A History of Interactive Fiction (2006) - <AUTHOR> http://maher.filfre.net/if-book/ <comment><USER2> There's an interactive fiction meetup in the SF bay area.[1] And for online meetings there's IfMud.[2]

[1] - [https://www.meetup.com/sf-bay-area-interactive- fiction/](https://www.meetup.com/sf-bay-area-interactive-fiction/)

[2] - [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IfMUD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IfMUD)

</comment><comment><USER3> You may enjoy the Interactive Fiction Archive -- including thousands of text adventures, tools, articles, essays, hints, jokes, and more.

[http://www.ifarchive.org/](http://www.ifarchive.org/)

</comment><comment><USER4> I had played various Infocom games as a kid, simply amazing. Then recently "discovered" that there is this exciting corner of the Multiverse know as Interactive Fiction, which has been flourishing quite well for a long time. Just finished "Beautiful Dreamer" by Woodson, enjoyed that very much.

</comment><comment><USER5> Related: there's a few versions of "get lamp" documentary online ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRhbcDzbGSU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRhbcDzbGSU)) or you can get the movie directly from getlamp.com.

These histories (the maher link above, the getlamp doc, etc) bring back a lot of great memories.

EDIT: the youtube link above looks like it's actually the getlamp movie being shown at a google event, with an audience (audience sounds in there now and then).

<comment><USER6> A really good documentary. Infocom's game division sounds like it was a magical place to work. The Google before Google.

<comment><USER7> There are two "official" versions of the documentary. One is a general documentary on interactive text adventures and then there's one that's cut to be more specifically about Infocom. (The latter was particularly interesting to me because I knew a lot of the people involved then and now and actually did some game testing at one point.)

<comment><USER5> Would love to read some of your testing experiences re: infocom. Have you posted on this before?

<comment><USER7> Not a lot to relate. I wasn't an official tester. I just knew a number of the guys--including one of their main designers--from undergrad. So he would sometimes send me a pre-release disk and I'd make notes about things I found confusing or where I got stuck. (And would call him for hints now and then.)

I think I was officially credited as a beta tester for Legend later on but that was just the same sort of thing.

<comment><USER5> Ahh... sounds cool to have been part of it, even in a small way (early copies and all that)!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> IF is amazing...particularly the works of Emily Short. Some great story telling.

<comment><USER8> Speaking of Emily Short, she compiled a more recent overview/bibliography of IF history that I found useful: [https://emshort.blog/2016/04/02/brief- bibliography-about-if-...](https://emshort.blog/2016/04/02/brief-bibliography- about-if-history/)

<comment><USER2> Emily Short gave a really interesting talk about collaborative, storytelling games.[1] Anyone interested in gaming who isn't aware of these kinds of games should really check it out.

She also recently gave a talk on IF's past, present, and future.[2]

[1] - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xefWN5qEY3A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xefWN5qEY3A)

[2] - [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx5ZLGBZAWs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx5ZLGBZAWs)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Not quite IF, but reading Ulysses and retracing the protagonist's steps around Dublin is surprisingly common. Interactive but deterministic...

</comment><comment><USER10> I remember really enjoying "Photopia", but that was more novel than game. It actually had a big affect on me much like a good book does.

I'm absolutely terrible at real, game-like IF with puzzles etc. Not sure what mindset you need to solve them.

<comment><USER6> You might like Blue Lacuna.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I had a big IF phase back in high school. I still don't think anything has topped _Curses_ for me. There's still tons of good content coming out of that community but they seem to have shifted away from the puzzle-heavy paradigm, which I find a little disappointing. I still enjoy the Photopia-type games, but big sprawling puzzlers like _Curses_ or _The Muldoon Legacy_ are tops for me.

</comment><comment><USER12> As much as I loved text adventures back in the day, I've found the real-life version of interactive fiction -- "immersive" fiction -- more intoxicating and memorable. I still think about "The Jejune Institute" in San Francisco frequently, and that ended years ago.

</comment><comment><USER13> i really wish i had a reason to spend some time programming in inform7. That language is so much like nothing else out there, too bad there seems to be no uses of it outside of IF, yet. Just imagine:

      A ping is a kind of icmp packet.

</comment><comment><USER14> Some years ago I spent a good amount of hours playing "A Mind Forever Voyaging" with Dave Brubeck's "Jazz Impressions of New York" running on infinite repeat in the background.

Highly recommended combination.

</comment><comment><USER15> I was into this about the time that was written. I successfully ported a random haiku generator from JavaScript to Inform 6.</comment>


Share HN: Bleeoo, a video site to record your impression of a dialup modem - <AUTHOR> http://bleeoo.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> This one is my favorite. The shape of his mouth is priceless: [http://bleeoo.com/videos/787c08d0-bb04-012e-3c83-123139208ff...](http://bleeoo.com/videos/787c08d0-bb04-012e-3c83-123139208ffa)

<comment><USER2> Here's mine :) [http://bleeoo.com/videos/2e353c80-baff-012e-07c7-12313917124...](http://bleeoo.com/videos/2e353c80-baff-012e-07c7-123139171242)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> awesome idea, blast from the past!</comment>


With all that bad developments in tech, why don't we build the light net? - <AUTHOR> There is so much criticism about Facebook and Google and the open web is clearly in danger. Instead of fighting a fight without hope, why don't we start to build an infrastructure and community that delivers the original promises of the internet?
Let's assume we would start over today with all what we know, what would be the principles of a light net and how can be kickstart it?
My first suggestion is that it should be geared towards the needs of communities, not individuals and that it should involve people without a technical background right from the start.
It should be based on transparency and accessibility and organizations that subscribe to it should subscribe to these values, too.
Hope this can trigger some discussion, as I am tired of just talk, no action. I think HN has all the capabilities to make a change here. <comment><USER2> Checkout Patchwork/SSB: [https://github.com/mwmeyer/awesome- ssb/blob/master/README.md](https://github.com/mwmeyer/awesome- ssb/blob/master/README.md)

</comment><comment><USER3> Network effects. "But why go to $new_net, everybody I know is on Facebook!" For a similar effort, see [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_(social_network)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diaspora_\(social_network\))</comment>


The Compost by My Couch: An Odorless Bin at Home - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/06/climate/new-york-coronavirus-composting.html <comment><AUTHOR> In a cardboard freaking box! With a tea towel over it. Kind of amazing.</comment>


McKinsey's Starting Up [1998] - <AUTHOR> http://www.scribd.com/doc/4505824/Mckinsey-Starting-Up-Business-Planning-Manual

<comment><AUTHOR> At my university there is a course on entrepreneurship, and this small book is the learning material.

I feel I have learned a lot about planning for a startup from this book. Some things that years of reading HN posts have not taught me.

It sort of led me to believe starting a business without writing a business plan with these 8 chapters (so at least ~8 pages) is a fools errant, and at best is taking needless risk.

Is there anyone who has experience with writing a good business plan before going into business, is there a sort of business that just wouldn't benefit from this at all? Why?

<comment><AUTHOR> The 8 chapters are:

summary: An executive summary of the entire plan, for the busy VC to get a small idea of what the plan is all about.

idea: The business idea in detail, what is the opportunity, the proposed value?

team: Who will be leading this venture? Why?

marketing: How will people know about you, how will you make money?

business system / organization: How will the product/service be built/delivered? What will happen when it's done, will it ever be done?

schedule: When do you think what will be done, what decision will then be made?

risks: What can go wrong? What will you do when it goes wrong?

finance: How much money should I give you? What will you spend it on?</comment></comment>


Machine Learning Tool - <AUTHOR> https://neurales.ai/info/ <comment><AUTHOR> Neurales is a tool designed to let anyone use and deploy machine learning without having advanced coding or mathematics knowledge. Check out the video and sign up for our beta [https://neurales.ai/](https://neurales.ai/)!</comment>


How they used to sell computers: Oldest computer ads:  - <AUTHOR> http://www.topdesignmag.com/oldest-computer-ads/

<comment><USER2> My first business was buying computers at garage sales and flea markets, fixing them, and reselling them. I've owned most of the personal computer gear in those ads, and a lot of interesting stuff not covered (like the original Lisa, the Colecovision Adam with cassette storage that was as fast as most floppy disk drives of the time, the huge TI99/4a expansion chassis with 8 slots).

Anyone who found this interesting should plan a trip to the Computer History Museum in Mountain View. I can spend all day just wandering through the collections, and listening to the docents (who are some of the same guys who built the technology we take for granted today) telling stories. I learn something new every time I visit, and I've been a nerd involved deeply in this stuff for ~30 years.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's funny how many of these ads are aimed at "normal people", while "normal people" today would be considered completely incapable of operating machines as (relatively) user-unfriendly as some of these.

<comment><USER4> Or maybe normal people today simply have expectations in keeping with modern technology? I'm sure modern Excel jockeys are fully _capable_ of slogging through one of those assembly language manuals for dozens of hours. I think they could also calculate radicals to five significant figures using pen-and- paper algorithms, 19th-century style. Or till their own fields using oxen, 18th-century style. That these are all "unthinkable" today doesn't mean humans have suddenly become stupider and weaker (the opposite is true); it means they're immensely labor-consuming tasks which no longer serve a purpose, and to perform them would be an astonishing waste of effort.

<comment><USER5> However, the expectation of easiness with computers does make one less-welling to work through and figure out things when it is necessary, I've found.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Oldest? Most of those ads are from the early 80's. There are a few real old ones though -- the IBM AutoPoint 610 was released in 1957.

<comment><USER7> That's not the oldest one there, though. The LGP-30 was 1956.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Compuserve ad: "By the year 2000, the world may catch up with the way Compuserve's electronic mall lets you shop today."

