The largest living thing on Earth is a fungus (2014) - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141114-the-biggest-organism-in-the-world <comment><USER2> Between slime molds using reinforcement learning [1], and plants using a fungal "internet" to communicate[2], fungi are interesting models for a lot of network concepts.

[1][https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/12/the- brai...](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/12/the-brainless- slime-that-can-learn-by-fusing/511295/)

[2][http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141111-plants-have-a- hidden...](http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20141111-plants-have-a-hidden- internet)

<comment><USER3> They are fascinating organisms, and the more we learn about them the wilder it gets. Radiolab did an episode that talks about some of the things they do. They present evidence that the fungal networks are what make forests possible, and that fungi are not simply passive participants: in woodlands that are affected by global warming, the fungi send nutrients from dying trees that are not well-suited to a changing climate to different species which are better equipped to survive the new temperatures instead of what they normally do, which is to share the nutrients with young trees of the same species. They essentially farm the plants whose nutrients they rely on.

Paul Stamets, mentioned briefly in your second linked article, has been doing research into their antimicrobial and antiviral properties. A handful of soil has hyphae that are only one cell wide, but something in the neighborhood of miles long, so they are constantly being attacked by any number of organisms and have developed advanced countermeasures that we can take advantage of to fight the maladies that plague us. There are treatments available in Japan for cancer, called PSK and PSP, which are essentially extracts from the Turkey Tail mushroom. He has performed studies that show promise in combating colony collapse disorder in bees with extracts from the garden giant fungus, which he discovered by watching bees congregate to lick the mycelium.

Their networking concepts have been refined over millions of years, and are undoubtedly worthwhile to study, but it seems that we are only beginning to scratch the surface of what we can learn from fungi.

[http://www.radiolab.org/story/from-tree-to-shining- tree/](http://www.radiolab.org/story/from-tree-to-shining-tree/)

<comment><USER4> I stumbled upon Paul Stamets on Joe Rogan's podcast, which made a nice introduction to the world of funghi- absolutely fascinating and exciting to think of what else we may discover in this field in the coming years! For anyone interested- [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPqWstVnRjQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPqWstVnRjQ)

<comment><USER3> Yes it's a good interview. Though it got _very weird_ for a minute when he was asked about the health issues with button mushrooms and refused to answer because he said it put his life in danger. I wanna know what that's all about!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I thought it was an undecided contest between Pando (aspen grove) and the humongous fungus. [https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2014/05/08/310259300/a...](https://www.npr.org/sections/krulwich/2014/05/08/310259300/a-question- of-biggitude-what-s-the-largest-creature-on-earth)

For visual appeal and as a potential tourist destination, Pando wins hands down (especially lovely in autumn). But I guess as a food supply, the fungus wins.

<comment><USER6> The argument against Pando is that it's fractured into many smaller parts that are no longer connected.

<comment><USER7> It doesn't sound from the article like they've shown that the fungus is connected, does it? Rather, they just got evidence that infections from genetically identical funguses were ~2 km apart, and that genetically identical funguses generally fuse together if they mechanically grow into each other.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'm sure it is a normal human reaction, by my first thought was: can I eat this thing? Embarrassing

<comment><USER9> A few years ago there was an article posted on Slashdot about Russian and Japanese scientists cooperating on the attempt to clone a wooly mammoth.

About half the comments were about eating the mammoth and what it would taste like. :)

<comment><USER10> Wikipedia does in fact say that the Holocene Extinction is an _ongoing_ event. And really, how very cool and interesting that something our ancestors hunted to extinction will be resurrected and eaten once more!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> > _Biologists have long debated what constitutes an individual organism. The > record-breaking A. solidipes clonal colony passes the test based on a > definition of being made up of genetically identical cells that can > communicate, and that have a common purpose or can at least coordinate > themselves._

From the article, I'm unclear -- are all the cells _physically connected_ to each other, or are they 1,000's of fruiting bodies which are genetically identical and can communicate somehow but aren't all actually connected to each other within the trees and among them, underground? (Even if some are connected?)

Because if it's the latter, it doesn't feel like a single organism to me, any more than communicating and coordinating with an identical twin would make two people into one.

<comment><USER12> Even the 'identical twins' are not 100% genetically identical[0] and they can't 'fuse' with each other like these fungi are and can. Humans also can't asexually produce more of their own clones to cooperate with while these fungi apparently can do both asexual and sexual reproduction with asexual one being more common. Even if we could then our clones have their own central nervous system and aren't enslaved by their genes to do the same as us and 'fuse' and cooperate with us.

On the other hand, common bananas are sterile clones[1] but they are more 'separate' from each other and not 'fused' in any way (I guess? I have no idea) then these bunches of fungus... But we are all over the Biological Kingdoms (Animalia, Fungi, Plantae), methods of reproduction, human intervention, 'fusing' and so on by now.

I'm not a biologist but I had very high level biology class with a really good (and demanding..) retired biologist as the teacher and I still remember how WTF this all gets (the entire Protista Kingdom which is just a bag of stuff that doesn't fit elsewhere and varies a lot internally, the pseudo-life of viruses, the scyphozoan jellyfish life cycle, concept of biological immortality, etc.). Pluto planet debacle is nothing and a 100% clear cut case with 0 controversy in comparison to this.

[0] - [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/identical- twins-g...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/identical-twins-genes- are-not-identical/)

[1] - [https://piecubed.co.uk/bananas-facts/](https://piecubed.co.uk/bananas- facts/)

<comment><USER11> Thanks! That was really informative and helpful.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "The record-breaking A. solidipes clonal colony passes the test based on a definition of being made up of genetically identical cells that can communicate, and that have a common purpose or can at least coordinate themselves."

Definitions...

<comment><USER14> As the article hints, the concept of an individual is a very slippery thing in filamentous fungi. A single hyphal network can contain genetic material from more than two parental spores, and while a bi-nucleate condition is typical (in a "stable dikaryon"), genetically different nuclei can cohabit different regions of the same mycelium at different times, and even established nucleotypes can be completely displaced by newly-fusing types. This all leads to quite different genetic situations from those that delimit individuals in the usual sense.

In this study, somatic compatibility of isolates (their readiness to fuse into a single mycelium) seems to have been interpreted as an indication of clonality – that the isolates are completely genetically identical. (At least it was by the BBC; the abstract of the linked paper, which is all I read of it, is vague on this point.) That would make the determination that this is a single individual fungus rather unassailable. But it's not clear to me at all that we can assume things are so simple.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Anyone know how large the red delicious apple tree is?

<comment><USER16> I was thinking the same thing. Or the Cavendish banana clones...

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I wish we weren't confined to our local group. Imagine being able to go faster than light and explore all the planets with unique wonders like this. Even if we only found deadly flora, it would still be beautiful.

How many galaxies have the equivalent of fungus? All of them?

The most provocative answer is "one." But for us, it will always be true.

<comment><USER18> We are more confined than to The Local Group[1]. Andromeda, the closest galaxy to us is in The Local Group and is 2.5 million light years away.

We are confined to our galaxy. In fact, we are confined to a small region of our galaxy. It's 100,000 light years wide. Without faster than light travel, very little is accessible to us.

[1] "The Local Group" is the name of a cluster of galaxies which are gravitationally bound to each other. Our galaxy, the Milky Way, is in that cluster. When all other galaxies drift away from us in billions of years, the local group will be the only thing visible to us.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Not the same thing but fascinating, in a similar way, nevertheless are the ant super-colonies that stretch thousands of miles! See:

[http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8127000/812...](http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8127000/8127519.stm)

</comment><comment><USER20> If clonal plants count, could that mean that Henrietta Lacks (HeLa cells) is technically worlds heaviest animal?

<comment><USER21> HeLa would fail the latter portion of the definition provided in the article:

> The record-breaking A. solidipes clonal colony passes the test based on a > definition of being made up of genetically identical cells that can > communicate, and that have a common purpose or can at least coordinate > themselves.

<comment><USER22> And even if it didn't, the assumption that HeLa cells are actually identical anymore is a bold one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> ... anyone see the old super mario movie? [http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0108255/](http://m.imdb.com/title/tt0108255/)

</comment><comment><USER24> "genetically identical cells that can communicate, and that have a common purpose or can at least coordinate themselves."

Would a group of cloned humans constitute a single organism?

</comment><comment><USER25> Every time I read something like this I am reminded of the X-Files episode featuring such an organism and I'm not sure what is imitating what.

</comment><comment><USER26> If only we could use it to travel around the world instantaneously.

<comment><USER27> Why not the universe? (Star Trek Discovery reference, I assumed)</comment></comment>


Could a new phonetic alphabet promote world peace? - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21505114

<comment><USER2> This is naive. Since there are more "civil" wars (an oxymoron) than wars between nations, the opposite argument can be made with some justice -- if everyone spoke the same language or had easier ways to communicate, that might increase armed conflict because for the first time, groups of people would more easily understand what other groups were saying, and take offense.

