The False Choice Between Babies And Startups - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.forbes.com/85broads/2011/05/16/the-false-choice-between-babies-and-startups/ <comment><USER2> It's important to realize, all you non-child-having people out there, that before you actually have a child, there is _no freaking way_ you can estimate the amount of time and dedication an infant will require of you.

Honestly, I would hesitate to start a startup with _anyone_ about to have their first child, man or woman, because they cannot possibly know what a cratering impact it is going to have on every aspect of their lives.

Now, a woman who is already at home with her children and has a couple of years of experience with it, her I'd trust to juggle. But starting a startup is already a gigantic change in lifestyle, and so is child care. Starting both at once is probably not a good idea. My own two bits as work-at-home father of two.

<comment><USER3> I started my first company, a web consultancy firm, seven years ago. I also have a daughter who is seven years old, Linn. I started out of my home office, which allowed me to spend time with my family while being at work. It was great but became stressful after 6-12 months because I felt I was at work all the time except when I left my home. I then moved into a proper office.

I started my second company five years ago. I also have a second daughter who is five years old, Julia. This company was a much more serious venture. I was appointed CEO, we were four founders and raised 1M€. We all worked long hours and had a great time from the start. Now we are ten employees and I'm still the CEO.

Here are the immediate effects I have seen from starting a new company simultaneously with getting a kid, twice:

\- You focus on the business model and sales, sales, sales rather than just cool tech, which is beneficial for everybody involved. However, there is always room for cool tech as well.

\- You have to push yourself to get to work, and do good stuff everyday. Because your family depends on it. You don't settle for mediocrity.

\- You get a counter-balance that keeps you in check. Especially when you are successful with doing something fun it is very easy to burn out. Out of four founders, two of us have kids while the other two didn't at the time. I'm sorry to say that those two burned out and left the company, while me and my other child-bearing co-founder remained.

\- You raise kids that get an entrepreneurial outlook on life. They think it is natural to have your own company, to be the boss of your own life.

\- If you are blessed with healthy kids, having them is hardest work in the beginning. Everything gets easier and easier from day one. At least so far.

All in all, I don't regret for a second my choices the past years. Because what are the alternatives? Not having these awesome kids that now rock my world? Not having started these awesome companies that have defined a lot of who I am today? No way.

If you get the opportunity to start a family with someone you love and who supports you, don't hesitate for a second. If you get the opportunity to start a company with people you'd love to work with, don't hesitate for a second.

If those two happen to you at the same time? Wow, you are truly blessed with good fortune! Go kick some major ass!

<comment><USER4> We started our company just after the birth of my second child and then my daughter was born as we were in the early days. We are pretty much self funded (we've had some seed funding but not a lot) and it's been a long hard slog but all that work is now paying off.

I have to agree strongly with:

"You have to push yourself to get to work, and do good stuff everyday. Because your family depends on it. You don't settle for mediocrity.

\- You get a counter-balance that keeps you in check. Especially when you are successful with doing something fun it is very easy to burn out. "

and

"You raise kids that get an entrepreneurial outlook on life. They think it is natural to have your own company, to be the boss of your own life"

made me smile. My daughter, now 5, was trying to sell me her drawings the other day.

My children are my counterbalance and my drive - there is nothing better than kicking back and talking nonsense with them or getting involved in their stuff. There is nothing more important than making sure they are fed and have a secure future (in which to make their own choices)

I noticed in a recent interview that when Tony Blair was the british PM his wife expected him to get up in the night to feed the baby still.

One of my girlfriends relatives says "if you want something doing ask a busy person." and I reckon that is spot on

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I don't think anyone ever suggested it was a choice... PG just said he'd be reluctant to start a startup with a woman who had an infant or was planning to have a baby soon. That doesn't mean he NEVER would.

But if a potential co-founder said, "I have a hobby I can't give up. It can cause me to lose sleep for days or weeks on end ([http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sleep-t.htm...](http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sleep-t.html)), cause marital stress, costs a ton of money (about a million bucks over 21 years), is intermittently really loud, and will likely require frequent trips to the doctor", would you be at all reluctant to team up with that person? I would. There are all sorts of things that could cause me to want to pair up with them anyways (lots of money, stay-at-home spouse or in-law, etc), but the bar would be higher.

A baby isn't startup insta-death-- there are plenty of examples of where it has worked out just fine. But it's heaping difficulty, stress, and expense on an already difficult, stressful and expensive exercise.

<comment><USER6> People having babies is kinda important. Strange how difficult modern life is with children.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> As someone who has started a company (one in YC at that) with a 9 month old, I do think it is a false choice. But the real choice is pretty clear:

      - don't spend time with your kids
      - don't spend as much time as you could at your company

I did the latter, or tried at least. So the time you take out from your company is serious, but manageable. Kids are very focusing; the time to spend with them came from other things most people do: tv, video games, socializing, etc.

My biggest concern with having kids (now a 4 year old and 1 year old) is the impression I'll leave on employees when I'll be home for dinner but still probably working later where they can't see. Setting the right tone will be harder than balancing my schedule for sure. I hope at my next company I'll be able to create a healthy, family-friendly environment full of people that are smart and get things done.

What I didn't do was milk being a parent to get press for my startup. I thought that would be cheap. It would have been trivial considering my cofounder was also my wife. The story writes itself, but I'm happy I didn't pursue it.

<comment><USER8> I don't understand your biggest concern. How is it a bad thing that you're setting the example of making sure you have quality time at dinner with your family? Especially if you're doing work after you put the kids to bed to make sure that stuff gets done that needs to get done.

<comment><USER7> Perhaps you've never been at a startup with recent college grads. 10 to midnight is a common schedule. That kind of work ethic isn't healthy, but recent college grads don't notice and even seem to enjoy it. What is does yield? A hell of a lot of code and an obvious boost in absolute productivity.

I would like engineers to work those hours with enthusiasm. My concern is that this wouldn't happen with a founder that is absent in the middle of their work day. The solution is to have a cofounder that works those hours, I suppose :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> My dad started a company when I was pretty young and I used to see him one week a month. It's quite naive to think that less time with your kids doesn't in some way prevent you from being the best possible parent.

Anyone who thinks kids getting less time with their parents is as good or can somehow be made as good as kids getting a lot of time with their parents is delusional.

Its a very real choice.

Nowhere in the post do we see any statistics or hard facts on how many entrepreneurs succeeded in launching a company and making it successful while being pregnant or while having young kids.

Given that there are fewer women entrepreneurs than men entrepreneurs it would be a safe assumption that the number of pregnant women entrepreneurs or women entrepreneurs with young kids would be pretty low.

Besides you can get into evolutionary psychology and then it becomes pretty obvious that men have a much higher impetus to take big risks than women.

This whole movement towards political correctness has become ridiculous.

How come men don't get to bitch about not being able to have kids? Are we supposed to pretend that being biologically built to bear kids doesn't in some way make women predisposed to favor kids over startups?

The choice is very real and it's between raising great kids who get enough attention from their parents and raising a great company that gets enough attention from its founders.

Without hard data pointing out how many women started great companies while also raising kids who didn't turn out to be nutcases the girl's argument is just wishful thinking.

<comment><USER10> I don't accept your premise -- that work time is, by definition, time away from one's children.

My son is 8.

His playroom and my office are really one big room, with some furniture dividing it into separate spaces.

He comes home from school and does his homework at a small table next to my desk. I help him with it and he "checks up on" my work.

He sometimes tests websites I'm designing to make sure the UI is easy to understand.

He's done data entry for extra allowance.

He sometimes goes with me to tech conferences, and has even spoken at one.

I work while he's at school, during homework time, and after he's asleep. We play after homework is done and/or after dinner.

Sometimes he just visits with me while I work, or sets his laptop down next to mine and we have a mother-son hackfest.

Chores are easier and faster because we do them as a team.

I _do_ enjoy the occasional break when he is at his grandparents' place for a while, but for the most part we do things together. I'm a single mother, so there's no one to pick up the slack when I'm "too busy". Also, I've noticed that I'm _more_ productive when I make time for what's important -- being a mom.

I can be having an awful day full of interruptions and some seemingly unfixable bug, then I walk my son home from school and it all changes. For twenty minutes I turn off my phone, get outside, and walk. By the time I reach his school I've calmed down. Then we walk home and talk about his day, or the squirrels, or my neighbor's new flower bed. By the time we get back home I am surprisingly refreshed. I usually fix the bug in a flash, and have more patience with nagging clients.

You can talk about evolutionary psychology and your desire for hard data all you want -- but neither will predict the behavior of an _individual_ , and most entrepreneurs are outliers in some way or another already. I'd never suggest that _anybody_ can juggle building a business and child-rearing without dropping either ball, but clearly _I_ can, so it's not out of the realm of possibility that someone else can, too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> "To further my ambition, my mother "hacked" the system by using her co- workers' address in a more affluent neighborhood to ensure that I received the best public education possible."

Oops now she would be a criminal for doing that.

</comment><comment><USER12> Comments there were interesting but somewhat depressing read. Seems like startup is still perceived as something where you eat ramen and sleep at work. Is that really so? Will one really do much better spending 18hours a day on startup instead of spending 6? Is it completely impossible that switching tasks and taking care of the baby will provide an opportunity for some insight (kind of "thinking in the shower")? Pure speculation there, but I'd love to know what you think.