<comment><USER9> Indeed: [http://www.topdesignmag.com/wp- content/uploads/2011/01/ad032...](http://www.topdesignmag.com/wp- content/uploads/2011/01/ad032.jpg)

I like that at the time, the mall photo shown inside the monitor would have been understood as purely evocative/figurative – whereas in another few decades, people looking back might wonder: "was that a real screen and was this the first rendered virtual mall environment?"

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> > _Innovation at it's Very Best_

I love glaring typos in prominent national advertisements.

</comment><comment><USER11> I love MS, Gates and even like Ballmer. Having said that, get a load of this gem:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk>

Amazing how commercials like this were helpful in the creation of such an empire. Oh, how the times change.

<comment><USER12> The scary thing is Steve Ballmer looks almost _exactly the same today_. I think he may be fatter, though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I see TI's computers haven't changed much.

<comment><USER14> Take an iPad, add a real touch type keyboard with mechanical switches, make the screen B+W for longer battery life and include user replacable AA batteries and you have the perfect TRS80 portable

<comment><USER15> Wouldn't that basically be a Kindle?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I think my dad had that 15MB hard disk unit from Radio Shack.

It was pretty sophisticated for its day. The previous model, an 8 MB unit, was _half again as big_.

</comment><comment><USER16> I remember a string of ads for minicomputer Fortran compilers, placed in Computerworld circa 1970. One manufacturer (might have been Data General) proudly stated that their compiler was "a pig", featuring long compile times but turning out compact object code. Another manufacturer posted its own ad: "Our tiger eats pigs".

A glass teletype ad was captioned "Tough TTY". Hee! Couldn't get away with that these days.

</comment><comment><USER17> My only wish would be for the ads to have a high-res version. I'd love to read them.

Some of them I never saw ;-)

</comment><comment><USER18> I still have a ZX-81, as well as a Epson HX-20 which is sadly not shown in these ads. It's amazing how far this technology has come in such a short time - and I love the prediction in the Compuserve ad about doing all shopping online by 2000.

</comment><comment><USER19> Should I be worried about how many of these I actually own?

By the way, I think the one in the Royal McBee advert is the predecessor to the machine immortalized by the immortal programmer's programmer in the pseudo-poem "The Story of Mel".

</comment><comment><USER20> I chuckled at the inflation of the VGA's color palette in the Tandy 5000 MC ad. The VGA could display 16 or 256 simultaneous colors, but any palette entry could be changed to any 18-bit (6-bit per channel) RGB triplet (i.e. 256ki colors).

</comment><comment><USER21> The thing that amazed me; "1K of memory expandable to 16K". I have yet to see this in a pre-built computer. The best I've seen was back when I had 128MB expandable to 1GB.

Although then again, a computer today comes with a year or more of warranty, while this had a 90-day warranty - which would personally scare the shit out of me today on an electronic product. Today that's dead in 6 months.

<comment><USER22> Those did indeed exist. My first computer actually only had 16kb of RAM, which was "plenty" given the typical simplicity of applications back then.

<comment><USER21> I didn't mean 16K was small, I meant I've yet to see a 16-fold increase in upgradeable RAM size in a pre-built computer.

<comment><USER22> In that case I should probably mention the 16mb (yup megabytes) upgrade you could get for the Commodore 64, up from 64kb.

It was a silly thing and needless to say, stupidly expensive.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Is it just me or do these ads look fairly similar to the landing pages of your typical web app?

</comment><comment><USER24> Damn, haven't heard of Cromemco in a long time! Thanks for sharing this.

</comment><comment><USER25> My God, how expensive they were.

</comment><comment><USER26> The Tandy 1000sx ad really surprised me, the ad must have worked as there is one in my moms attic. Thats the computer that got me started programming.

<comment><USER27> Same with me - I ended up changing out the processor and installing a 5mb hard disk that cost $500 and sounded like a jet engine when it booted.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> for xmas 1989 i got a C64. my uncle, big show off, got my cousins (two girls) an amiga. why? cause it cost a bit more. turns out amiga sucked and my C64 was pretty much awesome until i got a 286 a bit later. i even remember begging for 4MB more RAM so i can play rise of the triad ... anyway, thinking back it kinda feels like the C64 was a more open platform and everyone else was pretty much fucked.</comment>


Everyman Sleep Schedule - <AUTHOR> http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=Everyman%20Sleep%20Schedule

<comment><USER2> "/Leisure and Idleness/. There is an Indian savagery, a savagery peculiar to the Indian blood, in the manner in which the Americans strive after gold: and the breathless hurry of their work-the characteristic vice of the New World- already begins to infect old Europe, and makes it savage also, spreading over it a strange lack of intellectuality. One is now ashamed of repose: even long reflection almost causes remorse of conscience. Thinking is done with a stopwatch, as dining is done with the eyes fixed on the financial newspaper; we live like men who are continually "afraid of letting opportunities slip." "Better do anything whatever, than nothing"-this principle also is a noose with which all culture and all higher taste may be strangled.

And just as all form obviously disappears in this hurry of workers, so the sense for form itself, the ear and the eye for the melody of movement, also disappear. The proof of this is the clumsy perspicuity which is now everywhere demanded in all positions where a person would like to be sincere with his fellows, in intercourse with friends, women, relatives, children, teachers, pupils, leaders and princes-one has no longer either time or energy for ceremonies, for roundabout courtesies, for any esprit in conversation, or for any odium whatever. For life in the hunt for gain continually compels a person to consume his intellect, even to exhaustion, in constant dissimulation, overreaching, or forestalling: the real virtue nowadays is to do something in a shorter time than another person. And so there are only rare hours of sincere intercourse permitted: in them, however, people are tired, and would not only like "to let themselves go," but to stretch their legs out wide in awkward style. The way people write their letters nowadays is quite in keeping with the age; their style and spirit will always be the true "sign of the times."

If there be still enjoyment in society and in art, it is enjoyment such as over-worked slaves provide for themselves. Oh, this moderation in "joy" of our cultured and uncultured classes! Oh, this increasing suspiciousness of all enjoyment! Work is winning over more and more the good conscience to its side: the desire for enjoyment already calls itself "need of recreation," and even begins to be ashamed of itself. "One owes it to one's health," people say, when they are caught at a picnic. Indeed, it might soon go so far that one could not yield to the desire for the vita contemplative (that is to say, excursions with thoughts and friends), without self-contempt and a bad conscience. Well! Formerly it was the very reverse: it was "action" that suffered from a bad conscience. a man of good family I concealed his work when need compelled him to labor. The slave labored under the weight of the feeling that he did something contemptible-the "doing" itself was something contemptible. "Only in otium and bellum is there nobility and honor:" so rang the voice of ancient prejudice!"

Nietzsche in La gaya scienza, §329 (1882).

<comment><USER3> Ironically, alot of this is stimulated by a lust for power. Keeping up with the Joneses is a form of social power. I've thought that Nietzsche's writing functions as a koan for the West's power drive.

Anyways, I agree. We can see this in how introverts are treated in our culture. They tend to be looked down on since they don't "do" things. I suspect, though, that most of the great thinkers who shaped the world were introverts.

However, the best approach is to not arbitrarily elevate leisure or action, but to consider the purpose of each.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This stuff seems to me a kind of premature optimization for life. I know quite a few people who've done impressive things. None of them did it by sleeping less.

What did they have? Boldness, focus, an ability to see through illusions and fashions. I'd go for those first, and if you're still not getting enough done, then try sleeping less.

<comment><USER5> Sleeping less is actually a secondary benefit... Its really about avoiding burn-out and staying mentally acute over long periods of continuous work. Breaking up things with naps is actually highly effective.

I'll agree that its not about how long you work, but how productive you are while you are working. While there is no substitute for genuine, hard work, I'd advocate that a polyphasic sleep schedule can help some people with long hours of intense work.

<comment><USER6> > Breaking up things with naps is actually highly effective.

I disagree. Naps are inefficient. By breaking sleep up into more blocks you multiply the time you waste trying to fall asleep, shaking off "just woke up" grogginess, changing clothing, getting to and from bed, etc. Batching tasks is almost always more efficient. Grocery shopping every few weeks is much more efficient than going twice a week, for example.

I did some shift work for a while so I speak from experience. I would get about five hours of sleep before waking at 4:15am, and then take another hour or two of sleep in mid afternoon when I got home. I adapted comfortably to this and didn't mind it too much. But it did absolutely nothing for productivity or alertness. All it meant was more time spent changing in and out of PJs and lying in bed falling asleep. It also constrained the flexibility of my schedule because skipping the nap did a number on me.

Are people in siesta countries notably more productive than regular night sleep countries? I think evidence indicates the opposite. This whole "hacking sleep" thing is a red herring.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been tempted to attempt some form of polyphasic sleep. Currently it seems I'm practicing sort of free-running sleep... going to bed between 4am and 8am, waking up between 11am and 2pm...

Polyphasic sleep seems well suited for people in early stages of a startup, with very little external commitments... though that may change if it gets to the point of hiring additional employees, seeking funding, etc.

Pure polyphasic sleeping seems a little extreme to me since the days would end up blending together I think I might go crazy. But the everyman schedule is appealing because you still get a few solid hours of sleep to clearly delineate days.

<comment><USER7> Oh, and of course there's the 28 Hour Week: <http://xkcd.org/320/>

<comment><USER7> 28 hour _day_

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've been practicing various forms of sleep deprivation for a few years now. It's not to be taken lightly! The one lasting effect that I've been totally unable to eliminate is really poor memory. I have to take lots of notes now, and I really miss being able to keep track of everything in my head.

That said, I've pretty much settled on "sleeping like a warrior (Raa!)": Wake up when you have to. Work for as long as you're productive. Sleep when your body says "please". Get up, rinse, repeat.

This results in my usually having about one "dead day" a month, where I sleep 10 to 12 hours in one day, and an awful lot of days where I only get an hour and a half or 3, and make up for it by getting 6 the next night...

