another physical substance involves chemical reactions that may affect the color of the pigment, as may exposure to ultraviolet or visible light, or changes in temperature. At one point I had a Canon inkjet printer and I switched to using off-brand ink, because it was so much cheaper, and looking at the photos now (~5 years later) the difference is stark -- the cyans of the knockoff ink have almost completely vanished, even from photos that were not exposed to sunlight or significant direct light, while the original Canon ink is still true to the original photos.

<comment><USER3> Color are _colors_ only because _visible_ light reaches your sensor (eye, camera) and it's interpreted as one color or another. And this should already hint at where I'm going.

So whether you have a laser emitting a specific visible wavelength, or a sheet of paper absorbing some, in the end visible light will reach you and you can say "hey look, it's red". Different visible wavelength reaches your retina, different color.

Now imagine you had true black light source (paradoxically) "emitting" no visible wavelength. Or you had a sheet of paper covered with true black ink, absorbing all visible wavelengths. What kind of visible photons would you register? What wavelength of visible light would reach you?

Since no photons get to your sensor how exactly do you define that color other than "absence of color"? Or are you you talking about a convention that "the absence of color" would in itself be called a color, in this case _black_?

<comment><USER2> > Color are colors only because visible light reaches your sensor

You're playing a semantic game. In short, I dispute this definition. This is a reasonable definition of additive-based color mechanics. It is otherwise an arbitrary definition of the word "color" that does not match common usage of the term.

To expand the term, "color" is often used to mean the perceived spectral emissions from a surface under white-ish illumination.

If a wall is "red", and you turn off the lights, is it still red? By your definition, no, which means the tautology you extend is meaningless to me, as my definition of color would trivially admit that the wall remains red.

<comment><USER3> The question is not "what color is the wall?" but "what color are you seeing?". So what color are you seeing when looking at the red wall in perfect darkness? Better yet, are you seeing anything at all? Are you claiming that anything you can't see, on the other side of the wall, is also _black_ because you can't perceive any spectral emissions from their surface?

Earlier you said the wall should be black because black is a color and that's what you'd be seeing. But now you say the actual color is red but only using prior knowledge. And if the wall actually changed colors (I quickly painted it blue just to prove you wrong) what color would you say it is? Black? Red? Blue? So your example is purely philosophical and doesn't support your claim one bit.

Is the absence of _light_ a type of light? Can we call the absence of any photon a "close04-ray" in honor of it's distinguished inventor, me?

A room doesn't contain void, it simply lacks everything else. Water is odor- _less_ and taste- _less_. Silence isn't a type of sound, it's the lack of sound. And a completely empty fridge doesn't contain food. Your definition of a color while correct sabotages your conclusion that "detecting no spectral emissions" should be called _the color black_.

And please stop using additive/subtractive as if this should change how colors are perceived. It changes how they are _produced_ but your eye will still detect light at a specific wavelength that you'll call a color.

Colloquially people will still call it _the color black_. But it's just a convention also meant to support the fact that we call a wide range of greys and dark colors as "black". It's for ease of speech and description, not for accuracy. In reality true black is simply the absence of any perceived light.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I can't find the previous HN discussion, but there was a bit of a rivalry between Stuart Semple and Anish Kapoor over who could create the blackest black paint:

[https://creators.vice.com/en_us/article/ezw8wp/mattest- flatt...](https://creators.vice.com/en_us/article/ezw8wp/mattest-flattest- black-acrylic-paint-anish-kapoor)

</comment><comment><USER5> Is Nautilus doing ok, since the problem a few months ago about paying writers? I've noticed lately that a lot of front-page articles are pulled from older issues, and they publish fewer articles every week. Also, I still haven't received any print issues in the mail this year. Maybe they are transitioning to a digital-only publication?

<comment><USER6> You haven't received a print issue this year? That makes me think my story may not be unique.

I ordered a subscription to the physical magazine on May 1st of this year. Liz (managing editor) responded to my two inquiries about shipping. Each time she stated shipping was 2-3 weeks away. Both of those time frames were missed. Liz stated there were issues with the production of one issue (specifically #24).

Nearly four months after ordering, I am still product-less. I asked for a refund earlier this week, and I haven't gotten a response--I have escalated the issue to PayPal at this point. The order is marked as refunded on naultil.us's store page, but I haven't seem any action on the PayPal end.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Reminded me of this recent news article:

[https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/aug/21/holed-u...](https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/aug/21/holed- up-man-falls-into-art-installation-of-8ft-hole-painted-black)

</comment><comment><USER8> It's fascinating how technology, moods, fashion and status have sort-of followed each other.

I know Beau Brummell introduced the austere, well-coiffed style that sort of evolved to the modern suit[1] (likely helped by the dyes mentioned in the article). The Modern suit was also helped along by being a product of mass productions, as John Berger outlines[2].

The standard color of the suit had shifted from black to dark blue by the 1970s when I was growing up, John T. Malloy described the dark blue suit as a non-negotiable element of proper business attire.

And the rise of effective dyes in the 1960s meant that happy, colorful looks were universal as the casual look.

I think all this went into the late 70s/early-80s tendency of punks to wear black, which would now imply rebellion though that didn't prevent fusion of high fashion and rebellion later.

And that's a small fragment of all the ways these things have gone.

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

[2] [https://kwilliamscontemporarythemes.wordpress.com/2013/11/16...](https://kwilliamscontemporarythemes.wordpress.com/2013/11/16/the- suit-and-the-photograph-john-berger/)

[3] [https://www.nbizmag.com/magarticles/dressforsuccess2015.pdf](https://www.nbizmag.com/magarticles/dressforsuccess2015.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER9> Interesting they did not mention Vantablack even once. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vantablack](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vantablack)

</comment><comment><USER10> I have found it interesting that I cannot mix paints (subtractive color) to get black. It always seems to be brown. Is it possible to find a combination of paints that blocks all light? BTW, this is not considering the possible "combination" of just one color black.

</comment><comment><USER11> Good article but you can't really discuss the cultural impact of black without mentioning the goths.</comment>


Show HN: Notable – The markdown-based note-taking app that doesn't suck - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/fabiospampinato/notable#readme <comment><USER2> Nice work, would be awesome if it has google drive / dropbox syncing</comment>


Ask HN: How to sleep less and yet stay fresh?  - <AUTHOR>

I can Google it, but I want your experience if any! <comment><USER2> There is no replacement - only temporary highs. You can get away with caffeine, drugs, etc in the short term but in the long term there will be some form of a consequence.

My advice would be to practice better time management rather than less sleep.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ok! Anyway i'm off caffeine for a quite some time now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> If you can optimize breakfast, you can get away with 4-5 hours of sleep but not for long. I've noticed that if I do that, the body will catch up with sleep the next day, like make you drowsy earlier. As far as breakfast, nothing beats a protein rich meal like eggs. Been doing it myself for over 2 decades :)

<comment><USER4> You've been eating eggs every morning for the past 2 decades?? I really wish I could do that - if I eat the same thing at the same time for more than a week, I get sick of it and couldn't even force myself to eat it. What's your secret? Breakfast is a very complicated affair for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> There are a bunch on interesting comments in this quora thread: "How do I get more out of less sleep?" [http://www.quora.com/Sleep/How-do-I-get-more-out-of- less-sle...](http://www.quora.com/Sleep/How-do-I-get-more-out-of-less-sleep)

</comment><comment><USER6> Both of us, ( two developer team) we sleep very late after work yet the only thing that keeps us fresh is the exciting work the next day, saying that a wonderful coffee keeps us awake and a little nap also helps to keep fresh.

</comment><comment><USER7> "Early to sleep and Early to rise" is bottom line I try to follow. :)

</comment><comment><USER8> You can experiment with Polyphasic sleep. The extreme one will let you get away with 2hr sleep per day. But you need extreme discipline.

</comment><comment><USER9> Caffeine? Illicit drugs, maybe? The whole being tired is your body telling you to lighten up and catch up on sleep.

</comment><comment><USER10> Deeper sleep, better quality sleep maybe?

</comment><comment><USER11> As others have suggested, you should definitely try Amphetamine. If you have trouble getting to sleep, just take sleeping pills. You'll be fine.

<comment><AUTHOR> Amphetamine, α-methylphenethylamine, or amfetamine is a psychostimulant drug of the phenethylamine class that produces increased wakefulness and focus in association with decreased fatigue and appetite!

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Down a cup of coffee right before going to sleep. I usually get up in 45 minutes feeling alert and ready for the next day

</comment><comment><USER13> Lazy way: drugs and caffeine. Hard way: intense execercise, paleo diet, no sugar - balances insulin and hormomal levels to keep mental acuity sharp but you will still need at least 6-8 hours sleep to maintain a sharp mind during work hours.

<comment><AUTHOR> paleo diet oh yeah! here I come :D</comment></comment>


Oxford Professor argues invisible aliens are interbreeding with humans - <AUTHOR> https://www.oxfordstudent.com/2019/04/26/oxford-professors-theory-on-climate-change-and-alien-abduction/ <comment><USER2> They really should put "Oxford language professor argues... " in the title.