"It is only the dead who have seen the end of war" -- Plato</comment>


A Libyan refugee web developer's story - <AUTHOR> http://www.helpmarwan.org/ <comment> rami-kh I wish Marwan the best

</comment><comment><USER2> I hope it works out for the guy.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a great initiative for a guy who deserves a shot, you've got to respect how much he has been through and what he is doing for his family. We shouldn't ever take for granted in the West how fortunate we are - despite our own political turmoil at times!

</comment><comment><USER4> Sad that America destroyed Libya. The country had health care, education subsidies, free electricity, housing subsidies .. if you talk to actual Libyans, no one believes their people revolted. The CIA pumped in those people and then carpet bombed the country.

The nation had no debt and the highest GDP of any African country and overnight, the economy collapsed and the new installed dictators (a.k.a rebel freedom fighters) are in debt to the world monetary fund.

Most Americas are totally unaware of the real situation, and when confronted, with be in total denial.

<comment><USER5> I understand your point, but the real America did not do this. American has been under the control of a shadow group and is not reflective of the will of the people. Hopefully, that can change soon.

<comment><USER6> You need to wake up. This is the real America. Half the population did vote in the president. This type of behavior has been ongoing for decades.

<comment><USER7> Obama (under whom Libya was decimated) did win in a historic landslide...

<comment><USER6> The president has little to do with anything.

<comment><USER7> I was just supporting your point. More than half of the population did indeed vote for Obama (in fact he won in a landslide ). And it was under him that Libya was obliterated (which is what the comment was talking about). Sorry if I wasn't clear.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Doesn't load without javascript and unfortunately not trusting random domains from Libya.

<comment><USER9> Why do you expect a modern web site to load without Javascript?

<comment><USER10> It's surprisingly not that rare for a website to be usable without Javascript.

I'd argue a text+images website does not need to be modern in any interpretation of modern.</comment></comment></comment>


I.Saw - The World's First USB-powered Chainsaw - <AUTHOR> http://www.usbchainsaw.com/

<comment><USER2> Bad product design. The USB port on the saw is an "A" receptacle, which sort of implies you would connect a USB accessory (like a thumb drive) to it. This would be, for the average chainsaw consumer, kind of confusing (IMHO).

If tooling and initial manufacturing are not already done, this port on the saw should be changed to a USB "B" receptacle to help eliminate confusion. Otherwise, I can see support issues when people try to power iPhones or other devices from the chainsaw.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a (poor) joke meant to promote the conservation of paper. Click the "Preorder is now closed" link for the explanation. Or don't and save 30 seconds of your life.</comment>


What is viral marketing? (original article by Steve Jurvetson) - <AUTHOR> http://www.dfj.com/cgi-bin/artman/publish/steve_may00.shtml <comment><AUTHOR> If you read founders at work, sabeer bhatia of hotmail argues that DFJ claim they came up with the concept. I wonder if this is true :)

<comment><USER2> Technically, this article does not conflict with Bhatia's account on p. 22 of Founders at Work. "It was actually Jack's idea to do that. We ran it by our VCs just to make sure it was OK. When you alter somebody's email, you've got to be very careful."

The article writes, "Tim Draper persuaded the company to include a promotional pitch for its Web-based email with a clickable URL in every outbound message sent by a Hotmail user."

According to Bhatia, Tim did persuade the founders that it was a good idea; it's just that the idea didn't originate with Tim.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> It is sort of ironic(and of course, debated) that the concept of viral marketing came out of a VC's mind:)</comment>


Big Changes Underway in the Climate System? - <AUTHOR> http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/2015/changes-in-climate-system <comment><AUTHOR> There is a longer PDF linked below this article with more detailed information[1].

Wasn't sure what would be the better link. The PDF or Summary.

[1][http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/8/c/Changes_In_The_Cli...](http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/8/c/Changes_In_The_Climate_System.pdf)</comment>


Why you should burn your resume - <AUTHOR> http://www.sean-johnson.com/why-you-should-burn-your-resume/ <comment><USER2> Indeed, the times I've worked for someone else, I've never had to show my resume. I find it more important to highlight very specific milestones I have accomplished and by doing so, the employer has a good idea of what he can attain from me by hiring me.

</comment><comment><USER3> Bravo!</comment>


Creative Zii Egg Plaszma: An Android Based Multitouch Computer - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/5324542/creative-zii-egg-plaszma-android+wielding-ipod-touch

<comment><USER2> I'm most excited by the chip built into this. With a Dual ARM processor combined with 24 processing elements, this thing could have loads of potential.

Edit: Check out the data sheets <http://www.zii.com/Technology/ResourceLibrary.aspx></comment>


Salmon-ladder development is not the way to do agile - <AUTHOR> http://blog.apterainc.com/salmon-ladder-development-is-not-the-way-to-do-agile <comment><USER2> I start all kinds of projects with minimal requirements. You obviously have to have something to start but I'll go into a meeting with a notepad and suss out what's need enough to get started.

In my opinion, true agile is rapidly getting code in the hands of users as quickly as possible. Then iterating on that. You don't need a lot of requirements to get started. But need to be not afraid of change! Things will change (maybe everything will change) and that's ok -- plan for change. This author starts with the implicit premise that change is bad and all conclusions are the result of that.

I've been involved in a few "Agile" projects implemented in hard-to-change platforms. And ultimately it's just disguised waterfall -- if you can't change the product then you're doing big planning up front.

<comment><AUTHOR> > This author starts with the implicit premise that change is bad and all > conclusions are the result of that.

How did you come to that conclusion? The theme of what I was saying is that projects to be given direction from the stakeholders. I never said anything to suggest that the direction couldn't change.

<comment><USER2> Is it actually a problem that you've seen in real life where programmers write code without _any_ direction? That seems impossible. A program exists to solve a problem. You might have a pretty vague idea of the details of that problem but ultimately you know what it is.

If programmers are coding whatever they want based on wildly unfounded assumptions then they're not doing Salmon Ladder development -- they're just terrible developers. If they're given some direction, coding, and iterating on that result then that's great. Even if they make some wrong assumptions at first, I don't see anything wrong with that.

<comment><AUTHOR> It is a problem I've seen in the real world.

For example, I've seen a project where upper management tasked a team of developers with writing software and didn't give the team specific direction nor did they communicate clear goals for the software. The team asked for more details, and the management told them to "do it agile". The team wrote good software, but they solved the wrong problem.

<comment><USER2> This is not a software development process issue. If management is bad, doesn't understand the process, and there isn't buy in then the project will fail. Take that same team and same management and do it waterfall and I doubt the outcome would be any different.

But it is not just management that is at fault. Those developers did not have enough backbone to push back. Instead of educating management about the process or telling them it can't be done they just sulked back to their cubicles and coded. There is no surprise it turned out wrong.

I see where you're coming from on this; you cannot build any product without communicating with the stakeholders. That communication can be rough scribble diagrams, notes, detailed requirements, meetings showing off prototypes -- really anything. All software development processes are about communication.

<comment><USER3> > this is not a software development process issue... [followed by a list of > software development process issues.]

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Also don't start a project with a highly detailed list of requirements and estimates and a hard deadline and call it agile either. Sadly we do.

</comment><comment><USER5> Needs an example and some diagrams, otherwise, it's just words.

"Don't start without requirements"

Depends on if you even know what the requirements are, some projects are just an idea.

</comment><comment><USER6> It's possible to start agile projects without requirements but with loads of user research and prototyping instead.

<comment><USER7> From the linked post:

      Before you start writing software, have at least one
      clear objective. You might call this a requirement, a
      user story, or a specification. Give the developers a
      target to shoot at. Otherwise, you will be swimming
      upstream.

Prototypes and research give you a target, even though they aren't "formal" (by some definition) requirements.

Even producing the prototypes meant you probably had some objectives unless someone just typed something out one day entirely on a whim.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I hate the term "requirements" with passion. It is almost always used by people without any vision or passion.

Why is it so unimaginable to create something without being able to articulate it beforehand? Or why wouldn't it be possible to start with something and letting it evolve by discovering new insights while building it?

How many successful things are really built by first writing down requirements?

Sometimes it is just an personal itch or curiosity. Other times it is actually total epiphany that brings success...

<comment><USER9> Let's get 50 people to all start writing a complex payroll system, or critical embedded medical device software, on the basis of their "personal itch" or "epiphany".

When a project or task is individual or trivial, then who cares. When not, a "hack it 'till it (hopefully) works" approach doesn't cut it.