<comment><USER13> Like Tyrannosaurs said ( <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2555785> ), it depends on the nature of the start-up. "thinking in the shower" might work when it is about finding solutions to problems (although kids are rarely that demanding as the shower is)! ...but for the technical part, where those solutions have to be implemented, well, 6 hours per day would be either "employee thinking" or just a "lucky"/"very well designed" model of entrepreneurship.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I wouldn't hire anybody who put working at a start up ahead of raising a newborn baby solely on the basis that their bigger sense of priorities is completely skewed and that they have no sense of accurately judging future time constraints. Outside of Hacker News you dont have to be mired in a startup to be happy and you can take time to enjoy the rich experience that is raising a child even at _gasp_ a less than optimal income.

</comment><comment><USER15> I think the choice between family (because it's not just children who aren't compatible with a 18 hour a day 6 day a week work life, partners are likely to get pretty hacked off with it too) and start ups relies on a particular model / vision of what a start up is.

The reality is that it is possible to start a company based on a 5 day a week 40 hour work week and I've seen people do it. Yes, they're probably not the largest and most aggressive companies but I've seen people build good teams, good products and go on to make good money while still having plenty of time with their family.

I don't know anyone who founded a Google or Facebook following this model but frankly that's not where 99.9999% of start ups are heading regardless of the founders commitment to them.

I can understand why an investor might be wary about putting money into a company being founded by someone for whom it wasn't their number one priority and as an investor you're concern is primarily around getting a return on your investment but that doesn't start ups can't be done and done well by people taking a more balanced approach.

</comment><comment><USER16> The article is a bunch of conjecture. I don't see the direct correlation between her mom working her butt off and raising a child not being a conflict when starting a company.

I generally agree that women can be overachievers to the point that it would overcome the necessary commitment of birthing and raising a very young child. But that's not a very relevant argument. And it's not backed up by the article. One data point? C'mon.

I think the author is actually taking issue with the potential "handicap" of pregnancy as something uniquely ascribed to women. "Don't call me weak because I'm a woman and I can get pregnant!"

As a young married man in a startup, I'm scared of my wife becoming pregnant... I really do want to be a father, but I don't think she and I could remain fully committed to our current career arcs should we become parents at this time.

The problem isn't women getting pregnant. The problem is a newborn takes over part of your life. And that part might be too big for you to also maintain a commitment to your startup.

</comment><comment><USER17> Weird that she repeatedly asserted a lot of determination after reading Graham's positions, but didn't even try to argue against

> Economically, you can think of a startup as a way to compress your whole > working life into a few years. Instead of working at a low intensity for > forty years, you work as hard as you possibly can for four. - > <http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html>

</comment><comment><USER18> The fact is that I want my co-founders number one priority to be the startup and the cold hard facts are that that isn't possible for most new/expecting parents.

If we need to fly to New York or spend a week prepping a deck or taking care of some emergency, I need to know they can do it on a moment's notice.

Now, maybe this isn't true for some startups, especially if you have a lot of co-founders, but certainly in 1-3 person startups, there is more work than there is time in the day and I just don't see how someone who is getting little to no sleep every night can possibly keep up with it.

</comment><comment><USER19> Totally a false choice... Both FeeFighters founders have had babies in the past year (with working wives) - but there are certainly compromises to be made, and it's especially tough at the super-early stage.

There are some issues though - not every startup founder has the ability to pay for the costs of having a baby and watching it grow up. Nanny's aren't cheap.

</comment><comment><USER20> Few enlightened, modern couples believe that the responsibility to care for a baby falls primarily on the woman. That's because men and women have babies together.

Women carry babies for a 9-month term, during which time they are - in most cases - 100% able to work and 'contribute'. Labor takes ~36 hours; it can take just a few hours for scheduled c-sections. After labor, the baby comes home to Mom AND Dad.

For the average couple, there's a window of about 2 days in which the woman is out of commission. (Yes, that's simplifying things.)

A woman is only out of commission if her partner is not able or willing to help her with the responsibilities of being a parent. That's the only scenario in which she'd have to choose to be a mom before being a 'career woman'. So simply help your wives/girlfriends with the baby duties, and no choice will be required. :)

<comment><USER21> Unfortunately there is a mountain of evidence that suggests that breast feeding is extremely important for optimizing your baby's chances in life. It's even been quantified, I think, to about 7 IQ points.

So - sorry, once labor is over the mother's role can not just end and in many ways it increases dramatically as she will for many weeks be getting extremely broken sleep (up several times during the night to feed for 30 mins at a time each at least).

Having said that, I hate it when anybody tells anyone else they can't do something. As a startup you're going up against huge odds in the first place and doing something nearly impossible almost by definition. If you're the kind of person who just gives up when someone tells you something is a bad idea then you probably ARE the wrong person to do a startup, but it's got nothing to do with babies.

<comment><USER10> Who says breastfeeding time is unproductive time?

I used to sleep while breastfeeding at night -- plunk the baby on the bed, stick a nipple in their mouth and doze. When baby grabs at the other one, switch sides.

During the day, I coded while breastfeeding, or read, or whatever. Hmm... I wonder if that's why my little guy is such a geek? :P

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Its completely reasonable to rule someone out for funding because they have a child (although the "woman" thing isn't completely fair). Anything that will take time from the startup will negatively impact the startup's chance, and when you don't have a lot to make decisions on, whether there are obvious distractions is a fair way to make the call.

<comment><USER23> Reasonable I don't know, illegal I sure hope (but since it's not employment, I won't hold my breath).

<comment><USER22> Illegal? Starting a startup is demanding beyond any normal job. If discriminating based on things that will take time from work becomes illegal, the industry is done in the US and will move somewhere else. Investors have little enough information as is. Take any of that away, and they start to wonder whether investing under those conditions is worth it anymore.</comment></comment></comment>


How to choose a machine learning API to build predictive apps - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@louisdorard/developer-considerations-for-choosing-a-machine-learning-api-20e2de15eb3a

<comment><AUTHOR> You've probably heard about Amazon Machine Learning or Google Prediction API or BigML, but as a developer, how do you choose one of these APIs when you want to integrate ML in real-world apps?</comment>


Art Is The New Math - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcompany.com/1720011/art-is-the-new-math

<comment><USER2> The author quotes long division as an outmoded skill. So let's all use our IPhones instead, insuring that the genius of arithmetical computation and algorithmic thinking, which took generations of scholars to discover, will be abandoned for a black box from your favorite vendor. That way, only scribes (ie. mathematicians) will know what's going on underneath the hood, just like the old days. Hey, I've never used regression analysis either (same argument) so why bother with math at all.</comment>


How Carriers and Phone Makers are Strangling Android - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/5427938/how-carriers-and-phone-makers-are-strangling-android-and-googles-plan-to-save-it

<comment><USER2> "a gurgling software slurry of incompatibility, user experience inconsistency and general frustration."

Like that wasn't utterly predictable. And here - <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=996783> \- someone was arguing that the iPhone changing minimally between versions is a _bad_ thing.</comment>


John Nash 1955 on basing cryptography on exponential difficulty - <AUTHOR> http://www.gwern.net/docs/1955-nash

<comment><USER2> This was on the front page last week: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3604680>

<comment><AUTHOR> As a handful of quotes, and an unsearchable PDF of handwriting few would read.</comment></comment>


Scientists teleport photons 300 miles into space - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jul/12/scotty-can-you-beam-me-up-scientists-teleport-photons-300-miles-into-space <comment><USER2> Lol, no they didn't. They transmitted information that confirmed that they had received a photon which was in a state known to another party. Neither the information about the photon, nor the photon in question, travelled alomg a discontinuous path.</comment>


Stripe's Veneur: A distributed, fault-tolerant pipeline for observability data - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/stripe/veneur <comment><USER2> This was a pleasant surprise to see on Hacker News this morning! I work on the Observability team at Stripe and have been the PM for Veneur (and the rest of our metrics & tracing pipeline work) pretty much since we released it ~2 years ago.

If you're interested in learning more about how Veneur works and why we built it, I gave a talk at Monitorama last year that explains the philosophy behind Veneur[0]. In short, a massive company like Google is able to build their on integrated observability stacks in-house, but almost any other smaller company is going to be relying on an array of open-source tools or third-party vendors for different parts of their observability tooling[1]. When using different tools, there are always going to be gaps between them, which leads to incomplete instrumentation and awkward (inter-)operability. By taking control of the pipeline that processes the data, we're able to provide fully integrated views into different aspects of our observability data.

The Monitorama talk is a year old at this point, so it doesn't cover some of the newer things Veneur has helped us to accomplish, but the core philosophy hasn't changed. I've given updated versions of the talk more recently at CraftConf (in May) and DevOpsDaysMSP (last week), but neither of those videos are online yet.

[0] [https://vimeo.com/221049715](https://vimeo.com/221049715)

[1] e.g. ELK/Papertrail/Splunk for logs, Graphite/Datadog/SignalFx for metrics, and maybe a third tool for tracing if you're lucky.

</comment><comment><USER3> Am I the only one who is always slightly disappointed that neither the README file on Github nor the landing page at the website tells me why I would want to use the software in question? What problem it solves? Why might "a distributed, fault-tolerant observability pipeline" be interesting to programmers or anyone else? It seems like you've already got to be familiar with the problem space to understand what this is and what need it fulfills.

I'm not picking on this package. I see it all the time.

Can someone here explain to me what the use case is for this software?

<comment><USER4> It's not always possible to describe a problem in a way you will understand if you aren't already familiar with it. And that's ok! Reading something like "distributed, fault-tolerant pipeline for observability data" and ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯ could be good response both for you _and_ the people who built the thing. It's definitely ok that you have to dig a little more to wrap your head around it.

