Help a Frustrated Developer to get back into developing… - <AUTHOR> Hello Hacker News. I am a software developer/engineer that has gone through the management path, and didn't liked it.
I have been out of software development for 8 years, and now I want to start learning new technologies so that in the soonest possible future I would be able to get a job in development.
I know OOP and procedural programming, but I want to either do front-end or back-end development, or maybe both. But the problem is that it is overwhelming the amounts of new technologies and languages to learn.
What would be a good path for back end development? And front end? What about desktop Java development? And for each case, what would be the top 3 or top 5 books to follow/read at each step?
Thank you very much. A frustrated manager. <comment><USER2> Wow, you really have been out of the loop for 8 years. These days all you have to do is read a Rails/Ruby tutorial and go find one of the infinitely many jobs available out there. Once you get the feel for writing code again and get you skills back look for another more satisfying job.

Most productive programmers know that it is impossible to judge how productive another coder is by any method short of actually working with them. So interviews these days, I find, are significantly easier than they were 8 to 10 years ago when people asked irrelevant math questions to judge how productive of a coder you are.

Some points:

The world of programming has changed significantly in the last 8 years -- all the stuff you may have thought was good programming practice is now questioned by a dozen and a half blog posts/articles. Even the mighty if statement is under fire.

I think in general programmers are more friendly than they were 8 - 10 years ago. Perhaps because there are more of us which is forcing more of us off our opal pedestals and back into the reality that we are just blue-collars.

So brush up your CV get in there and join the mighty throng.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for replying. My problem is that I want to start programming for either the web (front or back), desktop (¡java/python/ruby?), or mobile (¡android/ios?). In the case of web, either front or back, there are 100s of tutorials, and 100s of technologies, and 100s of frameworks. Same for Java and maybe less for mobile. So I just want to know what would be the path of quickest start, because if I try to follow all the options, I would be ending up doing nothing.</comment></comment>


Majority Of Americans On Google Docs: "What You Talkin Bout Willis?" - <AUTHOR> http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/12/18/majority-of-americans-on-google-docs-what-you-talkin-bout-willis/

<comment><USER2> = majority of Americans on Web in 1995 = majority of Americans on Microcomputers in 1975.

<comment><USER3> But not "Wang Wordprocessor" or "gopher technology"?

It's difficult to predict the exact form it will take.</comment></comment>


Focus - <AUTHOR> http://micho.biz/post/80501503803/focus

<comment><AUTHOR> And a related post: "Curse of the Gifted", talking about how the skilled ones have trouble following processes or standards, and how this can be detrimental in the long run to your ability to create larger things:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7219872](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7219872)</comment>


Why is Adminer better than phpMyAdmin - <AUTHOR> http://www.adminer.org/en/phpmyadmin/

<comment><USER2> I never understood why people use phpMyAdmin to access MySQL... desktop applications like the MySQL Workbench itself are so much better and faster.

<comment><USER3> Because it's installed on shared hosting servers and works sufficiently for what most people using those services need.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Not because of their website design ...</comment>


How to spy on a Ruby program - <AUTHOR> http://jvns.ca/blog/2016/06/12/a-weird-system-call-process-vm-readv/ <comment><USER2> You know, sometimes i get slightly eye-rolly at the tone of Julia's articles, but fuck, this sort of attitude in programming is so much better than the alternative (i.e. lkml). Bringing more positivity and jolliness into programming is important. Fuck the traditional macho programmer attitude. I'm gonna try to be more like Julia.

<comment><USER3> Ditto, except for the eye-rolly part:D.

Also, I have noticed that she takes simple things we don't usually think deep about and drill down to it opening up underlying complexity and pointing a metaphorical magnifying glass at it. (An example I quickly picked from the blog [http://jvns.ca/blog/2014/09/28/how-does-sqlite-work- part-1-p...](http://jvns.ca/blog/2014/09/28/how-does-sqlite-work- part-1-pages/))

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> For Python, you can just use Pyrasite ([https://github.com/lmacken/pyrasite](https://github.com/lmacken/pyrasite)) and inject a script which prints a stack trace for all threads.

I've done this to debug OpenStack in the past and it worked very well. There are many similar projects for Python, I used this one since it's in the RHEL repo.

Useful summary on StackOverflow: [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4163964/python-is-it- pos...](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4163964/python-is-it-possible-to- attach-a-console-into-a-running-process)

</comment><comment><USER5> If this sort of stuff is relevant to you, [http://patshaughnessy.net/ruby- under-a-microscope](http://patshaughnessy.net/ruby-under-a-microscope) is an essential book to read.

</comment><comment><USER6> When I've needed to dump a stack trace, I've just included an interrupt handler which prints the call stack to a debug log.

That has been good enough for the problem of "wtf is this ruby process doing for _minutes_ at a time?" That doesn't get you flame graphs, but you can take a few snapshots and get an idea of what is happening.

For more involved perf debugging I've used ruby-prof.

</comment><comment><USER7> From the article:

"I'm constantly surprised by how many people don't know you can do this. It's amazing."

I'm probably nitpicking, but sad to see this in the article. One of the things I _love_ about Julia's writing otherwise is that it is free of this sort of 'I'm surprised that you don't know this simple thing.' expressions.

<comment><USER8> hey! Thanks for pointing this out. As you say, I _do_ normally try to audit my writing for feigned suprise like this!!

I'll fix it when I get home.

<comment><USER7> Hey, thanks for taking notice, and more importantly, fixing it.

You're awesome!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Don't forget if you're on a system with DTrace, Ruby supports a nice bunch of probes for various events: [http://ruby- doc.org/core-2.3.0/doc/dtrace_probes_rdoc.html](http://ruby- doc.org/core-2.3.0/doc/dtrace_probes_rdoc.html)

</comment><comment> jon-wood If you're planning ahead you can have your application load rbtrace which then allows connecting to a running process to see what it's doing, with options to limit to slow calls, IO, of specific method calls.

</comment><comment><USER10> I hadn't heard of perf - very handy indeed. It's in the linux-tools package for distros using apt. You will need to install both the generic package and the one for your kernel version.

<comment><USER11> Installing linux-tools-generic seems to have been enough for me (on Trusty).

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Of course there are equivalent programs for C. On GNU/Linux it's pstack aka gstack. Also gcore if you want an entire core dump you can analyze later with gdb.

[http://linux.die.net/man/1/pstack](http://linux.die.net/man/1/pstack)

</comment><comment><USER13> One issue I've run across is spying on JRuby's native Java classes. Anyone have a solution?

<comment><USER14> I've only ever used VirtualVM, maybe Charles Nutter or Chris Seaton will appear and enlighten us both.

<comment><USER15> I'm not sure what you want to do. Is your problem that you do want to see the native Java classes, or you want to hide them and focus on the Ruby code? Or is the key thing you want a Java flame graph?

<comment><USER14> Java classes and a flame graph would be nice sometimes. I really only know how to use pry and Virtual VM with JRuby.

<comment><USER15> It looks like some people are using flame graphs for the JVM.

[http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/07/java-in- flames.html](http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/07/java-in-flames.html)

I'm still puzzled that there seems to be no simple gprof-style graph profiler included with the JVM.

<comment><USER16> I"m surprised as well.

Last time I needed this I knocked something up that could use the internals of Mission Control or Visual VM to turn their profile formats into flame graphs, but I doubt it would keep working across versions, and it really needed more work to be something anybody else could use sensibly.

It was however very easy to do (maybe half an hour's work) and produced very useful results. If you're using an invokeDynamic based language implementation however you will want to filter a lot of internal stack frames out of the graph, or you'll have trouble seeing past the LambdaForms to what's really going on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Nice write. The FlameGraph link in Julia's article is broken, maybe points to this one? [https://github.com/brendangregg/FlameGraph](https://github.com/brendangregg/FlameGraph)

</comment><comment><USER18> > maybe it doesn't exist because a Linux-only Ruby debugging tool is sort of a > weird thing?

Linux-only seems perfectly acceptable, especially as more and more development moves to Docker containers.

Great write up, looking forward to seeing a completed tool!

<comment><USER4> Windows Docker is just around the corner!

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> "I was going to paste the strace output of what gdb is actually doing, but it is 20 megabytes of system calls."

I think this is why you shouldn't run this on production server itself. Each call is very resource intensive on the production server.

I believe the right way to analyze memory is to use "gcore", dump the memory, download it to the local machine's VM instance that's running the same OS as the production using scp. Also download the same ruby binary that production is running, and use gdb on the VM to analyze memory dump.

<comment><USER20> That may be "right" given the current options, but that doesn't mean we can't have better options.

And that's exactly what this blog post is about.</comment></comment>


Why Tailwind UI made $500K in 3 days - <AUTHOR> https://jay.kanakiya.in/blog/why-a-css-kit-made-500k-in-3-days/ <comment><AUTHOR> Woah! It jumped to the first stage for a brief second, never expected that</comment>


Ask HN: Do e-signatures hold in court where you are? - <AUTHOR> Please include your location as well <comment><USER2> In the US they are considered legally enforceable. Most real estate transactions are moving to e-signatures now for closing documents. I know many companies that have moved towards using e-signatures for contracts in lieu of faxing back/forth. Ironically, most court documents still have to be physically signed though.

[https://www.docusign.com/electronic-signature- legality](https://www.docusign.com/electronic-signature-legality)

[http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2013/06/what-are-e- sig...](http://blogs.findlaw.com/law_and_life/2013/06/what-are-e-signatures- are-they-legally-valid.html)</comment>


The Commoditization Of SaaS - <AUTHOR> http://profitbaron.tumblr.com/post/53228769794/the-commoditization-of-saas <comment><USER3> There is intense competition in the Saas space, but competition is different from commoditization imo.