Edit: grammar</comment></comment>


Gaps in Alumni Earnings Stand Out in Release of College Data - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/14/upshot/gaps-in-alumni-earnings-stand-out-in-release-of-college-data.html <comment><USER2> Its hard to take the conclusions of such an article seriously, especially with regards to the gender pay gaps, when they aren't normalized for degree program. Unless you are comparing Engineering women versus Engineering men, or College of Eng. in school A versus CoE in school B, it is utterly impossible to meaningfully compare schools A and B as well.

<comment><USER3> MIT PhD authored article may float your boat a little more: [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/upshot/new-data-gives- clea...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/upshot/new-data-gives-clearer- picture-of-student-debt.html?rref=upshot) Or [http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/bpea/papers/2015/loo...](http://www.brookings.edu/about/projects/bpea/papers/2015/looney- yannelis-student-loan-defaults)

For those visual people like myself, this is the most telling: [http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Projects/BPEA/Fall-2015_emb...](http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Projects/BPEA/Fall-2015_embargoed/Chart_LooneyYannelis_StudentLoanDefaults.PNG?la=en)

<comment><USER4> It's terrifying to see so many online degree-mills sucking up that much money.

<comment><USER3> The sinister in me asks "Well, who tends to make shitty decisions?" The innocent asks "How is this legal?" The realist middle-classer I am asks "Are my tax dollars going to be used to fix this shit again?" The Democrat in me says "well we should definitely introduce legislation to fix this." The Republican alter-ego laughs and says "we already fixed it because you can't get rid of that shit, even in chapter 7 and 13 bankruptcy."

<comment><USER5> None of your personalities are quite seeing the problem. The problem is that student loans are too easy to get. This creates the demand for the shit.

<comment><USER6> Why are they too easy to get?

<comment><USER7> For any other type of loan, if you have more current/future income, you can get a larger loan. For student loans, you get a larger loan for having LESS current income. This is reasonable since the loans are government-subsidized, but it might help to have some correlation between the loan and your ability to pay it off (i.e. future expected earnings due to your education).

<comment><USER8> This sounds like an excellent arbitrage opportunity for a startup. Find mispriced student loans (say, some honor roll student in MIT Computer Science paying the same 7% as some fine arts student at University of Phoenix) and refinance them at 4%.

You could even securitize the debt and sell it to alumni! I know I'd buy Waterloo CS Class of 2018 Honour Roll debt at even 3%.

<comment><USER9> This happens already. There was an article linked here some time about it. The twist was that the article scolded those companies, because it meant that the rates for government loans would have to go up, because their portfolios now consisted of worse borrowers.

Found it: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9695568](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9695568) .

<comment><USER8> Good. The interest rates should go up (and/or the tuition should go down) for these mispriced programs until they reach fair market value.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The data is at [https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/data/](https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/data/), which was posted as [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10211838](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10211838). We merged that thread into this one since they are the same story from two angles.

It's rather arbitrary which thread of the two to pick as primary. Arguably it should be the original source, but then the article gives more background, and people have linked to the original source in the thread. We can change it if people feel strongly about it.

</comment><comment><USER11> I think you must take these concepts into account if you're going to think about how to "fix" or "disrupt" education.

1\. Most students who go to elite colleges pay for what they can afford. While there are exceptions and financial aid is not perfect, the college bubble and loan crisis is largely occurring at for-profit colleges, 3rd tier universities, and the smaller liberal arts college.

2\. Most students who go to elite colleges are not attempting to optimize their future salary, but are positioning themselves to succeed and obtain prestige in science, law, medicine, politics, or academia. Many graduates of South Dakota School of Mines earn more than the POTUS, and salary optimization is not what many college applicants value.

3\. You do not and should not go to college primarily to sit and learn in classrooms. You go for the peer connections, professor mentorship, intellectual resources, and industry connections.

4\. Outside of technology, it is almost impossible to correctly learn and succeed in most intellectual fields without attending college. See: science, medicine, law, politics, literature, the arts. In technology, students who go to adequate universities and take advantage of the resources and connections offered there are merely at an enormous advantage.

5\. It is impossible to talk about (a) elite universities (top ~20 schools), (b) "top 100" universities, (c) small elite liberal arts colleges and conservatories, (d) lower ranked state schools, and (e) for-profit and/or trade schools under the same umbrella of "education" and have a productive conversation. There are all widely different environments where widely different rules apply and different policies should be considered.

<comment><USER12> >salary optimization is not what many college applicants value.

Is there any source for this? It's always something I've wondered about but haven't seen anything concrete indicating one way or another.

<comment><USER13> The words you're looking for are "liberal arts education." The liberal arts are (roughly) fields concerned with the search for truth and the study of human life: math, philosophy, physics, biology, chemistry, anthropology, psychology, literature, etc. Some computer science programs should arguably be counted among the liberal arts, insofar as they're about something deeper than contemporary software engineering practice. Liberal is meant as in freedom: the objects of study worthy of a free person, particularly if you put a Marxist lens on it and consider wage slavery unfree.

The liberal arts do not have salary optimization or the production of skilled workers of any kind as their mission, though it may be a side effect in some cases. Finance, business, management, engineering, communications, etc. do not count, and a proponent of liberal arts education (like myself) would say they do not belong in an undergrad program.

Many people believe that the primary value of undergrad is a coming-of-age ritual where students develop as intellectuals and learn to be informed and rational citizens of the world. The best way to do this is with mandatory and rigorous breadth in the entirety of the liberal arts [0], and a particularly rigorous specialization in one. Those professions that require additional formal training ought to be studied in graduate and/or professional school, as is the case with law and medicine.

This was a mainstream view until sometime in the late 20th century when the "college as job training and investment in future salary" narrative took off. Many people now (coincidentally almost all are liberals) believe this was a mistake. These are the people you'll find letting their children study non- salary-optimizing fields and lending political support to taxpayer-funded higher education, including in not-necessarily-economically-useful fields.

Start here: [http://www.ditext.com/pippin/aims2000.html](http://www.ditext.com/pippin/aims2000.html)

[0] This belief is responsible for most gen-ed requirements and core curricula.

<comment><USER12> Not relevant. I wanted hard numbers for students that don't take salary into account. I don't care about your apologetics for a field that pretends to take credit for granting the ability to think.

People from engineering fields and hard sciencies are much more rational citizens of the world than someone who spent all of their time on art history because they were required to rigorously think logically.

<comment><USER13> To the extent that we can infer desire for salary optimization by choice of major, I'd exclude humanities, social sciences, math and physical sciences (research is not particularly lucrative), and education. Those, taken together, are 46.4% of undergraduate degrees in 2011-12. CS, engineering, and business, on the other side, are 28.6% of undergraduate degrees [1].

Consider how arrogant it is to look at the history and present of human civilization, its institutions and customs and art and languages, what it claimed to know and how, what it fought for and why, who held power and how people thought about its legitimacy, what it valued and worshipped, and think "Nope, nothing there could possibly be interesting or important here beyond what engineers can discover in their spare time. Nobody should bother studying any of this." I'm glad there are people who disagree with you.

[1] [https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_318.20.a...](https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d13/tables/dt13_318.20.asp)

<comment><USER12> I never said it wasn't worth studying. Consider how arrogant it is to say that liberal arts are for teaching people how to think critically, implying that hard sciences, math, and engineering are just producing thoughtless drones for work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I think the worth of a college education varies so much from person to person, as well as field to field. If you are becoming a doctor, going to college is 100% necessary for obvious reasons. But for a programmer, it may not be, depending on the person.

More than helping you learn how to code, a college education helps you learn HOW to learn how to to code. You won't get much useful experience until you are in an internship or doing actual work in the field learning from people that are better than you. You can spend forever on theories, but it will never actually get you anywhere unless you put it to use. For the people that need to learn how to learn, the price of college can be worth it. For others, it can be a waste of time and a LOT of money.

<comment><USER15> I think it depends on the circumstances of your self learning. In general I think its harder to get a programming/software engineering job nowadays than it was 15-20 years ago without a degree. I mean, if you were self taught on PHP/Perl/Linux in the 90s, then you could've gotten yourself in on the ground floor without a CS degree. Likewise for any new tech stack that gets introduced, immersing yourself in it can certainly make up for not having a CS degree.

<comment><USER16> I'm not sure if it's true or not (and I was one of those self-taught in the late 1990s devs) that it's harder now, but I can tell you that even back then it had challenges even beyond getting a foot in the door: [https://medium.com/@opirmusic/why-software-developers- should...](https://medium.com/@opirmusic/why-software-developers-should-still- choose-to-go-to-university-if-someone-else-is-paying-45091d22acc1)

It was possible then, and it's possible now; it is definitely a lot more work than with the degree, though.

