Wanted: Highly skilled tech workers, $100,000-plus salary, no college required - <AUTHOR> http://fortune.com/2015/05/13/devops-jobs/?xid=social_qz

<comment><USER2> Isn't this basic economics at work? There's a shortage of workers with a skill-set that is in high demand, therefore, the cost of the workers is high.

Eventually, more workers will acquire the skills and the salaries will adjust accordingly. We saw the same thing with network engineers twenty years ago.

<comment><USER3> I have to agree... I don't have a formal education, but have been in software development for almost 20 years now... With IT, software development, devops and systems administration it comes down to keeping up with the tech, and being able to get the job done.

I don't think the lack of people to fill said jobs is quite as bad as the article states... many of these roles have been 100k plus for a while, and the people stepping into these jobs are likely to be several years out of high school at this point, having gained skill and experienced.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> In demand now; but continuing beyond AWSificiation it will go away via containerization and AppEngification.

</comment><comment><USER5> According to the article DevOps is like the MCSE 15 years ago, I'm not sure how to feel about that.

<comment><USER6> I just wish someone would've told us we didn't need Computer Science degrees before we wasted four of the best years of our lives on something with negative value simply because we were trying to do the best for ourselves.

<comment><USER2> Take it from someone that didn't get a college degree: You didn't waste your time. I'm doing quite well in a technical track, however I'll be fighting uphill if/when I move into management at a large corporation. Given two employees with roughly the same ability to manage a group of people, senior management will tend to promote the person with the degree.

<comment><USER7> Yeah, another issue that isn't immediately apparent is that it is _much_ harder to migrate to other countries without a degree.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Anyone have a modern & short interpretation of the term: "DevOps"?

<comment><USER9> Doing the work neither Developers nor Support want to be doing.

<comment><USER10> This actually sums it up pretty well and it's also the cause for the shortage. A lot of developers don't want to learn all the tools that sysadmins and devops are using. And I suspect that many sysadmins don't know enough about programming.</comment></comment></comment>


Hints of tool use, culture seen in bumble bees - <AUTHOR> http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/10/hints-tool-use-culture-seen-bumble-bees <comment><USER2> Bees are cool. There are also solitary bees who make little homes in walls. I remember watching one pull a nail out of a wall.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f9mhC- low4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f9mhC-low4)</comment>


Kindle app for iPhone - <AUTHOR> http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewSoftware?id=302584613&mt=8&o=i

<comment><AUTHOR> Here is a screenshot.

<http://trailofjames.com/archive/images/iKindle.png>

</comment><comment><USER2> why did you submit this to hacker news?</comment>


Ask PG: What has changed since you wrote Hackers and Painters in 2004? - <AUTHOR> I'm thinking of buying your book, but since it is from 2004 I was just wondering if there are any key findings or events that would have dramatically changed your viewpoint on certain of the issues you write about, so I could bear that in mind while reading.<p>Maybe are you planning to release an updated version in the near future? <comment><USER3> As way of a cautious recommendation:

About a year and a half ago, I was stuck for a week away from home traveling for work. Searching for something to read while I was gone, I popped into an Atlanta Barnes and Noble and futilely tried to find some books which were on my Amazon wish list. Of the five or six I looked for, they didn't seem to have any, save for "Hackers and Painters" (which required a storewide manhunt to track down where exactly they had decided to shelve it).

I read it in my hotel room that night and spent the rest of the week enthralled by the thought of quitting my job and working at a startup (either my own, or someone else's). When I got home, I told my girlfriend that I was possibly in the middle of something, and would need to take the next few weeks to decide if I was about to upend my (our) life. She was understandably nonplussed by this discussion.

Fast-forward a few weeks and I managed to come back down from the ledge. It may have just been the comfort of home, or the general inertia of a content over-priviledged life; but I reverted back to my previous plans, and set aside the fanciful notion of slaying dragons and working at a startup.

So by all means, you should read it. Just be careful about your mindset when you do, lest you also be swept away by notions of ramen dinners and liquidity events. Like a call to the sea, it has the potential to plant itself in your mind and than drive you mad if unheeded. You've been warned.

<comment><USER4> What! That's sad. You're a victim of what I call "Everest Syndrome": [http://eliasbizannes.com/blog/2011/08/everest-syndrome-is- th...](http://eliasbizannes.com/blog/2011/08/everest-syndrome-is-the-biggest- crime-in-our-society/)

Startups in my portfolio at CRV (we're the guys that funded Twitter, Yammer, Millennial Media...) have plenty of cash and I think you'll make more money working in a startup _and_ enjoy life more.

There is no risk, because if the startup fails, you move to the next one. Silicon Valley is like working in a big company with multiple divisions: you may change 'departments', but you're still working for something where everything loosely aligns as the same goal.

<comment><USER5> There's no risk in leaving stable employment for a lifestyle that can ruin your finances and relationships, and leave you completely burnt out?

Startups can be huge successes personally and financially, but there's definitely risk.

<comment><USER6> No risk if you're a VC. Best case, you're net worth increases by orders of magnitude - worst case, you still earn a hefty management fee on all committed capital. If someone else spends five years of their life on a failed venture, its just one company in your portfolio.

Nothing wrong with entrepreneurship. I just find it grating when the benefits are expounded by people who take the exact opposite deal, in terms of asymmetric risk.

<comment><USER4> Not quite. If you are a venture partner and you don't produce returns on the fund, you're out of there. The entire partnership needs to show gains on the fund. In my experience, it's actually pretty easy raising money (either from advertisers, investors, or sponsors) but what's hard is ensuring you give a return on that money. You can measure the success of a venture fund not on how much money they raise the first time, but how much they've raised in total over successive rounds.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I just looked through a copy. There's not much I'd change if I were writing those essays today. Obviously e.g. "A Plan for Spam" is obsolete in the sense that the state of the art has moved way past such techniques. Ditto for "The other Road Ahead." But the rest I'd write much the same today.

<comment><USER7> Actually now that I think about it, there is one thing I'd change. In "Mind the Gap" I implied the reason people were upset by economic inequality was the model of wealth they learned as children. Now I suspect it goes deeper than that: I think humans may have a genetic predisposition to equality.

What made me realize this was going to Africa and seeing lots of animals in the wild. All or nearly all the big mammals lived in groups and cooperated to survive. It was clear that our ancestors would in their day have been one of these groups, also cooperating to survive (as hunter-gatherers still do in a few places), and that their cooperative inclinations were probably genetically preprogrammed.

If so then people's problem with inequality is not a learned behavior. It simply feels wrong to humans.

That doesn't mean they're right. The Monte Carlo fallacy feels right to humans, but it isn't. But it does probably mean that people are happier, all other things being equal, when there is less inequality.

Of course you have to balance this against (a) other, equally deeply held traditions, like not stealing, and (b) the slower technological/economic growth you get when you ban being rich.

