How Meditation Changes the Brain and Body - <AUTHOR> http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/02/18/contemplation-therapy/ <comment><USER2> I've had serious anxiety issues and meditation has been the only thing to help significantly. I've spent ~1.5 hours/day meditating for the past six months or so, and I've studied meditation literature pretty seriously for about the past year.

At least in my case—and I think this isn't so unusual—there is a steep learning curve: for most people there's just not enough reason to stick with it. That said, at this point I can hardly imagine something more worthwhile. After acquiring some facility with it, my everyday experience with life feels more substantial—more 'real.' There's a kind of energy, curiosity, and enthusiasm that now often presents itself which I hadn't seen in a long time—maybe since I was ~22 or so (I'm 30 now). I also feel way less need to do things like smoke/drink, and have a restored sense of smell and taste. If you've felt like the world's turned grey at some point, give it a try.

This is my favorite source of info on the subject—very substantial content, yet light and even entertaining at times: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEw2mHpVv9A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEw2mHpVv9A)

<comment><USER3> Do you happen to have a good link to a jump-start article about meditation. I am in a sinilar situation as you, life is gray, anxiety problems, ...

How should I start doing this today (and the next 4 weeks) without doing too much initial research?

<comment><USER4> I suggest you start with HeadSpace, it's an app with zero spirituality or religion, and IMO killer content (if I'm not mistaken, the voice of the videos is that of the founder himself, who used to be a monk). Most of the content you have to pay for, but it provides the first 10 lessons (for the first 10 days, although you can replay them as much as you want) for free, and I think they're a fantastic, easy way to get started.

<comment><USER5> "Killer content"? I did 5 of the first free sessions and the content was essentially the same each time and the process is probably easier to do on your own once you have learned the 3-4 steps that are repeated. Did I miss something?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> For those of you who consider meditation a bunch of mumbo-jumbo, I get it, for I felt (and sometimes still feel) the same way. But let me try to phrase meditation in the terms I understand it as.

We often find ourselves in stressful or difficult situations, we are constantly bombarded by external worries, and we think it is difficult to deal with our problems. However, no matter how big external issues are, the way that we ultimately interpret these problems is up to our mind. At times we might find a dark joke about death incredibly funny, and at other times it may make us cry. Meditation takes a break from dealing with these interpretations of the world for a moment (instead concentrating on something basic like breathing) and in doing so, gives us a way to acknowledge the fact that our interpretations of the world are all in our head. So even if we can't extend full control over them, these thoughts and feelings are still ours and we might have some influence over them, and it turns out even briefly having this feeling can affect your mind in the long term.

A side effect of meditating is that you might learn to replicate the sense of "stepping outside the situation" even outside of meditation, allowing you to relax and consider the big picture rationally in intense moments in which you might've been originally felt too caught up "in the moment".

<comment><USER7> I don't consider it mumbo-jumbo. But I feel it doesn't fit well with my Western mindset: it costs a lot of time, and is that really the best way to spend that time?

I'd rather go out and walk, and think about problems I want to solve. Or use the time to get something done.

<comment><USER4> A lot of time? I'd say 30 minutes a day (consistently) is enough to get significant benefits. And after all, don't we all easily waste 30 minutes a day or things which really don't contribute much to our lives? Say, browse reddit or watch a TV show. Personally, I've found that trying to meditate in the middle of the day, even late at night, when I'm all "wired" from/during work, or just everyday life, is hard. What I found way easier to stick to is meditate first thing in the morning, only after going to the bathroom. At this point, if you're like me, you're the least anxious / stressed / wired or however you want to call it, and it's way easier to justify spending 30 minutes just being present and quiet. Any other time of the day and it feels like "I don't have time for this", even if I just wasted 30 or 60 minutes procrastinating (or I know I'm about to).

<comment><USER7> I need to get up way too early, get myself and my children dressed and fed, and commute to work. In the evening it's commute back, eat, get kids to bed, do chores, and then there's about two hours of free time / social things / time to interact with my wife.

So about a quarter of available time.

I would be a bit more relaxed, I know, it might have other benefits. But not enough, I think.

<comment><USER8> There is this Zen proverb that goes like this:

"You should sit in meditation for twenty minutes every day -- unless you're too busy. Then you should sit for an hour."

While I don't think it's necessary to sit an hour every day, it does inspire me. In my experience, if you meditate every day for a few weeks/months, you will start feeling more 'grounded'. You'll be more calm in most situations. You will be chasing external happiness less, and just be more content with being. It's pretty hard to describe, but to me, it seems like a good thing.

<comment><USER7> I know the proverb.

Zen is a form of Buddhism. Buddhism is interesting and many of the things is says are wise, but ultimately it sees life as suffering and its aim is to reduce suffering.

As interesting as it is, I come from a culture that is too different. No matter how futile it ultimately is, I want to _achieve things_. Being at peace with life feels good but is ultimately not enough.

<comment><USER9> Have you looked into Stoicism? It's got a lot of the Buddhist elements of learning to accept the present while also focusing on achievement. I think of it in some ways as a Western-friendly mindfulness approach. A Guide to the Good Life [1] is a great book on the subject, and in the past has helped me be more effective in life, while also being happier. I've also heard good things about The Obstacle Is the Way [2].

[1]: [http://www.amazon.com/Guide-Good-Life-Ancient- Stoic/dp/01953...](http://www.amazon.com/Guide-Good-Life-Ancient- Stoic/dp/0195374614/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1455899137&sr=8-1)

[2]: [http://www.amazon.com/Obstacle-Way-Timeless-Turning- Triumph/...](http://www.amazon.com/Obstacle-Way-Timeless-Turning- Triumph/dp/1591846358/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1455899281&sr=8-1&keywords=The+obstacle+is+the+way)

<comment><USER7> Marcus Aurelius has been on my reading list for years, but he never got to the top of the list. Maybe it's time to read something on this subject, like one of your suggestions, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> First time I meditated was one month ago. 20 Minutes. It was a pain, doing nothing, just breathing, keeping focus on your breath and body. I was suffering every second, doing nothing, having no thoughts, no mind wandering. It was so hard and awfully boring. Once finished I went back to my Macbook welcoming me with an open Facebook tab from my last session. My first thought:

 _I didn 't do that shit for 20 minutes to be now on Facebook_—and closed the tab.

<comment><USER11> I had the same experience. Though I tried multiple times with different methods, I have never benefited from meditation, or I never felt so, contrary to most studies. Maybe we are in the <0.05 population?

<comment><USER12> You're (both) doing it wrong. For starters, meditation is a learned skill. It's not something you can do right off the bat.

Second, it's not about 'not thinking'. It's about being aware of your thoughts, as if watching them from a distance.

Third, you can't _not_ benefit from taking some to sit and quiet your mind. That's as absurd as saying you don't benefit from sleep or rest.

<comment><USER13> > Third, you can't not benefit from taking some to sit and quiet your mind. > That's as absurd as saying you don't benefit from sleep or rest.

How do you know this?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Meditation didn't "click" for me for a long time because it wasn't ... aggressive enough.

A friend taught me this: Sit or lie still. Burn your body with a white-hot fire, starting at your toes. Incinerate yourself. Visualize intense fire with a child's pure unfettered imagination. Let that fire burn your body slowly, creeping up inch by inch with its quiet impersonal anger. When your body has burnt up, the fire quiets down and the weightless ash blows away. Then you open your eyes.

This worked for me - I felt it! - and opened up meditation for me. I have since had very good success with the Headspace app, for instance.

Another important thought for me was "Meditation is watching your thoughts go by like the bubbles in a glass of champagne."

Overall, in a nutshell, what meditation has done for me is: There is more of what should be. There is less of what shouldn't be.

<comment><USER4> Your last statement really resonates with my experience. The effects of meditation are indeed subtle but powerful. And I also vouch for Headspace.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> There is also a growing body of evidence that for _some people_ mindfulness and meditation can cause intense and lasting anxiety and exacerbate depression. (Just one of several recent stories on the subject: [http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/jan/23/is- mindf...](http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/jan/23/is-mindfulness- making-us-ill))

That has been my experience. I've done meditation retreats and the like. I do find it slows down my mind, but can also surface things that frankly I'm perfectly happy to leave under the surface.

I also don't believe every trauma or internal struggle can be answered or managed, or should be at a given time. Sometimes the best sanity-preservation mode is to ignore it until enough time has passed when we have the mental tools to face it. Mindfulness and meditation both make it hard to bury stuff til you're ready to mentally dig it up. Perhaps day-to-day stress benefits most from it.

I think it's a great idea for some people and I can see the attraction. But I also get tired of people suggesting it to me.

Massage on the other hand...that's like miracle medicine.

<comment><USER16> ... can also surface things that frankly I'm perfectly happy to leave under the surface.

Mind you they _will_ hurt you over time if you just push them away. You probably should get professional help first before trying to meditate.

<comment><USER17> > Mind you they _will_ hurt you over time if you just push them away.

How do you know that? (I'm not being facetious.)

I seem to recall there being reasonably solid[1] evidence that thinking about traumatic experiences can actually worsen anxiety and other PTSD symptoms. (Too lazy to look up references, and I don't have access to any paywalled journals anyway, so...) The evidence seems to point to just leaving things be may be better (well, less bad) than trying to "work through" the issues because it means that you'll be wallowing in the traumatic experience over and over.

[1] By psychology standards.