<comment><USER14> Interesting article. If you can go to university on a full-ride scholarship without getting yourself into debt, then by all means, you don't have anything to lose. But when you say that self-learning is a lot more work than a degree, I have to disagree with that. Getting a bachelors in CS is no cake walk, and after you graduate, you'll have to spend years getting actual experience with a company anyway. Either way, to be successful in a field, you'll have to work extremely hard. For some, paying for a college degree can be self-motivation to work harder, but in the end, everyone will have to work hard to make it.

<comment><USER17> I have several friends without university degrees that are software devs. The difficulty seems really variable. If you get that first job and can stay there for a couple of years, I would say it is often easier than going to University. Personally, I didn't consider comp sci to be a particularly difficult degree (in comparison to physics or pure math for example), but exams and assignments are definitely more stressful than what you normally run into in a job.

There is a lot of risk with going without a degree, though. Take the example of the person who posted a few days ago about working as an intern for 8 months, getting into a fight with his boss over money and finding himself without a job. I'll take the stress of an exam over that any day. Trying to find a junior position without an academic background often means putting yourself at the mercy of unscrupulous people :-(

I got a free ride through school, but I went through in the 80's when it was also comparatively cheap. At that time, I don't think there was much of a downside to getting a degree. If I were to do it again (on my own dime), though, I would seriously think about trying to get an apprenticeship at 18 instead. If you can work for those 4 years, I think you would be considerably ahead financially.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Carnegie Mellon has salary information for each major. For example, computer science majors: [http://www.cmu.edu/career/salaries-and- destinations/2015-sur...](http://www.cmu.edu/career/salaries-and- destinations/2015-survey/scs.html) have a mean starting salary of $103,608 and median of $105,000. This doesn't include any stock, stock options or bonuses yet. Out of 192 students, 32 joined Google, 19 joined Facebook and 12 joined Microsoft.

The data for MIT is very similar (even same median starting salary of $105,000 for EECS): [https://gecd.mit.edu/sites/default/files/about/files/2014-gs...](https://gecd.mit.edu/sites/default/files/about/files/2014-gss- survey.pdf)

So if you can just graduate in the top half of your class in at a good CS school you start with a 6 figure salary.

<comment><USER19> Or you can go to a normal college (like San Jose State), intern at apple or similar and make that six figure starting salary fairly quickly.

<comment><USER18> Yep, of course. Looking at SJSU's data [http://www.sjsu.edu/careercenter/employers/salary- data/2014S...](http://www.sjsu.edu/careercenter/employers/salary- data/2014SalarySurveyReport2.pdf) it seems like their average starting salary for CS is 85k which isn't far off.

EDIT: Since you mentioned internships, CMU also publish internship stats: [http://www.cmu.edu/career/salaries-and- destinations/2014-sur...](http://www.cmu.edu/career/salaries-and- destinations/2014-survey/SCS%20One%20Pager%20Internships%202014.pdf)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Important notes regarding earnings from the dataset documentation ([https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/assets/FullDataDocumentation...](https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/assets/FullDataDocumentation.pdf)):

> _There are two notable limitations that researchers should keep in mind for > all of these metrics. First, the data are not yet available to produce > program-level earnings data. Research suggests that the variation across > programs within a school may be even greater than aggregate earnings across > schools; for instance, STEM and health majors frequently earn more than > students who study in other fields. Second, the data include only Title IV- > receiving students, so figures may not be representative of schools with a > low proportion of Title IV-eligible students. Additionally, the data are > restricted to students who are not enrolled (enrolled means having an in- > school deferment status for at least 30 days of the measurement year), so > students who are currently enrolled in graduate school at the time of > measurement are excluded._

Although, looking at the data, the real problem is that half the colleges have PrivacySurpressed values for those fields.

<comment><USER21> Can anyone understand the logic of the NYT releasing this article, then going into the wage gap aspect, without mentioning that the data can't be quantified by major?

It also doesn't mention any steps taken to account for the willingly unemployed/underemployed- assuming both partners in a marriage will desire to work full time to maximize their earning potential seems like it's worth a disclaimer.

<comment><USER22> >Can anyone understand the logic of the NYT releasing this article, then going into the wage gap aspect, without mentioning that the data can't be quantified by major?

It fits a narrative that NYT has been pushing for years.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I really do wonder how much of these gaps can be attributed to the universities themselves. Elite universities are more likely to attract successful and motivated and thus will "produce" more successful graduates than other universities. No name state colleges are more likely to attract the less successful high school students and thus they will likely produce less successful graduates. I bet there is nearly as much correlation between SAT scores and pay as the eliteness of the attended university and pay.

<comment><USER24> Not necessarily.

Many talented students can't afford or avoid debt in elite universities.

At the same time, less competitive students may get accepted because of donations/connections/preparatory schools.

<comment><USER25> > Many talented students can't afford or avoid debt in elite universities.

That's actually very very rare. Elite universities will give grants which cover the vast majority of costs for low-income students.

There's a reason the average indebtedness at graduation for Ivies is only a few thousand dollars (and that's not even including the majority who have no debt).

<comment><USER26> While this is true, many disadvantaged students don't even know this, because they don't even look at these schools in the first place, as they assume they cannot afford to attend. Selection bias.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> > At Bennington College in Vermont, over 48 percent of former students were > earning less than $25,000 per year. A quarter were earning less than $10,600 > per year.

Bennington always impressed me as as rich kids' school. I have to wonder how many of these former students are living off of trust funds.

<comment><USER28> I went to Bennington for two years, and while it has that reputation, and there are some rich kids running around (myself included), there are a surprising number of working and middle class kids going there, and then coming out of school with no prospects.

Anecdotally, there are a surprising number of waiters, baristas, and other people doing jobs that are in no way informed by their years of study.

<comment><USER29> FWIW my good friend went to Bennington and nothing she studied in school is remotely applicable to life... Let alone work. That said she had a really good time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> This is really exciting, and I think this shows that the government is starting to 'get' software development after the healthcare.gov fiasco.

They released the data under an open source license and have the source of the website on github! It's built w/ Jekyll!

[https://github.com/18F/college-choice](https://github.com/18F/college-choice)

If you asked me a year ago how likely I thought this was, I would have guessed something like 1%.

</comment><comment><USER31> I feel like a tremendous factor behind the numbers for middle-tier schools is simple geography. For example, I make more than double what many of my college friends who I consider at least equally as smart and motivated as I make, and it's pretty clear that the only reason is I chose to move to California whereas they stayed in Nevada.

Colleges in sparsely populated areas will probably always have dramatically lower numbers given the tendency of graduates to stay close to home, regardless of the actual quality of education. The salary numbers should take the region of a former student's job into account in some way.

<comment><USER32> Does your comparison with your friends take location into account? E.g. if you're in SF and they're in Reno, then expatistan[0] claims your costs are 57% higher.

0 - [http://www.expatistan.com/cost-of- living/comparison/reno/san...](http://www.expatistan.com/cost-of- living/comparison/reno/san-francisco)?

<comment><USER33> Cost of living is hard to account for; it's definitely not just some percentage multiplier. For instance, my cost of living went up by about $5K/year to move to Manhattan (rent went up by a lot, which was partially offset by no longer having transportation costs). But my salary went up by over $100K. Yet a cost of living calculator says that Manhattan is significantly more expensive, and that an, e.g., $200K salary is only "worth" $114K in low-cost areas like Reno, which practically speaking, isn't true for me at all. I'm saving more money per year than what my post-tax salary in Reno would be in its entirety, which itself is an unlikely situation because the Big 4 don't have offices in Reno and I suspect there aren't a huge number of well-compensated developer jobs there, even at the $160K or so level that would yield the same savings left over as a $200K job in NYC.

You're always better off making a given salary in a higher CoL area than the equivalent salary in a lower CoL area, because not everything scales linearly with CoL (e.g. ordering goods off Amazon, or going on vacations), and your higher salary thus gets you more purchasing power on lots of goods and services.

<comment><USER12> >even at the $160K or so level that would yield the same savings left over as a $200K job in NYC.

200k in NYC has an estimated 82.7K tax burden and 160k in Reno has an estimated 50.3k tax burden.[1] That means that you only have about 18k more in NYC. So something is messed up for your calculation unless you are living on <=18k in NYC.

1\. [https://smartasset.com/taxes/income- taxes](https://smartasset.com/taxes/income-taxes)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> wow! -- the 10 year earnings for 2 yr college "Los Angeles County College of Nursing and Allied Health" is almost as high as harvard.

see: [http://www.ed.gov/blog/2015/09/colleges-where-students- earn-...](http://www.ed.gov/blog/2015/09/colleges-where-students-earn-high- salaries/) and [http://www.ed.gov/blog/2015/09/schools-with-low-costs-and- hi...](http://www.ed.gov/blog/2015/09/schools-with-low-costs-and-high- incomes/)

<comment><USER35> It is pretty obvious what most of LACCN grads are doing 10 years later. Harvard has a more economically diverse bunch of academics, authors, engineers, homemakers, and CEOs. Harvard's mean is higher than its medianm

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Anyone else find that 5 page slider of text just awful. I can only ask but WHY?