<comment><USER8> Could you explain what it means for people to be 'right' or not 'right' about inequality? I'm referring to where you say 'That doesn't mean they're right'

If we're genetically constructed to feel unhappy about something, and we build a society that makes that thing true, then it seems as though we are manufacturing suffering, and we should seek to reduce it.

From what perspective can it be 'right' to knowingly maintain a society where the majority of people are guaranteed to suffer?

Also - isn't there a giant difference between 'banning being rich', and making it possible for a reasonable number of people to share in prosperity. There's plenty of evidence suggesting that the US was more prosperous when there was less inequality, and yet there were always some very rich people.

<comment><USER7> I mean this inclination doesn't imply anything about what economic policy should be, except in the narrowest sense that gratifying it will (all other things being equal, which they are decidedly not) make people feel better.

<comment><USER9> > I mean this inclination doesn't imply anything about what economic policy > should be

Isn't it disingenuous to infer that this inclination should not imply anything about economic policy? I would arrive at the opposite conclusion. Economics are sentiment driven by a huge factor. Robert Shiller's work in behavioral economics and his book Irrational exuberance has established and popularized this idea. Krugman's discussion of the unsuitability of BitCoin as a currency rests largely on the peculiar nature of human sentiment and behavior. Large income gaps are perceived by most people as unfair irrespective of the contributions by the wealthy. No one thinks that Bill Gates/ Edison made a greater contribution to social progress than Einstein/Gandhi. I don't think the association of the net worth of an individual to the contribution that they have made to society is very strong. Economies rewards people largely on the basis of demand/supply with I believe is a weak proxy for social contributions.

Perhaps you want to draw an analogy to say gay marriage where the popular vote might end up denying gay rights, but I don't think a similar argument holds in the case of wealth distribution.

<comment><USER10> > No one thinks that Bill Gates/ Edison made a greater contribution to social > progress than Einstein/Gandhi.

Um, I do.

<comment><USER9> I should have said most people, rather than noone. Bill Gates helped make the PC cheap by building a hardware independent OS that commoditized hardware. Edison has a fairly colorful commercial history. But the PC/electricity revolution would have happened with or without these individuals, there were enough competitors. The same cannot be said about Einstein. When Einstein published the General Theory only 2 other people were able to understand it. Virtually, all peaceful civil disobedience protests that we see all over the world from American Civil rights to the Tunisian revolution follow a template set up by Gandhi. Peaceful civil resistance is an action that was never really thought of as practical/possible before. Bill Gates is making substantial social difference via vaccines now, but I would not count his work at Microsoft in the same league as Einstein/Gandhi.

<comment><USER11> The physics community was already converging on the special theory of relativity when Einstein published it. All the signs were there --and had been for quite a while--, but someone needed to add 1 + 1 together and accept the implications. Einstein did that and his explication was very clear, making it immediately undeniable (which doesn't mean that it didn't take some time for people to acknowledge that). However, if he hadn't, one of dozens of others would have. The time was ripe and the evidence was clear.

      When Einstein published the General Theory only 2 other
      people were able to understand it.

This is an urban legend. There were dozens of people that immediately understood it and hundreds that understood it after some additional explanation. That doesn't mean they accepted it in the absence of experimental confirmation.

However, the General theory was a far greater achievement than the Special theory, because the idea of mass influencing the geometry of space-time was far less obvious and it may have been a decade before anyone else would have investigated that possibility. Nevertheless: someone else would have come up with it. Einstein was no greater than any of the other great physicists of the time, who each had brilliant idea. Einstein just happened to have one that became widely known.

<comment><USER12> Well, Einstein had a few great ideas, not one. Special relativity, general relativity, statistical mechanics, and energy = mass. He only really missed quantum mechanics. Newton and Leibniz come close, but none of his contemporaries.

But it is really off topic. Let's say Einstein and his contemporaries are more important than Bill, the guy who really made DOS, and the first few MS employees, but obviously the later group is a lot wealthier.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> <http://www.idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm>

Probably worth linking to here.

While I enjoy pg's writing and I think the essays convey a good message in spirit, I do think there's quite a substantial populist aspect to some of them.

I'm glad I read all of them, but if I had to choose, I'd probably get On Lisp in deadtree format first.

<comment><USER14> Interesting. Not only is this guy getting downvoted, but I have showdead on, so I can see that another person commented with this link and the comment got nuked.

This is not a troll, and it is not inflammatory. It is reasonable discourse and an opposing view. These kinds of things are required for intellectual honesty.

It's especially ironic because the post starts out with a quote from pg:

 _I actually worry a lot that as I get "popular" I'll be able to get away with saying stupider stuff than I would have dared say before. This sort of thing happens to a lot of people, and I would_ really* like to avoid it*

Whichever moderator killed that link, and anyone downvoting this guy - <USER2> quality discussion allows reasonable minds to disagree. Censoring it because it is about pg is perpetuating the very problem pg describes.

<comment><USER15> I also disagree with the downvoting as it goes against all the rules and very spirit of HN, but this whole area is kinda touchy. It's probably the biggest amount of beef ever in HN history. It spilled out into outright brawls in the comments more than once between pg and idlewords:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=982832>

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1048849>

Kindof hilarious actually. idlewords finishes by calling pg a "weenis".

<comment><USER16> "idlewords finishes by calling pg a "weenis"."

Yes I thought the crude insults were indicative of the quality of the post as a whole.

<comment><USER17> Did you not read the preceding paragraph?

Maciej was mocking Paul's use of the same name-calling he professes to despise.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I just reread a bunch of the essays. There is very little that needs updating (and later essays address this).

I get the sense that PG wrote the essays and that book so they could be read many years in the future. Call it a decade for the timely ones, and much more than that for the rest. A few of the updates would be along the lines of "This needs to change from the future tense." For example, this brief review of the iPhone from 2001:

 _With Web-based software, most users won't have to think about anything except the applications they use. All the messy, changing stuff will be sitting on a server somewhere, maintained by the kind of people who are good at that kind of thing. And so you won't ordinarily need a computer, per se, to use software. All you'll need will be something with a keyboard, a screen, and a Web browser. Maybe it will have wireless Internet access. Maybe it will also be your cell phone. Whatever it is, it will be consumer electronics: something that costs about $200, and that people choose mostly based on how the case looks. You'll pay more for Internet services than you do for the hardware, just as you do now with telephones._

</comment><comment><USER19> I put together this 76-point summary of Hackers and Painters on my blog: <http://www.rosshudgens.com/thoughts-from-paul-graham/>

</comment><comment><USER20> For those who don't know, Hackers and Painters is essentially a collection of his essays on paulgraham.com

The essays are great, read them.

<comment><USER21> To that extent, the answer to the OP's question is likely "See the essays I've written since _Hackers and Painters_ came out."