The simpler the Saas service, and the lower cost of switching, the more competition and commoditization that may go on. But this article is talking specifically about Saas replacing enterprise software. Software is sticky, and some software is very sticky because it is mission critical, highly integrated into the business workflows, and/or there is significant user interaction.

For example, if a company has 500 sales people all happily using salesforce.com, why would a CIO disrupt everyone's work to switch to a cheaper but different product? The cost of salesforce.com is not a significant cost to the business, but the cost of disrupting people's productivity swamps any savings you might from switching to a cheaper service.

This is similar to someone telling a company to drop MS Office because OpenOffice or GoogleDocs have equivalent "good enough" functionality and are free. There is no 'commodity' version of MS Office which looks and behaves exactly like MS Office but just with a lower price.

<comment><AUTHOR> Your Salesforce example highlights a SaaS replacing Enterprise Software - Salesforce vs. Siebel. Regarding your point about software being sticky like some hardware offerings have been commoditized - software can also suffer this to some extent (especially in the SaaS space as noone is doing anything that revolutionary that a competitor or competitors cannot come along and literally clone them).

I do however agree with you about the switching costs, Salesforce actually use this as part of their lock-in & differentiator in that they have got their users to associate them with CRM - their stock ticker is it etc - this they become product evangelists for them. As a result, there is a network effect built around Salesforce which has helped them create a lock-in.

However, that sill does not mean users won't switch (look at the new [http://www.moz.com](http://www.moz.com) it isn't a coincidence that the UI looks like Google Analytics - that is one such example of how to "break" the lock-in). Moreover if a customer is offered a Salesforce alternative for 20% of the cost & it does exactly what Salesforce can do (as well as having a similar UI) that becomes a serious incentive for a business to switch - <USER2> all most of the decisions are made by the CIO etc who doesn't necessarily use the product day-to-day.

Finally to address your point about there being no commodity version of MS Office the problem is, is that no alternative has actually managed to provide a product to a similar level - Excel is by far the most superior spreadsheet product on the marketplace.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think there are two conflating ideas here, commoditization and uniqueness. Commoditization will happen over time, especially with open source becoming a bigger part of more industries, but that doesn't mean you need to rush to become a commodity.

You should start with something unique and keep making unique things that delight the people who are willing to pay for those things.

It's not a complicated idea, but it takes focus and time to really get to know your customers and their needs.

<comment><AUTHOR> I mentioned the uniqueness elements to highlight areas where SaaS services can evolve into from their "solution" service to a "problem" service.

I do however agree with you that, you should always try to offer something unique (as this is the USP and where you can make higher profit margins) and that it can sometimes take time to achieve this. However, SaaS is not revolutionary and it can be copied by anyone and some of them may have a nice user interface and/or great product functionality but it is not revolutionary aka a commodity - which as I mentioned in the post is a death spiral as it focuses on competing on price.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> > Chances are that your company or your industry will be commoditized > especially when you don't think it can happen because, in reality > commoditization always happens

Everything else in the post rests on this, and I'm not sure that its true. Do you have research or statistics to support this claim?

I'm curious what these industries are. Oil? Investment funds? Pharmaceuticals?

I'm thinking that there are a few industries where commoditization has not happened over the last few hundred years. Of these, I'm curious how many of the industries commoditization could happen in, but has not, and how many (for some reason) are strongly resistant to commoditization.

<comment><AUTHOR> In regards to the commoditization point & to you examples of Oil, Investment Funds and Pharmaceuticals there has been consolidation within these. For instance, OPEC has effectively brought all the oil-producing nations under one rule so to speak which has established uniform pricing throughout the world.

Moreover, commoditization doesn't happen immediately as there may be industries who disrupt existing solutions (as SaaS has done to Enterprise Software) but aren't yet fully established themselves (or in particular verticals of the new industry) and these can have time to evolve before commoditizing. Having said that, it's always better to commoditize yourself before customers (and potential customers) perceive you as a commodity. The reason for is that it becomes much harder to evolve into a preferred partner/problem service where you can make much higher profit margins during this stage as you are being compared on price & not your defensible value add.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is the tradeoff... SaaS gets great margins because it's not custom. There's a high fixed cost, then each incremental addition has benefit. Even with a low marginal cost this is true. The #1 SaaS can also add lot of features and increase reliability and spend more on Marketing.

You could argue that Wal-mart is a commodity too. It's just stores and the same stuff as K-mart and 7-11. But it crushes them. There's room for both Wal- mart and Tiffany's just like there's room for a SaaS for your billing system, and Accenture to build a custom one.

<comment><AUTHOR> I wasn't arguing about adding more features (since a competitor can also do that) but rather create an additional value-add that meets your customers or potential customers needs.

Whereas SaaS currently tries to say "this is the solution" it needs to be flipped to focusing on actual customer pain points (since the current solution may not actually meet their needs) which you can the re-create a slightly new solution which becomes your unique selling point and defensible base (which is why it's important to go beyond competing on features). The reason I'm arguing this point is because, SaaS is becoming commodified in that they they winning SaaS in the SMB space start getting pulled upstream to the enterprise market where their margins become much greater and SaaS becomes their method to provide you with the product than their actual business model.

Your examples actually reaffirm my point - Walmart has added value by offering "everything under one roof" so instead of going to 10-20 store you just go to the 1. Their value is convenience alongside this they also compete on price to protect their market from disruption and ensure they're the dominant player (its a 3 pronged attack which Amazon is replicating on the web). On the other hand Tiffany's offers you a more personal experience than a Walmart does (in my opinion) which is their comparitve value-add alongside their actual products.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> _As a result, by commoditizing yourself and creating a new unique selling point which is, unique to you, important to your customer (or potential customers) and is defensible against your competition, on top of your SaaS you can increase demand and give yourself the opportunity for highly profitable growth._

I don't follow. Okay so I find a selling point but what exactly makes it defensible or 'unique'?

<comment><AUTHOR> What I mean by this is don't make your selling point about having more features (since a competitor can copy them) but rather create an additional value-add that meets your customers or potential customers needs.

SaaS currently tries to say "this is the solution" and as I was saying in the post it needs to be flipped to focus on actual customer pain points (since the current solution may not actually meet their needs) which you can the re- create a slightly new solution which becomes your unique selling point and defensible base (which is why it's important to go beyond competing on features). Essentially SaaS is becoming the method to provide the customer with the product rather than the actual business model and if your SaaS works with your customers & solves a key problem for them beyond "hey pay us X for these features" you will become a preferred partner who is solving a key problem which is critical to the success of your customers

<comment><USER7> _you can the re-create a slightly new solution which becomes your unique selling point and defensible base_

Are you basically saying that in addition to features, you need to provide _service_ because that is what makes you defensible? It is just not very clear how a slightly new solution is inherently defensible. You could make your product offer a _slightly new solution_ by improving a feature. I'm guessing you'd argue that isn't defensible. So what concrete characteristics make it defensible? May be you are hinting at marketing/branding - once you have a brand/mindshare, people are less likely to switch to commoditized alternatives(ie. Tylenol).</comment></comment></comment>


Can Video Game Music Change the Way You Play? - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/resources/idt-sh/top_scores_video_game_music <comment><USER2> in my experience yes, i recently discovered this when i started playing overwatch while listening to random music on spotify (thanks to my vast and strange taste in music my discover can be a very mixed bag) and i noticed a pattern, i seemed to play more aggressively and get more kills when listening to horrible dubstep more so than anything else, i dont even particularly like dubstep but it seems to consistently improve my game

</comment><comment><USER3> IDK but playing DOOM while listening to DragonForce led to me absolutely obliterating my personal bests on arcade mode. Anecdotal, sure, but can't argue with the results.</comment>


USA Inc. A report looking at the US Government as a business, by Mary Meeker - <AUTHOR> http://www.kpcb.com/usainc/index.html

<comment><USER2> It is interesting but largely irrelevant (I haven't read through the whole thing yet but I read through the 18 page summary in the beginning). For example, take a couple of the changes they suggest...

\- Raise the Social Security retirement age to 73 while raising SS taxes by nearly 2%

\- Reduce Medicare benefits while raising taxes to fund the program by nearly 3%

Both are perfectly reasonable financial suggestions but the political will to accomplish them just doesn't exist. I'll go on record as saying every problem the USA has could be solved if you can find a politician who can sell raising taxes AND cutting services at the same time. But I don't think the person is out there.

Meaning these suggestions have no hope of being implemented and are largely just a mental exercise.</comment>


Show HN: How good is your Web Security Knowledge? - <AUTHOR> https://websecurity.firebaseapp.com <comment><AUTHOR> Test your Web Security Knowledge with Questions from the OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigations Exam.</comment>


Before you start learning Lisp... - <AUTHOR> http://abhishek.geek.nz/docs/lisp-answers/ <comment><USER2> From the article:

> This is because the Lisp standard tries to specify a portable language, not > a library.

> Note that even the C language doesn't include these things.

That's true, but the POSIX standard library functions are packaged with almost any C environment except for embedded systems and is usually available 'out of the box'.

Of course there is a clear distinction between what is part of the language and what is part of the library.

Is there an equivalent to so say 'stdlib' in the LISP world ?

<comment><USER3> Not for Common Lisp (CL), but a lot of what's in 'stdlib' for C is already in CL. Also a lot of implementations come with substantial extras, like f.e. sockets, that the article mentioned are not in the CL standard.