Do people who make websites nowadays hate people and want to see the world(wide web) burn?

<comment><USER14> Well it is a .gov... they have never been known for their beautiful UX :P

<comment><USER37> We are trying to change that; I'm curious what else would have been a better choice for presenting that info: [https://medium.com/@USDigitalService/under- the-hood-building...](https://medium.com/@USDigitalService/under-the-hood- building-a-new-college-scorecard-with-students-cbcf21a745fc)

<comment><USER14> They have gotten a LOT better in the past few years, that's for sure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> Interesting article. I graduated from (and interned) at UCLA while the need- based financial aid initiative was rolling out[1]. Obviously, it's the primary factor in minimizing student debt (it's obvious to see that students with well-to-do families have more financial support than poor ones).

An issue I take is conflating public institutions with private ones. I remember UCLA & Berkeley admissions people always struggling to poach students that might attend Stanford/Caltech, but the issue is very complex. Huge endowments are just part of the story.

It makes sense that a wealthy private school (Harvard/Princeton/etc.) has more extra-academic connections that help students get better jobs. Smaller class sizes also make a difference. I just think the article tries to talk about too many things and doesn't end up doing any of them justice. The gender stuff shoehorned at the end is a prime example.

[1] [http://www.ucla.edu/admission/affordability](http://www.ucla.edu/admission/affordability)

</comment><comment><USER39> > "students at private for-profit two-year and four-year institutions have > high rates of borrowing and their graduates often have large amounts of > debt."

Isn't that expected? Students who go to for-profit schools by definition have to pay their way through so it would make sense they have higher levels of borrowing and debt.

<comment><USER20> There's nothing wrong with restating obvious conclusions. At the least, it ensures the data is valid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Are people finally starting to ask where the DoE got its earnings numbers to increase student loan tuition caps, the resulting tuition hikes across the board, explosion in the private education market, and the zero risk (except to the tax payers) student loan interest income keg party?

</comment><comment><USER13> How is grad school factored in? At my school, a very large portion (~40%) of students go on to masters/PhD/law/MD right after graduation. This could deflate salary numbers compared to what those students make when they actually enter the workforce.

</comment><comment><USER20> The data is not particularly uniform, with NULLs and PrivacySurpressed values everywhere.

I wanted to play around with SAT/ACT data and create correlations with other variables...but the only values reported are 25% quantile and 75% quantile for accepted students (they derive a midpoint between the two...by averaging them, which is wrong). Hmrph.

</comment><comment><USER41> I love that to support their headline, the article states that at hundreds of colleges many students aren't earning more than high school graduates 10 years after graduation. Then in the next sentence says that those hundreds of "colleges" include barber academies, cosmetology schools, and for-profit colleges.

<comment><USER42> There are still plenty of traditional liberal arts colleges in that group. For my alma mater (Oberlin College) only 52% of students are earning more than high school graduates. Pretty sad.

<comment><USER41> That's true, but that's exactly the rhetorical trick they used to make their point seem stronger than it is.

They grouped barber colleges with 4 year schools to make the overall statistics look worse. Then they combine that with anecdotes about a few poorly performing 4 year schools.

To you're point about Oberlin--the data isn't separated by major, and from Oberlin's website they emphasize college and conservatory of music. It's not surprising that musicians aren't making a lot of money.

<comment><USER42> The Conservatory makes up only 20% of the students, so I don't think that's the bulk of the issue.

Of the College students, most major in literature, art or social sciences. And there's a strong tendency to work in non-profits or academia after graduation.

This would all be fine if it weren't so damn expensive to attend. While I had a great time there and learned a lot, I wouldn't recommend the same path to my kids.

<comment><USER41> 20% is a pretty big number, add to that music, art, theater, dance, and cinema studies and you likely have a pretty big chunk of the total population.

Saying that only 52% of Oberlin graduates make more than the average high school graduate is pretty close to saying that the performing arts don't tend to pay well.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> We believe that we should cram as many people in the country as possible through our current conception of a university.

There are several reasons people want to believe that's a good idea:

* They believe that someone with a B.A., B.S., etc. is a higher class person than one without

* They believe that putting everyone through the system will bring everyone up to that higher class, thus removing the negative effects of classes in society

* They believe that it's the only path to education

* They believe it's somehow immune from various biases, corruption, infighting, trend-following, etc.

* They believe it's a diverse forum for the free exchange of ideas, and that all reasonable ideas are given their due consideration

* They believe that "good colleges" are good and lead to success because of the quality of the education and the insight of the professors

Unfortunately, none of those are true. Until we admit that, we can't fix the problem.

When we do admit those things, we can acknowledge that:

* A person who reads a lot of books and participates in discussions with others who have different opinions has as much claim on "good citizenship" as anyone else (college or not), and it doesn't take tens of thousands of dollars

* Language, history, and art classes can be quite effective by teaching language, history, and art; and not spending the entire time on politics

* Vocational schools are probably the right place for a lot of things, including programming and software engineering (though a university might be the right place for Comp. Sci.). When we figure out software engineering, perhaps it belongs in the university, but for now it's not an established discipline.

* If we really want people to get a more academic education, giving them a loan and demanding them to pay it back regardless of bankruptcy makes little sense. Maybe that makes sense for vocational school, where it's more of a straight investment. But for a purely academic education, it's probably a lot cheaper to provide it anyway, so lots of financial approaches could work.

* "Good colleges" are good because of the kind and quality of _students_ that they concentrate in one place -- in other words, a social club built around an academic theme. (This is really the one that makes it obvious that bringing more people into the university system won't have the same results as the ones who are in it now.)

</comment><comment><USER44> College isn't the only method to become educated. Going in debt for on College lark is a social acceptable way to spend money, but it isn't the only way to win. If you know what you want to do chase then chase all methods to get trained. Otherwise spend some time traveling the world to figure your life and then consider spending $200K ~ $400K on college education. Don't waster your time on these for profit degree mills. Their product sucks and no employer cares you got a purchased a degree from Phoenix College

</comment><comment><USER45> "Mrs. degree" assortative mating (+ field of study preferences) make the 'females in college X' implication muddier, but overall it's good to encourage people to look at expected outcomes before opting into $100k debt.

That is, a rational woman would look at expected earnings including child support + alimony, and insist on figures stratified by field of study (so she can choose where + what to study).

</comment><comment><USER46> This assumes college is what determines salary after college... Sure it might have some effect but I bet other factors are also v important e.g. Parent's income, family wealth, social network, personality, life goals, etc.

Also perpetuates the myth that college is for job training. It's not. It's for education.

<comment><USER47> > Also perpetuates the myth that college is for job training. It's not. It's > for education.

While I agree, the sheer cost of college, and the huge loans many take out to attend, mean that the vast majority are expecting a decent return on their sizable investment. After all, if you're really just concerned about getting an education, there are a lot cheaper ways to do it than college.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> Given the point about program : tuition I wonder if different majors should be asked different tuitions. Bio/cs/things that cost more and have more earning potential could charge a higher price than the English lit majors.

</comment><comment><USER49> Has there been any sort of Marxist analysis about the middle class using the higher education system to entrench their advantage over the poor and therefore willingly going along with ridiculous tuition fees?

<comment><USER50> [http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/in-plain-sight/great- unequali...](http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/in-plain-sight/great-unequalizer- higher-education-policy-making-inequality-worse-n107651)

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Is there a data source link? Can't find it anywhere and I'm just jumping from article to article when it highlights their data source -_-

<comment><USER52> [https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/data/](https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/data/)

It's climbing the front page right now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> I think this industry is bound for massive disruption. It's one of the social pillars so . . . what happens when one of those gets moved?

<comment><USER3> You work at a startup don't you?

<comment><USER10> Please don't post snarky personal comments to HN.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> This wouldn't be a concern of the Federal Government at all if they'd just stop funding student loans. And there would be a side-benefit of college costs dropping sharply. A win-win for everyone!

<comment><USER55> That would lock poorer students out of higher education.

<comment><USER54> No it wouldn't. Tuitions would plummet. And we can certainly make sure we have a good, inexpensive (or free!) community college system with wide access so everyone can get a start with higher education.

<comment><USER55> > No it wouldn't. Tuitions would plummet.

To whatever the "middle class" can afford.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Beyond questionable gaps, like gender gaps, it's blatant we're living under a modern caste system.

</comment><comment><USER56> University is a scam.