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> This book was an epiphany for me! A colleague lended it to me, I started because the title sounded interesting, but I was thinking "here's another cocky all-knowing hacker type giving out cool advice". Boy, was I wrong. I first read the title essay and the truth of it struck me so much I took the day off (not literally, just hid somewhere where I coulnt be found) and finished the whole thing. That was almost three years ago. I've given quite a number of copies as presents and observed similar reactions. I go back and reread parts of the essays every now and then.

A good/bad analogy is a good book (or the good book), most of the advice has _very_ long shelf life.

I created my HN account soon afterwards and applied for YC that winter (rejected). I haven't done much in all this time, though. Books can carry you only so far.

</comment><comment><USER23> I still recommend it and lend it to friends. It's mostly made up of essays from his website, so if you want to avoid spending money, you can get most of the book from simply reading the essays on his site. The age of the essays is not a good reason not to read them, however.

</comment><comment><USER24> The idea from the book that seems most obsolete to me is that a web startup founder could gain a competitive advantage by using Lisp. (Not that a Lisp might not be the best choice, but your competitors are more likely to be using it too, and if they're not they're using something much closer than they were in 2004.)

</comment><comment><USER25> I read it a few months back, it's still a good read. PG's blog posts aren't easily dated, as you'll often see posts from 5 years ago linked here on HN.

<comment><USER26> Same, though I wonder if his thoughts on languages has changed much, if at all.

I was looking at learning a new language and considered Lisp, but decided on rails because it seems to be the most common language for web-apps these days, and therefore it should be easier to find good Rails developers than Lisp developers.

I'm curious if PG feels the same way about using Lisp/Arc for business reasons vs. Lisp for technical reasons.

<comment><USER27> I wonder this as well. Experimentally speaking, Lisp does not appear to have been a great success. I still prefer it, but that appears to be a perennially minority viewpoint, not necessarily one always just on the cusp of winning.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Technology predictions are very tough. (Look at The Road Ahead - missed the Internet ahead) Anything that survived 7 years should be considered a gem that's beyond technology and more about the humanities. (I mean this in the sense of being non-formulaic)

</comment><comment><USER29> Links to buy/sample the book:

Amazon: [http://www.amazon.com/Hackers-Painters-Big-Ideas- Computer/dp...](http://www.amazon.com/Hackers-Painters-Big-Ideas- Computer/dp/1449389554)

iTunes: <http://itunes.apple.com/us/book/hackers-painters/id396767497>

BN: [http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/hackers-and-painters-paul- gr...](http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/hackers-and-painters-paul- graham/1100152833)

BN (nook): [http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/hackers-painters-paul- graham...](http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/hackers-painters-paul- graham/1022856986)

<comment><USER30> And for those who want to buy it in India:

Flipkart: [http://www.flipkart.com/books/9350230398?_l=CJHVEqJO3veuHytb...](http://www.flipkart.com/books/9350230398?_l=CJHVEqJO3veuHytbACc9dw--&_r=x1fI5ZJ1MfZUBFSjsB7eKQ--&ref=ae687673-22e7-4410-9819-fb098d08ab9f&pid=os33f9817e)</comment></comment>


Opting Out of Vaccines Should Opt You Out of American Society - <AUTHOR> https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/opting-out-of-vaccines-should-opt-you-out-of-american-society/ <comment><USER2> Wasn't this the early approach to HIV?</comment>


Hacking the most popular cryptocurrency hardware wallets [video] - <AUTHOR> https://media.ccc.de/v/35c3-9563-wallet_fail <comment><USER2> Great presentation. Highlights for those short on time:

\- Holographic stickers are worthless.

\- A modified Ledger can include an antenna and chip that will click the "yes" button when signaled.

\- It's possible to radio sniff the PIN from a Ledger Blue.

\- It's tricky but possible to install custom firmware on the Ledger without it getting flagged as unverified. Said firmware could pass a different transaction into the secure chip than the one you think you're signing.

\- It's possible to make the Trezor chip glitch and give you the 24-word seed and the PIN.

<comment><USER3> Response from Ledger : [https://www.ledger.fr/2018/12/28/chaos-communication- congres...](https://www.ledger.fr/2018/12/28/chaos-communication-congress-in- response-to-wallet-fails-presentation/)

nothing critical

<comment><USER4> [I'm no expert on hardware security]

This is a full damage contain mode PR article. That said, I do agree that what was presented doesn't mean all ledger's are compromised and or as vulnerable as claimed.

A few attack vectors have been shown that weaken the overall security: When you buy a ledger and you get a box with "tamper proof stickers" and installation software that "verifies the genuine hardware" you don't expect those features to be as circumventable as they are. If ledger knew they were bad/worthless they should have been informing their users about it / removing them.

Also the article states that:

> It is quite an unpractical scenario, whereas it might be easier for a > motivated attacker to install a camera in the room to look for the PIN > entry.

That's a scenario end users understand and can try to defend themselves again (cover the thing with your other hand). This video proves there is are different attack vectors no one was expecting that is harder to protect against.

> In particular they did not succeed to extract any seed nor PIN on a stolen > device. Every sensitive assets stored on the Secure Element remain secure.

I'm not sure they ever claimed that. When I buy a hardware wallet I want it to protect my coins. For me it doesn't matter whether they get stolen through stealing the private key, or through completely owning the wallet and sending coins to hackers when I think I am sending coins to my friend.

Also I am not sure about:

> This scenario requires:

> [..]

> Physically waiting in a side room with an antenna for the victim to enter > his PIN and launch the Bitcoin app.

Why does the attacker needs to be there physically? I don't see why this whole thing can't be automated on a raspberry pi that you shove above the ceiling (which is clearly harder to detect than a camera).

<comment><USER2> Nitpick: it's the Trezor that has the stickers. The Ledger comes with a printed note explaining that stickers are worthless.

<comment><USER4> fair point, I keep confusing the two.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Typical cryptocurrency hardware wallet is horribly insecure as far as typical requirements for HSM go, which is at least to me somewhat expected and understandable.

The reason for that is that such devices are primarily designed to move the key materialoutside of the effectively allways online client device and thus the typical HSM-style threat models are outside of the design scope.

This is somewhat understandable because designing truly secure HSM is borderline impossible and certainly not economically meaningful for most of the target market.

<comment><USER6> HSM = hardware security module [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_security_module](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_security_module)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Quick summary for those that can't watch the stream (to the best of my understanding):

0\. All units tested were easy to open up to access PCB.

1\. The security stickers are easily removed and reattached. (There have been clones created).

2\. A hardware implant could be created to remotely "hit" the "OK" button for transaction authorizations sent to the hardware with minimal $partcount.

3\. Ledger Nano S has an easy-to-access interface (e.g. with pogo pins) for its STM32 MCU (used for its insecure tasks). There is also a 'Secure Enclave" STM31. A compromised STM32 could send malicious transactions to the ST31. Unsigned firmwares used to be loadable, but not anymore. But the bootloader doesn't verify flash on each boot (after a firmware upgrade), instead verifying a space in memory. But STM32's memory map mirrors some addresses. So you can write to the mirrored location the constant it wants to see and load your own unsigned firmware.