In short, it's reasonable to expect that people who see a project already understand the problem space and write for the ones who can say "yep I need this".

This particular project is probably only useful to people who know what observability data means.

<comment><USER5> Even though Albert Einstein seemingly didn't actually say this, I still think this aphorism is appropriate:

 _If you can 't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough._

<comment><USER4> Is it? Because there's an awful lot of base knowledge you need to understand any kind of OSS project. Can you explain what nginx does to someone who doesn't have a smart phone in any kind of meaningful way?

<comment><USER5> I have fifteen years of professional experience in software development and I didn't have the slightest clue what Veneur did from its description of "A distributed, fault-tolerant pipeline for observability data."

\- Distributed - Got this one, but it's an adjective and doesn't mean much on its own.

\- Fault-tolerant - Same.

\- Pipeline - OK, great, totally meaningless noun. I guess stuff goes in it?

\- Observability data - What the heck is observability data?

Nginx is a web server, plus a heck of a lot more. Their website does a terrific job of explaining it. [https://www.nginx.com/resources/glossary/nginx/](https://www.nginx.com/resources/glossary/nginx/)

<comment><USER4> The scope of software development is so broad I think you could spend 100 years doing it and still not understand everything.

For example, _I_ know what observability data is, but I'd have a difficult time explaining the problem Redux tackles. If you've spent most of your time building user facing apps + web apps, how would you immediately understand a problem that someone working on large scale payment infrastructure has to solve?

<comment><USER6> > _but I 'd have a difficult time explaining the problem Redux tackles._

Do you think you couldn't _understand_ a short description of the problem it tackles? Because if you could, then a short description in a readme would be valuable to you, and presumably the developers of the thing _are_ able to explain the problem.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's definitely interesting to see the different systems being built for monitoring across the different tech co's.

M3 aggregator, Uber's metrics aggregation tier is similar, except it has inbuilt replication and leader election on top of etcd to avoid any SPOF during deployments, failed instances, etc. Also it uses Cormode-Muthukrishnan for estimating percentiles by default, it has support for T-Digest too. Although these days submitting histogram bucket aggregates all the way from the client to aggregator then to storage is more popular as you can estimate percentiles across more dimensions and time windows at query time quite cheaply. You need to choose your buckets carefully though.

It too is open source, but needs some help to make it plug into other stacks more easily: [https://github.com/m3db/m3aggregator](https://github.com/m3db/m3aggregator)

</comment><comment><USER8> It always makes me happy to see approximate algorithms/data structures like hyperloglog being used.

<comment><USER9> "probabilistic" is probably the word you're looking for, and yes I agree, I'm fascinated by the idea of trading off a little bit of accuracy for massive performance gains.

<comment><USER8> That's a good term. I'm sure you've found this collection of links on 'streaming algorithms'. It's a gold mine of resources in this space: [https://gist.github.com/debasishg/8172796](https://gist.github.com/debasishg/8172796)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> When I'm evaluating a system like this what I want to read about is how is it hardened against client stupidity. For example, someone deploys an application in my datacenter and it emits metrics that have gibberish in their names (consider a common Java bug where a class lacks a toString, so the metric gets barfed out as foo.bar.0xCAFEBABE.baz). How does the system cope with this enormous, hyper-dimensional input?

</comment><comment><USER11> Why is Go so popular in the industry at the moment? What's the decision process for choosing Go?

<comment><USER10> I doubt anyone can answer this for you, but why shouldn't it be? It is a very sensible language and toolchain. When writing source, it is easy to write tests and testable code and to run the tests as part of your build. At build time, it's fast and it produces easy-to-deploy statically-linked applications. At runtime, it's pretty fast and compact ... compared to python, Go is most of the way to C++-level performance.

<comment><USER12> > I doubt anyone can answer this for you, but why shouldn't it be [popular in > the industry at the moment]?

Its build system is poor if you want to rebuild the binary from the same sources (you can't precompile the libraries used), and the statically linked binary may be nice for a one-off deployment ("fire and forget" mode), but for repeated deployments and multiple versions running at the same time it reminds me the Chinese torture "death by a thousand cuts" in what you can't do with such a binary (dozens of small things that are hard to remember, each on its own not being enough to go away from static linking, but boy, they do add up).

<comment><USER10> Can you remember even one? I'm interested. I've used Go at Extremely Large Scale (tm) and never thought it was terribly troublesome.

<comment><USER12> Sure I can remember. Checking libraries the binary uses ("why this cURL fails on HTTPs? oh, it's linked against GnuTLS, that explains everything"), injecting your own library, intercepting a function (maybe syscall, or rather its libc wrapper), tracing function's execution (ltrace). All these things merely annoy if you used to have them but now you don't and it's hard to remember them all, but there's a lot of them.

And then there's also sharing memory between different processes that use the same library. You don't have that for a statically compiled binary.

<comment><USER10> All those things sound like antipatterns to me. If your application is supposed to fetch HTTPS pages then there should be an integration test for that, so you would never have to debug it in production. Having shared objects on the machine actually makes this impossible because your tests are running with different libraries than in production. Shared libraries on a machine are a non-hermetic input to your build and are to be avoided. In addition, runtime shared objects (especially of something performance-critical like crypto) inhibit all of the most important compiler optimizations like inlining. The savings from sharing text segments is small in my experience. As for ltrace, there's a million ways to trace function calls these days, like uprobe or perf.

<comment><USER12> > All those things sound like antipatterns to me. If your application is > supposed to fetch HTTPS pages then there should be an integration test for > that [...]

It's not something to regularly rely on, but something that helps in debugging and troubleshooting. Not for a programmer, but for a sysadmin.

> Having shared objects on the machine actually makes this impossible because > your tests are running with different libraries than in production.

In such a case you have your deployment process broken. And if your testing and production environments differ in this matter, they differ enough bite your ass even with your statically linked binary.

> Shared libraries on a machine are a non-hermetic input to your build and are > to be avoided.

This is merely stating a generic opinion. I want to see a concrete, coherent, technical argument supporting this.

> In addition, runtime shared objects (especially of something performance- > critical like crypto) inhibit all of the most important compiler > optimizations like inlining.

Especially crypto should not be called in a tight loop, but passed a large chunk of data. Otherwise you inhibit all of the most important defence against side channel attacks, and I guarantee that you are not competent enough to defent against that on your own.

> As for ltrace, there's a million ways to trace function calls these days, > like uprobe or perf.

So let's break one of them for no good reason?

And still, lack of any of the mentioned things is merely an annoyance once you hit it, but as I said, they are numerous and add up, while the other option, static linking, provides little benefit apart from supporting broken workflows (like different environment in testing and production).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Know of anyone using this in production outside Stripe?

<comment><USER14> Intercom use it heavily in production.

Source: am engineer at Intercom.

<comment><USER2> > Intercom use it heavily in production. Source: am engineer at Intercom.

This is awesome to hear! Are you referring to this Intercom? [https://www.intercom.com/](https://www.intercom.com/)

<comment><USER14> Yes, that's the one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's from 2016: [https://stripe.com/blog/introducing-veneur-high- performance-...](https://stripe.com/blog/introducing-veneur-high-performance- and-global-aggregation-for-datadog)

<comment><USER2> > It's from 2016

2016 was the first public release, but the project has grown a lot in that time. You can take a look at the changelog to see what's new, ever since we switched to a six-week release cycle last year: [https://github.com/stripe/veneur/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md](https://github.com/stripe/veneur/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md)

Source: I work on the Observability team at Stripe and I am the PM for Veneur.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> What do they mean by "observability data"?

Is this a fancy way of saying "privacy-sensitive user data"?

<comment><USER17> More like diagnostic stats about servers - memory usage, CPU usage and many more things like that.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Y Combinator hackaton 2-3 august. Who's going? - <AUTHOR>

Who i am going to meet there? <comment><USER2> I'm game. Any details?

</comment><comment><USER3> Looking forward to it.</comment>


Tux.io – a Linux Desktop in your browser – second try - <AUTHOR> https://tux.io <comment><USER2> I encountered difficulty trying to use the terminal when attempting to enter commands. For example if I tried to type 'ls' Firefox captured the #\l and swapped tabs to the left. If I tried to type 'python' Firefox captured the #\h and swapped tabs to the right. If I tried to type 'ruby', Firefox captured the #\u and scrolled the page up.

Unlike just about every other website that captures keypresses with Javascript, this might be one where it has a legitimate reason...at least when the terminal is running.

Good luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm sorry you're experiencing difficulties. Could you let me know the operating system and version which you are using?

What do the "#\" symbols in your report mean?

<comment><USER2> #\a is the character 'a'.

As mentioned, I am using Firefox.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Sorry for posting twice in a week, but I had to take the site down half-way through the first ShowHN. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14044541](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14044541)

</comment><comment><USER3> Very nicely done.

Even as a simple private browsing option, it's great.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for taking the time to try this.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Try going to [https://ca0.tux.io](https://ca0.tux.io) if the European site is too busy due to this ShowHN.</comment>


The Internet mystery that has the world baffled - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet/10468112/The-internet-mystery-that-has-the-world-baffled.html

<comment><USER2> Is anyone on here trying to solve this? If so, is the difficulty similar to how the writer describes?

This seems like an elaborate recruiting tool to me. Google and Microsoft come to mind, but it could be a security firm or agency too.