Incompatibilities in those extras between implementations are handled by meta- packages (libraries or modules in other programming languages) provided by the community.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Should be titled "Before you start learning Common Lisp". Anyone with a reasonable functional programming background would know the difference.

<comment><USER5> See the last point in the write-up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm interested in learning Scheme, and keeping my fingers crossed that they can come together and specify some kind of "batteries-included" standard library. Otherwise, I'm afraid I'll only be able to fiddle with Scheme for an hour or two on weekends and get my real work done with one of the "popular" languages (i.e., Perl, Python, etc.).

Yes, I realize PLT has some batteries included but I'd prefer a community standard rather than a one-distro standard (not that I think (or even have much of an idea if) anything is wrong with PLT).

<comment><USER7> Your fingers are going to be crossed for a long time. I think the Steering Committee has too many divergent interests on it for there ever to be agreement on a serious standard library. Schemers are very DIY; for example, see [http://philosecurity.org/2009/01/12/interview-with-an- adware...](http://philosecurity.org/2009/01/12/interview-with-an-adware- author). Rolling your own libraries on top of a tiny implementation is not particularly uncommon. (I just hope you can write more, uh, ethical software than that guy!)

PLT has the most batteries of any distro I've ever seen (disclaimer: one of its authors was my undergrad advisor). That is, PLT is (a) free, (b) mature, and (c) has a fair number of modules written by people other than the developers of the language.

There's no sense in waiting, just dive in. If you don't want to use PLT, Bigloo can call Java libraries---solving your battery problem in a different way.

<comment><USER6> > Your fingers are going to be crossed for a long time.

Hm. That's going to make it very difficult to type.

> I think the Steering Committee has too many divergent interests on it for > there ever to be agreement on a serious standard library.

That would be most unfortunate.

> Schemers are very DIY; for example, see [snip]

Not sure what about that story points to Schemers being particularly DIY. Sounds like the fellow needed something tiny, so rather than take a full-blown batteries-included language and strip out what he didn't need, he instead just used something small that he was familiar with.

> There's no sense in waiting, just dive in.

Yeah. Trying to make the time... thanks for the encouragement. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Does anybody have a good elsip project idea?

I been trying to learn elisp but I didn't have good enough excuses to write anything in elisp.

<comment><USER9> write a hacker news reader so I won't have to exit emacs for that.

<comment><USER10> HN is pretty usable in w3m / emacs-w3m.

To log in you will have to patch your w3m to send "Content-Length" instead of "Content-length" (see <http://arclanguage.org/item?id=4419> )

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> why does it say LISP isn't a functional programming language but Clojure is? Isn't Clojure a dialect of Lisp?

<comment><USER12> The author forgets to specify, but he is talking about Common Lisp, not Lisp in general.

<comment><USER13> _While we're at it, the name "LISP" is obsolete. It's reminiscent of variants of the broader lisp family of languages, circa 1980. We're talking about Common Lisp instead, often shortened to "Lisp", being a much more modern language."_

(Unless the author added that after the OP was submitted)

<comment><USER12> I'm sorry, I mistated, the author forgat to specify what he meant by 'Lisp' _before_ writting a page and a half on it. He did get around to it near the end of the article when all of the laypeople left confused about Lisp.

<comment><USER14> I've added a note at the top disambiguating the term too. Thanks for the feedback. :-)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Free VPN Service - <AUTHOR> https://www.finchvpn.com/pricing

<comment><USER2> has anyone used this?</comment>


Colin Kaepernick to Join Medium Board of Directors - <AUTHOR> https://blog.medium.com/colin-kaepernick-to-join-medium-board-of-directors-7e5e8a28d7ee <comment><USER2> I was excited in the WashPo coverage that they said Colin would be pushing more coverage of prison reform.

It took me awhile, including attending a few events run by public defenders, to come around to the far end of the spectrum of reform which is abolition[1]. Abolitionists would say that reformers are wasting their time and that prisons work as designed.

Prison abolition, like defunding the police, is a topic that's reasonable if you dig into it but sounds radical and dangerous on the surface. So it's something the main stream media won't cover well or will cover with a lot of both-sidesism. I never read what the WashPo or NYT say on this topic because I know it'll be frustratingly bad.

So I see this as a great moment for Medium, to be a place where this topic can be covered fully and in depth. It's a win for their subscription model, which is generating the revenue that allows for high quality coverage. It's just great. I'm so excited.

[1] If abolition sounds dangerous or radical, the key point that got me over the hump was that it is a long term goal, say a hundred years, that is meant to be executed category by category. Once you see the goal that way, it's easy to first of all find categories that can simply be eliminated by decriminalization. And then as you keep going you find ways to either do restorative justice where the focus is on making amends or ways to solve the root issue prompting crime. It's not until the end where you would face the possibly impossible issues of what to do with a Jeffrey Dahmer for instance.

<comment><USER3> So what do you do with people who do things out of malice, say, mobsters, human traffickers? Some people do things because there's an opening.

How do you do restorative justice with them?

<comment><USER2> What do I do? Nothing. Did you see that part of my post? I really tried to emphasize that you go piece by piece and that harder pieces get addressed later. I'll be dead before anyone tries to figure out what to do with mobsters. But if you could find a way, almost definitely that way would be preferable to incarceration. That is why it's called abolition. The goal is to find ways to abolish every single category of incarceration.

<comment><USER4> >you go piece by piece and that harder pieces get addressed later

Sounds like diving head-first into something with significant short and long term consequences while refusing to plan for the actual end-game. Frankly the reason people haven't addressed the "harder pieces" of abolition yet is because there is no good alternative to prison. Some people are fundamentally dangerous to society and no amount of "please be nice" therapy or education will change them.

<comment><USER2> What is the risk here? Break it down for yourself. I think either you are imagining a different process than I'm imagining or you'll find there are no short or long term consequences other than maybe some research money that gets spent verifying a dead end.

If 90 years from now a set of experiments to find alternatives to incarceration for mobsters failed, that's not going to make people regret the first step of abolition which is probably decriminalizing drug possession. Or the second step, which is also well supported, which is eliminating cash bail.

<comment><USER5> It seems like you're setting a target that you have no actual plan to achieve. Perhaps de-scoping the project would have the twin benefits of appearing more reasonable to your audience, and allowing for the possibility of success.

<comment><USER2> The abolition movement does answer this which is that the reform movement has already been tested and failed.

For illustration, can we say the easiest and most straight forward solutions eliminate 50% of incarceration? We've had incarceration rates in the US that were lower than that.

When reformers say reform, they have to fight tooth and nail for 1% reduction. Even in New York State some simple bail reform got rolled back almost immediately after heavy PR by the police departments here.

How do you go from 1% to saying, no, no, we actually meant 50x more reform than that? It just doesn't work.

So, if abolition says 100% and it laters turns out that the theoretical healthy limit for a society is only 80%, well, nobody on the abolition side is going to be all that worked up about it.

<comment><USER5> If you were negotiating pricing with a single party, anchoring would work, but I think that's not what's going on here.

<comment><USER6> But he has a point that attempts at small reforms failed for years.

And it also seems to me that lately radicals can get their way somewhat, but "reasonable center" is not achieving anything or ends up being enabler for more powerful sociopath.

It would be better if things were the opposite way, but they are not. It is imo the core reason for radicalisation of all involved sides lately.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Just imagine if you are a person that has a PhD in criminal justice, spent an entire career in the CJ system as e.g. a parole judge or internal affairs prosecutor, wrote textbooks about CJ reform, maybe even experienced incarceration and rehabilitation first-hand. Imagine how you would feel about this appointment. Would this look like a genuine commitment to advancing the kind of intelligent discourse that solves a problem? Or would it look like a desperate celebrity appointment for marketing and fundraising? Surely he's brave and has learned a lot. His contribution was symbolically transformative. It's hard to imagine that he is the expert on the topic. It seems to me that what is going on here is picking sides. BLM is like a social startup on a massive growth trajectory. Invest now for massive gains in social proof. There's also a fear element, like, get your business on the internet or it's the internet will kill your business. Replace 'internet' with 'social justice movement'. This is the point in the timeline where every company on earth is desperate to make a website.

<comment><USER2> Pretty sure that the majority response from these PhDs is that they will be the authors in these publications. This isn't Colin Kaepernick's daily blog we're talking about. Colin has money/power and this is what he's using it to support. So, if I were a PhD or other expert, I'd be focused on the good news that there is a new source of support for getting my expertise out there.

<comment><USER7> Oh, you're saying that this is more like Colin Kaepernick's decision to partner with Medium moreso than Medium's conveniently-timed decision to support a movement through celebrity endorsement. Yes, that makes sense, and it seems that Kaepernick likely has the upper hand in this transaction. His brand is much stronger than Medium, better growth potential, impossible to replicate. I hope he got at least 20% of the company in this deal.</comment></comment></comment>


I redesigned the infamous IOWA App in 30 minutes - <AUTHOR> https://uxdesign.cc/i-redesigned-the-infamous-iowa-app-in-30-minutes-478a7ae7ffc8 <comment><USER2> I think one of the bigger issues is that they rushed it too fast, never got it approved in the app stores, tried to have people install it externally, and used the same phone number for help as they did for result reporting.

Sounds like most never made it I to the app in the first place.</comment>


Gobble (YC W14) Raises $10.75M for Its 10-Minute Dinner Kits - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2015/10/29/gobble-series-a/ <comment><USER2> To me, the highest cost of cooking for myself is planning and shopping. The value, therefore, is to offload the thinking, planning, and shopping part of this. The prep and cleanup is actually fun and easy to fit into my schedule. Therefore, solid value prop and great idea.