4\. STM32 sends the firmware to the STM31 to verify it. But they had a workaround with compression and RAM to send the original firmware to the STM31, while running something else. Youtuber: LiveOverflow has further info on this.

5\. The Ledger Blue. Has a BT LE module. It doesn't have it enabled, but does have an antenna (on the PCB). With a USB cable as an antenna, they could sniff PIN input. They believe it was probably because the PIN input changes the colour of the button when pressed. They were likely sniffing the display _output_. 90% accuracy per input. They used AI with automated physical input to train.

6\. Trezor 1: Vulnerabilities to glitching attacks. They admit that they couldn't find any other vulnerabilities into it. Using an STM32 again. The Tresor protects against a formerly published UV-based security downgrade attack (Obermaier attack). They attempt to downgrade the Read-Out bytes to give them access (which are in flash). They knew based on how long MCU takes to boot from boot ROM and when application execution is to narrow down when to try to glitch. They used an FPGA to get the timing right (their timing is predictable). A multiplexer was used to switch voltages. Just glitch and see if they have JTAG access. Rinse repeat. Took 3 months to get a successful glitch. They couldn't read the flash, only RAM. Seed is stored in flash. So needed method to get seed into RAM. Upgrade procedure is designed to allow firmware upgrades without erasing seed. It does this by copying seed to RAM. So they would start the firmware process, then dump the RAM. Voila, seeds are plaintext in the dump. And the PIN.

They've built a Trezor glitcher (would require desoldering the chip and placing it in the device socket). They think an Arduino could be fast enough to do the glitch.

To protect against this glitch attacks, a passphrase should do it.

</comment><comment><USER8> I opened up the RSA SecureID token I had years ago. It had a glue poured inside until the whole thing was basically solid. I spent hours trying to pull bits off it and ended up snapping the board.

It's overly surprisingly to me something so simple didn't seem to be a feature in these devices.

<comment><USER7> That works against you. With the hollow devices, you can weigh it to see if there's a difference.

If it's full of glue, remove glue, add your implant and add enough counterweight so it weighs the same as the stock device.

<comment><USER9> > remove glue

It's supposed to be "potting compound", which is a form of epoxy, and if the right one is chosen it's very hard to get it off with anything short of fuming nitric acid. Combined with the microwires trick it can be made extremely difficult to get at the PCB without triggering the tamper detection.

See FIPS 140: [https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HERKv5...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HERKv5MloV0J:https://csrc.nist.gov/CSRC/media/Presentations/FIPS-140-3-Section-5-Physical- Security/images- media/physecpre18.pdf+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-b-ab) (google cache version because the US has decided to be a failed state for a few weeks again)

<comment><USER8> Thanks for that info. These devices are FIPS certified so I'd expect you've explained exactly what it was.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> To make sure I understand, these attacks only work if someone get hold of your hardware wallet (either before or after it's delivered)? So they are stil safe if you buy it directly from the vendor (and trust your delivery service etc.)?

<comment><USER2> The worst attack was against the Trezor; in that case, after your funds are on the device they could steal it, extract the seed, and steal your funds. Using a strong passphrase prevents this attack.

The Ledger Blue was vulnerable to sniffing the PIN entry by radio, but Ledger claims it's not usable in practice.

All attacks against the Ledger Nano required them to get access to the device then give it back to you.

<comment><USER11>
      All attacks against the Ledger Nano required them to
      get access to the device then give it back to you.

Presumably if you were planning to exploit these things, you'd blend in with the 90 third-party Ledger Nano S resellers on Amazon [1], offering a slightly lower price.

Doctor the devices to use predictable private keys, sell at a loss to be the cheapest seller on Amazon, then grab all the bitcoins at a time of your choosing, because you know the private keys.

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer- listing/B01J66NF46/](https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B01J66NF46/)

<comment><USER2> That'd be devastating but so far none of the attacks have managed to make the Ledger create predictable private keys. You'd have to hack the secure chip to pull that off.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> this is why the yubikey has two processors? one secure one not?

<comment><USER13> The Ledger also has two processors and that added very little security. Bad firmware on the insecure chip could completely fool the user, because the secure chip didn't have access to any of the peripherals. Thus the bad chip could ask for a different payload to be signed (or could skip verification entirely) and so on.

<comment><USER2> Well it added some security, they weren't able to just extract the seed and PIN like they did with the Trezor. Instead of immediately stealing funds they'd have to return the Ledger to the user, and a careful user could check the signed transaction on another device.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Dupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18771987](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18771987)

An interesting topic nonetheless. I dunno why people put such faith in tiny devices less known than an offline airgapped piece of x86 hardware.

<comment><USER14> Since the video wasn't available yet when that was posted, we've merged the on-topic comments from there into this thread.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> offline entropy. only truly safe way to generate keys

<comment><USER16> Try computing ECDSA by hand and we'll talk.

<comment><USER2> Instead just generate the word list, which is what you need anyway to put your handmade key into the hardware wallet. Pick the words by some truly random method, like Von Neumann coin flips or picking words out of a hat. The last word is (partly) an 8-bit checksum made by cryptographic hash of the other bits; the easiest method without using a computer is probably just to try different words in the hardware wallet until one works. With the Ledger at least you'll have to re-enter the first 23 words with every attempt, so on average you'll be inputing 128 * 24 = 3072 words; at ten seconds per word it's 8.5 hours of focused effort.

<comment><USER17> I'm confused. How is it not 128^24?

<comment><USER2> All you're doing is using the same 23 words each time, and then finding an 8-bit checksum to match.

(Each word is actually 11 bits of entropy, so the last word is 3 bits of entropy plus an 8-bit checksum on all the random bits. You could either determine those 3 random bits in advance and narrow the list to the 256 words that match those 3 bits, or just pick 23 words and randomly pick from the full list for the last word until one works; this is a bit simpler but risks having to try even more than 256 words.)

<comment><USER17> Ok, I got it now :)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Sift – a fast and powerful open source alternative to grep - <AUTHOR> http://sift-tool.org/info.html <comment><USER2> This looks really good, but I'm always suspicious of extraordinary benchmarks with no explanations. What about sift makes it so much faster, than, say, ag? Ag already seemed to be decently optimized, so I'd be interested to know what the breakthrough is.

</comment><comment><USER3> And where's the source?

Edit: Here it is: [https://github.com/svent/sift](https://github.com/svent/sift)

</comment><comment><USER4> "a fast and powerful"... Couldn't you find a better naming? All newly tools, languages, etc... are: "fast, powerful, robust", but at the end of the day, it still sucks.