<comment><USER18> No access to paywalled journals? Try Sci Hub! (formerly on the HN front page) - sci-hub.io

<comment><USER17> Whoever did this is a f'in hero!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The original research paper from Sci-Hub: [http://sci- hub.io/10.1016/j.biopsych.2016.01.008](http://sci- hub.io/10.1016/j.biopsych.2016.01.008)

For those who are not aware of Sci-Hub:

Setting knowledge free: Sci-Hub is The Pirate Bay for research papers [http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/Sci-hub-research- pira...](http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/Sci-hub-research- piracy/#ixzz40az6XNjQ)

<comment><USER20> Search is broken?

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> For those who "don't have time" or find it difficult to get into a mindful state while doing meditation: try it while performing some sort of routine task (something we do on 'autopilot').

      During a drive or commute
      While you play a video game or sport
      When you're cleaning your house

If you experience a side-thought like the clichéd, "did I leave the stove on?" answer it ("no, I surely didn't") or eliminate it ("I don't remember, but I'll find out when I get home") and move on to the next thought. Eventually you'll run out of these side-thoughts.

Some people find it helpful to run through Maslow's Hierarchy as a guide for this mental checklist: ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs))

It might take a few tries, or maybe many, to run through this subconscious checklist of side-thoughts, but the goal is to run out of them. Then you're left to yourself, no side-thoughts to distract you.

This, in itself, can be worrisome because many people aren't comfortable with what it feels like to "just be," so hack your discomfort by creating another checklist: how does this make me feel physically? Is this state of mind stressful to me? What would it feel like if it wasn't? How would it look if I were the kind of person who handled this particular stress easily?

Point is, don't rush it.

Give it several tries. You probably need more repetitions to consciously break down your own checklist of thoughts.

Much of meditation's benefit (to myself) is in learning to handle decisions and worries as they happen, and removing them from my checklist of things to meditate over when I actually do take the time to meditate later in the day. Most things people worry over don't matter.

Hopefully my lens helps someone.

<comment><USER22> Please do not try to meditate while driving, especially if you are a novice.

Meditation is about not responding to internal or external stimuli which is the antithesis of the mindset you should be driving with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I often hear people say, "hm, I'll go meditate on that..." Or a guy I know who says he meditates on his ideas for his art. But actually, that is the complete opposite of what meditation is supposed to be. When properly meditating, the goal is to _not_ concentrate or think about anything.

I just point this out because the basics of what meditation actually is are widely misunderstood by most Westerners -- and even some I met in Asia.

<comment><USER24> > When properly meditating, the goal is to not concentrate or think about > anything.

I don't understand how have you got this notion about mediation. What you have mentioned can be useful for relieving oneself of thoughts which are a burden.

On the other hand, mediation is to concentrate on a purpose, directing everything towards the purpose, even the thoughts sprouting from your subconsciousness, all which eventually fade away.

<comment><USER23> There is clearly a lot of misconception about what meditation is, even in the responses to my comment, many contradictory ideas.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Meditation is a work-around only.

As written in another post: I started one month ago and then I was frequently meditating with Headspace (which is awesome btw).

While meditation helped me to go through hard times it never solved the underlying problem. It's like taking painkillers without addressing the real cause. I solved the real underlying problem few days ago and I feel like god again.

<comment><USER25> > I started one month ago

If I started programming one month ago and I couldn't yet get a high paying job or have a brand new app that is surging on the App Store, would that be a failure? I have been practicing meditation for 25 years and, even though I was earnest, it took me more than 7 years to achieve a state of perfect tranquility. I still have anxious moments in day-to-day life but I mitigate those with meditation. It's like washing your body to keep it clean.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Just a small note, you don't have to do nothing to practice mindfulness, I do it all the time while driving, walking, or doing anything that I have on "autopilot". All you need to do is be non-reactive; when you experience something (including a spontaneous thought), stop your mind from automatically pulling up associated thoughts and memories.

I find it helpful to remember that the sentient fraction of matter in the universe is vanishingly small, so your ability to experience is truly a blessing. Mindfulness occurs almost by accident if you just focus on savouring your experiences.

<comment><USER27> Totally agree, especially with the grattitutde aspect for existing. In my experience, getting into 'the zone' while running, hiking or bouldering is what I consider my meditation. Treadmill running doesn't cut it, it's got to be outdoors where my brain is stimulated by all the natural colors, sounds and patterns. It's a far cry from what alot of people think of when they think meditation (sitting quietly doing nothing). When running trails or climbing, its hard to be distracted by other thoughts, and the mind is clear but focused intently on the next step or move. For others curious to try meditation, I recommend trying minimalist running, or any activity which brings you closer to nature and your own body.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I really liked the recent book _The Mind Illuminated_ by John Yates as a basic meditation guide. Goes from the basics to advanced concentration, has detailed practice instructions for each stage, and is grounded in cognitive science with basically zero mysticism in the mix. An earlier short article [http://dharmatreasure.org/wp- content/uploads/LightOnMeditati...](http://dharmatreasure.org/wp- content/uploads/LightOnMeditationHandout.pdf) describes the same 10-stage model the book is about.

<comment><USER29> I really like this book as well. It would be my first recommendation to any meditator, new or experienced.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> None of this really surprises, a lot of what meditation is, is controlling stress and focus. By learning to control those, everything from the different chemicals released in your body to the actual neural structures can change.

My startup is actually working on something very similar called neurofeedback[1]. Which is very similar to meditation, in that we help users better control the subprocess of their mind. It's not perfect, but it actually helps significantly with people with epilepsy manage seizures (by helping them realize when it is going to happen)[2].

Other conditions, specifically ADHD and anxiety have also been shown to be treatable (to a degree) using this treatment[2]. Treatment using neurofeedback for depression has also been shown to be better than placebo[3].

Unfortunately, there is limited research funds to study this, and there really should be more. My startup is gearing up to do trials shortly, hopefully to make this treatment more available.

[http://synaptitude.me/](http://synaptitude.me/)

[1] [http://synaptitude.me/blog/neurofeedback- in-200-words/](http://synaptitude.me/blog/neurofeedback-in-200-words/)

[2] [http://synaptitude.me/blog/literature-overview-of-using- neur...](http://synaptitude.me/blog/literature-overview-of-using- neurofeedback/)

[3] [http://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/322290](http://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/322290)

</comment><comment><USER31> Try this cool app: [http://www.calm.com/](http://www.calm.com/) I also enjoiy using another app called Pause, developed by Monument Valley team.

</comment><comment><USER12> If you're looking for a low-entry start to meditation, Headspace is a great little app. It starts off easy, with 10 10 minute guided sessions.

<comment><USER32> Even a lower entry: sit down, put five minutes on a timer, start counting your breaths up to ten. one - out, two - in and so one. Once at ten, start from one. The odd breath out functions as a check sum. If five minutes seems easy, try 10.

If you notice you've lost count, it's ok, just start from one.

If you notice you are lost in your thoughts, it's ok, just try to gently move focus back to counting and breathing. Do not "give extra energy on purpose" to thoughts that pop into your mind, just aknowledge them.

This is, IMO, is the core of the meditation routine - training on introspective perception and association of observation of personal thoughts with calmness.

The focusing of breathing is a hack on autonomic nervous system as I understand it. It's the only bodily function that one can control that backfeeds into the brain, and calming the breath can be used to calm the brain as well.

I'm not an expert, I've just read a few books that I've not double checked - if this is somehow wrong please correct me.

<comment><USER33> There's not one 'proper' way to meditate, but what you're describing is indeed the most basic, no-frills approach, and so far it's been my preferred form.

That said, even most basic teachings add a 'warmup' and 'cooldown' to the breathing part. I've been using the Headspace app and the core template always includes the following:

\- sit down comfortably, and use a soft focus on some point in front of you \- breathe in and out a few times, audibly enough that someone sitting next to you would hear it \- close your eyes and focus on the points of the body that connect with the chair/floor/whatever. \- do a 'body scan' from the top of your head to your feet. As you do this, make note of tensions, as well as pleasant sensations, but don't dwell on them. \- this body scan often leads to a more general awareness of how you're feeling physically and/or emotionally. Make note of that too, but once again don't dwell. \- do the 'core part' that you describe \- once you're done with this, basically do the earlier steps in reverse. \- for bonus mindfulness practicing: think of what you want to do next, and practice maintaining the state of mind you're in (focus only on what you do now, rather than constantly being ahead of yourself in your mind)

Personally, I've found the warmup to be crucial to my own meditation, and the cooldown to be very beneficial in 'maintaining' the calmness throughout the day.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> There is much more than meditation, there are many excercises you can do to feel better, to "connect with your soul".

It is a matter of practice, same as for sport. If you go only one time at gym, you will not get so much results.

It would be ideal to meditate twice a day, 20 minutes. If you can move your energy from one chackra to another it is even better. You can also think of chackras as your gland system, it doesn't matter if it sounds crazy for you we have 7 whirls of energy in our (physical) body, if it makes you feel good, it is ok.

In my personal experience I found that meditation is healthy, so I recommend it. However keep in mind that there is much more than meditation, which is just the first step.

<comment><USER35> Can you refer someone who's interested in these whirls you're talking about to any sources to get started with?

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> 2009: 1 hr

2010: 30 min

2011-2014: 10 min

2015-present: 0-10 min

these are my daily averages. i have one rule: before I go to bed, I must assume the lotus position on the floor in front of my bed.