I'm okay with overly bold theories so long they have some merits, which I mean have some supporting evidence... this has nothing, which makes the quality of this theory right there with unpublished science fiction ideas.

It feels like to me he's ready to publish more books on the topic.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's easy to ridicule this, but I wish we would be more open towards "crazy" ideas in general. I believe that every person has something to teach me and contribute to the world, and if I have any strong preconceptions in my interaction with them that severely limits my power to benefit.

<comment><USER4> On the flip side, being open towards "crazy" ideas opens you to DDoS attacks from legitimate lunatics, in the form of you having to spend mental energy analyzing and responding to them.

<comment><USER5> but appeal to popularity/authority is not the proper way to validate a hypothesis no matter what

<comment><USER6> What does "proper" mean? Because it's certainly the only _practical_ way to validate most hypotheses. Sure, I could spend a couple of decades independently evaluating the effectiveness and safety of the flu vaccine, but in the meantime I'm going to have to decide whether to wear my seat belt and whether these apples I bought are safe to eat and how often to water my plants and so many more things. Appeal to authority is necessarily the way most people validate most hypotheses they depend on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Sounds like he watched the movie They Live too many times:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJC4R1uXDaE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJC4R1uXDaE)

</comment><comment><USER8> My partner's director of studies at Cambridge believed in ghosts and once played a tape recording purporting to contain a recording of one (random static) in a supervision.

It's fairly surprising how often you'll encounter fringe views in academic circles, but I think when it's not something directly to do with the things you're teaching it's generally just thought of as a harmless idiosyncrasy.

<comment><USER9> _It 's fairly surprising how often you'll encounter fringe views in academic circles_

It's not just academia, either. I've known a few somewhat prominent people who believed in some off-the-wall things.

When I worked in television, I knew a top-ten market anchor who didn't believe in dinosaurs. Not in the way a creationist doesn't, because she wasn't religious. She simply didn't believe they ever existed.

At a top-five market station there was an anchor who believed drinking his own urine made him healthier. He was a medic during the Vietnam war and said he started doing it then.

The same station had a manager in the newsroom who believed that Jesus, the Bible, and everything associated with it was a fabrication because there is no recorded history before the invention of the printing press in the 1400's. If you ask him about Egyptian hieroglyphics, or the Rosetta Stone, or the Dead Sea Scrolls, he insists that they're all made up.

At another top-ten market station my boss (a high-level manager) believed that those yellow sodium lamps are used along freeways because it helps police see black people better in the dark. She learned it from her boss (an even higher- level manager) who believed the reason that highways are built in elevated circles around cities is so that if the city needs to be evacuated, the police can stand along the highway and shoot black people as they're trying to flee.

When I think about these things I wonder if certain professions attract whackjobs.

Then I wonder if I have any deeply-held beliefs that I don't realize qualify me for a rubber room.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Looks like he teaches language courses: [https://www.orinst.ox.ac.uk/people/young-hae- chi](https://www.orinst.ox.ac.uk/people/young-hae-chi)

<comment><USER11> Seems like this alien theory is not related to his official research work.

In that case, it seems like a private project. Crazy ideas or not, I'd be happy if that guy doesn't get sanctioned harshly for this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I think it's good that out-there ideas can be debated within a University and that there is an opportunity for well educated people to debate the subject. The opposite of this is that he is relegated to the dark corners of the web and these ideas go unchallenged, or challenged only by trolls who only further strengthen his beliefs. I would much rather an open, public debate where the foundations of his beliefs are shaken and it can be seen by all the flaws in his ideas.

> In April 2018, Dr Chi approached The Oxford Union to propose a > debate on > the subject. The proposal was not accepted.

There is a concerning growth of subjects that can no longer be discussed or debated within Western campuses.

<comment><USER4> >There is a concerning growth of subjects that can no longer be discussed or debated within Western campuses.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say refusing to hold debates on subjects similar to this isn't a recent trend. There's definitely a growing trend of refusing to debate certain subjects (of the right wing politics variety), but this isn't yet.

<comment><USER12> > I'm going to go out on a limb and say refusing to hold

> debates on subjects similar to this isn't a recent trend.

It happens more than you think, you just don't hear about it. I don't think it's a particularly recent trend for conspiracy theories though, as you say.

> There's definitely a growing trend of refusing to debate

> certain subjects (of the right wing politics variety), but

> this isn't yet.

I understand what you're saying and agree, but I wouldn't attribute all of these topics to right-wing politics. There's also some weird acceptance that labeling something "right-wing" means it's okay to ignore or berate, which means there are topics that simply cannot be discussed despite a discussion being needed.

My point was that the number of subjects that can be debated appears to be on a decline in general, although as you say many of them are politically charged. I think it's really quite sad when Universities can no longer be places where ideas dual it out and get tested.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> If the aliens are invisible, how does he know what they look like?

("small; tall and bold; aliens with scales and snake eyes; and finally, insect-like aliens.")

</comment><comment><USER14> No doubt this language instructor will soon be providing us with the extraordinary evidence needed to establish his extraordinary claim.

</comment><comment><USER15> The human-alien hybrid thing is straight out of The X-Files. If he is correct, life imitates art.

NB: I do not find his conjecture remotely convincing.

</comment><comment><USER16> He's right -- they're called ideas.

</comment><comment><USER17> As Aristotle said, "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

</comment><comment><USER18> And tenure shall set you free!

<comment><USER19> He is an instructor, that's a non-academic position and does not have tenure. _Not_ having tenure may set him free from Oxford.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Where can I find an alien female to breed with her?

</comment><comment><USER21> Occam's Razor dictates that the correlation is due to increased climate change stresses & temperature swings impacting human mood disorders (the same way it correlates with increased violence)

<comment><USER21> Could someone explain the down-votes? My hypothesis isn't great but surely it's better than aliens interbreeding with humans etc etc?

<comment><USER22> Because you quote occam's razor then give no simple direct mechanism of action. There is a big gap in how a few degrees average heat increase causes mood disorders. It's more likely, for example, the result of the ten's of thousands of unregulated synthetic chemicals produced, some of which are hormone analogues like PHB and which make their way into the water sources. Then since they're not regulated no one filters them out or monitors their levels regularly.

<comment><USER21> Because it's not about averages. It's about wider ranges.

Fair point on chemical pollutants.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Jeff Bezos - Regret Minimization Framework - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwG_qR6XmDQ

<comment><USER2> For the YouTube deprived, here's a text based interview talking about this concept...

<http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/bez0int-3>

<comment><USER3> Also for the YouTube deprived, but not the headphone deprived, I've uploaded the audio to my site so you can listen to it, at least.

<http://tuneto.us/track/play/15>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I like this a lot.

The other part of being 80 is forgiving yourself for the mistakes you did make :)

<comment><USER5> or ... forgetting ... ;)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Reminds me of the "Death" portion of Steve Jobs Commencement speech. It seems that when presented with the end, our decisions become much clearer.

</comment><comment><USER7> Anyone else having trouble viewing this using YouTube's HTML5 viewer?

<comment><USER7> Work's now.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: What did you do differently to ensure completion of your side projects? - <AUTHOR> I often start side projects to explore new ideas or learn a new technology, but have a bad habit of leaving them half-finished.<p>If you were like me at some point, what work habits or best practices did you develop that enabled & encouraged you to start seeing your projects through to the end? <comment><USER2> 1\. Make _releasing_ your stuff the _primary_ goal, because anything you don't actually put into the world is just personal research.

And then update the project and release a new version!

Your product-making skill level is the number of product releases you've created. If you want to get better, you have to do more releases! Unreleased projects do not count because there are no other users!

Releasing is like exercising a muscle, so the more you do it the stronger you get. Jony Ive would be like a 350 lbs bodybuilder of product development.

2\. Constantly be creating new projects. Do not settle on one and spend years perfecting it, unless lots of people are really excited about it and you are too (see: Linux).

Don't get your ego or excitement wrapped up in one project. Tell yourself that this is just one of many projects and that you're going to keep doing new ones even if this one is successful.

Keep creating new things at a rapid pace. Don't get bogged down unless by very deliberate choice.

3\. Be ambitious. Go ahead and create a Google competitor in 1000 LOC, or whatever. It's amazing how few people even attempt to do anything big just because they assume that's someone else's job.

Go bonkers. Tilt at windmills.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think the trick is to release them as soon as they are almost done, think 95% because for me the last 5% was always the hardest and that's what caused the longest delays.. Trying to sort out all the bugs and making it perfect.

Once some money or feedback starts rolling in it makes it incredibly motivating (or sometimes demotivating but that's good too) to keep working on it.

</comment><comment><USER4> I tell all my friends about it.

I owe them to finish my projects, they know that if I promise something I deliver.

This helps, I'm working since oct 2016 on a project, I don't like it anymore since march 2017, the honeymoon is over, the tech stack is boring and the project makes me upset every time I have to write code.

I'm still coding every day, it should be done next month.

<comment><USER5> I'm doing this too, after a long time trying to do the opposite because it was frustrating to have to explain why I didn't finished something. It's better to have social pressure than not, actually.