</comment><comment><USER5> no brew, no love

<comment><USER6> No brew, submit a pull request?</comment></comment>


Philanthropist, Family Man, Sex-Toy Tycoon - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/07/sex_toys_and_the_recession_a_detroit_entrepreneur_who_succeeded_against.single.html

<comment><USER2> I may have a 12-year-old's sense of humour, but this is some damn fine copy writing:

[http://www.shopinprivate.com/inexpensive-travel- shaver.html](http://www.shopinprivate.com/inexpensive-travel-shaver.html)

<comment><USER3> I wonder if that's a genius bit of marketing for "embarassing" products? Lots of things that people could be embarassed about buying/caring about (men shaving/waxing, dildos, etc), these products can easily be bought as a joke, as a gag. It's socially OK to get a "joke dildo" (just look at all the hen party stuff). You can sell a real dildo as "joke" ( _wink wink_ ). Make the whole purchase flow as if it's a joke and gag, and you short circuit people's social embarassment and shame.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> How many of you clicked right on over to shopinprivate.com upon reading this article? C'mon... admit it!

I, for one, was impressed with the site. It's the right mix of frankness, humour and, well, given the subject matter, titillation. Well done.

</comment><comment><USER5> The site has a quality to it that the design world would frown upon, a roughness closer to tabloid design than Apple.

I wonder if this "plays better" with some demographics? Feels more honest and less highfalutin?

I've been wondering about these sorts of design questions (e.g., is "bad" design sometimes good depending on your audience) since 2007's SXSW where there was a High Class vs. Low Class Design panel, but while the panel raised some interesting questions, no answers were given and no data was cited...

</comment><comment><USER6> I was expecting this to be about Adam & Eve. -- Sex toys being sold from a rural NC town, where they are the #1 employer.</comment>


RIP Apple MacBook - <AUTHOR> https://sheep.horse/2016/11/rip_apple_macbook.html <comment><USER2> Wow, sheep.horse is my site. I never expected it to reach hackernews.

I wrote "RIP Apple MacBook" in reaction to the barrage of over-the-top criticism bandied around in the wake of the MacBook Pro announcement. A lot of the complaints seemed ridiculous to me, I wrote this piece as my attempt at Swiftian satire.

For the record:

* replacing function keys with the touch bar is a great idea, a real step forward in usability

* MagSafe is a great loss but possibly made up for with standard charging ports

* No HDMI or SD port, at worst a minor inconvenience

* Thinner and lighter - I travel with a 2013 MacBook Pro everyday, there is no such thing as too light.

I am not in the market for a new laptop but the new MacBook would meet all my needs perfectly. Expensive though.

</comment><comment><USER3> Warning: this is satire. (I know a lot of you have difficulty with the concept.)

<comment><USER4> Haha yes, it is shocking to see all the people taking this so seriously. If I am not mistaking there is still a version without the touchbar right? What is the big deal?

<comment><USER5> The version without the touchbar still requires a bagfull of adapters (which clearly nullify any size benefits), and has no magsafe.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > Gone is the fantastically useful SD Slot enabled the people who still use > discrete cameras to occasionally transfer photos.

This is the only thing the author really didn't get: the SD slot is for Raspberry PI.

<comment><USER7> And professional (or hobby) photographers!

<comment><USER8> Top-end 'pro' DSLRs primarily use CFast cards with SD only as a backup or omitted entirely.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Randomly found this article, so shared since it's relatable. I find it a bit crazy the new MacBooks cost more and require a $15 adaptor for many basic things...

I get that tech changes over time but seems crazy how fast ports keep changing and having to reinvest in buying all new things to work with it or adaptors if whatever you buy doesn't natively support the newer stuff.

Then on top of that Apple solders everything. So no ram or storage upgrades after your purchase. Seems like they are try to turn the Mac into just another iPad.

iPad is cool but more content consuming. I feel like there pro products are starting to lack.

Then ram is limited to 16GB. More than enough for most of the population. But be super useful for devs running multiple VMs testing things. Idk I like macOS a lot, so it breaks my heart a little bit that it seems like the Mac is being turned into just another client.

<comment><USER9> > How ever will we maintain our 18000 lines of code per day average in vi now? > The situation is intolerable.

It sounds a lot like satire to me.

I think the new MBPs are a great step forward. Four ports that can drive an amazing amount of things with ease. This makes these machines much more flexible than anything that came before it.

Touchbar seems like the logical first iteration in the future of keyboards.

<comment><USER5> Professionals don't usually look down at their keyboards.

I also use my laptop for videogames, and I'd hate to have to pause and look down to find F4/F5 instead of using touch typing (ironically named, nowadays).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It was really good up until the end.

"I am throwing out my 3 year old MacBook and will be buying a Inspiron forthwith."

He's implying that all other laptops are a joke, however the Dell XPS 13 and HP Spectre both comparable to the Macbook Pro in features, styling, weight, etc.

<comment><USER11> Except in OS. The new Windows 10 is ....

<comment><USER12> The OS is a matter of taste. After 8 years of Linux and macOS I switched to Windows 10 and I find it great so far.

<comment><USER11> You don't have issues of force upgrade, reboot every week?

All of my linux desktops/servers have system uptime measures in months and few in years.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Good riddance to function keys. They're slowly being pushed out of reach on many computers but my fairly new PC laptop still has sysrq and break keys. That's pretty objectionable.

<comment><USER14> If you're referring to the 'Fn' functionality, I totally agree - I'm not even sure what any of those are used for on OSX. If you're referring to the keys themselves, which control things like volume, media playback, and brightness, as well as offering a very convenient shortcut to the Launchpad (which I personally use frequently), I find them incredibly useful.

I can see some uses for contextual keys, but I can also imagine some pretty annoying inconveniences with this implementation. For example, if I'm in an application that 'takes over' the function keys, is it possible to still access media playback controls? Do I have to switch to whichever app is currently playing audio to access them? Is it possible to disable the contextual keys altogether and have a static, traditional set? Or is there a hotkey to toggle between app-specific and 'global' function keys?

<comment><USER15> As best as I can tell. While playing audio an icon comes up you can tap to open up audio controls.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Unsure if satire or not as most of the points made are perfectly valid.

</comment><comment><USER17> (Complete tangent, but isn't that a beautiful domain name?

How does one go about getting arbitrary names like this these days?

<comment><USER18> It's one of the _many_ new top level domains (.ninja anyone? . vodka?). Any decent registrar will register one for you. I can recommend iwantmyname.com, but there's plenty of others. They have a list here: [https://iwantmyname.com/domains/new-gtld-domain- extensions](https://iwantmyname.com/domains/new-gtld-domain-extensions)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> > Gone is the wonderful HDMI port that enabled you to display several screen > modes, none of which matched the native display

Replacing the port hasn't solved that problem, though. A very common port that people struggled to configure has been replaced with an uncommon port that people struggle to configure.

<comment><USER15> A _now_ uncommon port.