<comment><USER3> Sleeping less also seems to impair my creative thinking and ability to concentrate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Polyphasic sleep is a bad idea if you value creativity and alertness.

Here is an article from a doctor who has studied sleep schedules and memory: <http://www.supermemo.com/articles/polyphasic.htm>

</comment><comment><USER10> Is the closest most adults get to polyphasic sleep while they are caring for their newborns and get no sleep?</comment>


Trump Picks Top Climate Skeptic to Lead EPA Transition - <AUTHOR> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-picks-top-climate-skeptic-to-lead-epa-transition/?wt.mc=SA_Twitter-Share <comment><USER2> Previously: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12914828](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12914828)

</comment><comment><USER3> As a European I can't help but think that this is an immediate demonstration of how the leader of the United States can have actual impact on my life.

I was being mocked today by my (also European) peers when I expressed my disappointment in the election's outcome with the argument that I'm overly "Americanized".

I believe many people fail to realize how big of a player America truly is when it comes to global policies (environment, nuclear, wars even).

<comment><USER4> I get similarly laughed at for suggesting that America has such a big global impact that maybe everyone should get to vote.

<comment><USER5> Well, if you want to join the Union, we're always accepting new territories.

<comment><USER6> If your lucky, we'll even give your territory a seat in Congress. Not a voting seat, but a seat. Good luck getting a vote for president though (although Puerto Rico does get to vote in the primaries).

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

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_pri...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_primaries_in_Puerto_Rico,_2016)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> One of the several things that has bothered me about commentators on Trump is that they've concocted this fantasy in which they imagine lazy-never-worked-a- day-in-his-life Trump finding that being president is more work than he realized so he, being Trump, says "fuck this" and is the chillest president ever while the GOP freaks out.

The reality is, of course, Trump is going to have delegates. And these delegates are _not_ laid back about their political ambitions. Voting in Obama twice didn't end war or Guantanamo. If Trump is as dumb and evil as you imagine, the hope that he'll do something dumb enough to learn his lesson is the laziest, most self-destructive kind of thinking.

<comment><USER8> I don't understand what this comment has to do with the linked story. Can you connect the dots a bit more...?

<comment><USER7> I think there is still hope that fun-straight-talking-entertainer Trump will surprise us all. Yeah, he can still be that guy, but who he picks can still be destructive. Case in point, this EPA chief. But we haven't yet heard who's going to be Homeland Security.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> As an employee as one of the top flight research university I can't help but wonder what is going to happen to research in the states. My employer kicks out tons of research and tons of startups every year. We are the largest employer in the state. I'm wondering what kind of funding cuts we will experience because our research shows that vaccines work and that the globe is warming and our student base is overall pretty liberal. Seems like a perfect target for political extremists who might be appointed. Really it's the perfect institution to support if you want to bring around the next generation to your cause.

<comment><USER10> Liberal areas are going to lose federal transit funding entirely, and research funding will be heavily curtailed. Don't expect any major public works to be federally funded, historically GWB and his father both eliminated most of this type of funding.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> This decision could have a silver lining: inland areas that are conservative strongholds are more likely to suffer as a result of it than coastal states which are predominantly liberal. It could be a move that contributes to Trump lasting only a single term. If you poison the well in a serious enough way it might be enough to make climate change denial or lackadaisical attitudes towards the environment politically untenable in the future.

It's just too bad that the American public has to learn the hard way.

<comment> sid-kap Aren't coastal areas more prone to flooding?

<comment><USER11> True but I was thinking in terms of relaxing rules on drilling, mining, emissions etc. I didn't spell that out though so my bad.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> So the bad news starts on day 1.

How unsurprising.

<comment><USER13> > By Robin Bravender, ClimateWire on September 26, 2016

..a little sooner than that

climate actions was a part of the campaign

in the debate his vp repeatedly referenced a 'war on coal'

it's how he won some important states(o)

(o) [http://fortune.com/2016/07/20/why-donald-trump-wont-bring- co...](http://fortune.com/2016/07/20/why-donald-trump-wont-bring-coal-jobs- back-to-west-virginia/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> _Choosing Myron Ebell means Trump plans to drastically reshape climate policies_

That's actually part of his plan - assets.donaldjtrump.com/_landings/contract/O-TRU-102316-Contractv02.pdf, so no news there.

The guy has started doing what he promised to do.

By the time he's done, I pray God takes some pity on us. We're going to need it.

</comment><comment><USER15> Disappointing but not unexpected. I'm not deep into the science, but it seems as though humanity will survive. If that's the case I can understand skeptics rational, but I can't help but feel sadness for the less fortunate (animals and poor alike).

</comment><comment><USER16> Trump administration will be a disaster for science and an end to the idea that government can help solve our climate problems. Installing this guy at the EPA will be like having your Great Library sacked by barbarians in Civilization. You don't come back from that.

<comment><USER17> Didn't Neil deGrasse Tyson say republicans love wealth and every civilization thay took their efforts away from science lost all their wealth, so they will keep funding it?

<comment><USER18> It's not that they love wealth, it's that they hate the government telling them what to do. They'll like this guy because he'll loosen regulations, scale back enforcement, etc. It's going to be a rough 2 years until midterms.</comment></comment></comment>


URLFind – URL mapping and links cross domains - <AUTHOR> http://urlfind.org/ <comment><USER2> I'm so confused as to what this actually does and the use case. All I see is the same sentence on the site, no actual breakdown as to what the use is or what it does. Can anyone clarify? Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER3> Nice idea. My only complaint is that searching only works on domain names, rather than URLs like the name would suggest.

</comment><comment><USER4> What powers it? Google? Or are they doing their own indexing?

</comment><comment><USER5> This is really interesting... My security team would use something like this... though would be nice to suggest a pattern a la "inurl" that shows all sites where /about/carousel.php" shows up, for example.

Edit: I see you guys are a security company... makes sense. :-)</comment>


Mocking External APIs in Python - <AUTHOR> https://realpython.com/blog/python/testing-third-party-apis-with-mocks#.V3EuqqGwQYw.hackernews <comment><USER2> Like this?

# Oh look, I'm the Twitter API, I just can't make up my mind what features I provide!</comment>


Flat Earthers Nearly Derailed a Space Photo Book - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/14/science/nasa-flat-earth.html <comment><USER2> Last weekend I met a person that was convinced the US government protects "the edge". I told him that was very interesting.

<comment> munk-a I don't think there is anything you can do when interacting with these people outside of smiling and nodding - so I'm sad to see you get downvotes.

This is actually a really big problem for me as I find it physically discomforting to listen to lies being spoken unopposed.

<comment><USER3> Learn how to talk to people without respecting them. Once you've got it down, you can eviscerate this sort of person in public without getting your hands wet.

<comment><USER4> Speaking to someone without respect for them or their views isn't going to change their minds - ever.

I have a "flat earther" friend on Facebook. I didn't know that about him until after I'd already friended him, but he posts about it constantly. After an initial private message of "Are you for real?", I've made it a point to as mildly as possible point out the obvious logical fallacies in the things he posts. I don't expect I'll ever change his mind - it's possible, but you can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into. Instead, I'd just like to have him see inconsistencies in what others who believe what he believes say. Over time I'm hoping that will at the very least keep it from spreading.

<comment><USER5> > ... but you can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason > themselves into.

I'm living proof that this isn't true. I was a Young Earth Creationist for nearly 30 years, despite having an engineering degree from one of the world's best universities. I no longer believe in anything supernatural. It took a very long time, but I was eventually reasoned out of a position I wasn't reasoned into.

When people incorporate ideology into their identity, challenging the ideology directly is often interpreted as a personal attack or something else not worth honestly engaging with. A far better approach is to examine the methods people use to reach conclusions. There's a conversation technique called Street Epistemology that does exactly that. IMHO, it's the most productive way to have these kind of conversions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Just curious, do Flat Earthers never fly the earth a round to confirm? I mean, leaving from America to go to Europe then Asia then America. Doesn't have to go to the space to see the shape of the earth but just keep looping the round earth should be sufficient. Will they think it may be another continent? with same wife, kids, street names, etc?

<comment><USER7> > Just curious, do Flat Earthers never fly the earth a round to confirm? I > mean, leaving from America to go to Europe then Asia then America. Doesn't > have to go to the space to see the shape of the earth but just keep looping > the round earth should be sufficient.

If you look at the picture at

[https://wiki.tfes.org/Flat_Earth_- _Frequently_Asked_Question...](https://wiki.tfes.org/Flat_Earth_- _Frequently_Asked_Questions#What_does_the_earth_look_like.3F_How_is_circumnavigation_possible.3F)

you see that what you call "fly around the earth" is simply flying some giant "circle" (perhaps not a perfect circle in the geometric sense, but you get the idea) in the Flat Earthers' model.

<comment><USER6> If they have only one flat model, then probably pole-to-pole might be the best to explain... the plain cannot suddenly go to the opposite continent, for instance goes to Australia then south pole then south America...

<comment><USER8> Or challenge them to a race between those locations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Overall, we need to let go of the idea that people believe things because they have evaluated the evidence and have come to a conclusion. This is scientific thought, and if you have ever changed your mind on a strongly held belief based on new facts then you know that it takes conscious effort and humility, which even the best of us cannot apply to every single position they have.

Instead, I am convinced that all of us believe mostly for emotional reasons: the need to feel important, the need to be part of a group, the need to maintain some social order etc. For most people, who are not willing or capable to apply scientific thought, all of these needs trump every fact you may have. If you want to "convince" people, you need to address first the underlying issue, which is often difficult: loneliness, social isolation, feelings of inferiority etc.