<comment><USER4> Totally, especially when we care about those people and when we value their opinions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I agree with staunch. It's important you know whether you're doing it for the end result or to learn a new stack. If it is the end result train yourself to not care about the details. Keep the tech minimal and all the design choices should be centered around one question - "Will this help me ship?"

I had the same issue of getting bogged down by technical details, so when I was developing my side product ([https://discoverdev.io](https://discoverdev.io)) I ensured everything I do will be geared towards shipping it!

I hadn't developed a frontend app before so I kept it simple, just HTML and CSS - no JS, no framework.

</comment><comment><USER7> Start by building small, interesting, independent parts first. You'll gain momentum and then be able to stitch them together/do the boring things, like authentication, home page, etc.

For my notes app (Notational [https://github.com/tmm/notational](https://github.com/tmm/notational)), I first built the editor, then incremental search, then authentication. Finally I went back and did note sharing, dark theme, and the home page.</comment>


Learning to Drive by Differentiating Through Scenes - avik-pal Differentiable Programming has been shown to perform quite well in simple control problem tasks like cartpole, inverted pendulum, etc. Moreover, it has been used in some more challenging areas where the controller is an ODE solver like in case of Trebuchet. All these examples portray the advantages of using a smaller model in DP as compared to the heavily parameterized models in Reinforcement Learning (RL). This work is in a way a step in the same direction. Only now we combine all those things together and make the "differentiable" program even more complicated than a few ODE equations. <comment> avik-pal Link to blog post - [https://avik- pal.github.io/blog/learning_to_drive.html](https://avik- pal.github.io/blog/learning_to_drive.html)</comment>


JavaScript the new good parts – Douglas Crockford - phatak-dev http://phatak-dev.github.io/techtalks/javascript-the-new-good-parts/

<comment><AUTHOR> Can someone explain how TCO is a feature of a language? Does it change the syntax or grammar in any way? Isn't it an implementation detail that is invisible to the programmer? What would stop an existing javascript engine from rewriting eligible functions as constant-space, non-recursive equivalents?

<comment><USER2> Most of the concern is whether the spec says compilers/interpreters _must_ perform TCO. If they don't, users can't write that kind of code, because otherwise, on some users' machines, it will bork the whole site.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Advice on building a community from scratch? - <AUTHOR> I've recently launched a website/forum/community to help others use up their soon to be wasted food.
The idea is to help people by providing them with ideas and recipes. These ideas are provided by a community.
I believe it is a skill to look at ingredients and have a basic understanding of what to cook. That skill like any can be acquired by chipping away day-to-day.
I'm wondering if anyone here has any experience in building a similar type community and has any lessons to share or points of failure to watch out for.
Or if you have any other input?
For reference: gidfid.com - is the site. <comment><USER2> I run HelloBox - [http://www.hellobox.co](http://www.hellobox.co) \- a tool to create and manage online communities.

One of the main things that we encourage community owners to do is to let their community grow organically. This means, implementing features where sharing is easy, inviting other members are easy, email notifications etc. It's been really helpful to watch the communities grow this way. Hope that helps.

</comment><comment><USER3> I built a classified ad site once. I pre-seeded it with some of my own classifieds and then advertised it on google. I got people to fill out classifieds but it just wasn't enough to get a marketplace off the ground.

<comment><AUTHOR> I remember somewhere reading that the founders of Reddit did the same. Did you use adwords?

<comment><USER3> yes. was paying about 10 cents a click back then.</comment></comment></comment>


I accepted a 6 figure salary at 23 and quit 6 months later. Here's why - <AUTHOR> https://www.rianasingh.com/boss/2019/10/6/myuberstory <comment><USER2> >I started not to take myself seriously after a few encounters of getting manterrupted, mansplained, hepeated, and other things that slowly led to that internal feeling of defeat.

I wish people would leave these terms out. It takes me from an emphatic reader to a reader who is suspicious about a hidden agenda. "I was interrupted and patronized" suffices.

<comment><USER3> While I understand being annoyed at these neologisms, they do add information: the writer didn't just didn't just feel interrupted and patronized, she felt interrupted and patronized in ways that fit into specific patterns of gendered behavior.

That is highly salient to her experience.

<comment><USER4> To be fair, the way that people in technical roles explain things to those with less technical knowledge can often feel condescending and 'mansplained' regardless of the gender roles in conversation. I ( male ) felt this in my first job out of college from everyone that was senior to me on the engineering team. When I was there, I worked with a girl that was both younger than I and more senior in many areas technically. She, albeit I think unintentionally, would effectively mansplain issues to me.

Point being, in technical roles and roles where you interact with technical people, you will undoubtedly have moments where you feel like information is being disseminated in a condescending fashion. Context is key here as it would be unfair to conflate the general 'prickliness' of many engineers with misogyny.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have trouble understanding what that was really about. It seemed like she just didn't like the job because she didn't have a clear idea of what she was supposed to do and didn't feel important enough.

This part stood out to me a bit

>due to the fact that I had less technical experience, it was hard for me to garner the confidence to ask questions.

When I feel like I don't know what I'm doing, that's when I ask the most questions and I sit there and let whoever I'm asking mansplain the hell out of it to me.

From what I could tell, she didn't like the lack of direction from her managers, but also didn't like having things explained to her. She wanted constant feedback about what she was supposed to be doing, yet wouldn't ask questions and didn't like to have things explained to her. How do you accommodate someone like that? It's too bad her job didn't work out, but it sounds more like, she didn't like her job and the way the company was run.

</comment><comment><USER6> Uh, so what, this is tech.

I started making 6 figures a few weeks after my 18th birthday, over 20 years ago. I've worked with hundreds, if not thousands of people in their teens, or under 23, who made 6 figures. That's the industry, it's not even worth mentioning.

These posts are always just lame humble brags with a contrite anecdote or two and a weak inspirational ending. _yawn_.

<comment><USER7> Right now, yes, and in the dot com bubble, yes, but from 2002 until probably 2010, six-figure entry-level salaries weren't so common.

But I agree that for the last ~7 years, making six figures in tech hasn't been anything notable.

<comment><USER6> Looking at my records, around February 1994 was when I hit $100k, and I'm really a medicore engineer.

This formulaic post is just sad. It's almost as bad as reading Oleg's posts on LinkedIN. I hired a FELON!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Asks for advice from a "leader" (recommended by another trusted individual) -- then gets very upset when leader gives the advice requested.

This is very confusing to me. Why ask in the first place?

</comment><comment><USER9> Well, I can tell this was written by a young person and someone in California. Nothing wrong with that, it's just that she has a lot of expectations that are going to be really hard for any company to meet.

It's awesome if you happen to get hired by a great company that walks the walk, but for the most part the things students/graduates get sold on as "normal" for white collar employment don't happen, or only happen in certain circumstances in a limited way. Examples:

>Flag 1: I did not have a thorough understanding of the role, and I don't think management did either.

Not even unusual. Sometimes all a company knows (especially a small company) is that they need something done and need a person to do it. These are actually great opportunities if you know the work... it's a chance to write your own ticket. If you expect everything to be laid out for you when you're hired, you're not going to grow much or get paid the way you want.

>Flag 4: Push your manager to provide a clear description and/or breakdown of your role. You should know what you own, what your day to day or week to week looks like, and how with your position you will add value to the team that ideally aligns with a larger team goal or mission.

Wow. I think in my whole career I've had only 1-2 managers who could tell you in full how my role "aligns with a larger team goal or mission". Most of the time it's just "Our business runs on computers, and you know how they work". It's great if you have a visionary boss, but most people don't. If when you're hired your manager can tell you exactly what you're going to be doing and what success looks like, you've gotten an easy job... that again won't pay as much as you want nor help you to grow.

Uncertainty is normal.

>Flag 5: I didn't have an ally or sponsor in the workplace. This stemmed from me not feeling like there was someone that I could reach out to, and not feeling comfortable in the work environment.

Most workplaces you don't have someone to hold your hand except maybe your boss or (if you're an intern or trainee) your mentor. That's not a _normal_ thing to have, your employer is running a business, not an adult daycare. If you want support, join a women in business org or a fraternal organization.

>Flag 6:A good manager will work with you to identify your strengths, and provide you work opportunities to learn the skills that will allow you to advance in your career, and help you take it in the direction you want.

...and the other 90% of managers are doing well if they get all the work done on time and under budget and don't accidentally murder or grope their employees.

I'm sure the business environment is different in Cali, especially in the valley, but the author's expectations are rather high here.

</comment><comment><USER10> There is something beautiful in this story. Please read it.

</comment><comment><USER11> Always cool to hear these stories! Thanks for sharing :D</comment>


I have part time tech sweat equity to give. - <AUTHOR>

I have about 20hr a week that I'm willing to commit to a project. I'm a Full Stack Developer but no design experience. What do you think I should do with it?<p>Keep in mind, I'm terrible at coming up with business ideas and even worse at marketing. Yet, somehow, I still have the nagging desire to do a startup. <comment><USER2> Here's an idea/business you are more than welcome to steal/build/collaborate if you want.