I feel so bitter. I just graduated 1 month ago. I could have continued with my masters by I am done. I hated every second of being in university.

Not because of any other reason but because of how bleak my financial prospect was. I consider myself lucky that my parents bankrolled me - but looking at the aggregate amount I spent on it - 60,000 pounds.

I paid 60,000 pounds literally to read a bunch of books and write some code that could run on a computer from the 1980s, which I could have done on my own from my parent's basement.

Every-time a lecturer gave a low-effort lecture I felt like punching them in the face, I could feel the the negative acceleration of my net worth everyday I woke up from sleep. How was I to recover it ? Is it even possible ?

Meanwhile there is so much opportunities, so much data to explore, so much work to done. Its a crime that so many young minds are made to waste their time on meaningless stuff while they would start with small apprenticeship and allowed to grow.

<comment><USER57> 1) I don't think you'll get too many bites after talking about hitting people.

2) If you hated it so much, why in the world would you allow your parents to bankroll it? That seems so disrespectful to me.

<comment><USER56> Its a thought - I am sure many other students who were taking actual loans would have much more terrible thoughts.

Yes, I realize it was a mistake. When I was 18 I was fed the same garbage about going to university as everyone else and took it without much reasoning - It was my fault, I was an idiot.

There are many other people who are in much more worse situation then I am, A lot of my friends are in much more stressful situation then me.

Yes its disrespectful to my parents and that is why I quit. I felt terribly guilty since it was after all not my hard earned money but my parent's. They also brought into the whole university scam as a road to middle class life.

I have never felt more relieved. Now I can go do some real studying in a much more relaxed fashion.

<comment><USER58> Don't listen to that guy.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


It's Time to Rethink the Link - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@justpw/66d32ff0e2e2

<comment><AUTHOR> This essay is a proposal to build a public and open link database that developers can use to build all kinds of wonderful tools.

here's more on the subject :

[http://wayfinder.is/justin/Its-Time-to-Rethink-the- Link/540d...](http://wayfinder.is/justin/Its-Time-to-Rethink-the- Link/540dbaa29d3081110046d9a9/099280)

[https://gist.github.com/justpw/7d75746669f4b33c5011](https://gist.github.com/justpw/7d75746669f4b33c5011)</comment>


Ask HN: How Does SpaceX (Or Nasa) Deal with Van Allen Belts? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Wont claim following link addresses all aspects. Please have a look. [https://www.forbes.com/sites/jillianscudder/2017/06/16/astro...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/jillianscudder/2017/06/16/astroquizzical- van-allen-belts-barrier-spaceflight/#25ef09076f8d)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I can hardly get my head around the fact that Apollo 11 received just 0.38 rads passing through an inner belt that can easily reach 100 MeV. For whatever this paper is worth [0], unpredictable solar activity is a major driver on coming out dead or alive as an astronaut. So manned missions are left mostly to luck?? Any details on the optimal path followed by Apollo/Falcon spaceflights or scenario analysis on solar activity impact on manned missions would be greatly appreciated

[0] Radiation Analysis for Moon and Mars Missions - [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.01643.pdf](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.01643.pdf)

<comment><USER3> This is how Apollo did it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNiscigIgBc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNiscigIgBc)

They followed a flight path closer to the North Pole, which substantially decreased the radiation's intensity and the duration of the astronaut's exposure.</comment></comment></comment>


Darpa needs private tunnels in a hurry - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/DARPA/status/1166736432901308416 <comment><USER2> The project timeline is ... scary.

<comment><USER3> The timeline doesn't necessarily mean that DARPA needs the tunnel data by August 30. The timeline might mean that an MIT person is at DARPA, and understands that it will be convenient to collect the tunnel data during Orange Tour planning: [http://tech.mit.edu/V123/N36/36orange.36n.html](http://tech.mit.edu/V123/N36/36orange.36n.html)</comment></comment>


In VC pitches the bio slide should come first - <AUTHOR> http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2011/12/17/let-me-introduce-myself/

<comment><USER2> Any other opinions?

<comment><USER3> I don't see what the advantage is for someone to put up front that they went to some vc's rival school or something equally prejudicial.

<comment><USER4> If you're pitching to a VC who refuses to work with Harvard grads because he/she went to Yale, you're probably pitching the wrong VC...

<comment><USER3> Well, the thing is that an up-front bio is going to necessarily expose you to these prejudices (which do exist), that's why I ask what the advantage might be (and to who). The article pretty much handwaves this concern with an "it'll be better" type sentiment.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Visual Studio Code repository is open again - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/issues/87440 <comment><USER2> > "The Santa Hat on vscode insiders and pushing of religion is very offensive > to me, additionally xmas has cost millions of Jews their lives over the > centuries, yet even if that was not the case, pushing religious symbols as > part of a product update is completely unacceptable," the user wrote. > "Please remove it immediately and make it your top priority. To me this is > almost equally offensive as a swastika."

Santa is about as non-religious as you can get. IMO, I think Microsoft really put their foot in their mouth on this one.

Edit: Because I can't let this go, it's important to point out that what we find offensive is subjective. I wonder if whoever wrote that is really just trolling Microsoft, or just has an axe to grind.

<comment><USER3> I think the person who posted this was a bit silly, but you can't be serious about Santa being non-religious, can you?

He's literally a saint in every form of Christianity that has saints.

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

<comment><USER4> Are you sure Santa and Saint Nicholas are the same? In Germany we celebrate Saint Nicholas on December 6th, while Santa brings presents on December 24th (Christmas Eve).

<comment><USER5> Yes it is the same. Santa Claus comes from Sinterklaas which is Dutch for Saint Nicholas.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> A lot of people are piling on the original complainant for a ridiculous complaint, and rightly so. But they are not the only offender here, and arguably not even the worst one:

> _To adhere to our values and the Code of Conduct, we had to delete a handful > of comments, which is unfortunate but not uncommon. Our responses triggered > more responses. Bots were being employed to create issues and comments. > Temporary accounts were being created to spam the system. Offensive issues > were being created. The repository was filling up with issues which, > frankly, were uncalled for, and we needed to do something, fast._

Every person who felt the need to comment and create github issues (and even write spam bots to do so!) about a santa hat being _removed_ is not a person that should be trusted with any sort of responsibility or employment in the software industry. The absolutely staggering lack of maturity here boggles the mind.

This is not how sane adults should act. On either side.

<comment><USER7> >or employment in the software industry.

For commenting to point out contradictory standards on what is considered offensive enough to remove? Really?

Edit: One satirical (per my own assumption) comment I read was complaining about calling the main branch master. The idea that using terminology such as master is offensive to some people seems at least as plausible as the santa hat being plausible. Perhaps more so as there have already been some discussion about the use of the term master in tech lingo. That is the kind of comment I'm thinking of, but want to be sure we are thinking of the same ones.

<comment><USER6> It's harsh language, but honestly: yes. Microsoft had to _lock down the repository_ because it was being flooded with comments like this. For removing a _santa hat_.

I saw this story about it being removed as well, and I thought to myself "well, that's pretty silly, but whatever" and then five seconds later I had moved on with my life. The very idea that an grown person could be so upset about it that they would actually expend the mental energy to go to the github issues page and voice their opinion with an angry comment is mind-boggling to me. It is, in my opinion, an even more absurd reaction than the original complaint.

<comment><USER8> This is very meta.

You've commented twice on the incident now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > "Please remove it immediately and make it your top priority. To me this is > almost equally offensive as a swastika."

I don't know about their part of the world, but this person would not make it 1 meter through a shopping mall in Europe from November to January. Swa... Santas everywhere!

<comment><USER10> Equally, the swastika is a common religious symbol in East Asia.

<comment><USER11> Didn't know that India and Pakistan are East Asia. Always thought East Asia would be Japan Korea and the likes

<comment><USER12> They're not, but swastikas are common as a religious symbol all over South and East Asia, and go back all the way to Mesopotamia: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Historical_use](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Historical_use)

<comment><USER11> I don't see anything about East Asia. Tibet is literally besides Pakistan and India

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The paradox of tolerance [1] is a PITA. At the end of the day a santa hat is no big deal, but by the logic of "even a single person being offended is one too many", taken to the extreme, all that is left is the lowest common denominator of what all humans tolerate (if there is such a thing).

On a more practical note, I find it hard to reason on how deal with issues like this. It's like if you try to be level headed, avoid conflict, and try to see things from the other side you already lost, because there is no corresponding empathy coming from the other side. The only solution is to give in, or deal with an offended internet mob.

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

<comment><USER14> Why is someone being offended such a big deal nowadays? It seems everyone is always trying to make sure no one can ever be the slightest bit offended. Doesn't necessarily feel like the most important metric we should be optimizing for as a society.