One example I found particularly striking for the contrast between the common "rationality" assumption and actual working of beliefs, is this paper by Max Adams: [https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9893/2a75ad8e79585e95c58a26...](https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9893/2a75ad8e79585e95c58a26d61878b72c4937.pdf)

</comment><comment> it-just-wasnt No they didn't. There are no "flat earthers" fucking anywhere. None. Anyone horsing around with the gimmick is just fucking with people.

They don't exist. There are a handful of dipshits on YouTube pretending to be flat earthers for the views. Goofing off for patreon cash, because it's almost kind of funny. That's it.

No one ever bought the flat earth bullshit, except a tiny cross section of damaged goods schizophrenics. The rest was just the internet fueling a slow news day with prank calls.

I promise you there are less than 1,000 English speaking adults that ever professed an honest belief in such a theory and meant it. That's fewer than 10 per state in the U.S. Everyone else is rolling their eyes and cracking jokes.

<comment><USER4> > That's fewer than 10 per state in the U.S.

I've personally met more than 10 in my state. They are uncommon, but much more common than you'd think.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I looked into flat earthers are little on the internet because it just seemed like such an out there idea that I wanted to see how they justified it.

A lot of it seems to be based on them misunderstanding refraction and the way light behaves over distances. Their main argument seems to be that if you take water and put flags or boats over it, you can continue to see it for long after the curvature of the earth makes it so you shouldn't be able to see it.

The reason for this is that light bends.

this wikipedia page has a really good rundown

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Level_experiment#Exper...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedford_Level_experiment#Experiments)

<comment><USER11> That's just one argument. The flat-earth whatevertocallit has an answer for everything. This is what makes it so hilarious.

For example: If you are, from a truly objective perspective, firmly stuck with the idea that the earth must be round, you would have it no other way... then surely seeing objects that should be hidden behind the curvature means light must bend around the curve?

Its like person 1 arguing you cant look though glass, person 2 showing him a glass window then 1 argues woah! The picture travels around the window! Then the 3rd person argues the theory of transparent glass has now been refuted because we know the picture bends around it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I can't help but think that a lot of Flat Earthers exist just to troll other Flat Earthers and Round Earthers.

<comment><USER4> It may well have started that way online... but it's a real thing these days. I've not encountered anyone who strikes me as a purposeful troll.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Easily disprovable conspiracy theories like this have always existed, but it's funny (and sad) to see them actually convince hundreds of thousands of people through the momentum of social media these days. People really want to think they're smarter than the "rest of the sheep."

What's ironic is the real conspiracy they're missing is the people who publish & promote these theories (YouTubers, Bloggers, etc) probably don't believe any of it themselves and are just trying to make a buck from the gullible.

<comment><USER14> It's a gregariousness thing. Humans like to be in groups, and modern life has strongly reduced the quantity and kind of groups we can be a part of, as well as loosened family ties which used to prime over everything else.

Flat earthers aren't spending their time writing equations to justify their views - they're posting in Facebook groups, going to conventions, etc. People become flat earthers not because of their scientific beliefs, but because there is a flat earth movement to become a part of.

It's about the social group first and foremost, feeling smarter than the establishment is an added bonus.

<comment><USER15> > gregarity

I think you mean gregariousness?

<comment><USER14> Yup!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It's not designed to convince anyone here that earth is flat, this is however the target audience.

</comment><comment><USER17> I wonder if Facebook allows targeting to topic "flat earth" or "conspiracy"? If so, he could have just disallowed ads to these groups and got around the issue. What is more likely is allowing ad targeting to those with an interest in NASA or SpaceX or even just broad topics like space/astronomy etc and just avoid those flat earth users all together.

<comment><USER18> _> He learned that he could tell Facebook whom he did — and did not — want to reach. "We specified we didn't want conspiracy theorists and lunar landing deniers and flat earthers," he said._

<comment><USER17> Oops - I somehow missed that even though I looked through the article a second time to prevent this error from happening :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The documentary "Behind the curve" gives a nice glimpse inside the minds of Flat Earthers.

</comment><comment><USER20> So, it's not flat earthers at all, it's facebook trying to optimize what the world should and should not see through "algorithms" and "machine learning" for the sole purpose of selling more user information.

Why should facebook exist anymore?</comment>


SURF – Premium Mobile Live Streaming - <AUTHOR> http://www.getsurfapp.com <comment><USER2> If it meets the guidelines, this might make a good 'Show HN'. Show HN guidelines: [https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> I like the concept, but how will you ensure HD quality through cell phone cameras?</comment>


Steve Jobs a music visionary? Judge for yourself - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10152343-93.html

<comment><USER2> I remember when Jobs was caught by surprise by the then-Windows-only process of ripping and burning CDs using Winamp, etc. Apple had zero momentum in that area. I read an interview where he admitted to being 'caught by surprise' by the whole phenomena and he declared something to the effect of "Trust me, it won't happen again." Next thing you know, Apple came from a position of being in last place to becoming a market leader. AOL, on the other hand, bought Winamp, had all the raw materials and the dedicated users required to rule the music universe and what happened? (that is a rhetorical question ;-).

I'm not sure I'd want him as a boss, but I have tremendous respect for the man and his ability to hire great people and demand the best from them.

<comment><USER3> Very nice write-up... I remember the days when Winamp was King. I even got an Infrared receiver for my PC, and had it working with Winamp. It was pretty sweet being able to fast forward / rewind / shuffle, etc... with a remote. This was in the Napster days I guess about 7-9 years ago?

What bothers me is the hysteria surrounding Apple. They make a white remote with 4 buttons and suddenly it's "incredible design" and "pure genius."

<comment><USER4> I might be wrong, but I believe Winamp is still very much The King. Platform market share and all that...

<comment><USER5> I know plenty of audiophiles who swear by foobar now instead of winamp. They want winamp 2.x back, something about AOL ruining winamp with 5.x? I can't remember the exact reasons.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Panic's story about Audion and iTunes has been posted here before, and it's still an excellent insider look into Apple from the POV of a ISV.

<http://www.panic.com/extras/audionstory/>

"We were thrilled to say the least. So much so, we had almost forgotten about the fact that the answer to our SoundJam mystery was about to unfold, right before our eyes, in one week...

iTunes was, of course, and I'll say this now, brilliant. It single-handedly taught us an entirely new philosophy on software design. Do you really need that Preference that 1% of your users will use?"

<comment><USER6> Wow, just spent the last 15 minutes reading that. What an engrossing story.

Here's two things I've learned about making things happen: say "yes" to everything you can and do your best. And don't worry about "fair," worry about doing the best for yourself and your customers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> "Jobs correctly predicted that attempts by the major labels to find a technological solution to piracy would fail. When it came to subscription music services, he said the public would reject them."

I think most people on HN have predicted the same thing. To create something like iTunes, presumably a huge army of lawyers was necessary. Not saying that other people could have been as successful, but it was definitely not something some guy in a garage could have done, because of the legal issues.

<comment><USER8> An army of lawyers, plus a brilliant rock-star entrepreneur usually described as "the smartest man in the room" who can pull it off, based on smarts and bravado.

<comment><USER7> Definitely not saying just anybody could have done it, with enough lawyers on his hand. Also the iPod itself probably helped (I guess it was part of the sales pitch to the music industry).</comment></comment></comment>


Google asks Jon Skeet to give up his Microsoft MVP award - <AUTHOR> http://msmvps.com/blogs/jon_skeet/archive/2009/10/01/mvp-no-more.aspx

<comment><USER2> How about a title like "Google asks Jon Skeet not to sign an NDA with a competitor?"

<comment><USER3> The NDA is optional, although you don't get to participate in a lot of the MVP benefits if you don't sign it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=858022>

</comment><comment><USER5> Thread from 2 days ago: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=858022>

</comment><comment><USER6> Not again! Google never asked anyone twice before. This guy must be very important.

</comment><comment><USER7> I have no idea what a MVP is.

<comment><USER8> "Most Valuable Professional" - see: <http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Looks like this Google vs. Microsoft thing might get rougher. Maybe we are going to see something bigger than the Chrome vs. Internet Explorer head on attack.

Google wanting an employee to turn down an awarded designation from Microsoft might be the tip of the Google expansion iceberg. How much market share will Google be able to take away from Microsoft, and what Microsoft Markets will they go after next? Can Google become Microsoft II or Microsoft Jr.? From a development standpoint, new products present new opportunities. This could get interesting.

</comment><comment><USER10> It is much closer to an employment contract than to an "award".

</comment><comment><USER11> Someone should tell Jon Skeet that he's really not missing out on much.

</comment><comment><USER12> Why does this matter or is valuable news?

</comment><comment><USER13> I wonder if he gets a wave invite instead?

<comment><USER14> He already has one</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Would you prefer a non-profit domain name registrar? - <AUTHOR> If one existed, made their financial data public, did not provide additional 3rd party services (hosting, email, etc) and therefore was unable to offer below cost discounted pricing, would you prefer to use a non-profit registrar? Why or why not? <comment><USER2> Non-profits are not charities.

For the most part, they are tax-privledged special interest groups. They really don't need any special "help" in the world. Unfortunately, this system has been "hacked" by tax and wealth management professionals. The examples range from the NFL to MOMA to Ivy League Universities, each harboring $10's of billions of capital, that is used to pay and protect already incredibly wealthy patrons and their benefactors.

As such, using their tax-exemption as a form of marketing is highly suspect. And, lets face it, this is the purpose of self-identification. The terms "non- profit" for example is merely calculated to express empathy; it fails to highlight "tax-dodge" or "income & asset laundering".

The notion that "non-profit" entities run $30Bn hedge funds and pay executive salaries in the multiple millions of $USD, all while being granted tax and regulatory exemptions, is _something to think about_.