<comment><USER19> A port that is unlikely to be common for the expected lifetime of this machine. I very much approve of adding USB-C ports, but I think the removal of HDMI happened too quickly. If, in three years time, most TVs and monitors have USB-C ports that's one thing. I suspect that what we'll actually see is a large number of dongles for years to come.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I dont' buy that. A serious VIM user will have <CapsLock> mapped to <Esc> anyway.

</comment><comment><USER21> I'm pretty sure this is satire ...

</comment><comment><USER17> The one thing I will give the new MBP is losing the function keys.

That its not faster nor better than the old MBP I already have is why I won't be buying one though.

</comment><comment><USER22> _How ever will we maintain our 18000 lines of code per day average in vi now? The situation is intolerable_

Oh, I dunno, by pressing Ctrl + [ instead?

<comment><USER14> Yeah, that's as easy, quick, and memorable as pressing ESC.

I realise there are alternatives - I personally have caps lock mapped to escape, but I'm yet to get into the habit of using it - but that's not really the point. The point is that ESC _is_ in common use, probably enough use to justify a real physical key on the keyboard, unless there is a reason to remove it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Extremely fast laptop? Did Apple GHz and Apple GFlops gain in value when I wasn't paying attention?

<comment><USER24> GHz is only the clock speed, and only one of the factors related to processing speed. So it is entirely possible that they gained value. GFlops is processing power, though.

<comment><USER23> Whoosh

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> control + left square bracket

</comment><comment><USER26> I know this is satire, but I really don't get the snark. All the claims are pretty valid imo. Satire or not, but having 15$ adapters for EVERYTHING simply cannot be seen as anything else than a massive fail and nuissance. HDMI is one of the features I use most on my MBP and tbh I would probably have to buy a new HDMI adapter every other month because I would likely loose it on a regular basis.

So all in all I actually agree with everything stated in this article, despite the obvious snarky and satirical tone. Pretty sure that apple is going to kill their laptop game with this MBP bullshit move.

<comment><USER15> But we're heading towards a future where Thunderbolt 3/USB-C can do everything. It's like complaining about HDMI replacing VGA, or USB A replacing an inbuilt CD drive.

<comment><USER26> Yeah, but why not wait till the day where accessories are actually sold with a USB-C to kill off the alternatives? Why not start out with just a few USB-C ports in 2016, and then when the market is matured enough, you kill off the unused ports?

The only way this move makes sense is in the scheme of apples 'proprietary lock in' strategy where they try to force the user to stay in the apple eco system with bullshit like this.

<comment><USER27> How is there lock-in? Every new PC sold has USB-C as well.

<comment><USER26> You don't think that there is even the slightest chance that the decision to use FB3 / USB-C is based on the fact that consumers would have to replace their entire collection of USB accesories?

<comment><USER27> No , I don't. Nobody would pay 200$ for a new external SSD just to avoid the adaptor. For anything with a cable, you can also just replace the cable.

And, most importantly: Apple barely makes any money from the sale of peripherals. Their own products have mostly moved to bluetooth anyway.

I can understand people who don't like the switch, although I tend to disagree. But the idea that they have a profit motive in doing so I find absurd.

I've also seen it all play out before:

"I'm a professional, I need a floppy drive!", "Amateurs may be ok without a CD-drive, but I'm a professional", "They're just trying to push their WLAN base stations, it'll never catch on. Professionals like me need a real network".

<comment><USER26> > Apple barely makes any money from the sale of peripherals.

Well that is going to change now, since everyone and their mom now needs a few extra USB adapters + USB SD card reader + HDMI adapters etc.

> "I'm a professional, I need a floppy drive!", "Amateurs may be ok without a > CD-drive, but I'm a professional", "They're just trying to push their WLAN > base stations, it'll never catch on. Professionals like me need a real > network"

You don't think that having to use an adapter for something as generic as a USB thumb drive will kind of be an obstacle in the day to day business of the casual user?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Knife Maker - <AUTHOR> http://thisismadebyhand.com/film/the_knife_maker <comment><USER2> I'm torn between "This guy clearly enjoys his work, bully for him." and "The handmade movement is an extravagantly wasteful alternative to a factory in China to give rich white people an opportunity to demonstrate their social superiority over people who use functionally equivalent objects produced in an efficient fashion." (c.f. organic food, fair trade coffee, etc etc. This topic makes me positively Marxist. There was a time when only wealthy folks could afford goods. Capitalism happened and now everyone can afford goods. This _really discomfits some people_ , so they get very creative at inventing reasons why the goods they are using today are the right goods and the goods they were using ten years ago are now the wrong goods since poor people now have access to them.)

<comment><USER3> So you're saying that fair trade coffee benefits "the white man" rather than the producers in the third-world country? That's exactly the opposite of what fair trade means.

Also, hand-made isn't fighting against capitalism, it's fighting against mass- production, sweat-shops and machine-people jobs like the ones portrayed on Chaplin's _City Lights_ or even Discovery Channel's _How It's Made_.

<comment><USER4> No, but the price difference between buying normal and fair trade (as a consumer) is much larger than the price difference between the underlying coffee crop used in each.

Tim Harford wrote about this: [http://timharford.com/2008/04/business-life- fair-trade-or-fo...](http://timharford.com/2008/04/business-life-fair-trade- or-foul/)

In some cases, he says, fair trade is 10X the margin!

Fair trade exists to segment the market and collect more consumer surplus (more than it exists to improve conditions).

<comment><USER5> Also, the Fair Trade people will only certify certain business structures (they're really big fans of cooperatives), leaving a number of small family- owned businesses out of their world-view. Not that cooperatives are bad or anything, just that it's kind of a narrowing thing to do. They're opinionated. You may or may not agree with all those opinions.

Fair-trade coffees are also subject to adverse selection. The really good beans can be sold to coffee fanatics on their own merits, at a price above generic fair-trade costs, leaving the inferior beans to be branded fair-trade.

This isn't to say Fair Trade is _evil_ , just that it's... limited and has a few issues, and it's probably better these were discussed rather than covered up in the name of promoting an abstract unspecified good which may or may not actually justify the price premium. You may get better results by buying normal and giving the savings away.

<comment><USER6> > _You may get better results by buying normal and giving the savings away._ > //

Kinda like beating people up and then paying their hospital bills? Nice.

<comment><USER5> Yes, because buying something from a non-fair-trade coffee farm is "kinda like" beating up an employee. In fact, for each dollar you spend on any non- fair-trade coffee farm, the owner not only whips an employee, he makes fun of the employee's daughter and calls her ugly. They'd all be better off if you didn't spend any money on coffee at all. Also this is true of every coffee farm everywhere in the world, except those few saintly coffee farms certified by the experts at Fair Trade, who always thoroughly research and monitor every operation and all sales of fair trade coffee to make sure that there's never any abuse or fraud ever.

... Sorry. Cause-and-effect doesn't actually work that way. A facile equation of non-fair-trade spending and employee abuse does not meaningfully contribute to understanding or remediation of the many and varied problems facing the many and varied nations of the developing world today.