MarketingBar Similar to <http://www.hellobar.com> create a service where you can install a bar on the to of your site (javascript) and allow targeting the bar with 3 types of messaging (link, question, offer).

1\. Simple Link - e.g. Follow us on Twitter @username 2\. Ask a question with Call to action, e.g. We love talking to people on social media: What's your @username? [input box] or even a Yes/No e.g. Are you in the market for some new pants (yes [radiobutton] / no [radio button] 3\. Offer call to action - Take 10% off your order today with coupon code: 10off

Allow for a CMS like system for targeting each message based on URL and/or referal (.e.g if the refereal is twitter, show message about following or capturing their twitter username).

Bonus - integrate <https://github.com/codejoust/session.js> so now you can track each visitor and their entire path showing what message was shown and what pages they visited.

For ideas take a look at <http://www.getbackstory.com> <https://mixpanel.com/activity-feed/> and <http://www.springmetrics.com/>

Hope that helps or gets the ball rolling on some ideas :) Feel free to hit me up if you want to talk more.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hello, how can I contact you?

<comment><AUTHOR> firstname.lastname@example.com</comment></comment>


Format shifting (e.g. ripping CDs) 'to be legalised' in UK - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14372698

<comment><AUTHOR> That's weird, the BBC seem to have changed the link to another article. This URL now goes to "Government drops website blocking". The original one (<http://i.imgur.com/O7wiH.png>) seems to be missing.

<comment><USER2> I read the "ripping" article this morning. Strange to see it disappear. I wonder why that happened.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> Bad title: Content ripping is format shifting, not just burning mp3s to cds. Also cds to mp3, dvd to mkv, etc. etc.</comment>


ThoughtWorks has been sold to private equity - <AUTHOR> https://martinfowler.com/articles/201708-tw-sale.html Several employees vouching the info of the record, no public links available yet. <comment><USER2> Thoughtworks is unlike other IT services company I've seen. Their adoption of latest programming paradigms and open source software is not generally seen else where, because most clients like to stick with "What has been working for everyone".

Also it's one of the few service oriented companies which actively focus on developer relations. They have several developer/techie oriented programs in every city they have a base.

e.g In my small city, Coimbatore; which even several Indians doesn't know it exists has small Thoughtworks base which conduct monthly open event called 'Geek Night' focussing on geek stuff.

Here, the developer speaks about Clojure functional programming on how they adapted it for their web application & the dwarf who follows that talk with android customisation is actually me :D - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-VUlDgJ6aA#t=02h05m08s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-VUlDgJ6aA#t=02h05m08s)

<comment><USER3> This is true. There was a similar momentum around Scala. It's a tech first company

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> At least back in the early 2000s when I worked there, the expectation set by Roy was that once the legal issues versus Schroder, et al [1] were settled, that Thoughtworks would someday become a public trust. It would be very surprising to learn that the company was now being sold for the profit of an individual.

[1] [http://caselaw.findlaw.com/de-court-of- chancery/1138774.html](http://caselaw.findlaw.com/de-court-of- chancery/1138774.html)

<comment><USER4> My sources say the number was 600 million.

<comment><USER5> That's true

<comment> ayr-ton How could you confirm this?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Consulting firms are a strange thing... they build up a reputation for being all about being the veryh best etc etc but in the end the work tends to be just ordinary development work that you get sent in to do at some big company or government department.

I guess it appeals to some but wouldn't be my choice of place to work.

<comment><USER7> That's true. But many companies buy their services anyway. And that's often because they did not made the transition to software-driven companies (the "internal IT as a cost center" problem) and have trouble or don't even want to hire people.

Having worked in the industry for years, I saw so many disfunctional companies that I felt lucky to just be "the consultant".

<comment><USER8> ...or because they don't trust their own developers/architects. It's unbelievable that if a paid consultant tells you something, you tend to believe him more than your own developer[s].

<comment><USER9> Then you haven't seen the general incompetence. It still surprises me how most IT departments are run, and especially by whom.

<comment><USER10> _Then you haven 't seen the general incompetence._

Do you think consulting companies are any better? You should ask the NHS.

<comment><USER11> Don't confuse outsourcing under the guise of consulting, with _real_ consulting.

<comment><USER9> I think the distinction has merit. There are low-quality shops, which basically rent warm bodies, and then there are consultancies that actively shape future, with the client.

ThoughtWorks qualifies for the latter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> You know as a programmer myself for the last 15 years I can see how the market has changed and everything is becoming part of the global economy which means the rates are a lot lower which means Ukraine and India are playing a bigger and bigger role I could see private Equity trying to lower costs by outsourcing.

I think there's a fundamental flaw in the idea that you can just pay for cheaper labor- as Steve Jobs has said before the difference in a good programmer and an outstanding programmer can be 50 to 1 or 100 to 1 you can't capture that by trying to cut your cost from $100 an hour to $20 an hour.

Software inherently is one of the most scalable business models in the world the cost of manufacturing is almost zero all of the cost is in the design they should be able to make money. The mindset of being a consulting firm has to be changed.

<comment><USER13> Thoughtworks isn't cheap though. They sell the idea that outsourcing your work to them is outsourcing to an elite team. They do have teams in Brazil, China, etc, that are cheaper than their US based devs. But, those teams have rates much higher to end clients than a typical outsourcing shop.

That's what has me curious here. A PE firm usually buys when they think they see cost cutting opportunity. That may be hard to do with TW, since they pitch and price themselves as "premium".

<comment><USER14>
        A PE firm usually buys when they think they see cost cutting opportunity.

The PE firm buys things in which it sees opportunity. Often-times, the opportunity is to cut: the management team's adventurist streak in markets; weak products; bloated staff.

Other times, they might recognize that a company needs capital to get bigger faster in order to address an expanding market. In this case, I think the thesis might be: cloud deployments and migrations are exploding; ThoughtWorks has the thought leaders; "roll up" other consulting firms into ThoughtWorks; dominate the market. A friend's consulting firm was just bought for this exact reason. Something very similar happened to Pivotal.

<comment><USER15> This. I work with PE firms every day and this is essentially how they operate.

Consulting has notoriously low multiples and so if you couple a consulting business with a "computing/services" business you increase the multiple over night.

I expect this page to expand drastically over the years:

[https://www.thoughtworks.com/products](https://www.thoughtworks.com/products)

<comment><USER14> That's exactly what happened to Pivotal. Boutique consulting shop turned into a consulting/services behemoth by strategic investments and business flow.

<comment><USER16> > _That 's exactly what happened to Pivotal._

Disclosure: I work for Pivotal.

The original Pivotal _Labs_ was founded in 1989. Rob Mee sold to EMC in 2012.

A little later (circa 2013), EMC and VMWare took a number of teams and assets (notably Labs, Cloud Foundry, Greenplum, Gemfire and Spring) and spun them out into a new company, which was called Pivotal.

Pivotal is basically three divisions: Labs, Cloud R&D, Data.

Pivotal Labs is the consulting wing, there is a lot of cultural and conceptual overlap with ThoughtWorks. The Labs division is the most recognisably direct descendant of the original company Rob Mee founded. Its offerings and work have broadened over time.

Cloud R&D is responsible for Cloud Foundry (including our commercial distribution PivotalCF), KuBo, Spring, Pivotal Tracker and I always forget something or someone.

Data is responsible for Greenplum and Gemfire and a number of related technologies (eg HAWQ).

It's a complicated history, because nearly every part of Pivotal has a history that predates Pivotal.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Interesting. A company like ThoughtWorks doesn't seem to fit the typical private equity playbook. Assuming that most of the employees, for example, are assigned to consulting gigs at customer sites...you can't just start laying people off. What would drastic cost cutting look like at ThoughtWorks?

Edit: Or maybe there are a lot of people "on the bench" or middle management is overstaffed?

This discussion might be enlightening: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12458683](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12458683)

<comment><USER17> The cuttings will continue to happen (there has been a lot of layoffs) on the operational team, with downsizing and cost-cutting. Fewer travels, less expensive hotels, and luxurious meals. Also, the 'social justice' projects are already halted.

<comment><USER18> >fewer travels, less expensive hotels, and luxurious meals.

Doesn't the customer typically pay all these costs for a consultant anyway?

<comment><USER19> Eats at your margins if expenses go over holdback, or the percentage of the sale dedicated to travel.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Well, I've heard of Martin Fowler, but not Roy Singham.

Let's face it, the company (and probably all companies) has really been built by all it's people, not just a single founder/owner.

So who's now getting what of the $600 mil? A cursory search on Roy turns up various phrases like "software socialist" etc, but honestly it would be hard to justify that, or claim success in the "social responsibility" part of the company's famous "3 pillars" values, if they're not even giving their own people a fair stake.

<comment><USER21> Luckily, such things are not decided based upon cursory google searches.

<comment><USER20> The founder could be Jesus Christ himself, I still don't think that would justify owning the entirety of a company built by thousands.

<comment><USER22> If he dreamt up such a company as TW then proceeded to build it with his own resources, without any outside funding, why shouldn't he be able to capture most of the value he created by keeping the profits from the sale?