<comment><USER15> It's the PC (politically correct) movement. PC definitely needed a lot of push in 2000. It has certainly helped correct a lot of language problems, problems that either reinforce stereotypes, gender and/or sexual orientation issues. Indeed it is part of the reason people stopped saying Japs or the N. word or fat person.

The reality is that if you were one of the people that is sidelined, you would feel it too. It's part of the reason we need to keep at it.

So while PC'ism may have changed your companies end-of-year greeting cards from "Merry Christmas and Happy New Year" to "Happy Holidays and Happy New Year", or even just "Season's Greetings", you can probably imagine that's helped 10 to 20 percent of the workforce (that are likely atheist, agnostic, jewish or muslim or whatever feel more included in the greeting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> > we reverted the gear to something (hopefully) less controversial (a > snowflake)

I'm too sensible to get _offended_ by things like this (cynical amusement is more my style), but as a southern hemispherian—

People from the north hemisphere regularly seem to describe things in terms of seasons (e.g. "coming this summer"), completely disregarding the fact that such seasons don't hold in most of the world: in the southern hemisphere they're back to front, and nearer the equator seasons are just all-round different. Southern hemispherians don't seem to describe scheduled things with seasons much, and only ever in local matters, not global.

(Then you get things like Microsoft's use of "Fall" in a Windows 10 release which makes it not just northern-hemisphericentric, if I may coin a term, but downright American by virtue of not using the word "autumn" that everyone else uses.)

Back to the snowflakes. Australia's _on fire_ now, from the heat. (And a town near me was under direct threat of burning down from a bushfire last night.) Even if we ever got snow where I live (we don't), this would not be the season for it!

<comment><USER17> I am not saying its a good thing they do, but >85% of the population live in the northern hemisphere and thus experience the same seasons

[https://www.themarysue.com/world-population-latitude- longitu...](https://www.themarysue.com/world-population-latitude-longitude/)

Wikipedia notes it higher: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Hemisphere](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Hemisphere)

<comment><USER16> However, a great many of those live in tropical climes which do not conform to the four-season model, c.f. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Season](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Season).

<comment><USER17> At the current rate of climate change I would say that won't last for long.

But, I agree. Even though they adhere to the tropical model, don't they still know what "season" it is?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> > even a single person being offended is one too many

Seriously?? Take a stand against extremists, that's what I say. If you cave to the demands of individual offended people, prepare to waste a lot of time catering to trolls...

<comment><USER19> How bland and boring would this world become if we applied this opinion to everything?

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> A single troll has managed to create an insanely huge drama and loss of tons of people time.

I'm not optimistic about the future of Free Software. Especially with the new tendency of some projects to consider that people can be offended about pretty much anything, especially if it is completely trivial, and that the utmost priority is to attempt to not offend anybody on Earth.

Because like we saw here, attempting to not offend by modifying trivialities is actually going to offend way more people.

And this is exploited by trolls.

<comment><USER21> I commented on a similar case (on a gitlab thread) and got downvoted. I dont mind. it wont change the truth. my comment was:

"because it all comes down to the root cause:

the attack on an area which until now couldnt care less about politics. now in the context of "free speech" we try to brake the last known union out there in the world. developers, who have only let code speak so far."

we will see more and more attacks on free speech (in the name of free speech), open source and companies and people who contribute to open source.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> > we reverted the gear to something (hopefully) less controversial (a > snowflake)

A snowflake for all the offended snowflakes - how fitting.

<comment><USER23> This snowflake abortion is more offensive than the last! My grandfather died in the great blizzard of '78!

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> This is a very professional and level headed response by the VS Code team. I hope people reference this in the future to learn how to handle and respond openly to divisive issues.

<comment><USER25> This is not a divisive issue, the account that raised the issue is most likely fake, the person behind it intended to trigger and divide people and they succeeded at that. The world is no paradise, you will never satisfy everyone nor should you try to. Microsoft's response is cringeworthy.

<comment><USER24> By us being here, that so many people objected to the removal of an easter egg in a developer channel release, to me, indicates there is a serious schism. I expect people are using this as a proxy for concerns about PC culture and "the war on christmas". This written description of what happened, and how the team is handling what happened going forward is transparent and respectful, that is what I am attempting to comment on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The original icon: [https://disrn.com/news/santa-hat-on-visual-studio-code- icon-...](https://disrn.com/news/santa-hat-on-visual-studio-code-icon-riles- github)

How on earth is that offensive? It's literally just a Santa hat on a cog...

<comment><USER27> From your linked source:

> To me this is almost equally offensive as a swastika

Sigh.

<comment><USER28> Can we just start ignoring people whose sense of reality is so out of touch? I'm offended they took someone seriously with this BS. Millions dead versus a myth of someone delivering gifts, wtf?

I think some folks need to watch some Steve Hughes comedy on being offended.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Even though I'm a strong atheist who always rejects the pushing of religious values in our laws, I really enjoy the Christmas/Holiday season because it's honestly just a happy time around family (and unless you go seeking it out, you hardly see Jesus mentioned.)

I don't understand the idea of being offended at what is essentially a happy time for many people where they are celebrating something that matters to THEM. Again, they're not pushing it on anyone.

Maybe it's my polytheistic upbringing (grew up Hindu by name in India, with many relatives that also prayed to the infant Jesus alongside their Hindu Gods).

The Santa hat is about as harmless a sign of the holidays as I can imagine (it's not like they showed a cross or something). To borrow from the Reddit phrase, this is the most boring kind of dystopia where a completely harmless sign offends people.

<comment><USER30> Forgive me if this is a poor/rude question, but I'm curious about the inclusion of infant Jesus you mentioned. Is there some significance the infant has that another aged representation would not?

<comment><USER29> Sorry, I have no idea why. But Infant Jesus is really popular in South India.

As a very curious kid, I used to ask my grandpa and others the same question but never got a satisfying answer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> > even a single person being offended is one too many

That's a disappointingly defeatist philosophy. I really like VS Code and this won't change that, but it's a shame that they let a single crazy person destroy what was a nice gesture for the vast, vast majority of their users.

<comment><USER32> Now the VS community knows how to get new features added to the product. Simly say " _I 'm offended that you are not adding this feature_" and they will promptly add it, as not to "offend".

Slippery slope, VS team.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Christmas is not a Christian holiday. Christianity is young.

The symbols and traditions surrounding the midwinter feasts (Yule etc) go back way longer. It's not even _called_ Christmas or anything with "Christ" e.g in Scandinavia. Because no way we'd let the church change also the _name_. No sir.

The church just had to adopt the festive period. Santa Claus is an even later addition.

And famously the red Santa is thanks to Coca Cola.

So basically the red Santa hat is a symbol that Coca Cola put on top a legend of a saint that was in turn adopted onto pagan winter rites. It's not exactly bibles all over it.

</comment><comment><USER34> This is so fucking sad...

<comment><USER35> Indeed it is but I am almost sure that this guy is a troll.

<comment><USER36> Yep. And everyone is feeding the troll. Instead of closing the issue, they bend over backwards and encourage further trolling in the future.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I believe this was blown way out of proportion, but I am uncertain how else the visual studio code team should've responded.

Where do you draw the line?

Was there a way to politely respond to this person without kowtowing to them?

Maybe by adding an option to disable the santa hat, where it's on by default, but you can turn it off?

Google has been sprucing up their search page for years now; Many a santa hat has been present, and people were both annoyed and happy, and also apathetic. Would Google have responded similarly, if some random person had a pipeline right to their developers?

It feels like even though some random person with a complaint got his wish, everyone else lost something. Like the ability to put something fun in your software without being overly concerned about offending one person.

<comment><USER38> Totally agree. I wonder if he's also complained to the Unicode Consortium about the inclusion of Santa and Mrs Santa emoji.

<comment><USER39> This may be the only way to get rid of emoji, I say have at it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Original ticket: [https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/issues/87268](https://github.com/microsoft/vscode/issues/87268)

</comment><comment><USER41> > Thank you Microsoft, I am very pleased with that decision. I understand many > find this strange, therefor I would like to add an article about how > offensive xmas is to many so you understand why. > [https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/51928?lang=bi](https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/51928?lang=bi)

I am not sure there is that many people offended by Christmas for the reasons given in that article. I am inclined to change my mind though.

Is VLC next ?

</comment><comment><USER42> Couldn't he just not use vscode?

I think the response from Microsoft should have been somethjng like "it's unfortunate to are offended by this but this absolutely wasn't our intention". If you dont wish to use vscode during the holiday season then that's up to you but the vast majority of our users saw the hat as we intended and we aren't going to have one user dictate to us how we run vscode"

I mean, isn't vs code essentially open source? If the guy was so offended couldn't he just remove it and build hus own inoffensive version? Presumably if he's using vscode he is a developer...