2015 was particularly a challenging year for me (startup problems), and it was all i could do to even assume the lotus position for a second. so for much of 2015 i really didn't meditate, which was ironically when i probably needed it the most. such is my life.

it takes around 4 minutes for me to reach what i call stage 1. this is when all the normal chatter in your mind ceases and your breathing is synced (i've also noticed that it takes around 40 breaths, which is roughly 4 min, so sometimes for shits and giggles i just count to 40). after much trial and error i've noticed i don't even need to do anything; it's the mere passage of 4 minutes that gets me to stage 1.

thereafter is when the real effort begins. it is a constant effort to reach what i call stage 2, or what i consider the beginning of true mindfulness, which means you are neither thinking of the past nor the future. i would say i only enter stage 2 at seconds at a time, only to fall out again into stage 1 (usually by an intruding thought, and that thought is usually "oh, i've got it!").

to be honest, i don't know what the effects have been for me. i seriously don't feel any different. anyway, how are we to separate the effects of meditation with the normal process of maturation or aging? am i getting calmer because of meditation or because i am getting older?

i take it on faith. faith in data and science. our personal experience with meditation cannot be the guide with which we measure it's effectiveness, because subjective experience is exactly that. i liken it to flossing. i floss my teeth every day but still have worse gum recession than those who do not. my periodontist and dentist chalk it up to genetics, because that is the best they can conjecture based on the current science. we can measure flossing easily; without a brain scanner in our basement we cannot so measure effects of meditation. so from the research i take it on faith that the effects must be beneficial on my brain.

<comment><USER37> A lot of what you say resonates with me and my recent experience. I found that when I need meditation the least, it's easy to find time and the process is effortless. When I need to meditate the most, this is when I can't find the time and settling down for even a minute is tough.

I dont know what the long term effects are, but certainly short term effects are striking. Keep on meditating :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> It is very surprising that researchers could measure changes just after _three_ days!

One alarming detail about the article, however is the mention of "dose", which I think reflects the general Western, mainstream attitude to meditation. Mindfulness and meditation is being perceived as a tool of "relaxation", "reducing stress", dealing with anxiety, and so on. And it might be because of being "marketed" as such.

However, although meditation can in fact help you deal with stress and make you more relaxed, reducing it just to "benefits" is missing the point. After all, it is actually "you" who is dealing with stress, being more relaxed, etc.

Meditation is about paying attention to your thoughts _without_ any judgment, experiencing your immediate thoughts and feelings directly, facing yourself, gently watching your _unpleasant_ feelings, thoughts, memories and embracing them with all their both unpleasantness and pleasant joy. In the end, you get more and more in touch with yourself _and_ the reality, and become more alert, observant, thoughtful, compassionate, etc.

And that actually makes it a practice of _not_ running away from stress, anxiety, sorrow, but in contrast, facing all that with a gentle attitude.

Finally, it is a _constant_ and long-term practice, not something like a "pill" with "doses" to deal with whatever "symptoms".

<comment><USER39> Yep its such a western practice to cost-benfit analysis on everything. Ironically it the same thought process that is causing anxiety in the first place. People trying to make more money via meditation just sounds odd.

Pls guys do yourself a favor and listen to JidduK before you embark on meditation

short version - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOLYN64dfKs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOLYN64dfKs)

long version - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b9E9gz3yTE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b9E9gz3yTE)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I have/had pretty bad panic disorder. There were times I panicked all night and didn't sleep at all. I also wouldn't leave the house, and ended up at the emergency room a few times. I tried therapy, medication, etc.. Meditation is the only thing that worked. It has really helped me in many other ways, also.

In case no one else has recommended it yet - I _highly_ recommend a 10-day Vipassana meditation course: [https://www.dhamma.org](https://www.dhamma.org)

They are free and not affiliated with any religious organization. But be warned - it isn't easy! I like to call it "meditation boot camp." It breaks you down, but you grow and learn from the experience. It really is one thing you can try that can have a significant impact on your life and change its course. It is a unique experience - you can't read or write or speak for 10 days.

</comment><comment><USER41> There's a lot of false disagreement going on in these threads. It should be noticed that talking about meditation, and the resultant discussions about the uses of meditation, the strange experiences of no-self/universality/etc, the nature of the self-ing mind, et al are all ultimately recursive. At the edges of all of these conversations is self-cancelling language, and if one is to get too hung up on linguistic explanations of these things, one is almost surely going to end up arguing with herself.

Meditation is useful, possibly life transforming, and the techniques and effects are available to _most_ people. Unfortunately, this claim exists in a grey area between/overlapping objectivity and subjectivity, and can only really be tested in the laboratories of our own minds.

</comment><comment><USER42> Does anybody here have experience with a meditation headset? (I.e., biofeedback device for the brain)

<comment><USER43> yep i use the muse often and i actually discovered my device (pavlok) is useful for training meditation, although we don't market it for that purpose

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> So I wrote a super geeky meditation timer that predicts your mood and learns how long you should meditate:

Guru:Smart Meditation Timer [https://appsto.re/us/ukUP-.i](https://appsto.re/us/ukUP-.i)

<comment><USER45> How does the app go about predicting one's mood?

<comment><USER44> You record your level from anxious->relaxed and distracted->present before and after the meditation session.

As it gathers more personal data points it predicts more accurately your level of improvement with different length meditation sessions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> I've done various meditation practices in the past, but found this one to be the most effective: [http://www.ishafoundation.org/us/ishakriya/learn- online/](http://www.ishafoundation.org/us/ishakriya/learn-online/)

It's a little different from other practices, in that it is more "active" (you'll see what I mean) than just sitting there and watching your breath. It takes just 15 minutes once you learn it, and the sense of peace and focus I have after doing it for several months is incredible.

</comment><comment><USER47> I have been practicing Heartfulness mediation for quite sometime and have got immensely benefitted by it. It offers a simple and practical way to learn relaxation and heart based meditation. Anyone willing to try can go and check [http://en-in.heartfulness.org/experience-heartfulness](http://en- in.heartfulness.org/experience-heartfulness) or try the iOS/Android app.

</comment><comment><USER48> For anyone interested, here are some of the resources I used to learn about mindfulness:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVrnTNpVe5I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVrnTNpVe5I)

[http://www.amazon.com/Still-Mind-An-Introduction- Meditation/...](http://www.amazon.com/Still-Mind-An-Introduction- Meditation/dp/1577312147)

</comment><comment><USER49> Meditation brought about some massive changes for me: increased focus, better and more acute introspection; I became way less irritable and my stress levels reduced.

I briefly outlined my before and after experience in this blog post: [http://nimblegecko.com/you-are-batshit-crazy/](http://nimblegecko.com/you- are-batshit-crazy/)

</comment><comment><USER50> For anyone looking for a data-driven example, check out Wim Hof. This article does a good job of explaining his method at a high level. [http://highexistence.com/the-wim-hof-method-revealed-how- to-...](http://highexistence.com/the-wim-hof-method-revealed-how-to- consciously-control-your-immune-system/)

</comment><comment><USER51> When I don't meditate in the morning I try to make up for it by meditating in the car. One day I was meditating in the car trying to drive mindfully, trying to feel each bump and notice what my body was doing. While I was driving 25 in a 25 zone a toddler wandered out into the street in front of me. I'm glad I was paying attention.

</comment><comment><USER52> Sam Harris' _Waking Up_ presents a non-woo-woo look at meditation. His background as a neuroscientist really gave the subject the scientific perspective that I appreciate. [https://www.samharris.org/waking- up](https://www.samharris.org/waking-up)

</comment><comment><USER53> Having just doubled my workout routine I'm quite impressed how working out changes the brain and body.

</comment><comment><USER54> David Levy, a Stanford computer science PHD that worked at Xerox PARC research for decades before moving to academia is now a thought leader in the field of "Mindful Tech", a different way to interact with technology. I am reading his new book about it and find it valuable.

</comment><comment><USER55> I don't know how unrelated it is but I found playing polyrythmic percussions (4 limbs involved, doesn't have to be loud) often lead to a zen state. Dealing with many different parallel momentums and abstracting over them as one just massage your brain.

<comment><USER56> That's interesting! It squares with what I've read in books like Mindfulness in Plain English -- that some desirable mental states are achieved when certain harmful habits of the mind are in abeyance.

<comment><USER55> I'm not sure I fully parse your message. But I too believe that the mind is an odd loop, where you're own self can focus/amplify different emotions and while it may feel absurd by constantly not trying to think or feel it may help rebalance the whole thing.

<comment><USER56> Sorry, my impression of how it is said to work is, if you deliberately devote your mental energy to something non-harmful, e.g., strong feelings of compassion for oneself or others, it seems to brown out some or all of the harmful habits, at least to some degree.

<comment><USER55> Most of the time you can allow to live in negative emotions but under certain circumstances you realize that it will never end and you're just wasting time, better focus on positive emotions. It's not as good a genuine self emergent good emotions though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> I like to meditate on the bus on my way into the office. I have noticed a significant increase in my ability to "get things done" when stressed as well as my ability to take in sights and sounds.

I highly encourage everyone to start meditating.

</comment><comment><USER58> to paraphase myself:

I mean sure, yeah, but...

[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=changes%20brain&sort=byPopular...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=changes%20brain&sort=byPopular..).

so does walking in nature, poverty, cocaine, testosterone, inactivity, porn, drugs, focus, menstruation, Alzheimer's, cellphones, the Internet, The Knowledge, programming, football...

changing it's structure is how the brain reacts to basically any regular stimulus. Thats how it works.