</comment><comment><USER3> Yes, for the same reasons that Credit Unions are better than Banks. Watching out for the customer, in a principled way, is a great selling point. But it would also need to be stable, for the long term, which means profitable and large enough to survive the bad times.

DNS + simple hosting + support, is an ideal market for a non-profit focused on free speech and democratic participation.

</comment><comment><USER4> No. There are a lot of things I care about in a registrar but it being a non- profit is not one of those things.

I care how it handles my domains, policy and all that jazz, particularly in cases of hacks, take downs, etc...

I care about customer service.

I care about some options it offers that is and can genuinely be useful.

I care about what it does right or wrong.

Basically things that affect me and my domains/businesses.</comment>


Diaspora: An Overdue Update - <AUTHOR> http://www.joindiaspora.com/2010/08/26/overdue-update.html <comment><USER2> Appleseed is a lot farther along, and has been releasing steadily this whole summer. It's years ahead of Diaspora, they've been putting out a new release every month, and they already have a bunch of nodes already running their software.

<http://opensource.appleseedproject.org>

I think by the time Sep 15th rolls around, Appleseed will be on it's fourth release this summer.

<comment><USER3> A quick glance at Appleseed's SVN repo and I see the code base is PHP, like GNU social. It's maybe not a terrible decision, but it deters me (as a developer who sometimes deals with PHP at my day job) from any interest in looking any closer or wanting to risk installing it on my server.

<comment><USER2> A lot of the biggest sites on the web are coded in PHP, including Facebook, Wikipedia, and Digg.

<comment><USER4> We know and so what?

Not only is it in a language that many hackers dislike, but it's a supposedly _decentralized_ social app in a _centralized_ (and, in this context, archaic) SVN repo.

<comment><USER5> Judging by the amount of open source PHP code out there, some of it powering major websites, I'm not sure at all it's "a language many hackers dislike".

<comment><USER4> It's pretty universally acknowledged, even among PHP developers, that the language is a mess. There are reasons to use it despite this, but don't try to pretend it's something it isn't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> So, took some UI classes, ate some bagels, gave some talks, met some interesting people, off to Burning Man. All wonderful things but none of them actually say or show much about what they have got implemented and working.

<comment><USER7> That's a pretty horrible way to summarize someone's efforts. I'll resist the urge to describe pinboard.in the same way.

<comment><USER6> _I'll resist the urge to describe pinboard.in the same way._

We're always delighted to receive feedback!

<comment><USER8> Head's up: You probably shouldn't have a testimonial from a guy who hasn't used your site in months (Prakash)

<comment><USER6> Heads up: you probably don't know what you're talking about. But if you're curious, ask the user yourself if you happen to know him.

<comment><USER8> Why the condescension? The user's name is clickable and his profile shows he hasn't used the site since March. Instead of being rude, perhaps consider why his experience wasn't sticky.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I really hope their API will come soon; I think the best chance they have of user adoption will be based on the creativity of API developers bridging the gaps between Diaspora and other services. If users can communicate between Diaspora nodes and other social networks, at least on a basic level, they could see enough migration to make their efforts worthwhile.

<comment><USER10> I too think this will be key. If I can "remote control" Facebook through Diaspora, I will switch in a heartbeat. If I can't experience the same level of interaction as Facebook with the same number of people, I'll still probably switch, but gradually stop using it, I'm sure.

<comment><USER11> What is the point of that? I'm not into the whole social network thing but isn't the point of Diaspora to be able to control your own "private" information? If you post to Facebook from Diaspora wouldn't you be giving up the only real reason to switch?

<comment><USER12> I don't see why. While everyone you want to talk to is on Facebook you talk Facebook. When a group of friends you want to privately share with is largely on Diaspora, you use Diaspora. Diaspora's focus on making setting privacy levels unthinkingly sounds like it'd be a real useful thing to have hooked into Facebook [for people who give a shit about privacy, but not enough to fight Facebook settings afresh each post].

Embrace, extend and ...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I know most people always comment on how the Diaspora project is destined to fail, and they're probably right.

However, there's no denying how awesome it is that a few college kids can raise over $100,000 like this to build their project.

Even if the project fails like most people say, I imagine it will be a positive experience for the four guys that worked on it.

<comment><USER14> If Diaspora fails, it will have less to do with the awesomeness of the project, and more to do with the lack of everyone's friends actually using Diaspora.

I figure it will be a huge hit among geeks like us, but then will fall out of usage due to the lack of updates from people that matter, like friends and family.

I use Facebook for staying in touch with the mostly non-technical people in my life who actually use Facebook, and that's what will end up swaying most users (like myself) back towards Facebook in a relatively short period of time.

<comment><USER15> Non techie friends and family pay a lot of attention to what techie guy does. I remember using google when everyone else was using yahoo, and soon all my friends and family started to use google over yahoo. In 2006, I switched to mac. Half my non-techie friends and family now have macs. Trends, possibly, but they'll try it if they know you like it and if it is better, they are sold.

<comment><USER16> Both of your examples have no network effects, which is why it's very easy for people to switch. Try switching to a different IM, for example.

You won't switch if you don't have anyone to talk to on it, and you won't have anyone to talk to on it if you don't switch.

Google Talk and its Gmail integration did wonders for Jabber, thankfully.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> They don't seem to get open source. Open source is having code available so people can contribute and review, not simply dumping some files at a specified date.

<comment><USER18> Sometimes that's true. Sometimes the right approach for a project still just getting off the ground is not letting people in for a while.

It's easier to realize a vision when you've already got something concrete to point to. Otherwise you often waste time arguing over what color to paint the shed.

<comment><USER19> Sometimes there is another team out there that knows a better method to determining what color to paint the shed. As an open source developer, you are more than welcome to disregard feedback regarding your code provided it is publicly available, but when you don't make it available, how can it be called open source?

<comment><USER20> It can't be. Until they make it available. Hence the verb usage of Open- sourced, an action they intend to do to the project. That is, they intend to change it from closed, and very private, to open.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Why is their logo an asterisk when it seems their whole idea is that they are the social network without a catch? The asterick at the end of their name instantly makes me want to scroll down to read the fine print.

<comment><USER22> I always thought it was intended as a "all" symbol. All your privacy, all the control, all these different apps plugging in.

SELECT * FROM user_preferences; -- type thing

<comment><USER20> Blow a seeding dandelion, and you get diaspora. Which is why the dandelion is their logo, and the asterisk is a very close approximation of that form

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I still choose to be optimistic. Not getting my hopes up, but I'm still excited to see what they come up with.

</comment><comment><USER24> It's sad that they didn't just tack onto an existing project like Pinax and add functionality to it to handle the federated system. There was no need to reinvent the wheel, the existing ones just needed a little truing.

<comment><USER25> Anything but pinax, please...

I had a really good look at that and I did not like much what I saw (that was a while ago, but still). Do you have a specific reason for suggesting that over appleseed (mentioned elsewhere in this thread), which I think would be a far better fit?

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Wow, spending $10k on UX this early seems like an interesting move

<comment><USER27> That, IMO, is one of the best things they could spend the money on. This project is going to suffer from being a technologists dream toy. By bringing in outside help to focus on who the end-user is, they have a hope of overcoming this and making it usable for mortals.

UX should be the first dollars spent on a consumer product, not the last.

<comment><USER28> The demise of Google Wave must have been a hard story for them to read.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> What do they mean by, "Since the 1st of August is nearly over..."?

<comment><USER30> Sarcasm. They probably promised an update on the 1st of August.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> One might argue that all those other OStatus network are way ahead, but I never read _their_ updates on HN, so Diaspora has at least a lot of buzz around it and thus the potential to get a user base faster than all the others.

</comment><comment><USER32> Personally, I'd really like to see a way of giving people the ability to share eachothers posts on diaspora (with posters consent of course). Metrics for posts could then be measured and displayed, and a whole new golden age of blogging/microblogging/online-publishing could be born out of this.

Also, there's got to be a better way of connecting people of similar interests via groups than the current model.

Also also, please consider musicians in the melée!!

god speed diaspora. I for one will be joining asap.

</comment><comment><USER33> I just clearly support you guys. impatient to read your code and share the good parole in my countries (Farnce-Chile-India).. Your tools, partners and tech choices rock !! Ruby, MongoDB; Github, Pivotal. They give a clear view on what you do and how you work. I am also impatient to see what is that wonderful bot and how do you guys will handle propagation of seeds. Let's work !!.

</comment><comment><USER34> Great to hear that they have a solid team of advisors and that they are putting the user experience first. With open-source I am always a bit concerned that design and experience are secondary. Diaspora has a great story going on right now, I hope the product will continue that with the same spirit and capture people's imaginations.

</comment><comment><USER35> Sadly I don't think this will take off. So many people rallied over Diaspora calling it the Facebook killer not understanding the true implications. Maybe I am wrong about this but wouldn't the people that want to use this have to download it and host it themselves?

</comment><comment><USER36> I worry. The whole update reminded me of when I move out of an apartment and think I've got one more load to go at 9pm... Just a few lamps and the vacuum. Three loads and four hours later and I'm still almost done.

</comment><comment><USER37> Why don't they use a sans serif font? Sans serif fonts are just more legible and easier to read.

<comment><USER38> Careful youngin, don't equate conformity with professionalism. The text is quite legible and the serif font makes a nice counterpoint to the rest of the page.

<comment><USER37> It's just not consistent since other parts of the page are in sans serif. I just prefer sans serif, I guess. Serif fonts remind me of cursive. Sans serif fonts seem more objective. For example, when you write "dog" you don't necessarily want the word to look like a dog.

<comment><USER39> Nearly all available evidence suggests that whether the font has serifs or not makes no difference with respect to readability on the screen.