Please. Can't you come up with a more meaningful, nuanced critique? The third world deserves it.

<comment><USER6> There has been ongoing evidence of both child and [child] slave labour being used in chocolate production [in West Africa]. For example.

> _coffee farms certified by the experts at Fair Trade, who always thoroughly > research and monitor every operation and all sales of fair trade coffee_ //

Research it yourself; and that's the Fairtrade mark (I've not personally researched other fair trade certifying bodies). I did. What I found was a rigorous system of monitoring. Once a firm has been well established and proven to be providing the proper care to their employees, providing safety equipment for example, I think they only send a person to inspect every 3 years - but, like I said that's after a long history of passing the rigorous testing.

Never any abuse? Doubtful, there's abuse in countries with strict labour laws that obviates (or should) the need for fair trade certification.

So then we come back to my metaphor (you understand the term and function presumably, even though you used it as a direct statement). I don't see why buying a chocolate bar should have me being part of a supply chain that includes child/slave/below poverty labour and abuse of the workforce (like spraying crops with pesticides when workers are working on them). Nor do I feel that we're in such a state of poverty as a species that we need people to be worked hard without access to sufficient funds to cover basic health and education needs.

So, you feel Fairtrade fails? That we shouldn't support people working out of poverty by preventing multinationals working for us from offering below subsistence prices for crops? That we should exclude people from getting educated and staying healthy in the name of greater profits for wealthy capitalists?

You _appear_ to be worked up about my metaphor being imperfect; I couldn't care less about the metaphor. From everything I've seen Fairtrade works.

I've seen it before, it amazes me really, that HN has railed so hard against those that are trying to outlaw exploitative labour practices. Perhaps there are too many people here making a profit off electronics put together in Asian factories by underage workers who eke out their existence living amongst toxic chemicals working hard every day to remain in poverty?

\--

<http://www.fairtrade.org.uk/producers/default.aspx> [http://www.fairtrade.org.uk/business_services/product_certif...](http://www.fairtrade.org.uk/business_services/product_certification.aspx)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This series really got me thinking about the programmer as a craftsman or an artist. I know pg has written about this before, but I felt the connection for the first time as I watched these videos. I really empathized with these guys: the obsession, the passion to perfect some skill, wanting to create utility for others, the risk of failing or looking crazy, the excitement of using something you've built, chasing perfection. It all clicked for me. I think we've all caught the same bug, in some way.

Check out the other video in this series about a distiller: <http://thisismadebyhand.com/film/the_distiller>

All in all, this series is really beautiful and really well done. I'm looking forward to what's to come.

<comment><USER8> Great site. Even the HTML looks like it was made by hand, except the weird obfusticated javascript at the bottom.

Edit: it looks like he is using expression engine for the site.

<comment><USER9> i noticed that too. it builds the contact link, so the obfuscation is to hide the email address from spammers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I don't totally get the thought that handmade is always better.

Specifically, reminds me of a skit from Portlandia (IFC) about hand made light bulbs - <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P85vZpYF3Yg> .

<comment><USER11> > I don't totally get the thought that handmade is always better.

This. I live in a 3rd world country (Brazil) and see a lot of truth in what you say. This film talks about art, not about consistent production of quality.

Take a man with passion, resources, intelligence and immense dedication and he will produce a work of high quality; doesn't matter if it is shoes, painting, engineering, suits or knives.

But it just doesn't scale. You won't find many more people with the same skills. You won't be able to produce as much as 15 robots in Germany. And you also need an extremely up-scale market for your product (NY food scene, in this case). And you also need very efficient marketing (in this case a photographer to introduce him to the chefs community).

Bottom line: this guy is like a panda living in a extremely rare and delicate niche environment. Once the NY food scene vanishes he is toast. Find someone in India or China willing to do the same for 1/10 th of the price and he is toast. Have smarter knife making robots in Germany and he is toast. Any tiny little perturbation can get him out of the market.

There's a reason why industrial revolution succeeded. There's a reason why families of hundreds of years of pottery makers in India are going extinct (lighter, cheaper and uglier plastic bowls). There's a reason why my wife's father gave up on beautiful handmade carpentry. The reason is that ugly but cheap and good enough is what almost everyone wants.

<comment><USER12> * cheap and good enough is what almost everyone wants.*

The key word was almost.

Some people are willing to pay much more for something that is hand-made by a craftsman, even when there is something that is as good (or even better!) made by a factory. Their willingness to pay goes up dramatically if the craftsman is well known and signs or stamps his work, and can also go up if the craftsman in some engages directly with the buyers and the buyers can get to know the craftsman. Many value the authenticity and the connection to the craftsman. Some, in the right context, value being able to show the object and say "This was hand-crafted by xxx".

That is why, even though swords hardly ever see practical use anymore and you could get a machine to manufacture a sword to high standards you still have a few skilled craftsmen making a living hand-forging swords. Similarly, you can get software to play Go for free, a cardboard Go-board that works well enough for $25, and a decent bamboo machine-made set for under $100. But there are still plenty of people paying substantially (sometimes _very_ substantially) over $1000 for a hand-carved Goban made of kaya wood.

I do not think this trend will change any time soon.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> These are nice knives, but is this not also a really slick piece of lifestyle marketing?

Also, these knives are quite expensive. I'm not so sure if they are really up there with the handmade japanese knives[1], seems like theres a bit more to it than just sharpening a piece of hardened stainless?[2] Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[1][http://www.japaneseknifecompany.com/KNIVES/LAMINATEDSTEEL/JK...](http://www.japaneseknifecompany.com/KNIVES/LAMINATEDSTEEL/JKC63LAYERDAMASCUS/SANTOKU160MM.aspx)

[2][http://www.japaneseknifecompany.com/VIDEOS/KnifeMakingProces...](http://www.japaneseknifecompany.com/VIDEOS/KnifeMakingProcess.aspx)

<comment><USER14> He's doing stock removal rather than forging (buys steel stock, cuts, shapes, and sharpens it).

<comment><USER15> The only interesting part of these knives, IMO, are the pins (which he sources from someone else). In addition to merely being stock removal, it's pretty lame steel.

I far prefer Global (<http://www.global-knife.com/>) for mass-produced knives, and Kramer (<http://kramerknives.com/>) for custom kitchen knives.

<comment><USER13> Global knives are good, I've got some, but apparently they reduced the proportion of molybdenum in thier alloy a few years ago making the cutting edge more brittle and therefore requiring more frequent and intensive sharpening.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is the most inspirational/life-changing video I've seen all year. I really think that there is a huge amount of stuff that we could start building or making locally, individually with skill, craft and dedication.

I would love to be able to work with my hands in a workshop, learning to make unique and masterful things from a master craftsmanship instead of sitting for 8 hours a day in the office dealing with things so abstract that they disappear when you switch off the electricity.