Also n=35, t=3days seems insufficient to rule out any sort of confounding factors.

</comment><comment><USER59> You guys should try the Headspace App. Really useful for me.

</comment><comment><USER60> While meditation may be helpful in managing stress and other aspects, I am skeptical that it will work if you just meditated for three days.

<comment><USER61> When I was in high school, I meditated for the first time for two days and my grades spiked, for I made much less stupid mistakes. After that, the effect of meditation must be maintained regularly. If I didn't meditate for say three days in the last month, the grade bonus vanished quickly.

What I am trying to say is that to someone who has never meditated before, three day meditation may well have a significant impact. However if they do not do it long term, those effects may be temporary.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> I find working out or playing computer games meditating as I can completely let my thoughts go.</comment>


FBI believed Kim Dotcom had a 'doomsday device' - <AUTHOR> http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/10/kim-dotcom-raid-fbi-feared-doomsday-device/

<comment><USER2> Spam, actual site you want to visit is [http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&obj...](http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10826176) which was submitted yesterday <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4370843>

</comment><comment><USER3> A lot of cultures have a saying that goes something like this: "The innocent do not think of evil". There's variations, I've seen "The innocent walk without care", and others.

I have a hard time not thinking that either FBI members think that "Doomsday Devices" (a.k.a. "Pearl Harbor" devices) exist for FBI data, or that FBI members are incompetent when it comes to computers.

Of course, these two ideas aren't mutually exclusive.

<comment><USER3> Just found another version, don't know the original language or culture: "To the unclean mind, nothing can be clean."</comment></comment>


"Mamma Desta" and Ethiopian food in the U.S - <AUTHOR> https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2020/3/28/21195850/ethiopian-food-washington-dc-history-desta-bairu <comment><USER2> Oh, this makes me miss Zeni in San Jose. It's the best Ethiopian food I've had in this area. Must visit when they are open again! (I guess they have takeout, but I live some distance away.)

I saw one comment here from someone who dislikes the "eat with your hands and scoop up the food with injera" style of Ethiopian dining. Zeni has both options: a traditional Ethiopian dining room and a western-style room with regular tables and chairs. They are very nice people, and I hope their business survives the current crisis.

In the meantime, I will have to content myself with our home-roasted Ethiopian coffee. I love those fruity dry process beans. Yum!

<comment><USER3> Their coffee is second to none. I only drink Ethiopian coffee when possible. Amazing flavor.

<comment><USER4> Not only the flavour: I find that a lot of coffees make me feel slightly ill after drinking, but not with Ethiopian beans.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Mama Desta's in Chicago was second-rate, though I'm still sad to hear they closed (I left in 2009).

The hookup spot there is Ethiopian Diamond, the setting for some of my fondest memories of that city. The East Bay has many respectable options but none ever quite measured up.

I should have skipped reading this before dinner; there's one Ethiopian restaurant in my entire state and air travel to the island which has it is sadly restricted.

Great little slice of life article, only slightly marred by the author's feigned outrage that restaurant critics of the era referred to Desta Bairu as "Mamma Desta". Was it misogyny, in the era of Julia Child's celebrity, or the fact that the restaurant was called "Mamma Desta"? We may never know!

<comment> Digit-Al I didn't see anything in the article to suggest the author attributed it to anything as simple as misogyny.

From the article:

>Though Desta Bairu's cooking drew plaudits, a number of traits beyond her control — her age, her race, her motherly mien — may have put her at a disadvantage.

[edit: formatting]

<comment><USER5> I didn't see anything in the article to suggest the author attributed it to anything as simple as the restaurant being called "Mamma Desta", either.

Which was mainly my point. There's also no indication whatsoever that Desta Bairu would have preferred to be called "Desta Bairu" in print, over the "Mamma Desta" that she and the owner chose as the name of the retaurant.

That's just assumed, and used as a springboard for a collection of lukewarm tropes which I summarized as 'misogyny'. I thought that was more condescending than referring to her by her nom de kitchen.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> angelenos, and visitors to LA, should check out awash[0] in mid-city, near (but not in) the ethiopian district on fairfax. it's an absolute hole-in-the- wall with warm but wonderfully slow service (expect to wait 45 minutes to get served after ordering). you're expected to relax and chat with friends, unlike korean bbq restaurtants that try to turn your table over as fast as possible (that's why they cook the meat for you even at the table grill). get the vege combo (pictured in the link below) and the awaze tibbs (or the meat combo, which includes it).

it's fabulous and very reasonably priced.

[0] #1 on this list: [https://la.eater.com/maps/best-restaurants-los-angeless- litt...](https://la.eater.com/maps/best-restaurants-los-angeless-little- ethiopia-fairfax)

<comment><USER7> There's a restaurant called Awash on Court St in Brooklyn that's also delicious. Slightly more modern style but still terrific food and very chill. Ghenet on 4th Ave is probably my favorite though.

Also, you can't talk about Ethiopian cuisine without mentioning that they were the first culture to drink coffee.

<comment><USER6> neat! i think i went to a place once in DC or thereabouts that was also called awash.

and yes, ethiopian coffee is good and the beans from that region are among the best in the world.

<comment><USER8> oh man, first time I had Ethiopian food I was 19 with friends in Adams Morgan in DC. I've had a lot of good Ethiopian since but nothing has bested that moment.

<comment><USER9> Ha! Me too but I was about 22. We went to the "Red Sea".

<comment><USER8> The Ethiopian community in DC makes the best food. I need to get back down there one day.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Living in Los Angeles, we are fortunate to have a Little Ethiopia with plenty of restaurants baking delicious dishes. It's been a good opportunity to bring in friends from out of town to try "exotic" food and let them see that unfamiliar food to them can also be completely delicious, and even become a new favorite dish.

Note: If you have not tried Ethiopian food, check out Yebeg Alecha (Lamb Stew), along with the combination vegetable dishes that come with Injera (a thin, spongy bread that you can tear and use as a pocket for the vegetables).

</comment><comment><USER11> My favorite cuisine.

Walk down Telegraph Avenue, from Berkeley to Lake Merritt, you will find a number of great Ethiopian-style restaurants.

My favorite has long been the Blue Nile, which over the years has migrated south, now near the west end of Lake Merritt.

<comment><USER12> My favorite in the area is Enssaro.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> NYC has its share of good Ethiopian restaurants. My favorite for the past 20 years has been Queen of Sheba on 10th Ave (47st). There is Meskerem at McDougal St. There is Awash, as well.

</comment><comment><USER14> Best places in Seattle: Cafe Ibex and Cafe Selam. For beginners, veggie combo is always good. More advanced: Kitfo, which is Ethiopian steak tartare (raw or rare).

</comment><comment><USER15> Any Philadelphia recommendations? I remember one in the West 50s or so that had a bar called Fiume over it.

<comment><USER16> That's abyssinia. There's a couple clusters of Ethiopian restaurants in that general area. Baltimore Ave has several too.

I don't have any personal recommendations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I love Ethiopian food, but it has never seemed mainstream to me. Claiming it's part of the shared American palate is going to need a citation.

<comment><USER18> Yeah, I've eaten Ethiopian food and liked it, but unless I've been completely out of the loop, Ethiopian food is not "an American fascination".

<comment><USER19> Ok, we've taken fascination out of the title above.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I still remember the time I -- a Torontonian who has eaten extensively at the many Ethopian restaurants in town -- visited Munich with my wife and went to an Ethopian restaurant there, and found many of the local Germans eating with a knife and fork instead their hands.

Maybe this was just that night or just this one restaurant, but it kinda shocked me.

<comment><USER21> >Maybe this was just that night or just this one restaurant, but it kinda shocked me.

This may be a "German thing"; I remember being a bit surprised when I ate lunch with a vendor from Germany and he ate a hamburger and french fries with a knife and fork.

<comment><USER22> FWIW, I was raised American and have always done the same. It isn't just a German thing.

<comment><USER23> I imagine eating hamburgers and fries with a knife and fork is quite rare among people born, raised, and living in the US.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Is beef and chicken really available in quantities and prices deemed "affordable" in Ethiopia?

Beef seems like a luxury good here. Chicken may not be quite luxury, but it's more expensive than vegetarian.

<comment><USER25> It's relatively expensive, depends on your income level. Chicken beef and goat are common. Folks in the country have better access than in the cities.

<comment><USER26> Plus, people follow strict fasting (up to 210 mandatory fasting days in a year) ... at least the Oriental Orthodox church followers which make up 40-50% of the population.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Ethiopian food is probably underrated as the creators are African. It is actually superior to all of these combined: Chinese, Indian, Italian, Japanese, Greek and more

<comment><USER28> …in your opinion, of course.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I hate to say it, but I was never a big fan of Ethiopian food, even well before the virus situation. All my friends reaching in, grabbing, and getting their fingers in the communal bread/stew was a real turnoff. Flavors were not that different from other spicy types of food, and it really was the fingers- in-bowls thing that I could never get over.

ps. I know there are ways of individually serving it.

<comment><USER30> The restaurants that I've been to had serving spoons, I guess as a compromise to Western norms. The flavours were subtly different from other things I've tried.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> You know Ethiopian food is good because it's become popular without the "mother country" wielding any kind of economic influence/hard power/soft power.

</comment><comment><USER32> This food looks delicious and I'd love to try some. It seems that they haven't "Americanized" it as much as many other ethnic restaurants - though I haven't had real Ethopian food so I don't actually know that for sure.