That you think of sans-serif as more objective is actually quite funny. Newspapers, books and magazines – i.e. pretty much everything we read until a few years ago – used nearly exclusively a serif font for all their body text. Now it's serif that sticks out.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Strangest Book On Earth - <AUTHOR> http://the-dimka.livejournal.com/6645.html

<comment><USER2> Not so strange. It's just an art piece and there is lots more of that kind of thing out there. Look into early 20th century surrealism for instance. Watch the film Un Chien Andalou.

It would be more interesting if it was not trying to be a knockoff of the Voynich manuscript.

Also, some anime is like this, for instance Porco Rosso and The Wings of Honneamise. Both of them take place in alternate realities.</comment>


Ask HN: Can you recommend a Rails ecommerce framework? - <AUTHOR>

I don't have much Rails experience, but I'd like to build a customized ecommerce store. I thought Rails would be the way to go. I've looked into Spree Commerce. Does anyone have any experience with it or any other thoughts? <comment><USER2> Spree Commerce is perhaps the best ecommerce option on Rails. There are a few others like ror-e, piggyback which are not that mature or in continuous development. You could use Spree as a rails engine on top your site or combine with cms like refinery or radiant.

You could just choose to use only shopping cart feature of spree commerce with your existing site.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the info! I'm essentially trying to convert <http://outgrow.me/> (which is running on Wordpress with WePay buttons for payments) to a Rails site. I'm hoping I'm not biting off more than I can chew..</comment></comment>


Ellison on IBM: "In databases, they are a decade or so behind us." - <AUTHOR> http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9149883/Database_wars_IBM_Oracle_s_Ellison_trade_zingers

<comment><USER2> Pure numbers aren't the important thing here, IMO. How many college students are playing with DB2 or IMS on System Z? It's going to be a very low number, for a few very good reasons:

      * while reliable, System Z is incredibly hard to work with as a programmer or sysadmin

      * in my experience, IBM flat out refuses to give any of their "serious" products to universities. They say "Oh, download DB2 Express-C" and that's the end of the discussion.

If I know there are 1000x more people in the field with Oracle experience on common hardware than DB2 on System Z, I'm going to go with Oracle. Hardware is cheap. Good engineers/sysadmins aren't.

<comment><USER3> There is actually a great number of college students playing with DB2. They usually do so with DB2 Express-C, because it's free and production ready, so it's ideal for students and startups (even though we have large corporations who use it as well). DB2 Express-C is easy to work with, easy to administer, and has the same core code as commercial versions used by the largest companies in the world. System Z provides a nice hardware/software combo, but don't be fooled into thinking that DB2 LUW (Linux/Unix/Windows) is not "serious" or anything but great, really. DB2 provides many useful innovations that are not available to Oracle users. And thanks to DB2 Express-C, many of these benefits are available for free.

DISCLAIMER: I work for IBM in the DB2 team.

<comment><USER4> This sounds suspiciously like marketing speak. I graduated in 2006, and we never even spoke of DB2 in my time at the University of Michigan.

For curiosities sake, specifically to your post:

What makes it ideal to startups (any cool examples)? What innovations exist in DB2 that are not available elsewhere?

<comment><USER5> From acangiano's profile:

"I'm a Software Engineer & Technical Evangelist at IBM in Toronto, Canada."

<comment><USER6> College in Canada has a different meaning than in the U.S.. Here, it means community college. The equivalent term in Canada for an American college would be university. In Canada there are no universities that I'm aware of that have DB2 on their curriculum. There are definitely community colleges that do have it though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> > IBM is so far behind, they don't have any chance at all. In databases, they > are a decade or so behind us. I'm serious.

FUD.

<comment><USER7> I agree, total FUD. Oracle also claims to have invented relational databases, also total bullshit.

<comment><USER8> The list of Oracle claimed firsts is here:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Database#List_of_claimed...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oracle_Database#List_of_claimed_firsts)

I don't see them claiming to have invented relational databases. Do you have a reference for that claim?

<comment><USER7> I do, but I'd have to dig it out. In one of the earlier versions of Oracle than ran on Windows 95 (arguably the last decent one :), one got a set of manuals with it, one of which was titled something like "Concepts and..." It was in there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Entertaining back-and-forth, but are there independent performance numbers published backing up either claim?</comment>


Ask HN: Is anyone else seeing failures in AWS Elasticbeanstalk deployments? - <AUTHOR> Hey HN. For the last 1.5 hours we've been attempting to make deployments to AWS work using Elasticbeanstalk. But they keep dying out every 14 minutes. I've just started to see some tweets that match our time of issues exactly:
https://twitter.com/neilsandhu/status/895610077360439296
https://twitter.com/j_blotus/status/895619442859581440
Curious if anyone else is seeing this. <comment><USER2> Here is a thread with some of our observations.

[https://forums.aws.amazon.com/thread.jspa?threadID=261421&ts...](https://forums.aws.amazon.com/thread.jspa?threadID=261421&tstart=0)

</comment><comment><USER3> Even AWS admits this now on status.aws.amazon.com ...</comment>


Limitations of the GET method in HTTP - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.dropbox.com/developers/2015/03/limitations-of-the-get-method-in-http/ <comment><USER2> >GET requests don't have a request body, so all parameters must appear in the URL or in a header.

GETs can have bodies--- its just that some people who write software forget this.

A simple solution is to put a hash or maybe even just a body content length in the query string or a header so the server can make sure the body made it to it. If the the body doesn't make it, then it can inform the client retry with another less ideal HTTP method.

<comment><USER3> There's another article currently on the first page of HN discussing this issue. That post has a pointer to this [1] stackoverflow with the following quote from Roy Fielding:

        Yes. In other words, any HTTP request message is allowed to contain a message body,
        and thus must parse messages with that in mind. Server semantics for GET, however,
        are restricted such that a body, if any, has no semantic meaning to the request.
        The requirements on parsing are separate from the requirements on method
        semantics.

        So, yes, you can send a body with GET, and no, it is never useful to do so.

        This is part of the layered design of HTTP/1.1 that will become clear again once
        the spec is partitioned (work in progress).

        ....Roy

[1] -- [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/978061/http-get-with- requ...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/978061/http-get-with-request-body)

<comment><USER2> I should point out if you use my above approach and vary on the checksum/hash header, you don't even break the semantics here either...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> They could have used a GET method with a request body.

Although it's debatable whether it's a better solution (semantically a request body should not influence the result of an HTTP GET response), but saying that "GET requests don't have a request body" is false.

<comment><USER5> If the request body effects the behavior, they are breaking the semantics of GET and breaking anything (e.g., caching, including local) built around the defined semantics.

There should be a GET-like method that takes a (significant) request body but is otherwise semantically like GET (e.g., safe) -- essentially, it would represent asking for a representation of the result of applying a pure function to the resource identified by the URI rather than asking for a representation of the resource itself.

But no such function currently exists in HTTP/1.1 or any general purpose extension (there are highly-specific things like the SEARCH method, but that's not general purpose the way the base HTTP/1.1 methods and, say, PATCH are.)

<comment><USER6> There's a REPORT method that can used with any content-type.

<comment><USER5> If you mean the WebDAV one in RFC 3253, its spec (as is usual for WebDAV methods) has some WebDAV specific requirements in it that aren't really appropriate for general use; content-type isn't the only place where problems with generality can be found.

Something like that completely decoupled from WebDAV is basically what I'd like to see.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Another option is to use PUT/POST to create a query resource that you then refer to in your GET request. It can be useful if you want to refer to it and the server can use the information eg to cache the complex query.

<comment><USER8> That's technically true, but performance-wise I'm not realistically going to submit two separate requests for what is semantically one action. On the other hand, it makes the query resource reusable for saved searches, and for showing search history.

<comment><USER7> It is not much different from a prepared statement or a stored query, indeed it can even be parameterized. With keepalive two requests is not so bad.

<comment><USER9> And then you need to store the queries in a database. Make sure we flush them out 'some time'. What happens when a client tries to use a flushed query? Something that previously works now no longer does.

Or, lets just use POST.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Microservices largely break the standard HTTP patterns anyway. E.g. you are supposed to redirect after a POST request so that users can't double submit a form, but if you're hosting your frontend on a CDN then this isn't possible because the CORS spec prevents browsers from honoring redirect responses except for after GET and HEAD requests.

Incidentally, you are supposed to be allowed to redirect in response to GET requests, but if you use JWT auth then you can't even do this because the non- standard header forces a preflight request, and CORS requests with preflight aren't allowed to redirect at all.

I don't even understand how it's supposedly secure to pass back JSON with a URL for your promise to trigger a redirect, but it's insecure to pass your browser a 3XX response to do the same thing automatically.

<comment><USER11> To be fair, CORS is not a part of HTTP. If you're talking to your microservice with a browser, you've misunderstood the point of microservices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> (I feel like a broken record when this topic comes up, but...)

RFC5323 is still a thing, and the HTTP verb mechanism is still extensible. Use the SEARCH verb, submit your complex query in the method body. It's up to you to define the query structure appropriate for your use case, but MongoDB's query language is a good starting place.

[http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc5323](http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc5323)

<comment><USER5> Like most things connected to WebDAV, RFC 5323's SEARCH method makes sense within WebDAV when used for the specific role it is intended for in WebDAV, but is specified with a whole bunch of requirements that aren't all that suitable for general use outside of WebDAV or its specific intended use within WebDAV -- e.g., the requirement of the server to accept XML requests and the specific definition of how it handles XML requests, and the requirement to use the 207 Multistatus response code on success. (Of course you dump all that, but then you aren't using RFC 5323, you are just inventing your own thing that shares the same name as the method defined there.)

REPORT (also from WebDAV) is _somewhat_ closer to a general GET-with-body, but still has some WebDAV baggage.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> > As a rule, HTTP GET requests should not modify server state. This rule is > useful because it lets intermediaries infer something about the request just > by looking at the HTTP method.