<comment><USER20> So he did all the work? Or did his 3000-odd employees do some of it?

<comment><USER22> By your logic Mark Zuckerberg who became a billionaire before hiting 30 certainly doesn't deserve the bulk of his riches since there is no way he could have done by himself, all the work thousands of engineers were hired to do at Facebook.

I know you might want to say there is a fundamental difference between a privately held TW and FB which took VC money early on, but I'm fairly confident that if Zuck thought he could build FB without taking VC money, he'd have gone that route, instead he went with dual-class shares as a reasonable compromise to retaining control of his company.

<comment><USER20> Yes that is exactly my logic, and no I don't want to say there's any difference between TW and Zuckerberg - they do not deserve to own the entire company, which has been built by all it's people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I am surprised that they didn't sell to Accenture or IBM like I thought they were going to. This sale was pretty much a given. (I worked there for a year.)

I'm pretty sure that TW will cut TWU (onboarding for new starters in India) or scale it back massively, restart sales commissions, close a bunch of their intl offices, cut nearly anything that doesn't make money and build their India office super hard (body shop).

It's gonna be BAD.

<comment><USER23> Yep, there's a ton of deadweight and high salaries in the sales team and management team. Expect that talk of continuing with the same management team to not be true.

<comment><USER19> Well, if you can believe it, the high salaries are still a discount compared to the numbers that they _should_ be getting AND they are still pressured to close just as much as they would if on commission.

Eg if a TW salesperson HAS to sell $20MM of work within that year but only gets paid $300k/year (I doubt it's that high, but maybe), they are still underpaid because most places would at least give them a few percentage points of the margin, i.e. their entire TW salary...

<comment><USER24> > they are still pressured to close just as much as they would if on > commission.

Then what is the value of being uncommissioned, except for virtue-signalling?

[https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/zero- commissions](https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/zero-commissions)

But yes, 300K is a discount lol

<comment><USER19> According to those I asked on the matter, it was to mitigate selling 'bad' work. Which didn't really go away.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25>
        ... His death would trigger a tax event that we could not pay from our own resources, forcing a fire sale.
        Despite several years of effort, we haven't found a way that would preserve the company in its current form.
        This further encouraged him to sell when there is no tax bill hanging over our head.

</comment><comment><USER26> My short story with TW. Seven years ago, after several interviews, I was invited to move and work to TW office in Porto Alegre (Brazil) I asked 2,5k USD month, and they refused. It was a good salary at that time, I could live comfortably and travel to my home once a month. I was not willing to accept less.

I continue liking this company, but now I have my own small business so I haven't applied anymore.

<comment><USER27> The point of being a middleman is to keep that fat margin. Also the usual "we did not come to you country for cheap labor, we came to have access to a new talent pool" lie.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Whatever they do, dear god I hope they keep publishing the Tech Radar. That thing is so great to read.

<comment><USER24> I remember that "DSL"s kept continously increasing on their radar until their chief scientist George RR Martin Fowler finally, finally released his book on it after 7 years, and then it was gone off of the radar. No slow descent off the radar, just gone baby gone.

<comment><USER29> In his defence, "correlation is not causation", or even more aptly "predictions are difficult, especially about the future."

<comment><USER24> Or, more simply, that he is surrounded by "yes men/women" aka Fowlbots.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> The funniest thing about this whole transaction is that Neville Roy Singham always talked a big game about socialism, Hugo Chavez, central planning, etc.

He's all about the government redistributing wealth. But when it comes to his own wealth, instead of gifting the company to the workers who built it, he has all kinds of excuses for why it needed to be sold to a private equity company.

It doesn't surprise me one bit. What individuals won't do voluntarily themselves, they want the state to force others to do.

Neville isn't offering to give a dividend distributing the sales profit to all his workers. No no no ... he's going to use it himself for his charitable works. Much like Hugo Chavez's succesor in Venezuela, Maduro, takes all the resources of the country on the "behalf of the people" and distributes it himself. I'm sure the prestige and power associated with being the distributor is not a motivating factor at all.

<comment><USER31> This is so true. I worked at TW, and I believe the only thing that made it awesome was the people who worked there and the culture. Working there is a career-changing experience and definitely improves you as a developer. But, there was one thing that always stuck out to me. The 'false' reputation that Roy built of himself as a socialist. Roy was never the socialist he claims to be. As far as the 'social impact' projects are concerned, TW used to provide discounted rates for most of these projects. But, given the premium rate, I wouldn't call it social. It was just a sham to make the employees buy into this social stuff. And, a lot of people did buy into it. Except those who carefully heard Roy at the 'Away Days' and realized that he is just trying to make more money by getting the government contracts (which have big money even in India). All these social projects were a way to make money (very few 'social' projects were pro-bono). There's only one big 'social' pro-bono project I know of. I think a big reason TW contributed to OpenMRS, was to get big medical contracts from UNICEF, other charities and the governments.

Regarding the management, there is no doubt the company had a great management, but this changed for the worse somewhere around 2011-14 at least for India. The management at that time was the reason that the attrition rates for TW spiked in India (and possibly in other regions as well). Otherwise, people hardly used to ever leave TW, as it really was a great place to work at. Not anymore and that's exactly because of the management, which decided to kill the culture for profits. Regarding Roy, he is a guy who is pretty much as socialist as the "socialist" dictators we have had - socialist as long as I get to keep all the profits. TW never allotted any stock to the employees, and Roy is a guy who built a totally private company in a capitalist country. And, he thinks governments in South America are doing better. There is a good way to implement socialist policies like some of the European countries have done, and then there is all the crap that people in South America and Cuba have to put up with in the name of socialism. As long as your socialism involves a dictator and no checks, you can be sure it's going to be a hellish experience.

<comment><USER32> > There's only one big 'social' pro-bono project I know of. I think a big > reason TW contributed to OpenMRS, was to get big medical contracts from > UNICEF, other charities and the governments.

Strange, I ran this program (for the first two years) and there was no such intention, at least when I was working on it. It was goodwill.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Te me Martin Fowler has been branding of Thoughtworks. I am surprised he was not an owner. I wonder if Martin will remain.

</comment><comment><USER34> Pretty much the only things I know about ThoughtWorks I got from Zed Shaw's Rails rant, which put them in a sharply negative light as a body shop of mostly-useless people. Was that an accurate characterization or is there more to them?

<comment><USER35> Got a link for this? The original seems to be gone.

<comment><USER35> [https://web.archive.org/web/20080103072111/http://www.zedsha...](https://web.archive.org/web/20080103072111/http://www.zedshaw.com/rants/rails_is_a_ghetto.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> A few questions:

* What's the likely outcome for employees?

* Who was the previous owner?

* How much did it sell for?

* Are operations in specific regions likely to be shut down or sold off?

<comment><USER36> According to sources, there will be no changes for employees. It was Neville Roy Singham. Not informed. Everything was sold.

<comment><USER25> Someone who puts that kind of money down to buy a company is going to want to have a say in how it's run.

The second rule of buyouts is that everything will change in the second fiscal year. They won't tell you NOT to do something, they just won't give you any budget for it.

The first rule of buyouts is that the promises always come from someone who isn't in a position to back them up (like the old owner, or your boss's boss, who only have a single seat on the board between them).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Presumably the PE value prop is that they charge over the odds for their consultancy while paying their employees under market rate. If they can maintain a public image of technical excellence and social responsibility for a couple more years while the equity firm milks the profits, Apax get their multiplier. At the end of that they can sell off what's left and doubles all round.

Or am I getting cynical in my old age?

</comment><comment><USER38> [https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/apax](https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/apax)

</comment><comment><USER35> What did ThoughtWorks do with their profits before they were bought? If it was privately owned, does that mean the profits were dividended to the founder? Or were they all re-invested in the company to fund expansion?

<comment><USER39> Ex* Employee #500 here. All reinvested.

* [https://paulhammant.com/2015/01/06/farewell-2014-farewell-th...](https://paulhammant.com/2015/01/06/farewell-2014-farewell-thoughtworks/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I can just hear the private equity firm claiming it's "business as usual".

My experience tells me when that phrase is uttered only a short time passes before lots changes!

</comment><comment><USER41> Does anyone know what Roy Singham's activism consists of?

<comment><USER42> [http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=...](http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=12301)

<comment><USER43> Sadly it's a video that I cannot watch right now. I googled a little and all I found was the 2015 Freedom to Connect page: [http://freedom-to- connect.net/](http://freedom-to-connect.net/).

So right now, based on the little information I have, I am considering "activism" and "tax issues" as excuses to sell to the highest bidder.

<comment><USER44> Wow. "I googled a little and having now knowledge I've decided this is all BS because I'm so damn smart."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> >>> Funds advised by Apax Partners ("Apax Funds") have today announced a definitive agreement to acquire ThoughtWorks, Inc.

What does that mean? It's not literally Apax buying the company, but "Funds advised by Apax"... does that mean it's just the money that owns it, or child companies, or some sort of fancy tax/legal structure?