I wish that Americans would stop paying for shitty versions of other cultures foods. I live in a huge city with lots of people of a certain south-east Asian ethnic group. I am also married to a south-east Asian of said ethnic group. We have tried every one of the available restaurants and not a single one of them comes even close to properly approximating the food available in her home country (according to her).

In her opinion, this isn't just because of a lack of available ingredients. It is because Americans don't want authentic food. Fix your shit America because we will forever be (along with the UK) the laughing stock of the culinary world with these practices.

<comment><USER33> I have no idea why you're having a go at Americans so much, this literally happens everywhere. British interpretation of Indian dishes has nothing to do with originals. Every country has their localized version of McDonald's even(Poland has a burger with saurkraut and goat cheese). German idea of Italian food is....difficult, but incidentally Germans make the best kebabs. I'd argue that the worst pizza I've ever had was actually in Italy.

There's no such thing as "authentic" food. It doesn't exist and it never did.

<comment><USER34> With you until the last line. There are definitely corruptions of good dishes that have no merit. What do you call them?

<comment><USER33> Bad food. Seriously, food isn't good just because it's authentic, just like music isn't automatically good because it's traditional.

Like, some Scottish establishments will deep fry a pizza. Who cares it's not an "authentic" Italian food? It's "authentic" Scottish food at this point. I also don't particularly care about Italians thinking it's an abomination - they are free to think that, but I wouldn't have a go at the Scots for doing it - if they like it, then whatever.

<comment><USER35> Fried pizza is most certainly an authentic Italian thing -- it's street food in Napoli, and it's absolutely fantastic.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Academics are slaves to where they publish - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/pluto-network/on-where-they-publish-b190a6ffa2b2 <comment><USER2> The original article is titled "On where they publish", #5 in a series. The series is described as: "Pluto Network will share its thoughts on i) the problems with incentive structure in academia, ii) why it is making scientists not collaborate but rather compete with each other, and why they have to matter to all of us"

The word "slave" does not appear in the linked-to text, nor any other essay in the series.

Overuse of the word "slavery" for things which aren't slavery diminishes the brutality of slavery.

Or, how are they "slaves" and not "peons" or "serfs" or "proletariats" or any other terms for powerless workers?

FWIW, the series seemed aimed for readers with little knowledge of academic research. This might include people with an undergraduate degree or in early grad school. The first few essays set the groundwork, which I mostly skipped. I didn't find it interesting until #3, "Publish, but really Perish?".

And again, nothing in the series hinted at being "slaves".</comment>


Fun With C# and HP Laserjets - <AUTHOR> http://odetocode.com/humor/68.aspx <comment><USER2> I found this written in Ruby several years ago. My two favorites were, "INSERT COIN" and "ADD WATER".

Of course, this is only really effective when large groups use the same printer.

It was mentioned somewhere as an IT prank for April Fools day.

<comment><USER2> It was in the comments section...

#!/usr/bin/env ruby

# Simple HP Printer Hacker

# Written in Ruby by Erik Gregg

# 6/9/06

# Status Usage: hp-message.rb <host> status

# Message Usage: hp-message.rb <host> message "<message>"

require 'net/telnet'

      begin

      if ARGV[0].nil?

       puts "Read the script.

Status Usage: hp-message.rb <host> status

Message Usage: hp-message.rb <host> message \"<message>\""

       exit

      end

      host = Net::Telnet::new("Host" => ARGV[0],

                              "Port" => 9100,

                              "Timeout" => 5,

                              "Prompt" => /\b/n)

if ARGV[1] == "status"

      host.cmd("@PJL INFO STATUS") { |c| print c }

elsif ARGV[1] == "message"

      host.cmd("@PJL RDYMSG DISPLAY=\""+ARGV[2]+"\"")

else

      puts "Oh Cmon.  Look at the syntax inside me."

      exit

end

      host.close

      rescue Timeout::Error

            puts "Time to go now!"

            exit 1

      end

<comment><USER3> Sigh, it's "OUT OF WATER", not "ADD WATER". Only very new printers tell you how to resolve the problem ("Add Letter paper to tray 1"); old printers just tell you what the problem is. ("PC LOAD LETTER? What the fuck does that mean?")

And for the OP, it's "INSERT COIN" not "INSERT QUARTER".

<comment><USER4> Hey, give 'em a break. He's probably too young to have ever seen a real arcade game.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I did this years ago with an HP-48 calculator (serial port connected to laserjet): not only did I fool with the LCD panel, I generated postscript and printed, too.

Here at work I've found that many of the newer all-in-one laser photocopy/scan/print machines support this HP PJL feature. I drive it from a cron job to give a countdown to major events (trade shows, holidays, etc.)

The best part is when the copier dude comes in to service the machine: "how does the copier know when your trade show is?"

</comment><comment><USER6> Boy it's a bummer when people post code online without attaching a license to it.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, writing 1 line of text to a TCP connection is pretty hard, so if you can't use this code freely, your app is ruined...</comment></comment>


Hi HN. What do you think about my new startup - Karminator.com - <AUTHOR> http://www.karminator.com/

<comment><USER2> My first thought was, "ok, what does this do?" I then tried to figure out the site's purpose based on the limited posts but that wasn't sufficient. I then had to click to the About page. In my opinion, that's way too much thinking to just figure out the purpose of the site. Don't make a user think too much upon the very first time entering the site.

Maybe you could add a small bit of copy under the title briefly describing why the site is there. Or perhaps some catchy slogan that describes the purpose.

<comment><USER3> Exact same experience for me. Just-launched sites should have a quick, easy- to-read "what do we do" blurb or graphic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't feel your concept is compelling. Assuming I did feel the concept was compelling, I would use a text file as suggested, and not your site. The page feels extremely bare, which I imagine is due to my having enabled Adblock Plus.

</comment><comment><USER5> I didn't understand the purpose of your site just by visiting its front page - provide a short explanation.

</comment><comment><USER6> I'm of the opinion that 99% of web startups that are ad based are doomed to fail. There's nothing here that could be packaged into a freemium/subscription model, so forget about that. Perhaps merchandising could work out (get your successes on a T-shirt), but I wouldn't count on it.

As a fun weekend project, I'd say it was a success. Plus, if it works for you and you like it, that's awesome. It's a stretch to call it a startup.

</comment><comment><USER7> lots of advertisements makes me feel like you made a cheap site to make money. sure, it looks 2.0-ish and has a nice personable reason about why i should login, but now that i've added an achievement only to be rewarded with a new set of ads, that thin vaneer has become dirty. i feel used. you can do better.

</comment><comment><USER8> Just want to add that I love the design. Very clean, nice colorscheme, it's gorgeous. Only nitpick would be that the body text in those boxes could be a tiny bit bigger.

(disclaimer: adblock user and the product itself is not of interest to me)

</comment><comment><USER9> You should've called this "Yay-me!" instead of Karminator. The about page makes sense. The front page doesn't, really.

</comment><comment><USER10> make an iPhone app where users can share there karma's with their friends/everyone it might be a successful business. Being a website, I doubt a lot of people are going to use it.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> thnks guys. thats great feedback. I definitely need to add a bit of explanation on the front page.</comment>


NASAs Cassini spacecraft has delivered a glorious view of Saturn... - <AUTHOR> http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/whycassini/cassini20121218.html <comment> T-hawk Here's a fantastic detailed explanation of the geometry and what's going on with each visual element of the picture, from Slate:

[http://mobile.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/12/20/satur...](http://mobile.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2012/12/20/saturn_s_night_side_cassini_sees_rings_and_planet_in_stunning_picture_photo.html)

<comment><USER2> Thanks for posting the article. Really helped!

If you're still having trouble wrapping your mind around the shadowy part... Look at this image and imagine the light source coming from behind instead:

[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Saturn_HS...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0e/Saturn_HST_2004-03-22.jpg)

<comment><USER3> Why do they look almost computer generated? Just curious.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> If anyone stumbles upon a higher resolution image of this I would be much obliged. It's really striking.

edit: Just found it! <http://i.imgur.com/ZCEKA.jpg>

</comment><comment><USER5> Just wondering, is there a network of telescope webcams? Hobby astronomers hooking up their telescopes to the internet, perhaps even with remote controlled mounts? Would save the costs of buying my own telescope, which wouldn't be much use in the city anyway.

<comment><USER6> You mean something like <http://www.itelescope.net/> ? Also check for a local amateur astronomy association.

Research telescopes often have live feeds for popular events (such as the Venus transit).

Finally depending on your location you may be no further than a day trip away to an astronomical facility - they often have events open to the public, stargazing etc.

BTW Here's another "christmassy" picture (this time of the Bubble Nebula) from a brand new instrument:

<http://www.noao.edu/image_gallery/html/im1136.html>

Disclaimer - Latter link is my employer, but I have nothing to gain from you clicking on it :-)

Oh Edit: you can also go data-mining in public astronomy databases, though sadly most of them are not geared for use by the general public.

Oh Edit2: You can have some fun with this <http://www.worldwidetelescope.org/> but you need Silverlight

<comment><USER7> Another related development in democratization of astronomy is publishing of transient events (brightenings/dimmings of objects) as they happen. You can subscribe to feeds from robotic transient surveys, that do the image processing and photometry to generate events in near real time (e.g.: <http://skyalert.org/>). The events are published in a standard format so you can automate follow-up as well.