Further, imo, the cost and packaging "waste" is nothing significant. When I shop for myself I still get packaging. Worse yet, a lot of food gets wasted anyway, i.e. because the grocery store doesn't sell me exactly as much food as I need, whereas Gobble does. I suspect this is actually more efficient, i.e. on all frontiers, especially given the waste I always generate from shopping for these ingredients.

<comment><USER3> > To me, the highest cost of cooking for myself is planning and shopping

I agree with shopping. But not so much with planning. Once you've been cooking for yourself for a couple months you can pretty much nail down a rotating meal plan that requires no substantial planning

On the packaging waste, I was delving through the Gobble website and found out they offer a free "Return & Re-Use Program" [1]

[1] [https://gobble.com/faq](https://gobble.com/faq)

<comment><USER2> I think a better comparison is the planning it would take to get to the variety that Gobble offers. I've been on that rotating meal plan and it is pretty narrow in my experience. Every once in a while I find a new recipe, euphoria ensues, and then I spend two hours going to whole foods and trader joes - lesson learned, don't do that!

I don't think it is you and I appreciate the honest comment, but from the other comments it seems that everyone here has mastered the art of fitting in the planning, shopping, prep, cooking, and cleaning. Truly amazing! Or simply surprising that they can't hypothesize about the poor folk like myself who just can't quite get there in their life.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Serious question - Why don't grocery stores make and market these ready to cook fresh/healthy boxed meals? They already have the inventory & could use last mile uberRush type delivery services that are expanding.

I know I'm over simplifying this - but if I was wanted to be in this space, I'd partner with grocery stores to build their tech, and charge the groceries incremental fees off each sale without taking on inventory / capital risk.

I'm just not sure about Gobble, blue apron, hello fresh et all... how are they differentiating themselves operationally? (Besides throwing money at having their own refrigerated distribution centers)

FedEx-ing food around seems like a gigantic waste of resources and seems at odds with "changing the world" for better. But that's just me.

*I'm a "busy millennial" with a good tech job who enjoys cooking - so I guess I'm in their target market?

<comment><USER5> They do have this at the grocery store.

<comment><USER4> Can you provide an example? Preferably one from a regional or national chain that's not exclusive to the Bay Area or NYC

<comment><USER6> Bags of frozen prechopped veggies in sizes appropriate for a family of four for one meal, plus containers of fresh soup to go in the deli, plus a selection of fresh ready-to-heat entrees. A nice meal for two with enough leftover for someone's lunch would come to around $16 at my local Save-On. (veg $5, entree $7, soup $4).

<comment><USER4> Ha, I know that - I'm talking about these boxes of fresh & fancy ingredients with recipe cards that are all the rage with these startups

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> >The company says it currently has 1 million subscribers in California, so the round will help fund its national expansion.

Paying subscribers? Or people on their email list?

</comment><comment><USER8> I've always been a bit curious about the market for these services, if you consider:

\- Price sensitive novices: likely realize fairly quickly that they can save quite a lot of money by shopping & chopping on their own.

\- Price insensitive novices: likely find that the meals push the limits of their cooking skill, take longer and have more cleanup than they expect, and will either learn enough cooking skills to make the meal packages feel restrictive, or just go back to takeout.

\- Price sensitive with cooking experience: likely realize how much cost is added for something that is not a big hassle if you have a little experience (i.e. basic knife skills and knowing where to find things quickly in the supermarket).

\- Price insensitive with cooking experience: likely feel restricted by the ingredients and menus, and can get halfway there with grocery delivery.

A former roommate of mine (price insensitive novice) had a Blue Apron subscription for some time and I was always shocked at how incredibly much packaging there was, from individual foam wrappers around vegetables and tiny baggies with a glove of garlic to huge ice packs and layers of cardboard. It seemed like such a waste to me.

<comment><USER9> My wife and I use Blue Apron and I am a big fan. I have to admit the packaging is extensive but at least they are trying to reduce the net waste [0].

A few other positives:

\- You get the experience of making the dinner (chopping, cooking, mixing, etc.). It's a good entry point for novices.

\- Many of the ingredients are somewhat exotic, so you wouldn't usually buy them in the grocery store. Or if you did you end up with a lot left over that you won't use again.

\- $59 for six meals actually seems like a bargain to me. Maybe we were doing it wrong but when we used to go to the store for all our meals, we spent a lot more and ended up wasting a lot of it.

The downside is that you don't save that much time (other than the shopping trip). So I could see how Gobble is great for more time-constrained people.

In the end, I think all of these services are trying to own the space, starting with their own niches. Once they get enough traction they can land and expand to take over the other services' niches. This comes at a cost to them (poor unit economics initially), but we the consumers benefit...for now at least.

[0] [https://support.blueapron.com/hc/en- us/articles/202510818-Ho...](https://support.blueapron.com/hc/en- us/articles/202510818-How-do-I-recycle-my-Blue-Apron-packaging-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've got an idea.

Step 1: Throw some rice in a rice cooker, add water, press button.

Step 2: Cut up 2 sausages, throw it in the microwave for 2 minutes

Step 3: Put one or two cups of frozen vegetables in a bowl, add water, and steam in the microwave for 4mins.

Step 4: Throw the sausages and the vegetables on the rice, add Soy Sauce to taste.

Optional: Feel free to make some eggs on a pan. Should only take 2-3mins. You can add that into the mix of Rice/Sausage/Veggies.

Aaaaand that's dinner!

<comment><USER11> You can also just cook any meat and vegetables in the rice cooker with the rice.

<comment><USER10> Wait what, are you serious. You might have just changed everything I thought I knew about life and cooking....

I'm gonna try this out.

<comment><USER12> Yup, Roger Ebert wrote a cookbook on it: [http://www.amazon.com/The-Pot-How- Use-It/dp/0740791427](http://www.amazon.com/The-Pot-How-Use-It/dp/0740791427)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> $12/meal + shipping. Price is obfuscated on the website. I'd imagine that Gobble will struggle with the same things that every food delivery business in the world struggles with - low margins.

People just aren't willing to pay high margins for food that gets delivered. There is constant pressure to offer more food at lower prices.

Their most likely exit strategy is to build a brand strong enough that they can get a line of frozen prepared meals picked up by major grocery retailers or sign a licensing agreement to do something similar.

<comment><USER14> Thanks for putting that front and center.

My biggest issue with these services is that for a regular home-cooked meal, that is quite a premium for something where the portion size is quite often way too small or the ingredient quality isn't justified by the price.

I know I'm looking for something that may not be able to exist because of the razor-thin margins, but if someone came out with a service at the <$10 price point with decent ingredients and portions, and healthy (read: low sodium, low sugar, low processed-crap) options, I'd likely switch a significant percentage of my weekly meals to them.

As it stands now, it is just hard to justify at that price. But perhaps I'm not the target market.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> This strikes me as tech bubble stuff. There are already shops that sell you ingredients. And cooking is not that hard. In fact, part of the fun is spending time cooking, with friends. Also - most people in the world can't afford this kind of thing.

<comment><USER16> First world problems are still problems; this is "What's the most convenient way to deliver a home-cooked meal without dispatching a chef to cook it for you?", which is a thing that well-off professionals historically buy. Systemize the human labor there and it makes it affordable to more of the middle class while allowing people to cook for themselves, which at least some people want to do.

Cooking is not hard like reading is not hard: if you grew up doing it, you might not remember having learned it at all. The historical expectation that at least half the population grew up cooking has fallen apart, particularly among some social classes. I would not suggest contempt of business models which only succeed by helping more people learn to cook.

(Cards on table: can cook, do so rarely, would be very open to doing more _and_ very willing to trade money to decrease time investment required.)

As to the economics of it: doesn't strike me as having unit economics compatible with investor expectations but oh well capitalism happens -- if it does they make a bundle, if not they're sophisticated rich people who can afford to lose money while buying food for less-rich people at a loss. "Even the poorest Americans will have cooked food prepared by servants" was once science fiction, too. That business worked out pretty decently, modulo latter- day concerns that "Well maybe poor Americans _shouldn 't_ have their food cooked by servants."

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> ? At their $14/ meal price I can just order something healthy on SpoonRocket for a few bucks less, with almost instant delivery.

Why wouldn't I do that?

<comment><USER18> The price goes down the more meals you order their service is intended for people that would want to have "ready to cook" meals rather than an unplanned take-away.

They can offer more verity in their menus over time and some people actually enjoy cooking even if the majority of the work was already been done.

Their kits are also intended to be able to stored up to 5 days in refrigeration and up to 2 weeks if frozen which means you can use them on your own schedule which you can't do that easily with take-away or order-in.

Another important fact is that when you are cooking you can adjust the recipe yourself add or remove ingredients, over cook or under cook the veggies depending on how you like them, add or replace seasoning etc.

Oddly enough I don't understand why these types of kits aren't available in grocery stores I can go down to Marks and Spencer or Waitrose and get pre-cut veggies, meats, pre-cooked pasta/noodles and rice or whole premade meals including ready to cook steaks, fish, poultry, pasta dishes, pies, soups even deserts...

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I was a little skeptical about Gobble, but I used it when my wife was out of town at a conference a few weeks ago. It was pretty easy to do. Prep work is definitely the most time consuming part of cooking.

My only gripe is the amount of waste it generates. I definitely have a feeling of guilt with how much of the packaging gets thrown into the garbage. Gobble really needs to address this.