It's the request to remove it as a top priority that I find strangest. The ego of someone must have to think they can dictate to everyone else what to do just to make sure they themselves get a perfectly comfortable existence. I genuinely don't get it. It must be just an exhausting way to live?

Is this sort of perpetual offence/ victimhood more prevalent in IT than other industries? Is it just a by product of the sort of people out industry attracts?

<comment><USER43> even better, he could have not used the insider edition. Apparently this was _only_ on the insider edition

</comment></comment><comment><USER44> > even a single person being offended is one too many

I am offended by snowflakes. Go find something more inclusive, you insensitive clod!

</comment><comment><USER45> He probably could have been equally as effective by saying "hey, let's make this icon more generic so it's more inclusive" and ended it at that. I don't think he is wrong in his request, but the necessity people feel to say "This offends me" over just using other more concrete rationale is what causes these kinds of incidents.

We need to learn to use less divisive and accusatory language when making requests like this.

</comment><comment><USER46> This is the part where I suggest everybody read _Corporate Cancer_ [0]. It's all about how to run a business in this day and age of constant outrage.

[0]: [https://www.amazon.com/Corporate-Cancer-Miracles-Millions- Co...](https://www.amazon.com/Corporate-Cancer-Miracles-Millions-Company- ebook/dp/B081D58P1X/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=corporate+cancer&qid=1576880622&sr=8-1)

<comment><USER47> Isn't this guy extremely far-right? I wouldn't expect unbiased analysis here.

<comment><USER48> You shouldn't expect unbiased analysis from anyone, about anything. Don't look at other peoples' viewpoints as something to either wholly adopt or wholly reject; instead as datapoints to influence your own :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> As a resident of the Southern Hemisphere, I am offended by the use of a snowflake. 43 degrees Celcius here yesterday...

</comment><comment><USER50> I hope that Destiny weighs in harshly on the jerks who oscillate between

\- virtue-signaling about how diverse they are and

\- demanding conformity with some impossible standard of innocuousness.

The Roman alphabet and English language are bastions of intolerance and H8, after all: any one employing these instruments of oppression must be. . .oh, wait. . .

</comment><comment><USER51> I think this is a overreaction. Even Google has had Christmas Doodles. I see Christmas more of the commercialized thing, Santa, Trees, Snowman, Presents, Candy canes, Getting the family together... I'm not the most religious person, but Jesus isn't the first thing that comes to mind for me when thinking of Christmas but I'm sure if I grew up in a more religious household I'd probably have another view. However I do think cutting down a fresh tree is wasteful even though many people do it.

There's someone I know who tells me Halloween offends him though, but I don't really understand why. Even some churches celebrate Halloween, passing out candy and stuff... Then Easter I'm sure offends people too, brainwashing children that a bunny comes around laying eggs.

</comment><comment><USER52> It seems Santa struck back the original issue author: [https://github.com/Christian- Schiffer/servicelayer.chat/issu...](https://github.com/Christian- Schiffer/servicelayer.chat/issues?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Aissue+)

<comment><USER18> Not just on GitHub. Christian wrote up a huge response to the issue spam here: [https://github.com/Christian- Schiffer/SignalRAngularMVC6/iss...](https://github.com/Christian- Schiffer/SignalRAngularMVC6/issues/6#issuecomment-567907759)

Basically sounds like his entire online presence is being roasted by 4chan.

<comment><USER39> >One would think that developers at the very least would have some deductive reasoning, so using the n and k word against me, when my profile picture and name clearly show I am neither

I don't think this person understands that part of the internet...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> > even a single person being offended is one too many

This is how you make things bland, soulless and ultimately inhuman.

</comment><comment><USER54> A lot of us process the world using rule-based algorithms. This makes us natural programmers but sorely inadequate to handle the world.

For example the rule of "if religious, then don't include in product" is usually pretty sane.

But near a decision boundary, you will always get disagreement. A certain portion of programmers would've arrived at the conclusion that isReligious(santa) == False while some will be dead set that the answer must be True. Both side are confident that the other side is making a fatal mistake because they are confident in their logic skills. But the real problem is that binary logic can't handle these sort of high context fuzzy situation at all.

</comment><comment><USER55> Microsoft went full-blown Seinfeld with this. Let's just do Festivus then!

</comment><comment><USER56> Chap seems to be a troll, in all probability as Christian as his name.

That is, Christian in name only, and actually interested in leveraging woke / victimhood culture and microaggressions to generate a political reaction.

</comment><comment><USER57> May be it is about time we practise the same MIT license mentality, Dont use it if you dont like it?

All these what ever religions, something -ism, politics is getting ridiculous.

</comment><comment><USER58> "The snowflake on vscode insiders is very offensive to me, as people with delicate sensibilities are typically referred to as "snowflakes" as an insult. This is very politcal and has cost many Jews their lives, or something. Please remove it immediately and make it your top priority. To me this is almost equally offensive as a Santa hat."

I'm sure if we continue to cave to these people they will eventually stop.

</comment><comment><USER59> Every time I see things like this I always want to think that it's someone wanting to make a point of showing how mere feigning offense is enough to make a huge company bend over to your demands, and that there's some bigger lesson to be learned from this, but alas, that is probably not the case here...

</comment><comment><USER60> On one hand it is a bit of a non issue but on the other hand it is kinda funny watching a corporation strugle with trying to please everyone.

My personal test for when it comes to offending people is if there was any malice. And if the person being offended is using being offended as a form of control.

</comment><comment><USER61> I just feel sad for the folks at Crosoft putting their time and love in the product and have to put up with this stuff. That's the offensive part to me, littering other people's work, down to having them close the repo.

</comment><comment><USER62> If they had balls they would tell that user to STFU and go so something useful. If you worry about such things and oppress others by pushing your feelings like a spoiled child, you have way too much time on your hands...

</comment><comment><USER15> Just think about this for 2 seconds: What would this all have been about if the original icon was a Menorah? Just really think about that.

Or heck, how about one of the few icons used for Hinduism if you want to go for popularity.

</comment><comment><USER63> Holiday symbolic bikeshedding... either the trolls have won or the lack of sense of humor has won. Don't we have enough in-laws and existential threats to argue about?

</comment><comment><USER64> What was the complaint? Why was that one person so annoyed by the Santa hat? And why do projects admins need to care about him been offended from a Santa hat?

</comment><comment><USER65> I'm offended by the removal of the hat! Check mate ;)

</comment><comment><USER66> I think they handled this complex situation as good as they could.

Good job

</comment><comment><USER67> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_suit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_suit)

</comment><comment><USER68> > even a single person being offended is one too many

This is absurd.

</comment><comment><USER69> it's saddening and upsetting that such benign acts are blown way out of proportion by people, often with agenda, who simply are not happy or can't let other people go on with their life!

it just seems that we can't agree on anything anymore. i mean that's okay, but it starts to become worrisome when we can't agree on civility, decency, or even science in some cases!

</comment><comment><USER70> Unrelated info: Saint Nicholas is originally from Turkey :)

<comment><USER53> Not quite. He was greek and lived in what we now call the Byzantine Empire, several hundred years before it was invaded by arabs and turks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> The OP Issue Filer _has_ to be trolling...

</comment><comment><USER72> This is a pretty obvious risk. What value did adding a "cute" icon to VS Code provide? There's no upside here. Just don't do it.

The snowflake is an equally bad idea.

<comment><USER73> It creates delight. Celebrating the end of year and winter season

<comment><USER72> I know the date, why do I need a a UI element to remind me. It doesn't make me mad but it doesn't bring me joy either.

<comment><USER73> We made a winter themed mixpanel with subtle changes and many customers have let us know how much they love it. So I guess it's not for everyone.

In the same theme of google changing their logo doodles. I really love and respect that.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


You Can Now Order Raspberry Pi's $35 Linux Computer In Bulk - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/07/16/demand-rises-for-raspberry-pis-35-linux-computer-4000-units-made-per-day-bulk-orders-now-possible/ <comment><USER2> Well I'm about four weeks through my eleven week delivery period for my RPi so order quickly if you want to see you box of pi before 2013.

<comment><USER3> It does seem odd that they would start taking bulk orders when there are still individual orders they have yet to fulfill.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> But when will they be able to _deliver_ them in bulk? I'm still waiting for my single unit...

</comment><comment><USER5> Aggregator spam.

Actual blogpost/news is already submitted at <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4249808></comment>


Show HN: I automated my home with RPi, React-Native and Nodejs - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/deepsyx/home-automation <comment><USER2> Pretty neat stuff. If you want to control outlets, check out this guide [https://timleland.com/wireless-power- outlets/](https://timleland.com/wireless-power-outlets/)</comment>