Many of the events are asteroids or possible NEOs, but others are galactic and extra-galactic, like supernovae, blazars, etc.

It's not backyard astronomy, because the events are being detected by 1 meter telescopes and have magnitude of perhaps 18 or 20, but it's a more open and data-rich situation than a few sources being kept under wraps for follow-up by the discoverer only.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> While I do find this image visually appealing, and appreciate its technical merit, I find it a bit unreal looking. Maybe it's a bit two-dimensional.

I prefer the more three-dimensional looking images like [http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia1462...](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia14627.html).

<comment><USER9> Well, it's the night side, so obviously there's not the same kind of shading that you get with direct sunlight.

<comment><USER10> The planet and the rings seem to violate 3D spatial relations. ie, planet appears outside the orbit of the rings, for example. Its a touch awkward. On a more subjective note, the outline of the planet in artificial colour (the corona effect) seems a bit ?? overdone.

I'd like to see other renderings.

edit: I think there is a bit of an optical illusion, part of which is happening because of the over-saturation of the corona. The image makes more sense if you soom out a bit and understand you are looking <up> at the planet from the souther hemispher (ie, below the equator/rings belt). The missing rings should be in the fore-ground but are absent due to shadow. Again, the corona;s colour saturation is so strong it throws the image constuct off when looking at it in more magnification.

<comment><USER9> Yes; you're looking "up" but surely there are no missing rings - they are actually _visible_ against the planet as silhouettes. They are dark because they're in the planet's shadow.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Polar vortex

[http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/N001983...](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/N00198390.html)

<comment><USER12> Saturn's polar vortex has a hexagonal pattern, which I think is pretty interesting: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn%27s_hexagon>

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Why does Saturn appear green in this image but brown in the banner image above it?

<comment><USER14> "The new processed mosaic [is] composed of 60 images taken in the violet, visible and near infrared part of the spectrum". So the colors in the image were chosen for artistic effect, and are not "true" colors because you couldn't see some of them anyway.

This image was specifically processed to look closer to real colors: [http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/gallery...](http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/gallery/pia08329.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> It left me wondering: could smaller rocky planets have rings or would their gravity pull not be enough to maintain them?

<comment><AUTHOR> It is theorized that earth at one time had rings, but that they later coalesced into what is now our moon.

It is also theorized that the reason that the reason why Saturn's rings do not do this(though this could just a matter of time that we are now viewing them at) is because they are prodomonantly ice crystals which constantly bounce into each other breaking and re-freezing. IE why we can see them at all(reflective surfaces on the ice) rather then them be covered with dirt & dust and rendering them unreflective.

Further more to your question I "think" any planet or even any object could have rings, its just there are many factors that go into play and singularly it is REALLY hard to see them, and we only have our galaxy where we would be able to tell if an object did or didn't have them.

<comment><USER8> "It is theorized that earth at one time had rings, but that they later coalesced into what is now our moon."

Indeed. (1997 Nature article) [http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v389/n6649/full/389353a...](http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v389/n6649/full/389353a0.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Must be an awesome view from the surface at midnight on Saturn.

</comment><comment><USER17> Wow. Thank you for posting this. In light of the superstition of the day and recent events, I am reminded of Bill Hicks: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMUiwTubYu0>

</comment><comment><USER18> That really is gorgeous. I want to be able to fly by it in person.

</comment><comment><USER19> Is there a higher resolution image available? I'd love to make that a new desktop background.

</comment><comment><USER20> The emperor's gorgeous new clothes.

</comment><comment><USER21> Why does it look like clipart?

<comment><USER22> Because it's an exceptionally smooth and beautiful image?

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Fake.</comment>


Ask HN: How to handle database migrations with multiple applications? - <AUTHOR> We have a system of around 18 services that all need access to our database. We'd really like to use migrations to handle schema changes, but I can't figure out how to do this cleanly. How do you? <comment><USER2> When this is necessary, we have the migrations versioned independently of the services that consume the database; essentially, there is a "database package" and a database schema version. We try our best to make all changes additive, to reduce the potential for breaking changes that may require all consumers (your services) to change. As I'm sure others will comment, you should do everything you can to eliminate these dependencies; ideally, the database<\-->service relationship should be 1-1 and not 1-many.

</comment><comment><USER3> * Are you already using a Database migration tool like [https://flywaydb.org/](https://flywaydb.org/) or [https://www.liquibase.org/](https://www.liquibase.org/) or something similar? If not, start here

* You have 18 services all using one database? Be aware that this pattern has the drawback that all of them are tightly coupled through the centralised database, and you might have a distributed monolith at hand. A typical symptom is that you have to release all services in lockstep. Consider your resources and and see if actually having a monolith, or at least consolidating some services, possibly could lead to a better development experience.

* Use semantic versioning inside the services. Version additive changes to the schema (adding a column) by bumping the minor version and flag old code paths "deprecated". Only remove columns that no other service is using once the code paths have been migrated from using the deprecated code paths, or use Feature Flags, like someone else mentioned.

</comment><comment><USER4> Typical rails/django-style migrations have the problem of being coupled to a particular app/language - so you'll need to work directly at the level of the database.

You should add as much testing as possible - ideally have a central project that manages the database structure, and test each change carefully. Within each app, explicitly test that the app supports the intended new schema before moving to it.

Use a schema diff tool to autogenerate migration scripts and check that they result in a perfectly matching schema - I wrote `migra` that works with postgres, but there are good equivalents for most databases.

</comment><comment><USER5> I think other people already have great advice. What I can add is: work on shielding this database with a service because 18 apps fighting for the same data source is hell.

<comment><USER6> If the DB is split in logical and physical schemas and ownership and access is ring-fenced accordingly with each of the 18 applications getting their own access login, there shouldn't be issues.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Feature flags and version named types in code.

You conceptually need code paths to handle the different DB states asynchronously.</comment>


Spam vs Mahalo: Matt Cutts Explains the Difference - <AUTHOR> http://www.seobook.com/matt-cutts-eats-mahalo-spam

<comment><AUTHOR> Matt Cutts surely can't ignore this debate for much longer. The least he could do is chime in with Google's official perspective on the situation whether it's for or against the Mahalo approach.

<comment><USER2> It looks like he's unable to comment at the moment: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1143911>

<comment><USER3> That's not the real Matt Cutts

<comment><USER4> The real Matt Cutts has said he is aware of the mahalo problem. see this <http://twitter.com/mattcutts/statuses/9513414423> and the thread.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> There is a large incentive for google to send traffic to Maholo. The low quality of the pages causes the user to want to exit the page. What do they click on when leaving? the adsense ads! I'm not saying Google are going out of their way to support this but it is easy to see why they may be hesitant to penalize Maholo.

</comment><comment><USER6> This is doing the rounds among SEOs on Twitter: [http://www.mahalo.com/search?q=mattcutts%20is%20gay%20and%20...](http://www.mahalo.com/search?q=mattcutts%20is%20gay%20and%20wont%20ban%20us)

<comment><USER7> The "is gay" thing is lame.

<comment><USER8> Yeah, lamer though that Mahalo turned it into a permanent page: <http://www.mahalo.com/mattcutts-is-gay-and-wont-ban-us>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> All these Calacanis / SEO Book cat fights are getting annoying.

<comment><USER10> They're also important. If Mahalo, Demand Media, etc. all continue to do what they're doing, then they'll have built a publisher-paid paywall around most of the content online.

That is bad news for anyone who tries to get long-tail organic search traffic. It's good news for sites with great brand names, but terrible news for anyone else.

<comment><USER11> Its not fair to lump Demand in with Mahalo. Demand's business model is filling in holes with their own original content, not scraping (or "aggregating") other people's content.

AFAIK, Google views their relationship as symbiotic, not parasitic.

<comment><USER10> Demand Media does not produce high quality content. They product content that is good enough to rank (i.e. it's written in English) and unique. But they have a strong incentive to have bad content! If your article on "how to make pancakes" tells someone how to make pancakes, they close their tab and make pancakes; if it's 300 words of "original content" that makes no sense, you'll end up clicking through to another site (that has to pay for the privilege).

When you think of how many struggling freelancers use those long-tail guides to build their business ("How to shoot a commercial for a gym," or "How to write brochure copy for life insurance,"), you can see the magnitude of this problem. People who could trade their time for traffic now have to trade their _money_ for traffic. When they're just getting started, money is harder to come by than time. The result: fewer people creating this kind of content, more of them joining organizations that pay for the traffic instead.

<comment><USER12> But, doesn't Demand only occupy one slot in search engines result pages for a certain keyword search? Even if Demand would create billions of articles, one for each conceivable search term, other nine spots in first 10 search results are still available for others, aren't they?

All in all, I still think this is primary a Google problem, not Demand's. They can publish anything they want, it's their right protected under free speech. It's Google which should be concerned about quality of their pages.

<comment><USER10> The #1 search result gets about 40% of all organic clicks. And Demand Media has more than one property (eHow, Wikihow, Cracked, livestrong.com). So I wouldn't be surprised if there were some searches for which Demand Media got more than half of all traffic.

You are correct about this being Google's problem. These guys exist to exploit an arbitrage opportunity: Google's search algorithm picks them, and the average searcher's which-engine-do-I-choose algorithm picks Google. In the long run, one of these things will stop being true.

<comment><USER11> Cracked is not owned by Demand Media. It was a second-rate competitor to MAD as a print magazine, but has found tremendous success online.