<comment><USER46> Private equity manages funds, on behalf of LPs. Just the same as most VC funds. It's the same thing. Apax doesn't own the company, the fund does. Apax gets fees for the deployed capital and carry if the investment, upon exit, goes beyond a given return threshold.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> Either way a sale / transfer of ownership triggers tax consequences.

Couldn't this have been done as an ESOP?

<comment><USER13> It would have to produce enough actual cash to pay the tax bill. Roy apparently owned 97%. Probably a 9 figure tax bill.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> > His death would trigger a tax event that we could not pay from our own > resources, forcing a fire sale.

This just screams sht tax laws. Good tax laws don't wreck their major economic contributors.

The sad thing is I knew this was an American company based on that line alone.

<comment><USER49> So... the estate tax is what you have a problem with?

<comment><USER50> _I_ have a problem with it. Destroying jobs because of tax implications of a death is unacceptable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> Really? I search in google and twitter, all related posts' sources point to this page.

<comment><USER52> [https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/apax](https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/apax)

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> I was always saying that if I was younger, I wish company like ThoughtWorks got me under it's wing, send me off to their Bootcamp/University, indoctrinated me into right ways of doing things.

I had to learn same things, but much harder.

</comment><comment><USER54> I've always wondered what _design_ methodology does ThoughtWorks apply to most business systems. Is it the same modeling of use-case driven data-based design, as used by most outsourced development companies?

Edit: grammar

</comment><comment><USER55> [https://www.pehub.com/2017/08/apax-to-buy- thoughtworks/#](https://www.pehub.com/2017/08/apax-to-buy-thoughtworks/#)

</comment><comment><USER56> Sounds like everyone knew that a sale event would happen one day - why did they not focus on building a pile of cash that could be used to pay the taxes (Martin implies a ~50% rate in his footnote).

</comment><comment><USER57> Bought by Apax

</comment><comment><USER58> [https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/apax](https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/apax)

</comment><comment><USER3> What would it mean for the Devs, QAs etc of ThoughtWorks?

</comment><comment><USER59> Recent CompSci grad, I went down the interview path with both TW and my current employer, ended up cutting the TW process short as I decided to accept the latters offer. This is very interesting.

</comment><comment><USER60> How is it gonna impact the developers now?

</comment><comment><USER3> So it's official.

<comment><USER61> Quite so: [https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/apax](https://www.thoughtworks.com/news/apax)

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> [https://martinfowler.com/articles/201708-tw- sale.html](https://martinfowler.com/articles/201708-tw-sale.html)

<comment><USER62> Thanks. We've put that URL above. (The submission originally had no URL.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> And now the official story: [https://martinfowler.com/articles/201708-tw- sale.html](https://martinfowler.com/articles/201708-tw-sale.html)</comment>


Ask HN: Is there a list of WWDC parties for 2017? - <AUTHOR> Is anyone aware of the list of the events accompanying WWDC this year?<p>Something like this list for the previous year: https://2016.wwdcparties.com/parties/ <comment><USER2> Here is an app link. I used them before and parties are already listed :)

Parties for WWDC by Genady Okrain [https://appsto.re/us/InPC0.i](https://appsto.re/us/InPC0.i)

<comment><USER3> :)</comment></comment>


Could Minecraft be the next great engineering school? - <AUTHOR> http://qz.com/32868/could-minecraft-be-the-next-great-engineering-school/ <comment><AUTHOR> Both my son (6) and daughter (5) are avid Minecrafters. I got them the game at Christmas, and in 4 months, they are both still extremely enthusiastic, spending hours a day building worlds.

They are both learning to read because of it, since they sometimes need to search for items from the creative mode search bar, as well as when they hover over an item to see what it is, and for my son, he's also typing queries into the minecraft wiki, google, and youtube, to get answers to his questions when I'm still at work and can't help him. This is a six year old.

They're also learning to add and subtract, as they use up blocks to make things, or add items when mining.

Watching them build, even the youngest one, reminds me strongly of watching a mechanical engineer running Pro-E or SolidWorks, as they quickly and effortlessly change orientation and position to place a new block or to inspect what they just built. It's become 2nd nature to them, with no hesitation as they pan around in 3D like a Mech Eng with 5 years experience.

I am amazed at what this game is doing for them. They are leaps and bounds ahead of where I was at their age.</comment>


We Perform Best When No One Tells Us What To Do - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificblogging.com/rogue_neuron/we_perform_best_when_no_one_tells_us_what_do

<comment><USER2> Maybe this inherently explains why startups are more effective at innovation (less people telling eachother what to do) than big giants (more people, more accountability being created, less free thinking).

</comment><comment><USER3> _How can companies get the best possible performance out of their employees? Let them do whatever they want!_

Sounds like Google?</comment>


Eric Schmidt heading on mystery mission to North Korea - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/01/03/schmidt_visit_north_korea/

<comment><USER2> _It's being reported that Schmidt got into a heated exchange with Kim Jong Un by lecturing the North Korean leader on human rights violations in the country, to which Kim retorted, "Stop trying to make Google+ happen. It's not going to happen." It's hoped that negotiations will resume early tomorrow._

</comment><comment><USER3> This feels like the regime is holding civilians ransom for celebrity, business or diplomatic encounters[1][2]. I appreciate that when these types of events have happened in the past, they have brokered for civilians being freed, but we should be careful as this trade becomes too commonplace.

Note: the article speculated as to the connection with a recent US civilian arrest.

[1] [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/world/asia/06korea.html?pa...](http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/world/asia/06korea.html?pagewanted=all)

[2] [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/27/north-korea- us-p...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/27/north-korea-us-prisoner- jimmy-carter)

<comment><USER4> If all it takes is a diplomat to visit and give the DPRK government some face, that is much cheaper than war. Its amazing what face can accomplish in Asia.

<comment><USER5> The 'dear leader' of DPRK has always been a man who wants to be revered and responds aggressively in public to criticism.

Who really knows what these visits by high profile figures accomplishes behind closed doors? If nothing else, exposing Kim Jong-Un or just his inner circle to different thinking plants seeds.

It's very slow. Isolation doesn't work to promote openness.

<comment><USER6> Kim Jong Un has only been dictator of the DPRK for one year. I think you're mixing him up with his Father, Kim Jong Il. Jong Un is only 28 or 29 and was educated in Switzerland as a teenager.

<comment><USER5> My point is that each leader displays similar traits and is expected to act/react in a certain way

<comment><USER4> He is still following "the script." Let's see what happens when he gets a little bit more clout and confidence and is ready to step out of his dad and grandfather's shadow.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm guessing Eric Schmidt -> Google -> YouTube -> Gangnam Style.

On my plane back from Detroit to Beijing, there was this nice old man going around shaking everyone's hands. When I saw him, I realized that it was President Jimmy Carter. Now what sort of secret mission did he have in Beijing I wonder? At least now I can say I shook hands with a president!

<comment><USER7> A more efficient path through that graph: [http://cdn1.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/6699501/A3x6ld8C...](http://cdn1.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/6699501/A3x6ld8CAAAAwh- _large_verge_medium_landscape.jpeg)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm sure NK is probably against internet anonymity (for those allowed online), so he'll find plenty of comrades in arms over there.

</comment><comment><USER9> Better DNA test him before and after :-)

<comment><USER10> Haha :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Come back in 1 piece! :P

</comment><comment><USER12> I would guess Schmidt is much less interested in doing business with North Korea and much more interested in currying favor with other governments. Obama himself may have asked him to make this trip and it could go a long way toward softening ties between China and Google as well - depending on the results.

<comment><USER13> Why would obama give a shit about the feelings of the dictator of NK?

<comment><USER14> Because, as would any President of the United States, he cares about prosecuting his policy objectives as effectively as possible on a national and international level?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wonder if Schmidt would actually work with North Korea because while it could be profitable, it kind of goes against Google's "Don't Be Evil" motto given that North Korea is one of the biggest violators[1] of human rights on the planet.

1- [http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/06/14/the- ongoing-...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2012/06/14/the-ongoing- human-rights-tragedy-occurring-in-north-korea/)

<comment><USER16> Have you read the speech from Kim Jong Un that prompted the trip? There's a bit of the military worship and grandstanding you'd expect, but it's shockingly progressive. Besides pushing for reaching global standards in education, science and technology, he's actually calling for peaceful discussions with South Korea about reunification, and removing the barriers for that.

Kim Jong Un has barely been in power for a year, is not even thirty, and was educated in Switzerland. He's also a bit unknown, in that he was fairly well hidden from the world (seriously, it's kind of frightening). There is an actual, real chance that he wants to push for a peaceful reunification, something that would be amazingly good for the world. If he really wanted to do that one of the huge barriers is how polarized the two states are, both in terms of attitude towards each other and in terms of existing infrastructure. If reunification were to happen today it would probably destroy South Korea's economy, so if Kim Jong Un really wants peaceful unification he has to work to close the gap.

Which is why someone who doesn't want to do evil may be compelled to explore this option.

<comment><USER5> I'm skeptical Kim Jong-Un's speech prompted this trip. There's nothing to suggest the two things are linked.