<comment><USER3> You can see how the Cicada Jan 2013 puzzle played out here...

* What Happened Part 1 (2013): [http://uncovering-cicada.wikia.com/wiki/What_Happened_Part_1...](http://uncovering-cicada.wikia.com/wiki/What_Happened_Part_1_\(2013\))

* What Happened Part 2 (2013): [http://uncovering-cicada.wikia.com/wiki/What_Happened_Part_2...](http://uncovering-cicada.wikia.com/wiki/What_Happened_Part_2_\(2013\))

* The Leaked Email: [http://uncovering-cicada.wikia.com/wiki/The_Leaked_Email](http://uncovering-cicada.wikia.com/wiki/The_Leaked_Email)

* More Coverage: [http://uncovering-cicada.wikia.com/wiki/Uncovering_Cicada_Wi...](http://uncovering-cicada.wikia.com/wiki/Uncovering_Cicada_Wiki)

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I don't think this is any intel agency. It smells like Google.

<comment><USER4> Why would it be Google or even an intel agency?

<comment><USER5> Both intel agencies and Google have been known to use unusual puzzles in their recruiting process.</comment></comment></comment>


Thunderclap: Vulnerabilities in Operating System Iommu Protection via DMA [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://thunderclap.io/thunderclap-paper-ndss2019.pdf <comment><AUTHOR> Write-up of the paper at [1]

[1] [https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2019/02/26/struck-by- a-t...](https://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2019/02/26/struck-by-a- thunderbolt/)</comment>


New HBR research uncovers best practices for surviving the IT talent crisis - <AUTHOR> https://enterprisersproject.com/article/2016/6/new-hbr-research-uncovers-best-practices-surviving-it-talent-crisis <comment><USER2> This is an advertisement.</comment>


3D printable shaft-passer: parametric shaft-passer in OpenSCAD - <AUTHOR> https://cubehero.com/physibles/epicepee/Cable-passer <comment><AUTHOR> In case some of you were wondering, this is related to a previous post:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6817451](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6817451)

It's a device that allows cables to pass through it. As it happened, we were talking about in on HN, and a few days later, I found this 3D printed version.

</comment><comment><USER2> As I said on the previous thread, I'd really like to see actual evidence that the thing existed, worked, and was used. Every serious discussion I can find goes back to the mention in Feynman's autobiography, in which he presented the thing as a friend-of-a-friend tale, and it's a bit improbable to accept on that alone--it doesn't look impossible, but it seems like it would be very difficult to keep the gear turning smoothly without binding.

Without convincing evidence, it's hard to see the shaft passer as anything more than an engineer's prank. I'd love to be proven wrong, though.

</comment><comment><USER3> What if you had a spoked wheel (bicycle wheel) where every spoke had a little spring loaded collar at the location of the shaft. As the shaft hits the collar, it is pushed out of the way while the other spokes, secure in their collars maintain enough tension to keep the wheel attached.

spoke closed '===', the collar is '/' and the shaft '(asterisk)'.

Spoke direction of travel is s4 -> s0.

      s0c</comment><comment>===</comment><comment>

      s1c</comment><comment>===</comment><comment>

                /
      s2o</comment><comment>/*</comment><comment>-

      s3c</comment><comment>===</comment><comment>

      s4c</comment><comment>===</comment><comment>

      etc.

<comment><USER4> When the collar closes, its spoke will have pulled apart a little bit under the tension and widened the gap. You'd need some kind of motorized grabber- puller collars to make this work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The beauty of OpenSCAD never ceases to amaze me .. minkowski as a built-in?

[http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/Transforma...](http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/Transformations#minkowski)

Wow, its just so .. elegant ..

<comment><USER6> Maybe, but it of limited use for most CAD problems - "standard" visual sketch- and-extrude systems are MUCH easier to use for 99% of things you'd want to model.

Exceptions are highly repetitive and mathematical objects like gears, CNC art, fasteners and so on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> 3D printed: [http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:193022](http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:193022)

</comment><comment><USER6> Cool, but I'd be surprised if this actually works well - the shaft would surely catch on the shoulder bit, and the force pushing the shaft through is perfectly in line with the axis of the wheel, so there is very little moment turning the wheel.

These can be fixed by:

1\. Smoothing out the outside a lot. 2\. Rotating the "guards" around the wheel by 45 degrees about the axis of the wheel, so the shaft enters at the top or the bottom of the wheel rather than in the middle.

I can make a drawing if that isn't clear.

Plus I haven't come across any low-friction 3D printed materials yet but there's not much you can do about that.

</comment><comment><USER8> Can you please describe what this is exactly and how it works?

<comment><AUTHOR> Sure, I found this blog post that describes it pretty well:

[http://somethingsurprising.blogspot.com/2011/11/feynmans- sha...](http://somethingsurprising.blogspot.com/2011/11/feynmans-shaft-passer- in-reality.html)

But basically, it was something that was posted recently on HN, about how Richard Feynman (famous physicist) happened upon a mechanism designed in WWII to avoid mines being detected by trip wires between boats, by allowing the trip-wire to pass through the shaft-passer

<comment><USER8> Wow - that's actually really cool.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Am I in the wrong for briefly wondering why 3d-printed dildos was on HN?

<comment><USER10> Yes, you are wrong. 3D printed anything is still pretty amazing, and now we have people who are trying to disrupt the adult toy industry. A worthy hack IMO.

<comment><USER11> And an excellent moniker for it, _Jade D 'Drag_.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Amount of free time to prevent burnout? - <AUTHOR>

People often emphasize work-life balance as a way to prevent burnout, but the proportion of work to life necessary for happiness is very idiosyncratic.  What is your requisite balance or amount of free time necessary to prevent burnout and achieve maximum contentment?<p>(For instance, school and the occasional coding work take up about 60 to 70 hours per week, which I consider to be pure, obligatory working time totally distinguished from leisure. However, I usually get between 15 and 25 "pure leisure" hours per week, during which time I have no professional or scholastic obligations. This is time during which I read, take photographs, and of course perform basic tasks like hygiene and eating. This seems to work well for me, and I can complete all of my work while still allocation time for personal pleasure, and so 15 hours per week would be my minimum requisite leisure time.) <comment><USER3> For life balance I wouldn't try balancing work/school vs free time but in stead fun tasks vs tedious tasks. Perhaps you find your job to be fun and you don't mind working crazy hours, but other people hate their job and working too much makes them depressed. So you gotta find a balance between stuff you enjoy doing (it could include work, school, hobby or sport) and stuff you hate doing but still have to do (it could be cardiovascular exercise, your job, your taxes, cleaning your house, etc). Stuff you enjoy doing gives you energy and revives you. Stuff you hate doing drains you. Therefore you gotta balance these two in such a way to optimize your productivity and your health.

</comment><comment><USER4> In my experience, exercise is more important than free time to prevent burnout.

</comment><comment><USER5> Just as deliberate practice and focus help you work much better at your job and other pursuits, deliberate, focused leisure will get you much more for your time spent. If you are a heavy TV watcher, you might not be fully rested with 50 free hours per week. If you exercise and do restorative, creative things that are complementary to your day job, you might be able to recharge in very little time.

A lot also depends on the quality of your sleep. If you sleep well, you'll have more time for recreative leisure and also perform better/reduce energy dissipation at your job.

</comment><comment><USER6> If your job is unsatisfying, you can experience burnout even working 50 hours a week.

That said, it's a good idea to have free time even if you love your job - <USER2> father's a workaholic and he had heart problems, now he makes time to go fishing and is much better off.

</comment><comment><USER7> A couple of days every three months. Plus 15 minutes a day to water my plants. (:</comment>


Notes On: Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find? - astro-codes <comment> Lorenz-Kraft No. Always the same.</comment>


Ask HN: Should we be concerned? Potential partner uses proprietary framework. - <AUTHOR>

I'm an intern at a growing, local web development firm. I've worked with this startup for one year. Late last year, I partnered with a group of students to form a business. Over the past five months, we've worked to develop a solid business model, talked with potential customers, and now we're ready to start software development.
My boss expressed interest in a mutual partnership and we've begun moving in that direction (although, no written contracts have been signed by either party). If we form this partnership, our software will be written in a proprietary framework solely owned by this firm. We're wary to jump into this arrangement for several reasons:
1) We won't own all of the code. The codebase would be licensed to us by the firm in return for minimal equity (less than 5%) in the company.
2) The firm's framework has gone through several revisions over the past few years. The latest revision was a complete overhaul. Even though the firm has built some impressive web applications with the framework, we're concerned about the overall quality of this codebase.
Despite these concerns, there are some positive aspects to the arrangement. We'll have easy, cheap (read: free for now) access to existing hosting services. I have extensive experience with the framework and feel comfortable undertaking the software development of our project.
We're in an awkward situation, because saying "No, we're not interested" could damage our relationship with an otherwise very connected individual with many valuable contacts.
Are there any others out there that have encountered similar situations? For those that are ahead of us, what advice do you have?
EDIT: Formatting. <comment><USER2> This sounds awful. One of the main considerations when picking _any_ kind of framework is: What kind of community is there? If I run into a problem, how likely is it that someone else has solved it first? Will it still be popular in a few years? If you use say Rails or Django you can be pretty confident about these things.

But a _proprietary framework_ that's been created by a group of students? In PHP? <http://i.imgur.com/AHqEn.jpg> ? Unless there's something big you're not telling us I wouldn't touch this with a bargepole.

Edit: Ah, so not created by students. But everything else stands - the whole arrangement sounds like huge risk unless their framework does something amazing.