Their model is similar to Demand's in that it is UGC + payment, but that's about it. The topics are not generated by an algorithm, for instance.

<comment><USER10> <http://www.demandmedia.com/brands/>

I was surprised, too.

<comment><USER13> Wow. Can't believe they own Cracked. Learning this made me die a little inside.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> How can Google NOT look at that sample page Aaron has displayed? That is truly terrible :( Also, Matt Cutts is generally very honest and public, but in this case, uncharacteristically quiet.

<comment><USER15> If you visit a page on Mahalo that you think doesn't cut it, be sure to hit the 'Ads by Google' link and send feedback to Google about it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> some of these discussions make a lot of sense for HN as many entrepreneurs here are building businesses around content ie - "what is spam?". This one does not.

</comment><comment><USER17> "I talked to him, and so I said what software do you use to power your search engine? And he said we use Twika or MediaWiki. You know, wiki software, not C++ not Perl not Python. And at that point it really does move more into a content play. And so it is closer to an About.com than to a Powerset or a Microsoft or Yahoo! Search."

<comment><USER18> Depressing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> If the title of an article is a question, the answer is no.

</comment><comment><USER20> How much original content is there in Google Reader? Not defending Mahalo, especially if it stealing copyrighted content from other sites, but not having original content doesn't mean you don't provide value. Google Reader has value and no original content.

<comment><USER10> If Google started giving people public Google Reader pages, would you like it if Scoble's Google Reader outranked your blog when people searched for your blog's name?

There is value in duplicate content. But there's no value in a search query taking you to a search page, where the site you wanted to land on has to _pay Mahalo_ for adding an extra click between you and what you wanted.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> The internet is only moving in the direction where Google points and Google favors quantity over quality. All Internet problems flow from this Google unstated rule.

Google would rather make a cent each on a million stolen pages of crap than $10 on an original content, plus the spam "author" is not going to ask anything for the "content".

</comment><comment><USER22> manhalo and seo are the reason HN need a friend-foe system like slashdot.

Every time you post anything about it, you prove you don't deserve to exist. Or you are a spam bot.

</comment><comment><USER23> FLAME BAIT IS FLAMING

<comment><USER23> While I can understand downing based on my knee jerk immaturity towards this, but is any of this legitimate?

Will anyone benefit from having read this article?

Are there really that many people interested in this?

Are you all really up voting this stuff because you're legitimately interested?

<comment><USER24> Many startups here rely on cheap SEO for marketing.

If Mahalo (or anyone else with a high PR domain) can outrank everyone else simply by spamming, it's not fair to a nascent startup

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> This whole thing is insane.... we have "stub" pages just like Wikipedia.

These are topic pages that people are working on and THEY DON'T RANK in search engines until they we get the word count to around 300-500 words.

We are the process of NOINDEXING the pages that are below 300 words just to make Aaron happy... we actually had these noindexed before our last version and that got lost in the shuffle of the new launch (really, it did... when you do new code you might leave something out of the old code).

i'm also getting a list of every page under 300 words and having the page managers build them out in 30 days or deleting them.

Anyway, i thank Aaron for busting out chops and making us better!

The claims that we are "scraping" are absurd... we're using google, bing, twitter, etc. apis to do a comprehensive search page.

i dont know everything about SEO, but i don't understand this claim by Aaron. i think he is trying to start trouble for us... and maybe it will work. Thanks pal!

<comment><USER26> A couple clarifications if you don't mind then ;)

\- If you don't want those pages indexed in Google then why are you submitting them in an XML sitemap?

\- I have already shown examples of the 0 original content pages ranking, so how can you claim that they do not rank?

\- You are not scraping directly, you are pulling from 3rd party sites and using it as content on your own site. Which is worse, because there is no way to opt out of it.

\- My problem is not just with what you call stub pages, but with most of your pages. When you give people embed code to embed your content in their site you give them an iframe AND a direct link back to you. If you want me to stop highlighting the absurdity of it then perhaps you should hold yourself to the same standards as what you offer others. But you do just the opposite when you embed 3rd party content in your site. You slap a nofollow on the links _and_ embed the content directly into the page (rather than in an iframe).

\- Worth noting that every time I mention the above point you end up talking about stub pages or experiments or some other strategy to try to redirect attention. But in reality, what I am talking about is what you do on almost every page of your website.

<comment><USER25> 1\. everything in site is in the sitemap... it's not selective. it will be shortly.

2\. they don't get traffic is my point... we look at any page that gets over 100 page views in a month and we build those pages out. so, even if you find a page that ranks it will not have traffic. if it has traffic it gets built out.

3\. we are not scraping, we are using search APIs

4\. i dont understand this issue of our widgets (which don't get used to be honest.. it's a failed program)

5\. this is simply false... our traffic comes from how to articles, walkthroughs and Q&A. if you want to know what the top 10 pages are they are things like how to play guitar and call of duty walkthrough pages. those things are 3-5k words!

just lay off dude... go troll someone else.

<comment><USER26> \- 1. everything in site is in the sitemap... it's not selective. it will be shortly.

Ah, so now you admit it was intentional. But good on you for (eventually? hopefully?) fixing it.

\- 2. they don't get traffic is my point... we look at any page that gets over 100 page views in a month and we build those pages out. so, even if you find a page that ranks it will not have traffic. if it has traffic it gets built out.

If a person has a quarter million pages that are getting 5 visits each that is still a lot of traffic. Especially when the page has 0 editorial costs.

\- 3. we are not scraping, we are using search APIs

The end result is what people would typically call a "scrapper site". It is irrelevant how it is created (if you scrape directly or syndicate from somewhere else that is scraping). The issue is a lack of editorial control (see your page about 13 year old rape) and a lack of citing sources with links.

\- 4. i dont understand this issue of our widgets (which don't get used to be honest.. it's a failed program)

Search engines have duplicate content filters. If the content is within the page as HTML (as you do on Mahalo) then you can often outrank the original source for their own content. You bypass this issue and me mentioning it if you only use an iframe to embed the content in your pages. But if you embed it directly into the HTML (as you are doing right now) then of course it is bogus.

\- 5. this is simply false... our traffic comes from how to articles, walkthroughs and Q&A. if you want to know what the top 10 pages are they are things like how to play guitar and call of duty walkthrough pages. those things are 3-5k words!

I am not talking about your top 10 pages. I am talking about the bottom 300,000 pages, which in aggregate get far more traffic than the top 10 pages do. :D

\- just lay off dude... go troll someone else.

Not trolling at all. Just trying to give you valuable feedback, as you have claimed it to be publicly multiple times (unless you were lying when you stated that) :D

<comment><USER25> Anyway, we're deleting any short pages right now and noindexing any short pages.

this will all be done in the next 72 hours and then there will be nothing to complain or write about after that Aaron!

Thanks for making us better.

<comment><USER26> Good first step!

Does that mean that (for the remaining pages on the site)...

a.) the other scraped content which exists on the remaining pages will be put in an iframe (rather than as text on the page)

\- OR -

b.) that you will be removing nofollow from the pages you are scraping content from?

Either you trust the content enough that you should link to it directly, or you should put it in an iframe such that search engines don't see it. Either route would likely be more akin to fair use than what you are currently doing (automatically scraping 3rd party content into your pages and using it to rank against the content creators, without permission, and without a way of opting out).

<comment><USER27> After this many lies, do you actually believe he is planning on actually taking that step? In my books he's already used up his credibility. I won't believe anything he says until he says what he has done and someone else publicly verifies it. (He has lied enough that I don't think it worth my time to bother verifying anything he says. The bozo bit is well and truly flipped.)

<comment><USER26> Fair point. ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Funny. By those standards applied strictly, google's own search result pages would be considered spam. Jason can argue that there is value in the SELECTION of content that is not explicitly visible but nonetheless significant.

Similarly, Hacker News homepage might be considered spam because it's mostly titles of articles. Until you take into account the value of the votes--which is value that these google guidelines don't address clearly.

<comment><USER29> And you'll notice that Google does not index its own search result pages, nor encourage anyone else to do so. Perhaps "spam" is too pejorative a word and "things that should not be in our search engine" would be a better description.

<comment><USER30> For what it's worth, Topsy is doing the same for tweets. I've seen Google show a Topsy search page more than once while searching for things recently.

For example, links such as <http://topsy.com/s/toyota+grand+jury+subpoena> are submitted into google to be indexed.

<comment><USER30> Backtype does the same too as far as I can tell so there are definitely quite a few companies out there with such activities.

This is a bummer as this just serves to increase the noise to the detriment of getting good results.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Researchers Create 'Super Black' Material (2014) - <AUTHOR> http://www.designntrend.com/articles/16676/20140714/researchers-create-super-black-material-so-dark-the-human-eye-cannot-process-it.htm <comment><USER2> It should be called 'fuligin,' in honor of Gene Wolfe.

"I put on the cloak... the hue fuligin, which is darker than black, admirably erases all folds, bunchings and gatherings so far as the eye is concerned, showing only a featureless dark."

From The Shadow of the Torturer, by Gene Wolfe. Published by Simon & Schuster in 1980

[http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1495](http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=1495)

</comment><comment><USER3> 2014\. You can get some info from the wiki page: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vantablack](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vantablack)

Most interesting being the layman explanation: "Vantablack is composed of a forest of vertical tubes which are "grown". When light strikes vantablack, instead of bouncing off, it becomes trapped and is continually deflected among the tubes, eventually becoming absorbed and dissipating into heat."