But like you I'm optimistic that any change at the top could be a good thing.</comment></comment></comment>


Marketing open source is made for geeks - <AUTHOR> http://opensource.com/business/12/9/a-complete-guide-marketing-project-business

<comment><USER2> Love this post! Great overview of marketing and communities in open source.

Jason</comment>


Latacora: Factoring the Noise protocol matrix - <AUTHOR> https://latacora.singles/2018/07/18/factoring-the-noise.html <comment><USER2> We wrote this. Happy to answer questions.

</comment><comment><USER3> Isn't Noise the exact opposite of what we should providing developers? We need near-zero choices for non-crypto-expert developers and a misuse-resistant API:

secure_connect(endpoint,my_keypair);

And pretty much nothing else. No options. No choices. Even nonces and message serializaion are handled by the API. What NaCl should have been.

<comment><USER4> Part of the issue is that if there are no choices for common scenarios, developers go and invent something (poorly).

In an https competitor style situation, what is my_keypair from your example? The server doesn't care who you are. You do however care who the server is, so you need an input for server identity.

If I'm starting a chat session with anonymous people I might only care about the endpoint, or if we care about everyone it would be more like secure_connect(endpoint, their_keys, my_keys).

Pretty soon you've built this matrix.

<comment><USER3> But the very existence of this matrix will make Noise insecure _in actual applications._

It's like WS-Security/OAUTH/PGP/JOSE all over again. Another overly-flexible "framework" that's a minefield of footcannons for people to misuse if they're not trained and experienced in crypto.

If the security bar is going to be raised, repeating history isn't the way to do it.

<comment><USER2> We should have the safe, just-connect version of Noise; my understanding is NoiseSocket wants to be that.

I disagree with the comparison you made to JOSE et al. The problem with those specs is the specification and implementation complexity of the product. But actual noise implementations like WG are counterexamples to this pathological mode: they have 1 mode with well-known properties. The real problem is that people think of Noise as a protocol spec and it's really a roadmap for designing a protocol.

<comment><USER3> Then Noise should say, in large font on the front page and in README:

"Do not use this library or try to implement this spec without formal training in applied cryptography. Use X instead".

Make it very clear who the target audience is, or we'll end up another generation of ad-hoc insecure crypto.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Reasons the 9 to 5 Workday is Obsolete - <AUTHOR> https://blog.30hourjobs.com/5-reasons-the-9-to-5-workday-is-obsolete/ <comment><USER2> I went from a typical 9-5 job to working part time, about 16 hours, to focus on my studies. Doing this increased my overall happiness by a massive factor. Being able to spend the majority of my day on something I was actually interested in and passionate about pulled me out of a "life is meaningless, why bother" mentality that my former job had buried me in.

The pay cut was drastic, but I was lucky (in a way) that I had come from having nothing the majority of my life so going back to almost nothing was an easy transition because it was essentially my 'default mode'. And even when I was making a considerable amount of money, lifestyle creep never became an issue. I lived well within my means. This is important because this combination allowed me to actually quit my job and live off of savings for years while I went back and completed my undergraduate. I've had friends in similar situations who have had to go back to a job they hated because they couldn't adjust. But for me, it was worth cutting every single cent and I will never work a 9-5 ever again.

<comment><USER3> If only it was actually 9 - 5, seems that 7:30 - 6 is a lot more common

<comment><USER4> I focus to do always 8.00-16.00 or 7.30-15.30. doing more than 8 hours a days is bad for you and your employer anyway..

Actually I would prefer to work 6 hours a day for 5 days or 4 days for 8 hours, so I can have more time for me and my interests

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have noticed that 9 to 5 works best for most middle managers and other gossip oriented staff.

As for the productive workers; they should be allowed to work at the time of their own choosing.

</comment><comment><USER6> It is interesting that we have largely the same group of people complaining at the same time, that:

1) They don't feel like working as hard as people in the past used to work, and

2) They feel they're being screwed by a "rigged system" because they're not as rich as people used to be.

<comment><USER7> That's the whole point of productivity gains... Either you're richer or you can work less or ideally both.

<comment><USER8> I own a business. I invest in a garden hose so my gardener can water the plants more productively than refilling a watering can constantly. Why would you expect the financial savings of my investment to flow to the gardener rather than to me? If anything, the gardener is now exerting much less effort, and may accept the job for less pay (or be replaced by someone less skilled and cheaper).

<comment><USER7> Well, at least at a societal level because you want to live in a relatively equal society and have all of the benefits that come with that as opposed to a feudal dystopia.

<comment><USER6> Feudal dystopias, as you call them, were characterized by minimal capital creation and the lack of rights to exploit that capital leading to both poverty and inequality.

On the other hand, the sudden explosion of capital creation and exploitation that sparked the industrial revolution led to the creation of the first societies in which wealth and freedom were attainable by families not of noble birth.

<comment><USER7> And that happened after the period of horrific exploitation of people in factories, including children. Economic growth is good not in itself but only if it is widely shared. It will be better for economic growth in the long run anyway because inequality comes with its own set of problems.

<comment><USER9> A society where everyone is poor is worse than a society where some are rich but most are poor. It is worse that everyone be in crushing poverty forever, than to have unequal distribution of wealth.

"Growth is only good if widely shared" is a meme that has led to immiseration every time it is implemented. If capitalism has to own child labor, then redistributionists have to own the violent mass scale enslavement of the peasants under Mao/Stalin.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Have you paid for the photos/headshots you use in professional setting? - <AUTHOR> And if so, why? <comment><USER2> We tried to do it ourselves (two of my small company, including me, have an art college background - I studied photography for a year) and the results weren't great. They were obviously taken by non-professionals, and gave the staff section of our site an ad-hoc feel. Having said that, I prefer that kind of feel to photos that are so "professional" that they're mind-numbingly boring. There's a fine balance to be struck between stuff that's too slick and stuff that's amateurish - getting images that feel professional while still having a soul is very tricky, and generally involves finding a photographer that you click with (sorry, not sorry).

<comment><USER3> Getting headshot images that feel professional (in the sense of being well-lit with a decent background/setting and otherwise good technical execution) is actually a doddle. Especially these days, what with there being a plethora of resources available - good tutorials, cheap equipment, the equivalent of free film, and immediate feedback. There's no need for necromancy involving light meters, and no need to read the tea leaves of a Polaroid to guess at what the "real" picture will look like after it's souped. You don't need to do anything moody, dramatic or otherwise risky. As picture-taking goes, it's about as low as you can go on the technical difficulty scale.

The hard part is getting "a person who happens to be in a picture" rather than "a picture that happens to have a person in it". That's psychology, not photography, and it's a completely separate skill. You can get the book learning from successful headshot types (notably Peter Hurley, but there are certainly others), but that's sort of like knowing the theory of standup comedy. You've got to actually work with people to figure out how to make them seem like they're looking through the camera rather than at it. And you've got to care enough to keep your subject from figuring out that you're doing any of that.

<comment><USER4> I do some hobbyist photography, and I have kept myself to photographing nature and architecture because I have never been very good at posing / the psychology aspect as you describe it. Recently I have become more interested in doing more people photos, but I'm not sure how to go about learning it. Other than practice, are there any resources you might be able to suggest?

<comment><USER3> First, make an honest assessment of whether or not you (a) _are_ a "people person", or (b) can fake it for long enough for your subjects to really believe you are one. I'm not going to kid you: if you're a severe introvert who can't at least pretend to be open in a convincing way, then the majority of the work you'd need to do to get into the game is actually on your own comfort and skills in the social setting.

If you're up to the game, or at least think you could be, then starting with a YouTube search for "Peter Hurley headshot" and watching the excerpts from "The Art Behind the Headshot" (they'll be at the Fstoppers channel) is a great place to start. Hurley's a salesman with an ego, and his clientelle are mostly actors looking for a different sort of headshot than the typical corporate client, but don't let any of that get in the way - the interaction tricks, etc., are still the same. Posing should seem like little offhand comments in the rest of the patter; the idea is to get rid of the obvious, gigantic and scary camera thing, and reminding the subject that the photo is important is going to kill that. Expect a low "keeper" rate, especially early on. (If you allow time for school pictures, you're going to get school pictures.) Once you've watched Hurley, you'll be able to judge others. Joe McNally's humble approach - like he's been given the privilege of taking the photo, no matter who's in front of the camera - also works well. Find someone who reminds you of who you'd like to be, and can be, behind the camera. But it's about reading the people and working with them _as_ people that makes all of the difference.

<comment><USER4> Thank you. I will follow your advice and lookup these resources!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Random tidbit: for some reason, LinkedIn displays your own profile image to yourself at a lower resolution than other profile images. I think it's related to the fact that your own profile image opens editing tools when clicked.

(It took me hours to realize -- after digging through their HTML -- that the reason my own pic looked so blurry once uploaded was because of this. Logged out, it looks fine.)

</comment><comment><USER6> Yes, I have done so twice. The first time, I had a professional photographer take photos of my team and I so that our "about us" page would have a consistent look. The second time, my local Chamber of Commerce provided the services of a professional during a networking event. I use these photos over something I took with my phone or cropped from some other photo because they look a lot more professional.