</comment><comment><USER20> I wish instead of: "we shop, chop and deliver to your door" on the homepage they modified the expression to "we shop, chop and drop it off at your door"

</comment><comment><USER21> On the plus side the meals do look quite good.

On the downside when I see such a business racking up silly valuations like this I see lots of bubbles floating around.

</comment><comment><USER22> I think Blue Apron has set the price ceiling on this sort of thing: $10/portion.

<comment><USER23> Blue doesn't do any prep work though. You gotta chop those onions yourself.

<comment><USER24> It's true, step 1 of a Blue Apron recipe can take 20 minutes. Green Chef does a lot of the prep and is only slightly more expensive.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Why do I lose interest in every project after 6 months? - <AUTHOR> It's like clockwork.
I'll get HYPER-interested in something, to the point that I can't stop talking about it or thinking about it nonstop. I go through 'buildout' if it's a project, 'level up' if it's a game, or even went down the road of DJing and playing in a band.
Each time, after roughly 6 months, I burn out and end up moving on to something new with little desire to pursue my last project.
I'm extremely worried about this as I've been working passionately on a new startup idea with some friends and we're nearing the 2 month mark.
How can I stay enthusiastic? <comment><USER2> To keep your "level up" analogy going...

The first few levels of a startup are EASY. You're GOOD at this stuff. Ideation, deploying prototypes, early design work, etc. You're GOOD at it. You blow through these levels like a pro and you get the emotional reward.

Then you hit the wall where you SUCK. It's working, but not as well as you've hoped. There are more questions than answers. The next level is a long ways away, so you don't get the "rush of success" for a long time. You're not even sure you can COMPLETE THIS LEVEL AT ALL.

So why not find a new game? Rinse, repeat.

The problem seems two-fold. You might have unrealistic ideas about what startups do. Second, founders fight through shit like this because their motivation is bigger than just getting the "level rush". What's your motivation?

There are all sorts of ways to "hack" yourself here.

1) VERY publicly declare that this project isn't a project-- it's your life.

2) Commit to your friends that you'll run a specific number of experiments (the ones necessary to prove out the model as worth pursuing).

Another thing to consider is to just embrace it. How many have you punted? My dad played bongos in a jazz band, drove a cab, sold veterinary drugs, did electrical work, etc., until he was about 35. He then went on to build companies and ended up in executive management for the last 10 years of his career. You may have to kiss a lot of toads to find your prince... And it MIGHT not be the right decision to force yourself into long toad makeout sessions if it doesn't feel right (okay, that's my best analogy ever).

<comment> X-Istence _clap_ that analogy was absolutely fantastic.

What I have found personally that keeps me going is knowing that other people appreciate the work I have done, so I release early and often in an attempt to get other people riled up as well and to also get them working on the project if at all possible. So number 2 is definitely a good point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> "Life is pain, Highness. Anyone who says differently is selling something."

Enthusiasm, like optimism, is a choice rather something that just happens to you. It requires a lot of forethought (what do I _really_ care about?) and continual maintenance. You need to spend time discovering and remembering the fascinating parts of whatever you're doing, and the end-results you're shooting for.

I was stuck in an awful job stocking a supermarket, with no alternatives I could find. I realized I had a choice about how I approached it, I could either mope around all day or find something I liked about it. I discovered my OCD side really appreciated looking down a whole aisle and seeing every can perfectly stacked with the labels aligned. It still makes me smile thinking about it, and left me enthusiastic enough to stick with that job for years, get through college and move onto other goals.

<comment><USER4> This is the perfect answer the original post. I wish I could close the thread and promote this all the way to the top.

I suffer from this same issue as the original poster and tried agency world to cure it. Projects rarely last long enough to get sick of them. However what really works is just finding something that makes you happy in whatever you are doing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I jokingly called it 'tass' (toddlers attention span syndrome), and I've had it since I was three.

Buying toys for me was according to my family the stuff of nightmares. I'd play with something for 3 minutes really excited, then see if it could be taken apart and if not toss it aside and never look at it again. And the ones that I could take apart suffered the same lot, only in bits and pieces.

It took me a long long time to outgrow that, I still have to be _very_ careful when I am exposed to something new and shiny to stay away from screwdrivers.

In software projects I have much the same tendency, as long as it is challenging, new and I can learn it's ok. But woe the day the last bolt is screwed on to the carriage, that's when I'm in real danger to lose interest. Building is great, maintaining is not, so I try to build things in a way that they are as maintenance free as possible (which is good anyway).

If the money would be the motivating factor (or the 'desire to change the world' as some other commenter put it here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1369566>), then it would be easy to keep going.

But for me the driving force is to learn, and it's hard to keep 'learning' the same stuff over and over again. So I try to frame my days and the things I have to do that are not exactly 'new' in terms of what I will learn from them, and if I can then I can usually do the job in a reasonable time.

If not, I have a tendency to make mountains out of molehills.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting. I really like the point about building things to be maintenance free. Good call.

The motivating factor for me is more in the 'change the world' idea, and I think that learning is definitely a key motivator for me. If I'm not learning, and I'm just "executing" what I've learned, I get stuck.

Can you give an example of how you've made things (preferably software!) maintenance-free?

<comment><USER5> I try to keep an eye out for a pattern: that I'm doing the same thing twice.

As soon as that happens I stop and I analyze the problem, if I can automate it completely I'll do it, if I can only automate a part of it I'll do that and then try to find a way to either get rid of the remainder completely, offload it to my users in some guise or other and failing that I'll pay someone some money to do it for me.

Concrete examples are for instance the system administration tasks involved in keeping 20 servers up and running without additional staff, scanning email in my inbox for recurring questions (people not reading the FAQ), which get handled by an auto-responder pointing them to the relevant page with a friendly, personalized letter and so on.

Support is inevitable, I put myself forward to handle the 'problem' cases because those tend to drive development, but if I can get away from boring work I'll do it.

Someone joked that I'd rather spend a day at automating something that costs maybe 5 minutes to do by hand, and in a way that's very true but it's gotten to a point now where I can run a huge website pretty much by myself with occasional help from a few users with 'elevated' status.

<comment><USER6> As one of my previous colleagues put it : "I'm a lazy developer. I will write a tool for anything that I must do manually more than once."

I think the hard part is to decide that it's better to spend several hours automating a 5 minutes manual task.

I'm often faced with repetitive tasks and I realize that it's wrong to do them, but it's not easy to say : "Ok, let's put my important work aside and automate this."

<comment><USER5> Another risk is that progress as measured to the size of the project is not linear, but asymptotically approaches '0'.

Real progress is still being made, but it is _much_ less visible later in a project than in the beginning.

So those of us that are motivated by being able to measure their progress on a day-by-day basis have a hard time to stay motivated later on in a projects life-cycle.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've always had this problem but a few months ago I borrowed a poster from my dad (career Marine, epitome of focused, determined and successful) and it's helped me keep my focus. It gets me out the door to run (I've never worked out before), it helps me pick up the statistics books I have (course I failed in college) and and it reminds me to do my best at work everyday. It's quickly becoming my mantra and maybe it will help you but you might also find it to be extremely trite so take this for what it is.

CONSISTENCY By George H. Allen (Only NFL coach to never have a losing season)

Consistency is the truest measure of performance. Almost anyone can have a great day, or even a good year, but true success is the ability to perform day in and day out, year after year, under all kinds of conditions. Inconsistency will win some of the time; consistency will win most of the time.

Consistency requires concentration, determination, and repetition.

To be at your best all the time, you must: Take nothing for granted. If you aren't "up" every day, some thing, or someone, will knock you down. Take pride in what you do. The things you do well are the things you enjoy doing. Take setbacks in stride. Don't brood over reverses; learn from them. Take calculated chances. To win something, you must risk something. Take work home. To get ahead, plan ahead. Take the extra lap. Condition yourself for the long run. The tested can always take it. Don't take "no" for an answer. You can do what you believe you can do.

PS…Celebrate after the victory!

</comment><comment><USER8> Find a customer whose hair is on fire. They won't let you lose interest until you solve their problem.

The problem is that your projects are things _you're_ interested in and you're obviously too easy on yourself. Do something for someone else. The meaning you'll be making together will keep you interested until you finish, no matter how long it takes.

<comment><AUTHOR> I definitely have those customers and although I am 100% CSR oriented to start, I end up snubbing them a few months in because they become so pushy.

<comment><USER8> _I end up snubbing them a few months in because they become so pushy._

You may not want to hear this, but you just answered your own original question: you lose interest because you don't care.

I can't imagine "snubbing" anyone, much less my own customer. And I know lots of people that would give almost anything for a customer. You may not realize it now, but the "pushy" customers are the best ones, especially when you're first starting out.

Go pursue some other passion. Leave the start-ups for those of us who really care about the people we service.

<comment><USER9> The haughtiness is really unhelpful in gaining insight from a dilemma that many people encounter to various degrees. He's mentioned that this issue is applicable to his endeavors in general, not just startups. People can be involved in business and startups for various reasons, not just a personal sense of ideological purity.

<comment><USER8> _haughtiness is really unhelpful_

Sorry if it seemed like that; it certainly wasn't my intention. OP asked a question and then provided some clear data: any attitude toward your customers is _your_ problem, not theirs.

 _People can be involved in business and startups for various reasons, not just a personal sense of ideological purity._

I believe that caring for your customers is necessary but not sufficient for _any_ business. I also believe that if one doesn't believe that, then they shouldn't be in business. Period. No "ideological purity" here, just basic functionality.