<comment><USER3> What is a web framework (typically) but a router, some sort of MVC scheme and other various libraries?

Hopefully it's modular, then I would just use whatever components I wanted and leave the rest.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Being at the whim of another company potentially places you in a very compromising position. I wouldn't do it.

It doesn't sound like there are any technological or product dev advantages to using their framework. Even if that's not what you meant to say, I suspect that it's true (unless they have build something as-yet-unheard-of in PHP, which seems unlikely).

I would look for a polite way to decline the licensing deal. Tell him that you want to develop it in a different language. It shouldn't be hard defending the decision to move away from PHP.

At the same time as you say that, I would extend some sort of other offer to your boss. If they are as important and influential as you believe, then it's worth having them on board. However, I would want their compensation based on their contributions, not something ancillary (like running the company that owns the underlying framework). Chances are that he just wants to be involved -- so offer him some compensation in exchange for networking on your behalf, or serving on the board.

Again, if he's influential enough to warrant giving up 5% of the company, you should compensate him directly for that. Especially considering the alternative is super weird sounding -- licensing a proprietary framework (in PHP, no less) from a company just to not offend this man. That could put you under their thumb (even unintentionally -- what if they go out of business?) without offering any value in return.

<comment><AUTHOR> "Being at the whim of another company potentially places you in a very compromising position. I wouldn't do it."

This was one of my concerns that I did not elaborate on. Our growth could be limited by the partnership.

"Chances are that he just wants to be involved -- so offer him some compensation in exchange for networking on your behalf, or serving on the board."

I suspect you're right on this account. This sounds like a reasonable offer.

<comment><USER4> It also allows you to incentivize his participation with compensation. If you really want him to network for you, make his equity based on that.

I would also take it as a compliment. It sounds like he just wants a way to participate.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "The codebase would be licensed to us by the firm in return for minimal equity (less than 5%) in the company"

I've never heard of such an arrangement. What does licensed even mean?

<comment><AUTHOR> We would use the firm's framework to develop our product. We would not have any ownership of the framework.

<comment><USER6> What language?

<comment><AUTHOR> PHP

<comment><USER7> There are so many good, well supported and easy to use PHP frameworks out there, I really can't see a good reason to take them up on this deal. A bit of hosting isn't worth being locked in like that.

<comment><AUTHOR> We're not in it _just_ for the hosting, but for the networking and the advice. The framework is an extension of and takes a lot of queues from Zend.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Don't walk, run.</comment>


Kitchen Table Cryptozoology - <AUTHOR> http://www.skepticblog.org/2011/11/08/kitchen-table-cryptozoology/

<comment><USER2> Unfortunately, there's no convincing people that report such sightings.

</comment><comment><USER3> I doubt there are sea serpents beyond the poisonous sea snakes I have personally seen and which are not contested by anyone.

However, using this same, common "debunking" methodology, I can debunk the existence of airplanes by pointing out that sightings of alleged airplane lights in the sky can be explained by hypothesizing they actually saw the planet venus and swamp gas. Concluding then that airplanes don't exist doesn't really follow from this though.

<comment><AUTHOR> Don't you think it makes a difference that there are many other forms of evidence for the existence of airplane lights in the sky?

[http://centennialofflight.gov/essay/Government_Role/landing_...](http://centennialofflight.gov/essay/Government_Role/landing_nav/POL14.htm)

<http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/electronics/q0263.shtml> <http://www.google.com/imghp?q=airplane+lights+at+night>

AFTER EDIT: Thanks for your reply, in which you wrote,

 _The argument that because one imagines an alternative explanation, therefore something is debunked; is fallacious._

I don't read the submitted article as making a fallacious argument of that nature. From what I know of the author's other writings, observer reports are examined for plausibility on the basis of all available evidence, including evidence about how human observers can misperceive things they think they are observing. If someone tells me, "I see a moving light in the sky," I can respond with, "Let's look at how it moves, and see if it is an airplane or a satellite." If the observer says, "It's neither; it's a spaceship from another star system," my response would be "What evidence do you have for that?" The point is that the observer of something unusual (a sea monster never observed by a professional biologist, or even an experienced fisherman) should have more evidence than the bare observation for a claim that something that unusual exists.

<comment><USER3> That is a separate issue. Obviously airplanes exist. The argument that because one imagines an alternative explanation, therefore something is debunked; is fallacious. Hopefully all can understand this.

<comment><USER4> It would be much closer to say: All existing evidence has alternative, and much more plausible, explanations. Therefore, something is not debunked per se, but it loses much of its weight.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ventilators 101: What they do and how they work - <AUTHOR> https://hackaday.com/2020/03/25/ventilators-101-what-they-do-and-how-they-work/ <comment><USER2> " _There's an argument that "if there aren't enough ventilators and patients are being turned away, I'd rather have a slim chance with a hacked solution than no chance with no solution. The reality is closer to "if there aren't enough ventilators, a hacked solution will most likely do more damage than good, take up too much time from already strained health care resources, and could lead to death."_ "

This is a difficult point for many people to understand. Sometimes the problem really is too complicated for a simple solution.

<comment><USER3> > Sometimes the problem really is too complicated for a simple solution.

I've been yelling this at the top of my lungs across a range of platforms. I understand the hubris created by the Dunning-Kruger effect. We all fall prey to that at some point or another in life.

That said, just because people don't know what they don't know it doesn't magically endow them with supernatural powers to be able to create solutions to problems that have decades of development, a complex history of evolution and are the result of intense development, testing and manufacturing by dedicated multidisciplinary teams over years of dedication.

You cant Superman ventilators.

Please stop.

Find other ways to contribute. If you must work on ventilators, call established companies making them and ask how you might be able to help. Ask to work for them for free if you are able to.

<comment><USER4> That's not what Dunning-Kruger's thesis is.

I guess that makes your comment Dunning-Kruger about Dunning-Kruger.

<comment><USER3> From Wikipedia.

"In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people assess their cognitive ability as greater than it is. It is related to the cognitive bias of illusory superiority and comes from the inability of people to recognize their lack of ability."

Engineers who don't know they don't know what it takes to design, manufacture and test a life-critical medical piece of equipment at scale. Yup, very much Dunning-Kruger. They think they know far more than they actually do. There's was a link HN just a few days ago from a bunch of physicists who set out to design a ventilators using, among other things, Home Depot parts. Let me put it this way. We have someone in my family with a PhD in Physics. Super smart guy. He has never built anything and can't build anything, much less life saving devices by the thousands.

DK doesn't just apply to "dumb" people. I have worked with dozens of engineers who don't understand just how much they don't know.

Maybe not the strict intent of DK, but very much the same kind of effect.

Let's not split hairs. I think you know what I meant.

<comment><USER5> I've worked at companies that do light manufacturing. Light manufacturing because we contract out components to houses that specialize in that. I feel like a lot of software people don't get that hardware at scale requires 10X the amount of resources each step from design to production to shipping and support.

hardware also fails in the field in unpredictable ways. Especially to anyone without long practical experience.

<comment><USER3> Exactly. There's a general and very real disconnect with what it takes to make things. I watch the White House and Gov. Cuomo's press conferences every day. The repeated questions about test kits, beds, ventilators, etc. drive me up a wall.

I calm down when I realize none of the people asking the questions understand manufacturing one bit. And then I get rattled again because they are communicating falsehoods to the general population. We don't have enough masks, test kits or ventilators because you can't Superman hardware production.

It isn't Trump's fault or anyone else's. It takes time --lots of time-- to setup a manufacturing process and start to produce product at scale with consistent quality and performance. Weeks for the most trivial of products, years for more complex hardware. Yet people don't have an understanding of this.

Ventilators? Holy cow. Talk about not being able to Superman something into existence.

If people understood they would realize that we made a massive mistake over the last 50 years by allowing our industrial base to evaporate and migrate to China to the extent it has. Consumers are as much at fault as the decades of incompetent politicians who allowed this to happen. While we bothered with nonsense (wars, etc.) China quietly went from an agrarian society to the second economy in the world. And, even worse, the world's factory. We, quite literally, cannot make anything in the US or Europe without Chinese components and, in some cases, all we are able to do is design in the US or Europe and have no choice but to manufacture in China.

I suspect things might change over the coming years. The money we wasted in wars would have been far better spent keeping industry alive locally. Yes, subsidies, no taxes for manufacturers, relaxed regulatory burden, etc. Either we do those things or the next pandemic will, once again, find us not being able to even manufacture face masks at scale. How laughable is it that people have to sew face masks at home in the US? Sad.

BTW: In Spain they just woke up to the reality that they received 340,000 bad test kits from China.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> My dad died from multiple strokes this Feb. When he was transported to another hospital for a brain surgery he was intubated. A couple of days later, the ICU doctor came and told us to prepare to fulfill his wishes. They said to have him intubated again would cause a great pain for him. Also, chest compress would be lots of pain. We did let my dad go in peace. Here I am, wondering if people know what it feels like to be intubated? It is not something you can do off and on when you feel like it. There was a team of anesthesiologists there to seduce my dad when they shoved the tube in his wind pipe.

<comment><USER7> The mortality rate of ventilated COVID-19 patients could be 80% [1]. I get that we don't want people to die, but at what point is this standard intervention just cruel? It feels like we should have a serious discussion about palliative care.

[1]: [https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2...](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600\(20\)30110-7/fulltext)

<comment><USER8> Ventilation is not a very cruel intervention, especially since you will almost certainly be sedated. I've been intubated a few times, and I'd much rather take this than for example CPR which regularly breaks ribs.