As long as we're picking nits, it doesn't really matter if a GET request modifies server state so long as the state after N requests is the same as the state after 1 request (idempotence).

<comment><USER14> Actually there are two guarantees for GET:

1) It is a "safe" method.

2) It is an idempotent method.

A safe method (GET/HEAD) should not modify server state.

"In particular, the convention has been established that the GET and HEAD methods SHOULD NOT have the significance of taking an action other than retrieval. "

Whereas PUT & DELETE are also idempotent but not "safe".

[http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html](http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html)

<comment><USER15> Safe implies idempotent.

"Same effect from 0 or more actions" implies "Same effect from 1 or more actions".

<comment><USER16> All safe methods are idempotent, but not all idempotent methods are safe (e.g. PUT or DELETE.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> This doesn't really sound like a problem with HTTP, but more a problem with common implementations on clients and servers.

What they are doing with their delta API does seem like a GET is the correct option, and according to the spec a GET with a really long URI should be allowed.

It's good to raise awareness of this so http client and server software stops assuming that the URI is something small (historically entered by a human, or at least copied and pasted around)

<comment><USER18> Right, it is not a problem with HTTP. It is usually a problem with buffer sizes of (proxy) server implementations, resources (memory) or practical security concerns (DoS prevention). For example, if a proxy server uses a single buffer for evaluating the headers, you end up with a size that is too large for the majority of request, which raises resource and security concerns.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I believe they're right in using POST, and here's why:

\- Using GET with a request body:

Per RFC 7231, Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content, section 4.3.1 [1]: "A payload within a GET request message has no defined semantics; sending a payload body on a GET request might cause some existing implementations to reject the request."

Although you can argue whether or not you should be able to define the semantics of such a request body within the context of the resource, it quickly becomes moot in the face of reality: there's a good chance it won't work due to whatever client or intermediary is involved.

\- Using non-HTTP verbs (i.e. REPORT, SEARCH):

Again, one can argue over their validity, but since most clients or intermediaries will not support them, there's little practical use. In this particular case, I'd recommend against them since most developers will not be familiar with them, making your API less user friendly.

\- Using POST:

Per RFC 7231, Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content, section 4.3.3 [2]: "The POST method requests that the target resource process the representation enclosed in the request according to the resource's own specific semantics."

In other words, do whatever you want – such as executing a search query contained within the request body. This is semantically valid, widely supported and common practice. The only downside would be that caching of POST requests is not widely supported, although still possible. The spec even suggests an alternative solution: "Responses to POST requests are only cacheable when they include explicit freshness information (see Section 4.2.1 of RFC7234). However, POST caching is not widely implemented. For cases where an origin server wishes the client to be able to cache the result of a POST in a way that can be reused by a later GET, the origin server MAY send a 200 (OK) response containing the result and a Content-Location header field that has the same value as the POST's effective request URI (Section 188.8.131.52)."

In other words, you can implement a caching mechanism for your query resource that exposes itself through a URL structure, available for GET requests.

[1] [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-4.3.1](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-4.3.1)

[2] [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-4.3.3](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-4.3.3)

<comment><USER5> > Using non-HTTP verbs (i.e. REPORT, SEARCH):

These are HTTP extensions, and are as much HTTP verbs as PATCH. The big problem is that REPORT and SEARCH are WebDAV extensions to HTTP, and their specs have WebDAV related baggage, and its at least as much "bad REST" to redefine the semantics of methods with existing standards as to use POST to get around the technical/practical problems with GET.

<comment><USER19> Let me clarify, by non-HTTP I mean "not defined in the HTTP/1.1: Semantics and Content RFC" (RFC7231) and therefor not likely to be commonly implemented.

Could you elaborate on what you consider to be "bad REST" with regards to using POST in this case? The RFC clearly leaves the definition of the semantics of POST up to the implementation of that particular resource.

The only argument I could come up with, is that POST is not guaranteed to be idempotent or safe, whereas a search query would be. But a lack of guarantee doesn't exclude use cases where it would be.

<comment><USER5> > Could you elaborate on what you consider to be "bad REST" with regards to > using POST in this case?

I'm not saying POST is bad REST, I am acknowledging the claim by some that it is and, without debating whether or not it is, saying that using REPORT or SEARCH, as currently defined, is _at least as bad_ as using POST from a REST point-of-view.

(I actually think that, in terms of using HTTP in a RESTful way, POST is the least-bad choice in terms of existing verbs, though it is not an exceptionally good fit -- its basically a case where POST-works-for-anything-for-which-no- other-method-seems-appropriate logic applies.)

<comment><USER19> Ah, my bad, I misunderstood. Thanks for clarifying!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> A POST does not mean that a state change must happen as the result of the request. The server may just process the data of the body and return a result, without changing state.

If you happen to run into buffer size problems with GET headers, a POST can be an inconvenient answer (no caching). Or you create a new verb and customize your proxy's buffer settings for that special thing. This will make the pain explicit in your infrastructure.

But generally, I assume a complex operation behind a large URI. So a POST would do fine if the costs of the request are somewhat transparent to the user. And if you cannot do HTTP caching, an application cache would be the next thing to look for.

</comment><comment><USER20> a bit of a tangent but...

> For forms that use HTTP POST, it may not be safe to retry so the browser > asks the user for confirmation first.

this always makes me a bit mad. the user has absolutely no idea what the server is doing... and most users are baffled by this message and can't understand why they would want to do anything else other than resubmit the form, in the vast majority of cases.

if it really is potentially dangerous (it can be) browsers should apologise, not offer the user a gun to shoot his feet with.

</comment><comment><USER21> We use http get body to be able to submit searches to the servers. It feels somehow cleaner that doing a complex search in an encoded url.

The client can decide to use query string or body. Most ruby web servers handle this transparently, so the app doesn't know if the params came from the query string or from the body.

</comment><comment><USER22> I've hit this a few times. One way is to try to reduce the shape of the parameters. There is obviously a balance between magnifying and making it readable.

In one of the cases I ended up using POST as well. It was easy as that resource didn't already have a POST method (like in this case).</comment>


Show HN: A sound toy crossing an ecosystem and musical instrument [video] - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wv8sy9dufLQ

<comment><AUTHOR> Someone on HN suggested I make a video of my app, so here it is. Previously I had just screenshots and text, and I can see how that would be discouraging. You can learn more about sonaur here:

<http://www.sonaur.com></comment>


Things I've quit doing at my desk - <AUTHOR> http://justinjackson.ca/i-quit-my-desk/ <comment><USER2> I would add "Eating" to the list.

I eat at my desk all the time, and I really need to stop. When I eat at my desk, I'm generally eating things that aren't that healthy to begin with, snacking unnecessarily, and/or eating too quickly, and doing it in some misguided notion that I'm able to work and eat at the same time. I'm not _actually_ productive at times like that, it just lets me deal with some illogical guilt I feel when I get up to go eat at a table with other people, or out by myself in the park near the office.

When I get up and go to lunch instead of eating at my desk, I'm taking a real break, I'm socializing, or taking time to think.

I gotta stop eating at my desk.

<comment><USER3> Often when I think I'm hungry, I'm actually thirsty. A glass of warmed water (surprisingly) quashes the need to snack. Cold water is no good. Does anyone know why that is?

<comment><USER4> Not sure why is that, but I think it temporarily fills your stomach and makes it 'relax'. In my experience the same meal if hot makes me feel much more full.

I've heard that fast food joints intentionally try to serve the coldest possible drinks to make patrons feel they are hungry for another burger.

<comment><USER5> The fraction of visits that involve seconds is vanishingly small.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > Nobody does their best thinking sitting at their desk. When you reflect on > your biggest "Ah-Ha!" moments, how many of them occurred while you were > staring at a screen?

My biggest ah-ha moments are seldom staring at a screen*, but quite often it's at my desk with a paper and pen.

(The big exception is when doing profiling; the highest ah-ha-per-second ratio of all activities)

<comment><USER7> Agreed - that or a white board.

A lot of times it helps to get out of the office if you hit a rut/wall.

Just getting in a new environment and re-approaching the problem with a fresh perspective makes all the difference.

I like to take long walks with my dogs and try to let my mind wander. Usually, I'll end up thinking about work or a personal issue that requires a solution to be addressed.

<comment><USER8> +1 to white-boards

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I knew before I clicked that there was going to be something about a standing desk. I feel a subtle smugness coming from the standing desk crew that irks me a little.

But, as far as procrastinating I have definitely been slipping lately and need to lay off facebook, reddit, and (gulp) HN as well. Wait... what am I still doing here..!

<comment><AUTHOR> Ha ha. I only mention it because it's really worked for me. There are other strategies that could work well: one is to sit for only 30 minutes at a time, and then get up and go for a quick walk. The challenge for developers is that they often need 2 hours of uninterrupted time to focus.

<comment><USER5> I tried a standing desk, and got horrible blood flow pains on my arms when typing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I quit _working_ at my desk.

It's uncomfortable (despite considerable investment), takes a lot of space, has terrible lighting, is too hot or too cold and is eerily quiet. It's quite depressing really.

I tend to sit in the garden when it's not raining - good lighting, relaxing ambient noise and great air (which is really important). Plus you can get up and walk around regularly and focus on stuff that isn't right in front of you.

The only downside is bird crap and my neighbours think I'm insane.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is great! I think we need to keep exploring new models for how people get their best work done. This guy built a desk in a tree: [http://variationsonnormal.com/2011/09/15/tree-branch-work- de...](http://variationsonnormal.com/2011/09/15/tree-branch-work-desk/)

<comment><USER10> That's fantastic - thanks for posting this.