I'd love to see someone walking around in a bodysuit made out of this stuff (although I have no idea if it's flexible enough).

</comment><comment><USER4> This site got the name wrong. It's called 'vantablack'. It's also not 'ten times stronger than steel' in the traditional sense, given that it's typical use is going to be as a coating rather than a structural material. A microthin layer of vantablack may have greater tensile strength than a microthin layer of steel, but building girders of the stuff is infeasible.

<comment><USER5> Well if you scroll down to the comments section you'll see the quality of readership that site draws in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Now that is really bad for the eyes! It's just so... black! You can hardly even make out its shape. Light just falls right into it.

</obligatory>

<comment><USER7> I'll see your Douglas Adams and raise you "None, none more black!"

<comment><USER8> I want to paint doors with this stuff. Especially red ones.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Not only is the material "super black" it:

> conducts heat seven and half times more effectively than copper, and the > material is ten times stronger than steel.

Both of features are very useful. Heatsinks, spacecraft... all sorts of awesome uses.

<comment><USER10> The thermal conductivity is just because it's carbon, you can use other forms of carbon like diamond which also have about 10 times the thermal conductivity of copper.

Diamond is used sometimes in thermal pastes and adhesives one of its disadvantages however is that it's quite abrasive so it cannot be used on naked silicon dies or in applications that require thermal grease and are hence under stress, I would suspect that other nanoforms of carbon are more or less just as abrasive as diamond so they would have similar restrictions.

<comment><USER11> I don't think graphite is abrasive.

<comment><USER10> Graphite also doesn't have that good of thermal conductivity it's actually worse than copper in most cases.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> [2014]</comment>


Demo: How scammers use hidden Facebook "like" buttons to go viral - <AUTHOR> http://coding.pressbin.com/files/86-clickjacking_demo.html

<comment><USER2> Nice clean example, though I was unable to actually like it. Does facebook actively monitor and block such uses, or is there some flaw in the code that doesn't allow the like to occur?</comment>


Your UI Isn't a Disney Movie - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@sophie_paxtonUX/your-ui-isn-t-a-disney-movie-703f7fbd24d2 <comment><USER2> Some other problems I've found...

\- If the user has already interacted with something in a visible way (e.g. pressing a button that is now clearly in a pressed state), _no opening animations should occur_. If I click a menu, I want it to open _now_ ; I do not want to wait for your pretty scroll-down or fade-in effect to finish.

\- Similarly, once a finishing action has been requested, it should be initiated immediately and _not_ be contingent on the completion of any animation. To achieve this, closing animations should be optical illusions: for example, a window that "fades away" shouldn't really be the original window; the real window should _immediately_ commit its changes and close, replaced by an _image_ of the real window that can be harmlessly animated away in the background.

\- Animations should generally _not relocate clickable elements_. It's very frustrating to click something open (like a menu drawer) and have the corresponding close-button start _sliding away from my mouse_ to a location that can only be determined when the animation is done. I feel like I'm chasing your UI around the screen, and that's just ridiculous.

</comment><comment><USER3> IMO, this rant highlights very well what's wrong with Google's Material design: the whole interface is jelly-like and does not feel very functional.</comment>


Oakland official threatens to seize house occupied by "Moms 4 Housing" - <AUTHOR> https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-mercury-news/20191225/281745566296832 <comment><USER2> Why not just link to original story?

[https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/12/24/oakland-official- thre...](https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/12/24/oakland-official-threatens-to- seize-moms-4-housing-home/)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The dangers of leaving your house vacant.</comment>


Ask HN: What's a good, intermediate-level JS book? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> +1 for the Eloquent book. Has a very nice section on functional programming. Plus, in my opinion, some of the best typesetting I've seen in a technical book.

I also learnt a good deal from Stoyan Stefanov's book "Objected-Oriented Javascript", for example closures. I don't know why the book had to have that title, maybe to attract Java/C# developers.

Prototypical inheritance is covered in both Eloquent and OOJ.

Here is a nice article on the topic: [http://beej.us/blog/data/javascript- prototypes-inheritance/](http://beej.us/blog/data/javascript-prototypes- inheritance/)

Read more such articles, easier than starting a book.

</comment><comment> atom-morgan I'd recommend Eloquent JavaScript. There's also a discussion here on a few books: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7434720](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7434720)

</comment><comment><USER3> As the author of Underhanded JavaScript, I must definitely recommend Eloquent JavaScript and JavaScript Design Patterns. The latter is quite important because the design patterns that Addy talks about actually does patch up a lot of rough spots of JS.

And of course, JavaScript the Good Parts is a must. Trust me, go back and re- read JS:TGP, see how much you missed. I re-read it from time to time and always find new stuff.

Axel's Speaking JavaScript is pretty good too, and I read his blog, so quality is quite high.

But hey, gotta plug my book, so buy Underhanded JavaScript! Why buy it? Because I list some of the most common pitfalls people fall into when writing JavaScript code, as well as the nastier parts of JavaScript, for when you're in a bad mood and feel like thrashing the production server. I'll even show you how you can enable simple DoS via RegExp.

EDIT: here's the link with HN coupon. Price was randomly generated between $12.25 and $19.77

[http://leanpub.com/underhandedjavascript/c/NackerHews](http://leanpub.com/underhandedjavascript/c/NackerHews)

</comment><comment><USER4> I enjoyed the depth that "Secrets of the JavaScript Ninja" went into. It was written by John Resig, the author of JQuery.</comment>


The Star Trek Economy: (Mostly) Post-Scarcity (Mostly) Socialism - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/11/18/star_trek_economy_federation_is_only_mostly_post_scarcity.html

<comment><USER2> So this implies that there are people who want to work in the hellhole that is the pergium mine on Janus VI (dodging protective homicidal hortas) simply because they want to show their mastery at mining?

Even in the 24th century there's going to be jobs that very few people want to do. Yet are necessary. How do they persuade people to do them?

<comment><AUTHOR> I guess it would require a social and cultural shift to put more status and respect on these unwanted jobs.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Worries about a cofounder - <AUTHOR>

Hi Everyone--
I was hoping to seek council about a situation at a very, very early stage startup. This is, btw a throwaway account.
Long story, trying to be short: I asked a friend about 6 months ago (another programmer) to work with me on a startup. We began meeting and tossed around some ideas that we were interested in. We came up with 3 ideas that we think could be a good place to start. At the same time another friend (a coworker of ours) and I had lunch and he said he wanted to get working on a side project. He is a good guy; pretty smart, nice and seemed, at the time, passionate. Definitely a businessman (project manager) and not a coder. I suggested he meet with me and my original friend. We began meeting weekly to discuss a startup venture. We settled on one of my original ideas, though the project manager guy focused it in on a specific niche inside of our market.
Fast forward 6 months -- the business guy is still interested, but after having another kid, missing a bunch of meetings and just waiting for us to actually build the product, I'm questioning his motives for joining. We met earlier this week and his focus was on getting us, inside a year, to a position where we could sell for a couple hundred thousand dollars. The other founder and I said we'd prefer to see about getting a couple thousand from very early round friends and family so that we can hook up with some big name partners in our field early on. We're in it for the long haul; we'd prefer to build something, run it for a while, and sell later. Not build and sell immediately.
So the question is, my gut is telling me to drop the project manager. I don't feel he is passionate about the project enough and is in it for the short term benefits as opposed to the long term. We haven't signed anything or spent any money; didn't even discuss titles, rights or what not. So we (my friend and I) could walk away safely, I think.
Is this a situation where I should trust my gut? <comment><USER2> An emphatic yes and the sooner the better. I was in the same situation and it cost us dearly because we let it drag on for way too long (a co-founder systematically not completing work and talking often of short term sell/profits).

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm sorry to hear that you went through something like, this but I'll be glad to learn from your experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> "could sell for a couple hundred thousand dollars"

Start-ups are high risk, high reward and ton of WORK endeavors. The PM is treating it like a high risk, low reward, no work endeavor.

Has he put in a ton of work into this? Did he pass up opportunities to do something else because of this?

No? Then he doesn't fit.

</comment><comment><USER4> Do you really need him? If not, ditch the guy: it's already hard enough making good decisions with the two of you. It sounds like there's quite a lot of negative energy going on: I would focus that energy on building your product, not on dealing with partners who are only in it as a no-risk sideproject.

</comment><comment><USER5> Sounds like you have already made your decision.

<comment><AUTHOR> My gut has. But I'm hoping to gain insight about the "nerves" of cofounders and if this is normal or whathaveyou.

<comment><USER6> Yeah, it's normal, telling someone that you've worked with closely that they aren't working out sucks; but you have to do it. If you don't it's a drain on you and your company when you can least afford it.

<comment><USER7> Indeed. One of the things I try to figure out about a startup I'm considered working for is "can they fire people?" Because while making a wrong founder/hiring decision is often fatal, it becomes much closer to surely fatal if you don't have what it takes to correct it. (And it is hard.)

<comment><AUTHOR> I hear that. Worked at a startup where that just couldn't be done and it damn near killed me.

That being said, is it an indicator that as a founder not having what it takes to fire someone can be closely related to just not having what it takes to be a founder in general?

<comment><USER7> I wouldn't think so ... but this is so disabling in and of itself that I would think that doesn't really matter.

It would depend on the reason, e.g. an inability to make hard decision is much worse than an inability to do a necessary but cruel thing.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>