<comment><USER9> I've seen nurses and doctors on Twitter mention that "every patient needs to be fixated, as they experience a feeling of drowning or asphyxiation and try to remove the tube"

I'm not sure if that experience is caused by the ventilation, or by the disease and misattributed. In any case, I've decided not to get infected by this bug. And if I fail at that, I might even consider a living will excluding ventilation.

<comment><USER8> It is true, if you are conscious you will try to remove the tube (self- extubation), as it makes you gag. But that means that sedation is too low, which could be because they don't have time to monitor everybody.

<comment><USER10> And/or they have shitty monitoring equipment made by legacy players in an industry that needs disrupting. I mean yes there are staffing issues as well, but both can be true.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I think that since building ventilators is very difficult and beyond the capability of the diy and foss communities and has a fairly low survival rate anyway, I think that we should focus on other ways in which we could help.

One way to help would be to aid physical containment. The first thing that comes to mind are online tools for communication, learning and doing basic daily life things. I think that there is still room for improvement.

The next thing comes to my mind is that people need to go out to buy food, medicine, etc. They also need to drink something and in some places water needs to be sanitized. Maybe DIY sanitizers are an option?

Food and other supplies might be bought online, but companies doing online sale and food delivery seem to have issues handling the load. I think that the biggest issue is finding drivers and delivery man to bring groceries do people's doors. Surely, self driving cars and trucks and robots taking packages and climbing staircase or using the elevator aren't an option, but I have other ideas.

People could order stuff through internet from their local shops and supermarkets and then pick them packaged in boxes from parking spaces or a drive through with store employees putting boxes in people's trunks or even a system where people go to a door with a belt, scan a QR code from an app, see the door open and their package arriving on that belt.

I remember that when the epidemic was starting, journalists reported that people rushed to shops and all the pictures of people with their carts filled with toiled paper standing very close to each other in a very long queue. To me it seemed like the best way of getting infecded.

I have many other ideas for 'improvements' and notice other 'mayor problems', but this comment is already way too long...

I hope that this isn't off topic in the ventilator thread.

</comment><comment><USER12> Ventilating a patient with active pleural effusion (fluid in the lungs) is a finicky process. The vent alarms constantly, and the patient frequently needs to be suctioned, which is a team effort often involving several bedside nurses and a respiratory therapist. Even if we stock up our ventilator supply, I have no idea how we will get enough people to operate them effectively.

<comment><USER13> > I have no idea how we will get enough people to operate them effectively.

Yes, we don't have enough ventilators. But we have more ventilators than what our currently trained staff can operate.

But that isn't a problem that excites engineers.

<comment><USER14> Actually that seems kind of exciting: making ventilators that don't need highly trained staff to operate. But maybe I'm just weird that way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> While I'm genuinely thrilled to see this on the front page, this article is incomplete and inaccurate.

First, mucus is protective of the lungs. Personally, I don't believe there really is such a thing as "too much mucus."

As someone with chronic lung problems, I cough up less crap when I can keep mucus production up. So I think that if you have junk in your lungs, it's phlegm, not mucus.

They can be hard to tell apart. The difference is phlegm is basically infected drainage, sort of like the lung equivalent of pus.

Salt and fluids are the two main components of mucus. To support mucus production, you should stay hydrated and get enough salt.

Second, there are other ways to improve lung function in the face of pneumonia and inflammation. Many of these methods are medically prescribed and used daily by people with serious, chronic, incurable lung conditions, such as cystic fibrosis.

I have talked about this before. I don't really want to harp on it or argue with people.

I'm not a doctor. I'm just someone who has a form of cystic fibrosis, so management of serious lung issues is a daily part of my life.

Please see some of my previous comments for additional info:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22651884](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22651884)

<comment><USER16> I would hesitate to write that "too mucus" is not an issue, because too mucus can cause a lot of problems for your lungs. For example, individuals with chronic bronchitis have hypertrophy of the mucus glands relative to the bronchial wall (look up Reid's index). This leads to mucus plugging within smaller alveoli and subsequent cyanosis and hypoxemia. Moreover, the obstruction due to the stasis of mucus can lead to the formation of purulent material/inflammatory necrosis (bronchiectasis) as well as damage to the mucociliary escalator. In fact, this mucus trapping is an underlying cause of the respiratory symptoms you see in cystic fibrosis and several other respiratory diseases. *I would add that in CF, the formation of the mucus is fundamentally impaired, causing it to be less effectively cleared.

<comment><USER15> I've stated as clearly as I can that this is my personal opinion and what that personal opinion is based on.

I am aware of the official explanation for CF and have noted what it is in another comment of mine in this same discussion.

I am not actually looking to get into some long tangent concerning my opinion about how CF really works. It's irrelevant to this discussion.

If you don't care for my personal opinions about how this works, please just focus on the takeaway that "non mechanical air clearance methods exist and are medically prescribed" and please seek out official medical sources of information on airway clearance, which Italian doctors are apparently using in cases not serious enough for a ventilator.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> What's interesting is I knew about cpap machine (I mean everyone does from the ads for "sleep equipment" right?) but I didn't know there is also bi-pap machines which may be suitable for some with covid19.

Some also get away with just taking in oxygen, I guess at the hospital they have to evaluate and monitor.

</comment><comment><USER18> > infection that leads to the lungs filling with fluid

> The ultimate goal with these three things is to give the patient time to > develop antibodies and fight the virus and clear out the lungs

Where does the fluid come from in the first place? Do the viruses (I can hardly believe) or bacteria produce it? Doesn't the patients own body do? If it does then why and how? Can that be inhibited?

<comment><USER19> The patient's own body makes the secretions. It's a combination of leakage from damaged cells in the lungs caused by the virus, and the natural immune response. Since the infection is inside the lungs, producing mucus is the body's way to try to encapsulate and expel contaminants, and also provides a liquid medium for antibodies and white blood cells to circulate in.

With covid-19 and flu, you generally don't die from the effects of the virus, you die from the side-effects of your own body's immune response.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Really shows you how complicated things are. I wonder if I'm given enough time if I would be able to do a full solution that I would be willing to use on myself... I don't think I would... I don't think in all honesty any single person would...

</comment><comment><USER21> Question: is it possible to oxygenate blood via IV (similar to how toxins are removed via IV in dialysis)? When babies are in the womb they get oxygen without using their lungs.

<comment><USER22> ECMO? That's even _more_ complex and resource-intensive than ventilation, with its additional share of thorny issues. I think ECMO is indeed being used to mitigate this outbreak, but the equipment is even scarcer than ventilators and it only really makes sense for patients in extreme critical condition.</comment></comment>


Why Codecademy is overrated and missing its target audience - <AUTHOR> http://www.attendly.com/why-codecademy-is-overrated-and-missing-its-target-audience/

<comment><USER2> Wow. I really disagree. I suppose it's hard for me to decide if I am a "total beginner" or "slightly intermediate" beginner, but either way, I approached the Javacript Codecademy about 2-3 months ago with a promise to myself to finish it, no matter what, and as a true beginner in my own mind.

I found the lessons and explanations generally very strong. There is A LOT of review, and I mean a lot. So, if one teacher's explanation doesn't work for you, wait 5 exercises and a huge review of the concepts will soon follow.

I understand the argument that there is "no context." Often, I find myself wondering how I get from recursively counting sheep to building a real-live website/app. But, big point here: as a beginner, I can't handle context. I need something very boiled down. As far as Codecademy teaching me the basic, boiled down concepts, I feel it has succeeded amazingly with this. I am almost done with THE ENTIRE javascript track and have learning tons. In fact, I can now pair with my husband and vaguely get what he is doing. "Oh yeah, there is your array of arrays and objects!" type stuff.

In reference to getting stuck, yea, okay sometimes that happened to me. The first thing I did was look at their Q&A forums, and someone usually had the same problem as me. There was already several solutions and explanations posted. I read through their code and then blindly fixed my own. If a student is copying and pasting, well, they are just cheating themselves. I don't believe there is anything wrong with looking at the correct code and then going back to your own and rewriting it a few times to make sure you understand. This was my approach. If this didn't work, I was proactive by going to the internet and googling things. This often worked to solve my confusion and taught me things about how "real coders" solve their problems. If I was still stuck, I could always wait until my husband got home from work, but this has rarely ever occurred. (I know not everyone has this resource and all, but he wasn't that crucial to my codecademy learning as I did codecademy during the day by myself). I have only felt a few times, in the entire Javascript track, of over 200 or so exercises, that I had to ask a programmer directly for help.

Overall, I really cannot relate to the qualms others have with codecademy. If you are expecting something magical to happen... well... yea, they don't magically make you a hirable Javascript expert in 2 short months, and, yea, not every exercise is great. Every learner, no matter WHAT platform they are using to educate themselves, should/must take some responsibility for helping themselves out of problems by going to the Q&A or to the web, or occasionally, asking a programmer friend (most of us have at least one of those). I believe that with these tools available, the RARE Codecademy issue I ever have is quickly solved. But again, even needing to do this for me was very rare, as the lessons were generally good.

So, this beginner gives them an A, after the whole Javascript track completed. I know a lot more now than I did before, and I credit Codecademy for that. I don't think they sell this as a "2 months to becoming a Javascript ninja." They did, however, tell me I would learn a lot about basic concepts, and that I did.