I used to camp in my local woodland as teenager, sometimes 80+ days a year. Perhaps I should go and work there as well (seeing as there's a massive great big 3G mast in the middle of my local woods now).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> #1 (thinking elsewhere, especially while taking a walk) is definitely true for me, but it does require being in a setting where you're allowed to leave the office for a few hours in the middle of the day to go for a walk in a nearby park. In academia or at your own startup, probably not a problem, but many companies aren't very accommodating of people leaving the office for hours at a time.

<comment><USER12> I find that too - much of my best thinking in the past has come to me during the walk to the office or back home again. I once took to carrying a dictation machine so I could capture these thoughts because I used to find that the process of arriving at the office, making a coffee, booting up and logging on used to distract me and I'd forget what I'd thought of while walking.

My theory about thinking and walking is that it gets the blood flowing round the brain more than just sitting at a desk does. I think that was the thinking behind having table tennis tables in offices as well, to get the blood moving around. There's also something about the action of walking that seems to let the mind wander off as well though...

<comment><USER13> I suspect it's a mental context switch more than anything physiological.

For example, I'm pretty bad at creative tasks when at a keyboard (this was also true in pre-internet times, so it's not a matter of distractions), but sit me down with a pencil and paper and the juices start to flow. It just creates a different state of mind.

<comment><USER14> For me, often just looking out of the window (we have a nice view on our office) helps a lot.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Ad procrastinating: I remember someone (Paul Graham?) reporting that he configured a separate machine for procrastination-inducing activities so as to avoid the "just quickly check my feed while this is compiling" syndrome.

<comment><USER16> It was Paul Graham. He later noted that it didn't really work.

<comment><USER17> Where did he say it didnt work? It seems like a great idea.

<comment><USER18> The "Note" on top. PG says: "The strategy described at the end of this essay didn't work. It would work for a while, and then I'd gradually find myself using the Internet on my work computer. I'm trying other strategies now, but I think this time I'll wait till I'm sure they work before writing about them."

<comment><USER19> I developed this method independently, and I've gotten it to work (more or less).

The trick is that you need to make it more difficult to access your "time wasting" sites on your work station.

I do this by adding entries into my hosts file and redirecting certain sites to 0.0.0.0, this way I need to use another machine when I want to browse these sites.

This helps maintain the separation, and keeps you from mindlessly entering in your favorite urls in a browser while at your desk.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> We should declare our desks sacred, and define a set of rituals to perform at those desks, to calm the Gods of Creativity and ask their forgiveness for all those sins we committed in their temple - the Desks.

</comment><comment><USER21> The "writing hut" part reminded me how Wallace Stegner's house / writing hut will be torn down in order to build a multi-million dollar monstrosity of a mansion [1]. :(

[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallace_Stegner>

edit: apparently the writing hut will be preserved, though inaccessible to the public

[2][http://www.sfgate.com/books/article/Stegner-s-studio-won- t-b...](http://www.sfgate.com/books/article/Stegner-s-studio-won-t-be-open-to- public-3824687.php#photo-3379476)

</comment><comment><USER22> And switch laptop for desktop computer. Reason is - you shouldn't do work at social station, at rest station and at sleep station. You should only work at work station.

<comment><USER16> I think it's handy to have both, actually. Use the laptop for email and the like, and reserve the desktop for real work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I like the ideas put forth in the article, thanks for the write-up. For me, it's really sometimes just finding what works best for the situation I'm in. I've found that sometimes the solitude of a library study desk can be the best place to get work done. At other times, sitting in a busy area (a cafe, a park, even public transit) can be invigorating and creates enough background as to allow me to focus more. The recliner in my living room has seen more than its fair share of use while sitting at my laptop typing away.

There are times when my mind races and I can't focus. I turn the lights off, close the shades and the only light and thereby focus becomes the monitor.

I look at this article and others that offer advice on finding that working place for yourself, or that motivation to ignore distractions and I see them more as tools than as rules. A man with a well supplied toolbox is more likely to find the one he needs when the time comes.

</comment><comment><USER24> _Sitting: for the past 18 months I've been using a standing desk. I've realized that the best part isn't that I'm standing all day; it's that I'm not sitting._

I actually got a GeekDesk a while ago, and I think it's a better solution: I wouldn't want to sit _or_ stand all the time.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yup, I'm the same way. I use a barstool for sitting and leaning. I probably stand 50%-75% of my day. I also try to get away from my desk more often.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I would also add "drinking" to this list. It's never good to drink anything at your desk.

<comment><USER26> I disagree - I keep a 24 pack of bottle water by my desk, which helps me stay hydrated. I also have a few cups of tea per day, which I find pleasant and not distracting.

(Unless you mean alcohol, in which case I don't disagree, but it doesn't sound like you do.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I disagree about the socializing part, in part because so much of our socializing is driven through the same mechanism we might otherwise do work at. Perhaps Justin might have two desks, one that is the communication/socializing desk and one that is the execution/work desk.

Of course a number of people would love to do that where the TV ends up the display for your socializing function.

<comment><USER28> I think it is good to clearly separate working and socializing activities. Working in an open work space where anyone can socialize with you at any time can be very distracting for work that requires you to focus. In my opinion having a private office and separate watercooler/coffee/socializing space would be ideal.

That said, having that separate desk to indicate that you're working on something that is not so susceptible to distraction might be enough.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I wrote an article very similar to this a few months ago. I make a similar argument: we need defined workspaces, and when we're there we shouldn't do anything but work.

[http://burakkanber.com/blog/staying-productive-while- working...](http://burakkanber.com/blog/staying-productive-while-working-from- home-or-why-we-need-workspaces/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Loved your post! I especially identify with "not actually working from your home while you're working from home." I too found that working from a coffee shop on my remote working days was way better than being in the basement at my house. The coffee shop was nice, because it still allowed me to work outside of the office (without the distractions of the office).

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I've been experimenting with getting away from my desk at home more often and taking breaks to play games and such. I use RescueTime to track what I end up doing and how much I end up working and if anything my productivity has only increased.

It's not a perfect measurement but it helps me to realize its not at all expensive to unchain myself from my desk.

<comment><AUTHOR> Exactly. I think we need to experiment and see where we're actually productive.

Too many times we "lie" to ourselves, and think that if we're at our desk, we're working (and being productive).

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> > Even better, I've felt more freedom to _just walk away_ when I'm faced with > a problem and need to do some thinking

I don't have a standing desk, but this is possibly my biggest incentive to consider getting one: if you're already standing, there's a lot less inertia to keep you from _just walking away_ from your desk.

</comment><comment><USER32> Best thing I ever did was move away from the desk unless working. Get a tablet for web browsing and keep your desk for work. I'd guess it's added 10 years minimum to my expected lifespan.

</comment><comment><USER33> I couldn't agree more regarding using a standing desk. The ability to stretch and move around makes working for long periods of time much more productive.

</comment><comment><USER34> That desk seriously needs a nice 27" monitor before it can be a proper "workstation".

<comment><AUTHOR> I had a large external monitor, but I haven't set it up in my new office yet. I'm actually enjoying the limitation of the smaller screen: ensures I'm only working on 1 thing at a time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Has anyone else switched to a standing desk setup? Do you like it?

<comment><USER36> Yep. I first switched to a standing desk at work, and later got one for home as well (built from IKEA parts). I've found that I'm a lot more productive with a standing desk, mostly because I procrastinate less.

Adjusting to working while standing is difficult. Adjustable desks that can go up and down, especially at the push of a button, only make it harder to actually get used to it. You'll get tired quickly from standing, switch to sitting, and then forget to stand back up (because sitting is a habit, whereas standing is not yet).

I've built a standing desk that does not adjust. When I get tired of standing I'll grab my laptop and go to the couch for a bit, and then get back to standing. This might not work for every setup, but it's great for me.

<comment><USER37> My solution for when I get tired of standing is to sit on a bar stool. I have an Ikea Sebastian bar stool which is the perfect height to sit at my standing desk. It is uncomfortable enough that I switch back to standing after a while.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> imho; if he's talking about the desk in the picture, its positioned wrong, he needs to stare a wall all the time he is behind the desk.

</comment><comment><USER39> You don't use a mouse?

<comment><AUTHOR> Are you referring to the photo on my post? The photo is a little bit of a lie: I'd just moved into this office, and my desk is not normally that minimalist. ;)

I do use a mouse. And normally my laptop is elevated on a box, with a keyboard in front. I also have a external monitor that's normally beside it.

<comment><USER39> Yes, I was referring to the photo. Glad to hear I'm not crazy for still using a regular old keyboard and mouse.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I call BS. Nobody has a desk that looks like that.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're right; the photo in the post is a bit of a lie. I had just moved in, and I snapped a photo while everything was nice and clean.

Here's what it looks like now: <http://bit.ly/S8o7Ju></comment></comment>


Henry Payne: Why I'm Buying a Tesla Model 3 - <AUTHOR> http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/columnists/henry-payne/2016/04/05/payne-buy-tesla-model/82682524/ <comment><USER2> The comments section is a great indicator of the prevailing attitude in Michigan towards Tesla. They're uninformed and see Tesla like they do Japanese or Korean competitors.</comment>


Bank Chairman Comments on the Fine Print Case: Nobody Will Win Anything From Us - <AUTHOR> http://www.minyanville.com/business-news/editors-pick/articles/Russian-Bank-credit-card-fine-print/8/8/2013/id/51217

<comment><USER2> Those of us in the cycling world know Oleg Tinkov well, and the first rule of listening to Oleg Tinkov is don't listen to Oleg Tinkov. Few people on earth are as full of it as he is...

I don't know what the result of the case will be, but his statements regarding it will certainly be useless.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> 'Fine Print Hijacker' settles conflict with Russian bank

[http://themoscownews.com/business/20130814/191850685/Fine- Pr...](http://themoscownews.com/business/20130814/191850685/Fine-Print- Hijacker-settles-conflict-with-Russian-bank.html)</comment>