How long will you try to teach you child to walk before you give up? Ask that to any parent, and they'll look at you like you're from Jupiter. Then they'll give the obvious answer, "I will _never_ give up until my child walks!"

I feel the same way about helping my customers solve their problems. And if OP felt that way, his 6 month attention span problem would just disappear. That's all.

<comment><USER9> I'm in agreement with you about customers after reading the astute distinction you mentioned to Wheels (prospects vs. converted customers). Once you've curated a stable base of good customers you absolutely must tend to them and that relationship can be very enlightening.

My only issue with your reply to OP was that it seemed unnecessarily sharp in tone ("Go pursue some other passion. Leave the start-ups for those of us who really care") and addressed an effect ("snubbing customers") of his problem rather than trying to untangle the source of the problem itself (being addicted to inertia but lacking grit).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I have this same problem often - maybe not even six months. I have several techniques that seem to work to combat this well

1\. When you do have the enthusiasm for the project try to do the "dull" or "chore" work first. That way the fun and exciting bit will keep you going for longer - they lose their motivational benefits once they are done after all.

2\. Make sure you can come back to the project and work on it later - this way taking a two week break won't be fatal, and it is necessary to take breaks to refresh your enthusiasm for the project and avoid burnout. Some of this is design, some is management and some of it is attitude.

3\. Make promises to other people. I find it so much easier to finish something that I told someone I would finish for them, than something I want to make for myself. Be careful not to promise too much though...

4\. Learn how to force yourself to do work. I find when I start doing even a small piece of work on a project, a good proportion of the time the rest of the project will "draw me in" and I end up doing more than I intended.

Hope it helps. :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed, this is great advice. I tend to not do #1 because of my non-linear approach to problem solving.. which basically means I try to solve whatever I see as the biggest problem rather than the 'easiest' or 'most boring.' I'll try this one next week :)

On #2, I've definitely seen this happen for me but it's usually more like 2-3 months later. I wonder how I'd feel after a true two week break ala a vacation with no internet. I bet that would be phenomenal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Could it be a fear of success? Or of stretching outside of your comfort zone? Or of the long stretch of hard work after the bloom is off the rose?

You're better informed about your psyche than I am, but I suggest pacing yourself, staying grounded to the other things in life which matter to you in addition to this startup, and carrying it through to completion.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't know if it's fear of success, but I think the stretch of hard work is a good one. Perhaps it's also a result of an unrealistic roadmap?

i.e. I want A, B, and C to happen in X amount of time (hoping i can use that description w/ all the nerds here) and we're barely scratching the surface of A.

I think that accepting that it take 6 months to get anything decent STARTED is a good place to start :)

<comment><USER12> _I want A, B, and C to happen in X amount of time_

Perhaps this is your problem. If A, B, and C haven't happened by X, then what? I'd examine my reaction there if I were you. If you're doing something purely as a means to an end, and the end doesn't happen when you expected it to, then you're in trouble. I've found two things make a big difference here.

1\. Do something that isn't just a stepping-stone to a desired goal, but which you also enjoy doing for its own sake. It's ok if there are extrinsic goals too, as long as they don't dominate.

2\. Multiply your time frame by an order of magnitude. That is, accept that it may take 5 years to do anything worthwhile. It doesn't have to, of course, but psychologically the point is fundamental. If you're not ok with it, I'd try to find out why, since the answer to your question is probably in the vicinity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> There are many possibilities:

* After a few months, the hardest parts of the problem have been solved. Since your skill level exceeds the challenge, boredom results. See: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)>

* Perhaps you are not motivated by the actual task, but by the sense of mastery. Once you've mastered a challenge, you are satisfied because you've learned something about yourself: I can do that! The project still requires work to be done, but you're interested in pursuing some other new challenge that validates your sense of self-mastery.

* If you're cycling, perhaps you have a touch of bipolar.

* Perhaps "How can I stay enthusiastic?" is the wrong question. Maybe "How can I persevere when my enthusiasm inevitably wanes?" Expecting to always be enthusiastic is unrealistic.

<comment><AUTHOR> The last is definitely the case. It's just a question of persevering.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Same thing happens to me. After about a month it takes discipline to just continue. You start doubting the idea, thinking its stupid or wont work (mostly subconciously) and thats what makes you lose interest. My advice would be to keep searching out things that will make you believe (subconciously) that what you are doing WILL work. I do research, read up, make plans, etc.

If you find that this does'nt work. Maybe your brain is telling you something.......

<comment><AUTHOR> I definitely agree with you on the 'doubt' issue. Reading up on things, talking to customers, and other things like this tend to work for a short week or so, but really I've never find something to truly revitalize me on an idea.

The brain could be telling me something, but I would argue that many of the ideas were 'great' and nothing is going to be successful if you only see it through to 6 months :\

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I'm exactly the same way and it's been irritating me since I can remember. I think the issue for me is being so convinced initially that the idea I'm executing is my ticket to billionaire-dom, that by the time a product is built and the real work is required, finding customers, reality sets in that maybe your idea isn't as amazing as you once thought, lowering my level enthusiasm and making me less willing to really put in the effort to see if the idea has a chance.

I don't know how to fix it, but what has helped is waiting some time after I've come up with an idea to let whatever get-rich giddy emotions subside, allowing me to arrive at more realistic projections of how far an idea can be taken (with proper research of course). And like edw519 says, find a customer that is really interested in your idea. Having that validation from an already-acquired customer will probably give you the motivation to continue since your idea has been validated by someone other than you.

</comment><comment><USER16> It sounds like you are stopping at the first 90 percent.

"It is a cliché in our business that the first 90 percent of the work is easy, the second 90 percent wears you down, and the last 90 percent - the attention to detail - makes a good product."

— The Graphing Calculator Story <http://www.pacifict.com/Story/>

</comment><comment><USER17> Try doing two things at the same time. Let one be the one you are hyper- excited about, but that is not going to make money. Let the other be the "work" that you carefully plan through and slowly work through. You can change the other project every 6 months, but let the main thing just be slowly worked through.

<comment><USER18> I'm normally a big fan of your comments maxklein, but I would advise to exercise a bit if caution with this one.

I suffer from the same problem (haven't found a solution yet), and I've done the 'get started on something else', but I find that I get more and more sucked into the new thing, and the old thing slides.

If it can be organized ala Google 20% time, and make sure that the overarching goals don't get in the way, then I'd say it may work, but I don't think it is for everybody.

<comment><USER17> Obviously, it does not work for everyone. For me it works, because the second project is like a "hobby". Hobbies help.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is perfectly normal (or, at least, common). Okay, I have no idea if it's either of those things, but I know I get a very similar thing.

A few good ways to keep motivated are:

1\. Know _why_ you are doing this. If you have a clear goal in mind, you can motivate yourself towards that goal when the project itself is not motivating/stimulating/interesting (e.g. you've done the fun bits of the coding, and now have to do the non-fun parts that make it work nicely).

2\. Have a clear roadmap, with milestones that are achievable every few months (or some other finite period - I think we all have different 'milestone horizons' within which the milestone is motivating). It's hard to motivate yourself with an endless project. It's easier if you know you are working towards a certain feature, a certain number of clients, a certain musical piece played well.

3\. Do something else. The initial rush phase is great, and you can get a lot done in that time, but for the long haul you need to give yourself space from certain things. Make sure you're not doing the same thing all day, or spending all your free time doing it.

<comment><AUTHOR> The clear roadmap is something I've never been good at and perhaps this is a root cause.

For example, as a 'product manager' I have tons of big dreams for my product. Generally, it takes 2-3 months to get any solid prototype out there. Add on another 2-3 months of buildout to go from prototype to something people use and... by the time anything I've built in the past has reached 50k+ users, we're at least 6 months out and only touching the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the features that I want.

<comment><USER20> The big dreams for your product are understandable. But a roadmap won't help, it will just make you waste time on planning a future that you can't possibly plan.

There's another way.

Think of this exciting vision first. Then, instead of making a roadmap and starting years of coding to finally arrive at this vision (which will never happen, likely), start cutting away stuff from your vision. Cut away non- crucial stuff, but keep that 1 or 2 features that are exciting. Search for what makes this really exciting. You don't need picture uploads. You don't need 90% of the features.

Now build this core product. The core value. The exciting experience. And resist the urge to add stuff to it, instead cut more stuff out, even stuff you've already built, and keep improving this core thing.

<comment><AUTHOR> Peter, I'm doing exactly this right now :) And it's damn fun.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Don't try to overcome your weaknesses; that is the way of madness and frustration. But I'll give you a piece of advice: great strengths are great weaknesses and vice versa.

Therefore, rather than trying to be someone you're not, learn to harness your strengths and avoid your weaknesses.

Personally, I'm the same way. I'm a good project starter, but not a good finisher. Once I've gotten a project started, I'm ready to move on to something else. Guess what though? There are plenty of people out there who are great finishers, but can't start a project to save their life. Thus, they'd be my perfect partner.

That's what you have to do: harness your strengths, but realize that you're a human being. Rather than trying to be perfect, find someone whose skills complement yours. Then you'll be unstoppable.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good call here. I actually considered finding a job where I would just 'start' projects and hand them off :P So far that doesn't exist.

<comment><USER21> Sure they do. It's called R&D.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's the common creative's problem of: what you can imagine vs. what you can produce (aka "moving the goalposts").

When you first imagine a solution, of course it's great and inspiring and you want to dive in. But after time it becomes "work." Worse, your imagination can see more to add to the project - to make it even better! Meanwhile, the longer you work on one project your imagination starts to think up solutions to unrelated topics... and _those_ are now better because they're fresh.