<comment><USER3> "The first thing I did was look at their Q&A forums, and someone usually had the same problem as me. ... If this didn't work, I was proactive by going to the internet and googling things. This often worked to solve my confusion and taught me things about how "real coders" solve their problems."

This. I don't understand why people think having to Google something here or there is a complete failure of Codecademy. If anything, that gives them a better idea of how programmers solve their everyday problems.

It would be really interesting if Codecademy attached keywords or Google phrases to each step in a lesson. If they sensed that someone was stuck, they could show the phrase they recommend Googling, and explain that that's probably what a programmer would do. Or they could just sneak in a step in a couple lessons that involve Googling something. I really think that is a huge part of the programming mentality that should be taught.

<comment><USER4> 2nd.

When making the lessons they should include a quick Google button somewhere inside. Learning to use Google to seek or ask for help is vital. So many problems would be solved in seconds or minutes if people simple just knew how to look for the answers to the questions they're asking...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Thank god _someone_ has said this. I want to learn JavaScript. I tried Codecademy. My god, it made so sense whatsoever. There was context for nothing. "Why should I learn this? How does it fit?" "Just shut up and do what this prompts tells you to do, like a beast of burden." This is why I loved the top post at HN today: Learnable Programming. If only _he_ was teaching JavaScript online, it'd make sense and be an actual breeze.

And for the record, yes, I already know to close HTML tags and that typos will kill code. And what the hell a browser is. And that JavaScript is named that to cash in on Java and should properly be called ECMAScript.

<comment><USER6> I think context is the hardest part of teaching web-application development. You have so many moving pieces that need to be taught before someone can build something tangible that often-times people get stuck or discouraged before they hit this point in the learning process.

<comment><USER7> When you sit back and look at it web application development is a total disaster. If you tried to conceive of the "ideal" UI platform (or even a "good" one) you would never, in a million years, come up with what we've got now. It is a testament to the skills of everyone in the industry that things like google maps, Gmail etc. can be built on this sky-scraper of bananas. No wonder it is hard to learn.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Codeacademy is awesome! The industry had to start somewhere and they've done a stellar job, but it could be even simpler.

That said, the issue the author appears to be having is specifically the disconnect between the marketing, _'easiest way to code'_ and the reality.

For example, my gf who is a non-coder but has modest computer literacy skills, tried it out for the first time last week (doing the python track). She was going fine until about 10 minutes in and didn't understand some really elementary concept, she spent the next 30 minutes trying to figure it out, got frustrated, and then gave up.

A quick win might be to focus on the community aspect more, helping each other, live chat rooms and forums, and explain the UI a bit better. There might even a tutoring revenue model somewhere in there...?

Technical people have years of built up mental models that we take for granted. You really have to take someone like your mom and put her on the site, to realize just how complicated it is for the masses.

</comment><comment><USER9> I have used codecademy to teach my gf's brother (12) who is a computer n00b that wants to make computer games, I'm tutoring him while he's using the computer. We hit a brick wall at assignments. He could not understand why `a=a+1` is okay, he could not under stand how `x=1` is okay and `1=x` is bad syntax. Codecademy does not explain how programming is different from algebra. Codecademy test if basic concepts are understood, eg. difference between `hello`, hello and hello() I think n00bs w/o tutoring wouldn't even get past further stuff.

</comment><comment><USER10> The problem with Codecademy (and most programming instruction) is that users are learning in a vacuum with no real direction. Learning for the sake of learning rarely works, unless you're an autodidact extraordinaire. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but in my experience, I learn best by doing -- specifically when working toward a concrete goal. Codecademy is a decent option if you just want to refresh or pick up the basic syntax of a language. But for in-depth learning -- as with all things in life -- you'll learn best by doing, especially if you need to know that certain something to progress.

<comment><USER11> @bitsoda, completely agree

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I try to stay out of these "learn to code" conversations due to being crucified for believing that it takes years to become a programmer who can create anything of value or significant complexity.

I've helped TA for CS classes and aided new CS students in college. The intro classes start with Python, second level classes move on to Java and OOP.

Students really struggle and bust their behinds to pass these classes and become good coders.

When websites try to sell an equivalent education in a matter of weeks, I always have trouble believing them.

On the other hand, I've had some good experiences with LCTHW by Zed Shaw (I used it for refreshing myself in C and regex). But I think it was helpful mostly because I already had the coding mindset.

I'd like to see a "Learn to code" website really focus on "warping" the average mind into a coder's mind. Attention to detail, thinking holistically, and iterative problem solving should be the teaching goals for any resource that wants to teach beginning coding.

<comment><USER13> > I'd like to see a "Learn to code" website really focus on "warping" the > average mind into a coder's mind. Attention to detail, thinking > holistically, and iterative problem solving should be the teaching goals for > any resource that wants to teach beginning coding.

Introductionary university-level mathematics does that to. Just take a random university's, say, Linear Algebra course.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I started codeacademy about a month ago. (I am a complete beginner at programming). The article sums up a complaint e-mail I sent the other day.

The upside for codeacademy for now is that there are few viable alternatives and there is little information about comparable sites.

</comment><comment><USER15> I spent probably 10 hours on codecademy. I've done PHP, Ruby and some CS classes in college, but day to day I don't write _that_ much code.

I wanted to get some fundamentals on Javascript to be more capable with D3.js.

If I didn't have all of that previous knowledge, I would find it really difficult to get going.

I wouldn't call Codecademy overrated. But I'd say that geeks like me (and probably you guys) are the wrong people to be evaluating Codecademy.

If they're not testing out their teaching methods on n00bs, they should get on that right now.

<comment><USER16> I'm a high school computer science teacher, and I use CodeCademy in my intro Web Development course.

For my use case, it's not bad, but the students are working through the lessons _in class_ with me there to help them when they get stuck. And they get stuck a LOT. The lessons are improving (slowly!), but they've still got a LONG way to go.

I can't imagine anyone is teaching themselves to code anything using CodeCademy that couldn't have done just as well using a tutorial online. Anyone with the natural aptitude to make it through their lessons could teach themselves with damn near anything.

<comment><USER17> I have the same experience as a student at Hackbright, a 10 week programming course. Prior to hackbright I took a lot of codecademy courses, but it never got me from newbie to 'yes I can do this' programmer. Yes, I can follow the exercise and figure out how to pass each quiz, however, I believe CodeCademy essentially suggests that you have to follow 1 way to do things to be correct, which is not how problem solving (and programming) works.

At Hackbright however, I found learning with CodeCademy to refresh some knowledge is helpful, especially with a teacher around to ask questions. Most of the time, the questions confirm that my solution is also valid, but it's just different from the CodeCademy answer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Why is this being posted on Attendly's blog? This seems suited for a personal blog, I don't think a startup's product blog is really an appropriate place to lambast another product/startup/project.

Not to say the opinions expressed are wrong, just that this stuff shouldn't be mixed with your startup's product blog.

</comment><comment><USER19> I think there are 2 key issues at play here:

1\. The difference between user expectations and delivery

2\. Not enough of a narrative and different levels of motivations

1\. This is where you expect something to be really easy, or really amazing, or really beautiful but instead get something simply easy, amazing, or beautiful. The fact it doesn't have the superlative means a slight let-down or disappointment.

When I tackled Hartl's RoR tutorial, he made it clear that even just getting starting by installing and configuring the tools and environment can be a bit of bitch, particularly for new comers. Sure enough, when I encountered problem after problem, I was mentally prepared that this could happen. I wasn't discouraged.

I think Codeacademy would be well served to provide some kind of contextual introduction for how difficult – but ultimately rewarding – programming can be. Rather, it makes it sounds like a stroll in the park with some friends that can be picked up at the drop of a hat. This is inevitably going to lead to frustration when the user finds this isn't the case. Their expectations are not matched by the reality.

A second aspect to this is that programming is different than other pursuits you may do in your spare time, like sports, writing or drawing. For example if you're a bad pool player, writer or drawer you can still play, write and draw 'till your heart's content and reach the end of the game/book/picture. It doesn't matter whether you're good or not.

But with coding, you can't just offer up any old attempt at the code and have a program run for you. It has to be correct code. So it becomes the equivalent of saying why not come play an awesome game of pool with your friends, but when you turn up there's a cranky coach who won't let you take a shot unless you have perfect form and execution. Or a writing class where the teacher crosses out your work in red pen and won't let anyone read it until it is grammatically perfect and conveys your meaning in perfect clarity and beautiful prose! I can imagine these activities would quickly get frustrating too in such a context, and wind up losing your interest unless you were prepared for such rigor.

2\. The second issue with Codecademy is a lack of narrative. Other comments point out that there are multiple entry points and it doesn't always get you to follow a linear path. This is something that services like Treehouse try to improve upon (I started learning HTML and CSS with them) by bringing elements of gamification to the tasks. You win badges, unlock new lessons, get treated to funny videos, take quizzes and it generally feels like you're progressing as part of a narrative.

The problem with learning to code is that most exercises are pretty dull and repetitive. They're like Mr Miyagi's "wax on wax off" lessons – it's hard to see the point to them without knowing the end goal. The reason why Daniel LaRusso continues to do this annoying tasks if because he has a really powerful motivation to do so. He knows he wants to master karate to stand up to bullies and prove himself in the sport.