If you are developing a service related to professional headshots, I would appreciate you contacting me at firstname.lastname@example.com as I am developing something related to that industry.

</comment><comment><USER7> I haven't yet.

I'm considering it because of the popularity of LinkedIn but in the Anglo- American culture and thus most multinational companies - it is frowned upon to attach a photo to your CV.

<comment><USER2> This is interesting in terms of the ubiquity of LinkedIn - the lack of a photo on a CV is obviously to do with reducing bias. For example, if a recruiter doesn't know how attractive someone is, that won't influence their decision, and rightly so. But now that everyone's on LinkedIn it's easy to track down someone's photo if you want to. I often do this with clients who approach us through email because I like to have a face in mind when I speak to them on the phone, but it's easy for recruiters to misuse.

<comment><USER8> I attended a tech resume workshop recently and the recruiters there said they would absolutely discard resumes with photos (and other overly personal info) on them due to bias, and were instructed to do so by their employers. Interesting, but understandable.

I do wonder how that reconciles with all the social media around though considering the main way recruiters reach out to me is LinkedIn.

<comment><USER9> Yeah at my last job where I used to get CVs I was always told to bin CVs that had photos/age etc. on them.

<comment><USER10> In my country (Spain) you must attach a photo to the CV to get into consideration.

I've been told in Germany you must attach a specific type.of photo, and you must gomtona professional photographer for it

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I paid for professional headshots to use in professional settings. It was partly about LinkedIn and other social media, and partly about conferences and press.

Why? Because it's an effective way to tell your story better.

It says you're confident, because you know that you're awesome enough to deserve a professional shoot.

The specifics of whatever photos you end up using will carry some message. For example being shot in front of books carries an obvious message.

It's good to have a photo specifically designed for professional contexts, rather than one awkwardly repurposed from a social context.

<comment><USER12> I second this, the lady I went to took around 80 different pictures, and she was telling me how to stand (where to place my feet, shoulders, turn my head, smile - even though the photo was chest-up the placement of the feet were important) and was very encouraging with "Smile! Oh wow, that's great!". Later on we reduced it to several photos by sorting out the ones I wouldn't like at all and going "Photo A or photo B?" through the ones we had left.

A stiff passport photo would've been boring...

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I did, and use it in the company slack, email, salesforce, etc.

Like it or not, others respond to our image. Using a professional photo is a great way to influence that response.

</comment><comment> pure-awesome I have a friend who studies photography. I paid them a bit of cash to snap a few semi-professional photos outdoors, and do a few post-processing touch-ups. I make use of these on my CV etc.

Much better than I would have been able to do myself / with an amateur friend's help. Not as high quality as studio photos, but also not nearly as expensive, and good enough for my purposes.

</comment><comment><USER14> I don't use photos online anywhere. When silly tools/platform require the use of some kind of profile picture, I draw a stick figure or something similarly silly. It might not look terribly professional, but my face is entirely irrelevant in a professional context.

<comment><USER15> Except for somebody looking for you...

<comment><USER14> I have a name. They can look for that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Yes, about ten years ago when founding a startups because we thought it might be useful for press releases and similar publications.

It probably wasn't the best way to spend our limited resources at the time. However, the pictures weren't particularly expensive either and I still use one for profile pictures and similar use cases, mostly because otherwise there aren't that many decent headshots of myself. Well, there's this one but I suppose it'd not be particularly suitable for a professional setting: [https://bjoernkw.com/images/top-hat.jpg](https://bjoernkw.com/images/top- hat.jpg)

So, in hindsight I'd say I got my money's worth for those shots.

</comment><comment><USER17> I spoke at OSCON once. As part of the speaker package they did professional headshots. It was a great perk. I've used those extensively since - lots of other conferences ask for a headshot on their speaker list. I also use it on Linkedin.

</comment><comment><USER18> Yes - the guy who did our wedding photos was great and I was just starting my own startup and knew I wanted headshots. I was happy to pay him for an hour of taking photos and knew I'd get something usable out of it.

</comment><comment><USER19> Yes. I had a professional photo made for my passport instead of the usual instant photo where you look flash burned, have a big nose, and a shadow behind you that looks like a mullet.

There is a substantial difference in the way people handle identification with good photos. It feels like people think, "oh, of course, this is you." I liken it to my photo having taken a shower - it makes a much better impression.

People usually hate their identification photos. Having a quality photo is a nice conversation starter.

</comment><comment><USER20> I did it for my personal website hosted at [https://www.milanmotavar.com/](https://www.milanmotavar.com/).

I think it came out well.

</comment><comment><USER21> No, it's not the kind of image I want to project. I randomly use a crop of a normal photo or a drawing of me that my daughter made when she was like 3 or 4.

</comment><comment><USER22> I'm a developer, so no...

A headshot would be of exactly zero value to me. I have no photo on linkedin or any social media. In fact, zero photos of me online.

Current work asked me to upload a photo for the company skype / whatever. I told them no. It's completely pointless.

If a company wanted a photo for me to apply for the job, I wouldn't apply.

Judge me on my history / technical skills / personal skills etc at the interview. My face is irrelevant.

<comment><USER23> You're greatly limiting your career potential with this mindset. Soft skills matter too. If you want to advance in your career you need people to pull you up, you'll never get the necessary contacts with this kind of attitude.

<comment><USER24> Is being able to smile for a camera a "soft skill?"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> No, one time I took the team (~10 persons) to a nearby park on a nice day, and took photos with blurry green background. Otherwise, I just order people to stand in front of the white wall with best lighting I can find in the office, smile, and done.

I use a low-end DSLR that I take the time to manually adjust.

Results are good enough that I won't bother finding a professional to do better.

<comment><USER26> Good enough is the enemy of great.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Have not. For me, there are events where the internal media team (responsible for announcements and for ads) handles taking these.

</comment><comment><USER28> I've heard from those who have that it was worth the money. The only caution is that for some reason people still use those 70s olan mills background which connote a sort of tone deafness or cluelessness of the subject.

<comment><USER26> What is, these days, an appropriate background?

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> No, but my current job provided one as part of onboarding, which I think is a great idea. When my nieces and nephews enter the work force, I'm planning on paying for professional headshots for each of them.

</comment><comment><USER30> No. Then again I'm not awful at photography myself and nor are the people who snapped pics for me (the ones that aren't selfies). Fwiw I'm an academic though I do interact with business.

</comment><comment><USER31> No, but I will do it in the future. It's handy for Tinder as well :)

<comment><USER26> Because nothing communicates "I can be fun and exciting" as a stiff headshot.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> was considering this recently and came across something interesting. This photo studio in berlin charges different prices depending on where you plan to use it. Also curious whether that is common practice?

35 euro: for private use in applications, social networks eg Xing, LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram etc.

80 euro: You acquire the full rights of use to use your portrait commercially eg for websites, brochures, business cards, publications in books or magazines, all without time and space restriction.

<comment><USER12> I've seen that too from some studios. Legally the photog is the copyright owner (they created the work), and you're purchasing a license from them, and I suppose in this case there are 2 levels of licenses.

I guess one could try bargaining with them - because without you hiring them, there'd be no license to sell to you. But I guess successful ones can just turn you away.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Yes, because it's usually pretty inexpensive (I think I paid $35) relative to having a perfectly lit, clean background picture when one is needed at the last minute

</comment><comment><USER34> Nope, though I'm using a photo from an (unpaid) photoshoot from a startup accelerator, made by a semi-pro photographer.

</comment><comment><USER35> Of cause. I consider it a relevant part of my professional identity just similar to dressing appropriately to the occasion.

</comment><comment><USER36> I am currently re-using the picture from my work permit, it looked professional enough for me.

</comment><comment><USER37> oh how much I dislike this latest trend in tech-hip employee headshots where they blast insane amounts of light on one's face - that, in combination with the fake smile on all those pics, gives such an eerie effect..

<comment><USER26> Smiling says "I'm an idiot" in Japan, so be careful if you're going for a headshot that can be used internationally.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Yes. It's cheap and well worth it, you can use them for quite a while.

</comment><comment><USER39> A previous employer paid for mine. I had considered paying for my own.

</comment><comment><USER40> I paid for my Christmas photos and that's what I use on LinkedIn.

<comment><USER41> Ditto. After the family pics, I told the photographer I want one of myself for professional use and she did a great job with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Kind of. I use a good headshot from my wedding.

</comment><comment><USER43> Yes, and it's been worth it every time.

</comment><comment><USER44> yep. I went to a pro with a lot of experience because i wanted a professional image for linkedin.</comment>


How Fast Can We Design and Deploy an Open Source Ventilator? - <AUTHOR> https://hackaday.com/2020/03/12/ultimate-medical-hackathon-how-fast-can-we-design-and-deploy-an-open-source-ventilator/ <comment><USER2> If hospitals are overwhelmed and begin turning people away, improvised solutions could save lives. Informed discussion is critical, though. The evacuation of Dunkirk was crazy and unorthodox, but it worked!</comment>