The simplest cure - recognizing this is a natural paradox for the creative process. This will reduce the massive downer to comes from not chasing every dream and at the same time provide long lasting satisfaction through respecting the few you picked and stuck with.

</comment><comment><USER23> I really do feel your pain, as I have been through similar mental struggles before (and still do occasionally). One remedy I've found is to release a MVP or show your work to others, as it helps to reaffirm what you are doing isn't a complete waste of time. Launch early if you can and once people start using your it or you start making money, it's much easier to keep pushing forward. This one is more of a reminder to myself than anyone else but your product doesn't have to be absolutely perfect before you launch. Quality control is important but striving for perfection can be an impossibly long journey that can quickly lead to burn out.

<comment><USER6> I completely agree with this. I tend to be bored by projects when I don't release the stuff I'm working on soon enough.

Knowing that your product/service is relevant, because you got early feedback, is the biggest motivation factor which helps you not to lose interest in the long run.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> What do you mean "burn out"? Does this actually mean that you get to tedious parts and stop working on it, even though it's worth finishing? Or is it not worth finishing but you feel some obligation to 'finish' for its own sake?

The real question to ask yourself is whether reward_of_finishing * probability_of_reward > costs_of_finishing. If not, you're better off taking the lessons you've learned and moving on to the next project and cutting your losses. The important thing is to not lose sight of the actual goals/rewards that you want, and asking yourself whether your actions are putting you on an effective path toward them.

<comment><AUTHOR> By 'Burn Out' I mean literally stop thinking about it subconsciously. This can even be something that I _WANT_ to continue doing, but just don't feel any motivation.

A good example: I worked with a small team on a web project for a company I worked for. We sprinted sprinted to get it out there and it grew very rapidly. Nearly 500k uniques in 3 months.

For some reason, even though I was working on it every day until launch (roughly 6 months time) and VERY adamant about fixing things for the first 2 weeks or so, I eventually just stopped browsing the site, stopped reading users' posts, and stopped responding to e-mail from them.

I found something new and I ran with it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I think having other people to work with is your best leverage. With a group commitment you're working to support your team instead of a less tangible goal (it works for gangs, political parties and the military).

</comment><comment><USER26> Success is a marathon, not a sprint. Yes, not all times are going to be interesting, you may lose motivation, get tired or bored, have setbacks, and want to give up, but it is only when you keep going on, that you complete the race.

A clear idea of goals and self-discipline are what separate the extra-ordinary people from the rest.

But since you're working on a startup, sometimes it's important to know when to give up rather than pursue an unsuccessful idea. But I'm sure enough people have talked about this.

<comment><USER27> This is so true. We're going through this same problem right now [<http://techneur.com> for the interested]. We get unmotivated and get confused thinking that we are following the wrong path. When what we need to do is to just follow our small goal, which is to bootstrap. This is far harder than I ever imagined, and this is my third time around! First two were failures.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I was having the same issue for a while.

Here's how I resolved it :

Stop working 18hrs a day on project (even if it's a startup), find other hobbies, meet people enjoy your life but be very productive in your 6-8hrs dayjob.

The thing when you're too much involve in a project is that any deception, even something taht looks ridiculous will lead you to a lost of interest and motivation.

Take a breath, take your time. A project need to mature in your head it's not a rush, it's a marathon (I know it's already have been told thousand of times).

</comment><comment><USER29> I'm pretty much suffering from the same myself. I started to think that success stories of other people are probably doing more harm than good and I'll now stop reading when it looks as a success story. I need to _write_ a success story about me first.

</comment><comment><USER30> What would you work on even for free? I stay enthusiastic by working on the one thing I'm most passionate about in my whole life.

Look back through life and build your startup around what excites you the most, and you'll have better luck sticking with it.

<comment><AUTHOR> The only thing that's kept me coming back is 'user interface' design or just working with a designer on a really tough web problem. This is why I've focused on another web startup that falls into this area, as it definitely takes all of the 'favorite' pieces I have. We built a super quick prototype, fell into a lull for a month or two, and are now iterating and improving it. Unfortunately the iterations are taking longer than I had hoped, but it's still moving forward.

The problem I'm running into on this one is having 3-4 GREAT ideas to improve the software, but being stuck waiting for idea #1 from last month to be implemented. This may be a big piece of my motivation issue. Figuring out how to release things faster is key for me at the moment, I've even turned to coding to try to speed it up.

<comment><USER20> Was idea #1 really that good if you can't even motivate yourself to implement it?

Implement 1 idea. Then figure out why it doesn't work. Then change it.

As for all your other ideas, if they're better than idea #1, move on, if not, stick with #1.

<comment><AUTHOR> To clarify, I'm definitely motivated to implement it. I just want it to move faster ;) I'm not really a developer so every time I start coding I feel like a swimmer who thrashes in the water and moves about 3 feet while the other guys are gliding :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> How young are you? I blew through probably 15 projects in 4 different spaces and by the time I was a sophomore in college I had only completed 2. One was a c++ game, the other was a web site I ran for worms Armageddon.

Why did I get bored and quit? I had tackled the most challenging problems of the project (the ones that initially got me excited) and what was left was the non challenging stuff. Maybe you are similar, you enjoy and require steep learning curves and challenges. Maybe one day that challenge will become completing a project

you will make an excellent contractor or entrepreneur. If it's challenge you seek, you will find it

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm currently 28. I cruised through college because of the lack of 'real world' application and have been working for startups in NYC for the past three years.

I definitely am ambitious when it comes to challenges. Solving them does make me happy, but I am seriously feeling at the moment like my ideal job would be to sit in a room, have a bunch of budding entrepreneurs (or experienced businessmen) come to me with their problems, and spending an hour solving them!

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> I have a similar behavior with personal projects, and I don't really have any advise as to how to stay enthusiastic. But what I'm trying to do now is route around it, construct project so that they can continue even if I temporarily lose interest in the them. Which is basically making projects with other people. So even if I lose interest in the main goal of the project, I still have interest in helping my friends, who are continuing with it. You could say I'm trying to form my projects in such a way that the completion of it doesn't completely rely on my own enthusiasm.

</comment><comment><USER33> For me, it's that I simply lose momentum as the project drags on. To build up momentum if it's a software project, for example, release it to the public, get feedback, bring some other collaborators in.

</comment><comment> tomh- I have this every 1 month, still haven't found a solution for it. But I'm suspecting making a comphrehensive todo list with checkable items and a progress bar would push me through the end.

</comment><comment><USER34> That, grasshopper, is something you have to figure out for yourself.

<comment><USER5> There is something condescending about your comment but I can't put my finger on it.

<comment><USER34> Sorry, I don't mean it that way. It was a quick way of saying that you have to discover what drives you. Reading about how others do it may give you some insight, but you are not going to find 'the answer' on HN or anywhere else. Threads like this remind me of self-help books - you can spend all of your time reading about others, or you can start trying different things for yourself and see what works.

<comment><USER5> I think it was the 'grasshopper' that did it, it's funny in one way but it makes it seem like you're talking down to someone. He asked a very valid question and there is tons of really good advice in this thread, indeed, it may not be 'the answer' but it can help and 'you need to find it out for yourself' makes it seem as though that advice is worth nothing.

Self-help books have limited use they are too general, but the situation between HN'ers in the same profession as the OP is so comparable that it is possible that some concrete tips will in fact materialize.

Even I learned a lot from the answers in this thread and I really hope that such questions keep coming. No such thing as a stupid question.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree, there are tons of good suggestions here and although I'm sure I'll face this situation countless times again, the most positive thing that I've realized from posting here is that lots of other people have this same problem :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I have a job that lets me be this way. The development style is rapid application development. We spend 6-9 months on a certain module for a larger software suite, and once it is released we may enhance it, but usually we move on to building the next module. Its all part of the same overarching project but the needs of each specific module differ significantly.

The places you will find this kind of project are in emerging markets. The market doesn't know what it wants yet and you can help shape it.

</comment><comment><USER36> Conciously replicate the feelings you had when you started.

Your seemingly unlimited drive is not something providential, it is something you can 'conjure' up, by consciously shaping your every thoughts:

Try and go a day focused only on the most awesome outcome of your goals. Actually imagine and feel that outcome as if it already happened. Do this constantly and before you know it, you will suddenly have the same 'Hyper- interest' and motivation you had in the early beginnings.

Cheers, Edo van Royen

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Edo, I will try this. I completely understand and agree with the idea that I can 'conjure' or manifest this feeling in myself. I just need to figure out how to channel it :)

I'll give the 'awesome outcome' of the goals a shot.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Learn to have the discipline to work on things you don't have enthusiasm for. It will make you less dependent on your passion to build stuff in the longer term.

</comment><comment><USER38> You don't _have_ to (if you don't want). Take advantage of your natural inclination and create new things every 6 months. Find a way to make the "6 month plan" work, whether that involves selling a nascent business each time or if they can become passive income streams. I see little need to fight against your innate personality traits if you can get away with it, rather, you should be taking full advantage of them.

</comment><comment><USER39> For me its based on progress; if a project is going well and I am constantly being presented with new challenges it does not get boring. If that is not the case then (e.g.: not growing and no progress) then i quit. Quitting is not always a bad thing. I highly recommend a book called "The dip". It may help you understand when its time to call it quits on a particular project.

</comment><comment><USER40> I have a strong feeling you are giving things up at the moment when you feel you 'get it'. I guess the best advice will be to follow what Kathy said in her blog: [http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2006/0...](http://headrush.typepad.com/creating_passionate_users/2006/03/how_to_be_an_ex.html)

</comment><comment><USER41> I get the same problem. The burn out problem is mostly due to the fact that you 100% immerse yourself towards that issue.