I think for anyone who casually just thinks 'learning to code sounds fun' then they're doomed to failure, because it is hard work and has a lot of obstacles to overcome. Whereas someone who has a business idea or a problem they really want to be able to solve will happily stick with it, because they have a vision for what it will help them achieve. I'm not sure how Codecademy could possibly cater to these different types of individual. One amazingly cool way though, would be ask at the beginning "describe what you want to build" and create an algorithm that could match the types of functionality required with the video content that would help you build it. Then you'd have a really, really compelling, tailored narrative that helps you to your end goal. Then, for the more casual user, they could try and think of more fun, practical applications they can work towards building to give them a sense of purpose.

As everyone has referenced though, Codecademy – and others like it – is an amazing step in the right direction, and will only get better with time. The fact that people care about it is a major indicator that it is on the right track and will ultimately succeed.

</comment><comment><USER20> Yeah, it's not perfect, but their goal was obviously to get you to jump straight in to coding. No explanations, no videos, just "bam, you're coding." Could they do a better job? I'm sure they could, and I'm sure in the future they will. But couldn't every product?

</comment><comment><USER21> I actually agree with much of this. Having attempted to "re-learn" to code since my time in college I got several lessons in before hitting a wall where the on-site messaging failed to be helpful anymore. I loved the concept, and was more than able to find help with Google and friends, but to keep things on-site and cohesive, they'll have to improve some of that.

PS- I know that most developers google answers as much as they write things

</comment><comment><USER22> I think Udacity does an excellent job of structuring intro coding lessons. They provide the proper motivation (build a search engine) and explain the theory behind what you're doing.

<comment><USER23> I agree, I've tried a bunch of different "Learn to Code" sites out there and think the Udacity's "Intro to Computer Science" course to be the best, IMO...

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> If you want to really learn to code as a beginner, you should check out CodeHS (<http://codehs.com>). You get tutoring and help from real people, and the programs you write are actually really fun and interesting.

The focus isn't really on syntax but more on problem solving with a computer and helping motivate why you should write good quality code.

The idea is that you become a good programmer by having people read your code and give you good quality help and feedback.

</comment><comment><USER25> A beginner, who is willing to put in a bit of effort and that wants to discover the magic and beauty of programming?

Check out the Abelson/Sussman lectures: [http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.001/abelson- sussma...](http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.001/abelson-sussman- lectures/)

</comment><comment><USER26> I really don't agree with this. I had no experience with coding, but after messing around on Codecademy I was able to put a website together > <http://outgrow.me/> Isn't that the whole point?

</comment><comment><USER27> codeavengers.com is way better...you dont have to search through forums if your answers are your wrong.

</comment><comment><USER28> I have to completely agree with this</comment>


Hacker farmer security - <AUTHOR> Hi HN,
So we have a piece of land (4 acres) that we are leasing to try out some small scale farming here in Zambia.
For context, the farm has a small house where 2 people currently live to take care of the farm.
The current issue we are facing is thieves. Not dangerous thieves, but small scale - wait for you to sleep and sneak in to steal anything not cemented down. I kid you not, they have stolen an unsecured submersible pump, later came for an electric cable delivering power from the house to the pump and also some Poly Pipes. Same MO - wait for the rainy day when now one can hear them, jump over the wire fence around the property and steal. Discovered only in the morning.
This is greatly limiting what we can do - I had a dream of undertaking a drip based irrigation and having some free range chickens that sleep in a little house, but of course this is failing.
Being a programmer in my day job, I have been trying to come up with some motion sensor based security that can work with our constraints. Please help with suggested components Constraints:
  1. Unstable power supply - hoping for solar possible solution.

  2. Limited ability to run power cables from power source (house) to for example motion sensor

  3. Need a sensor that can work in heavy rain - and maybe "see" through crops such as maize.

  4. Easy to operate (can be complex to setup)

  5. $1000 budget

  6. Can be bought online
 Just for full information, I have strongly considered security dogs, but there is some taboo here when people see dogs going walking through vegetables that people have to buy probably the same day so when we tried it, our customers who come to the farm shunned it. <comment><USER2> Without soldering skills: wildlife motion camera or something like that, depends on version it can send mms or email. Or if you want save more, buy lights with motion sensors and put how much as you can just remember burglars hate light

<comment><USER3> Very good, cheap motion sensor enabled solar light with good illumination.

[https://m.banggood.com/12-LED-Solar-Powered-PIR-Motion- Senso...](https://m.banggood.com/12-LED-Solar-Powered-PIR-Motion-Sensor-Light- Outdoor-Garden-Security-Wall-Light-p-1010454.html?rmmds=search)</comment></comment>


Couple arrested after feds trace their IPs as having accessed Silk Road - <AUTHOR> http://boingboing.net/2014/11/21/california-couple-arrested-on.html

<comment><USER2> Somewhat misleading headline. The IP trace led them to the couple but old fashioned techniques like surveillance provided the evidence to actually make an arrest.

<comment><USER3> It is interesting that having _visited_ a website that's been mentioned in multiple mainstream publications seems to have served as grounds for surveillance. I hope there was more to it than that.

<comment><USER4> While it could be 'a visit' got them flagged I think it's more likely their selling weed on the site resulted in heavy usage which led to surveillance.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How did you get website traffic? - <AUTHOR> I have tried posting to HN, reddit, etc. Blogging is what I will try next. What are some things you guys have done to increase website traffic? <comment><USER2> There is really no good answer to this. Just keep trying stuff.

My language learning website (www.captionpop.com) was ignored by HN, reddit, and the other random places I posted it. Finally, I put a post on producthunt and it spent the whole day in the top 5. From there, other blogs started writing about it. Ironically, it was then passed all over reddit.

I had another web property that was totally ignored, and then one day the Google Chrome Webstore decided to feature it. From then on, I had more than enough traffic.

So, there is no magic formula. You just have to keep trying stuff and wait for the internet gods to bless you.

Blogging is a popular approach, but I think people underestimate how much work this is. You have to consistently write good quality blog articles that are actually solving problems for people. This can be as much work as building your actual product.

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool website! I was thinking about paying someone to write a handful of articles for a blog. As It would be a lot of work, and work that I'm not especially good at.

"You just have to keep trying stuff and wait for the internet gods to bless you." I like this quote

<comment><USER3> It's what I'm doing. I tried generating my own content - it's tons of work, and you might work for hours on a piece of content that won't interest anybody. I find it's better to delegate/pay someone who is good at writing while I'm focused on building product.

<comment><AUTHOR> This exactly. Mind sharing your product?

<comment><USER3> [https://ppn.gethuan.com/](https://ppn.gethuan.com/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Play to your strengths. I'm a programmer (there's a good chance you are too if you're hanging out here), so my preferred technique is scalable content generation for SEO.

For example, I get about 90% of my 200,000 monthlies to my marketplace site selling law notes via two initiatives: \- I hired an UpWorker to generate 500+ short case summaries (perhaps 300 words each), and put them on individual pages on my website. \- I turned 30% of the PDF and DOCX documents people upload to sell on my website into HTML as free samples that can be picked up my Google.

I have a series of videos explaining more here: [https://www.semicolonandsons.com/episode/seo-strategies- for-...](https://www.semicolonandsons.com/episode/seo-strategies-for-web-apps- part-i)

<comment><USER5> Fantastic answer!

Thanks for sharing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I created a web-based utility. That on its own isn't much to bring people in (or even back). I quickly found out that it was important to keep the site updated regularly with fixes and new features.

Announcements of new changes would be published to sites like HN or Slashdot as press releases. So I wasn't really posting things like "hey, check out my site, it does X!" It was more like "How Y can integrate into X" or "trending stats on Z, provided by X". That sort of thing.

It was also crucial to have a mailing list in place where people could sign up easily. That way, I could reach the users directly without worrying about trying to get a post approved or posted onto a third party's site. The other benefit is that, if people liked my updates, they would sometimes go out of their way to repost my updates on sites that they visit that weren't even on my radar.

Communications would always try to tie back into relevant problems or interests of our userbase's demographic, but referring to the site as a potential solution. So there's value for readers, even if they aren't my users.

Just keep trying new things and new audiences. Things will click into place as you go if you're delivering quality and as long as you don't stop.

<comment><AUTHOR> Have you ever tried writing blog posts of relevant subjects? How about social media or youtube?

<comment><USER6> Blog posts, absolutely. That was the main form of each press release and article, actually.

Social media requires a lot more smaller and frequent effort which I honestly haven't been able to keep up with to say whether or not it's worthwhile.

Videos, though, are much harder because they take a long time to produce, relatively speaking. They also aren't visually engaging for the subject matter in my case.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> To paraphrase the great answer given by ' jbaudanza':

Be consistent in both producing value, and in sharing it. Try to get better at both of these activities as you progress.

Your 'luck surface area' [1] will, over time, increase and then network effects will take over.

[1] - [https://www.codusoperandi.com/posts/increasing-your-luck- sur...](https://www.codusoperandi.com/posts/increasing-your-luck-surface-area)

</comment><comment><USER7> Reach out to a few people with a sizeable audience (or some other means to potentially amplify it) who may be interested. And also don't immediately write off channels that didn't work. There's a lot of luck involved. You can definitely try again later in a different way.

Then there's always paid advertising don't be afraid of it. With not much $ you can do a lot of experimenting.

</comment><comment><USER8> Nathan Barry's Authority [1] is a very good and instructive read.

Focus on writing every single day. Create educational content. Have only one ask as the call-to-action in the article.

[1] [https://nathanbarry.com/authority/](https://nathanbarry.com/authority/)

<comment><USER9> Nathan has a lot of good stuff to share and persistence is key. I additionally recommend "Traction" by Weinberg & Mares.</comment></comment>