One solution is not keep a balance between 3 different projects and allocate time to each if necessary.

By splitting your free time between the 3, you diffuse the burn out. That said if 2 of them feel right and one annoys you, move on.

</comment><comment><USER42> there are lots of great comments on this thread, so i won't attempt to re- iterate them ... the one word i would add is:

grit

anecdotally, one trait that all successful people i know possess is 'grit', which i define informally as the ability to buckle down and 'power through' seemingly tough/tedious/un-interesting portions of your work.

</comment><comment><USER43> Sorry if this has been mentioned, but I haven't had the chance or time to read all the comments but...It sounds like you are quitting when you hit The Dip

[http://www.amazon.com/Dip-Little-Book-Teaches- Stick/dp/15918...](http://www.amazon.com/Dip-Little-Book-Teaches- Stick/dp/1591841666)

</comment><comment><USER44> Have you ever been tested for ADHD? Hyper-focusing on one project to the detriment of other important commitments and being quickly discouraged after hitting the initial roadblocks are two of the signs. Do you consider yourself a daydreamer? Impulsive? Disorganized?

</comment><comment><USER45> You find something you're passionate about but ensure that people are counting on you to succeed. Once people depend on your success (family, cofounders, investors, etc) and/or your reputation is on the line, it can do a lot to keep you driving forward.

</comment><comment><USER46> have a look at this article by jason fried 37 signals

Getting Real: Release something today [http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/getting_real_release_some...](http://37signals.com/svn/archives2/getting_real_release_something_today.php)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Rama, I've read all of Jason's books and thoroughly enjoy them. My day job is in a 'rapid deployment' environment where we push out projects pretty regularly. We're also doing this on my startup but it is less 'rapid' because of the limited amount of time we all have.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> Having a hyper interest for 6 months is a feature not a bug. I see it as strength. In a span of 6 months you can contribute more and then later find some one who is excited about it, transfer it and move on.

</comment><comment><USER48> don't quit on something until you've seen it through, and if you do decide to quit on it, try to get some value out of it if you know someone that can take some of your old stuff to 100% completion and still own some of it, whatever that is.

This applies to a product, not so much a WoW account.

<comment><AUTHOR> Funny you mention that, my last 'project' that I got passionate about was returning to WoW (I played about 5 years ago) and it followed this same 6 month pattern.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> Read 'The Dip' by Seth Godin. Describes it exactly.

</comment><comment><USER50> are these projects related?

<comment><AUTHOR> Nope, completely unrelated. Could be a work thing (website) or a new startup (website or otherwise) or a musical venture, etc.

A few things I'm noticing I don't do after reading the responses in this thread and thinking alot are: 1) Setting reasonable goals to start 2) Communicate my goals clearly w/ the others involved 3) Don't spend every waking moment thinking about it

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Buy, read, and use "I Could Do Anything I Want... If I Just Knew What It Was" by Barbara Sher. Don't let its goofy self-help look deter you, because the design is horrible and the back cover is retarded but the book is quality, no- nonsense all the way through it. And because it describes you and your problem to a T. It will help you uncover the core issue of why you keep abandoning things.

It's more complex than "it just gets hard," trust me.

After that, read The Path of Least Resistance by Robert Fritz. Take notes. Think hard about it. Figure out if you're even working on something you love so much you want it to exist, whether you want to feel satisfied or feel engaged, and how you're misusing stress or rewards to keep yourself going.</comment>


"Web users getting more selfish" -- Jakob Nielsen - <AUTHOR> http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/mpapps/pagetools/print/news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7417496.stm

<comment><USER2> For a certain, made up definition of selfish. I think the data cited really means to say that "search engines are good enough that people prefer them over manually going to a likely starting point and hunting for relevant links". I can agree with that.

And there should be an automatic warning on any article that contains the phrase "beat Google".</comment>


Ask HN: What Are Outcomes of University Research - <AUTHOR>

If someone with greater depth of knowledge knows more, can you explain this to me.
I believe there are two major roles of a university, the academic side (teaching students) and the research side. If there is a 3rd or more, please list them.
On the academic side you have professors and counselors helping students earn their degrees and charge tuition, etc... On the research side there are grants and stipends and funding to make the research happen. What does that lead to? Is it mostly just public research that gets disclosed? Do they ever commercialize the research. Is there more to this that I am simply not grasping?
Thanks <comment><USER2> As a researcher you have a cycle of motivation. You need to publish papers to journals (semi-public) to get grants.

Grants lead both to more publications (again public) and patents (normally co- owned by you and your university).

Patents are then licensed by the university to companies to commercialize. Sometimes we academics decide to commercialize research ourselves, but more often universities license patents to government contractors who are supported by the initial grant-providing government agency.

</comment><comment><USER3> See here: [https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/technology/report/20...](https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/technology/report/2012/12/10/47481/the- high-return-on-investment-for-publicly-funded-research/)

While some of this foundational work was done in government labs, a fair amount came out of university labs.

The primary outcome of university research is validated ideas in the form of academic papers. 99% of those papers will be forgotten in a decade (and derided by cynics in hindsight as "useless ivory towering"). But the remaining 1% will push the world forward in meaningful ways. The main issue is that it's impossible to tell which projects will lead to that 1%, so funding agencies try to invest broadly. That's the optimistic view, at least :)

</comment><comment><USER4> A 3rd approach to University outreach:

Work placement programs/ mentorship/ networks Ex. Ivy League</comment>


Getting Started with Android App Runtime for Chrome - <AUTHOR> https://developer.chrome.com/apps/getstarted_arc

<comment><USER2> Having used ARC, I'm surprised at how well it works. ARC runs applications noticeably faster than my Nexus 5, and it runs amazing well compared to the Android emulator. I think in the next few months well see someone creating a plugin for Android Studio that will allow you to use it as opposed to using the standard emulator with Intel HAXM.

<comment><USER3> That would be great. One of the reasons I never got into android development is the unbearable performance of the emulator.

<comment><USER4> Same here, however I've recently been doing some android and if you Install Genymotion it's actually not as terrible.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The title is incorrect - it should remove the "OS" part. ARC means "App Runtime for Chrome", it is not specific to Chrome OS.

That isn't a trivial difference - it matters. This is Google bringing Android apps to Chrome - on Mac, on Windows, on Linux, on Chrome OS - and not just to Chrome OS. In other words, Chrome isn't just a browser, it also does things that have nothing to do with being a browser.

<comment><USER6> Where did you get the Windows, Mac, Linux part? All current ARC apps are Chrome OS only. (e.g.; Vine, Evernote) Is there a release date for ARC for Win, Mac and Linux?

<comment><USER7> From the link:

       To test your app, you need three things:

        Your APK.
        PC, Mac, Linux, or Chromebook on Chrome Version 41+.
        The ARC Welder app.

I successfully installed the ARC Welder app on my Macbook (haven't tried it yet though).

<comment><USER8> Is ARC Welder intended to be the official way to do what chromeos-apk[1] does? I have had mixed success with chromeos-apk. Some apps work flawlessly, others crash performing certain operations, and others crash immediately. It would be nice if ARC welder does it all right.

edit: I should have read the other comments first. It looks like ARC does exactly what I'd hoped.[2]

[1] [https://github.com/vladikoff/chromeos- apk](https://github.com/vladikoff/chromeos-apk)

[2] [http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/googles-arc-opens- up-...](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/04/googles-arc-opens-up-to- developers-runs-android-apps-on-most-desktop-oses/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> That is an unfortunate name for an API; most people these days know ARC as Automated Reference Counting, which Apple's Cocoa and Cocoa touch use to hide memory management.

<comment><USER10> The API targets Android devs. I doubt many of them particularly care about Apple's ARC.

<comment><USER9> There are many developers, as well as many software publishers who support both iOS and Android.

<comment><USER11> I would even go so far as to say people who only target or care about one platform are an extreme minority.

<comment><USER12> Generally, developers focus on a single platform (eg: iOS), and whomever hired them hires another dev to handle the each other mobile platform (eg: Android, etc).

In my experience, I've never seen a same developer work on both.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I was part of the original group of early access developers. If anyone has any questions regarding ARC feel free to contact me.

</comment><comment><USER14> Hope this doesn't mean that data collecting Google Play Services are coming to the desktop as well.</comment>


Ask HN: When do you NEED a co-founder? - <AUTHOR>

In the past, I brought in some friends who are really smart to help build out a product idea. Unfortunately, the initial flurry of dedication and output turns into a complete lack of long-term desire. There seems to be a general lack of entrepreneur interest in my friends.
I need to go out and meet new people to find someone who really aligns with the idea, is smart, and is interested spending the time long-term. Unfortunately, as an introvert, this is a daunting concept and not something I look forward to. I would need to meet new people, have pretty extensive conversations, and finally trust someone I have not already known for years.
There will be challenges building a product but I have not hit any big ones yet in this discovery/prototype phase. So then the question becomes, at what point do I truly NEED a co-founder? <comment><USER2> As soon as you run out of the ability to do an aspect of product or business development, that's when you need a qualified partner on board. Or, if there is a job that you simply do not want to do, you may want to bring on someone passionate for the position then.

It could be from the outset, if you need developer experience on board. It could be later, if you need a saleperson or marketing person. That would be more of an employee hire though. Basically, there are only so many hours in a day - there will be a point when you can't do it all, and you're hindering growth by trying to do so. That's when you'd want to bring someone on,</comment>