<comment><USER16> So do it.

<comment><USER17> I imagine that he can't afford to lose income for the time it would take to train.

<comment><USER12> And worse,there is a good chance his income would be much lower than currently even after he finished his training.

With that said, I used to go to some of the SCA meetings while I was in college. I met more than one excellent craftsmen that did their crafting on the weekend while maintaining a "normal" job during the week. Some made a decent second income off it.

You can do both.

<comment><USER18> Here's a shameless plug for a friend of mine. Of course he is more interested in art than functionality, but I am commissioning at least one piece from him:

<http://www.jloose.com/>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Just watched both available videos in the series and can't help but be inspired. The point that the "art is in the details" of a hand made item really resonates with me with respect to handmade guitars. Factory made guitars, from the big manufacturers such as Fender, Gibson, Martin, etc. are excellent guitars, but there's something about the attention to detail in a hand made guitar that makes it special, makes it art. I really hope they plan a film focusing on an small, independent luthier.

</comment><comment><USER20> I found this fascinating. I love seeing people develop and demonstrate their craft in a authentic, passionate way. There is a physical component to his work where you use all your senses, such as when he feels the edge of the sharpened knife with his thumb, that you just don't have with programming. To produce a physical artifact that has the right balance, heft, lines, and finish requires the integration of a lot of different skills that when done properly, is deeply satisfying.

<comment><USER21> I have rarely gone wrong in being a consumer of someone passionate about what they are doing or in doing something I feel passionate about.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> A small part of me wishes that I didn't enjoy coding so much, or that I wasn't good at it, or that it didn't pay so much better than woodworking, which I find just as enjoyable.

</comment><comment><USER23> Reminded me of this post <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2646501> about a guy who created a knife from scratch, starting with the construction of this own smelter.

</comment><comment><USER24> The part that struck me was when he said something along the lines of: It takes 10,000 (or 15,000) hours just to get the necessary knowledge. Then, you are at step one. You may or may not be good, but don't know until you've put in the required time.

Also, the immediate authenticity I felt by this man and this story is something amazing. Great way to start my day.

<comment><USER25> _"10,000 hours of training, according to Malcolm Gladwell's book Outliers. Gladwell based this assertion on the work of Anders Ericsson, who studied classical violinists and found that, in every case, it had taken a regimen of 2-3 hours a day for 10 years to develop their abilities. Later research by Ericsson and others confirmed similar results in other fields."_

[http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifestyle/on-luck- success-a...](http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifestyle/on-luck-success- and-10000-hours.html)

<comment><USER26> I don't think it is as straightforward as that. Imagine you're learning chess and you have a chess master as your teacher, you are going to annihilate someone who has putted the same amount of time, even more, but who doesn't have such a good teacher.

<comment><USER27> Yeah, the original states that the practice must be deliberate. Of course, generally better practice would prevail.

<comment><USER28> And that little side-note unravels the whole argument: how much better can practice be? Can it be so focused that one reaches mastery in 5k hours? 1k? To what degree is being a fast learner in a field a talent?

[http://www.sportsscientists.com/2011/08/training- talent-1000...](http://www.sportsscientists.com/2011/08/training- talent-10000-hours-and-genes.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> If anyone finds this interesting, I recommend trying a blacksmithing/bladesmithing course in your area. I took a weekend course in knife-making and, while nowhere near the quality in these videos, it was a lot of fun to create a knife to my specs from a thin scrap of steel. In the US, take a look at ABANA.org.

Shameless plug: I've tried to start a new stack exchange on blacksmithing here: [http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/36172/blacksmithin...](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/36172/blacksmithing/)

</comment><comment><USER30> I'm a hobby blacksmith, as well as a professional programmer, and I love making physical things, too. This film strikes me in a very personal way. I see a lot of intellectual discussion on this which, while interesting, I think misses the point. This guy found a trade that he really loves, and is making sacrifices for. He's making a living, but he's certainly not getting rich off of it.

I do a lot of different things with blacksmithing, but I've been really getting into kitchen knives, as well as spoons, ladle, forks, cleavers, etc... I like combining copper work with blacksmithing.

I can't tell you how much I enjoy it. Mostly because I like making functional and unique things. There is a great sense of satisfaction that I just don't get from writing code. Also, blacksmithing uses a wonderful combination of technical ability and visual/artistic skills. Also, it's hard to find good friends and a good community that you feel comfortable in.

That film did a good job of expressing the emotional side of making stuff. It really is just a _huge_ amount of fun. Thanks for posting that.

</comment><comment><USER31> This video reminds me of why I loved living in New York. And, it epitomizes what is great about that city -- many people who believe that great art is worth the sacrifice.

</comment><comment><USER32> Beautiful knives.

I hope the handmade movement really takes off. Maybe people could consume less but unique artifacts that have a real story behind them rather than accumulating mountains of mass produced, generic stuff that ends up in a trash heap a couple of years later.

<comment><USER33> There is a happy medium with mass production - the main issue is that many people (in my observation) no longer value quality equally to price, e.g. the cheapest pot from WalMart will do, and when it chips or warps next year we'll just spend $15 on another one instead of buying a single $50 version that will last. One of the greatest lessons that I've ever learned in business is that you shouldn't spend extravagantly, but you shouldn't be afraid to spend a little more for quality where it matters.

<comment><USER34> _you shouldn't be afraid to spend a little more for quality where it matters_

It's more likely that they don't see any reason to spend more than $15. Someone knows they can get a pot that looks OK for $15, whereas the $50 doesn't have any immediately obvious benefit.

I love tools, but I'm far from a tool snob. I have lots of cheap tools because I'm never going to wear out, e.g., a screwdriver. It's worth more to me to have five $3 screwdrivers than a single $15 one. But I just spent $200 on a wire crimping tool because I know that the $15 ones won't do the job right. But if they did, then there is no way I'd buy the more expensive one. Most people are just like that: they won't spend more than they have to unless there is a clear benefit.

<comment><USER33> > I know that the $15 ones won't do the job right. But if they did, then there > is no way I'd buy the more expensive one

That's a matter of perspective. If you cook often and have had an opportunity to use the two, you'll notice a stark contrast; just like you notice the difference with crimpers. The guy spending a weekend to redo his home theater wiring is probably going to opt for the $15 option.

How many people research purchases like pans and wire crimpers in order to gain a proper perspective of where the price vs. quality lines cross, and how many just go to the store and get the one with the prettier package? I think that's where you start to see the trend I mentioned.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Did anybody else get absolutely electrified when he described working in that warehouse of shops with other creators and how the creative energy was amplifying itself?

That sounds intoxicating. I would love a dev environment like that with a small team. I have experienced this one time professionally in its truest rawest sense... A small team hacking on fun problems. It was phenomenal, literally hopping out of bed in the morning just to get to the office.

Anyone else experience this before? (not necessarily with dev if you have a good story)

</comment><comment><USER36> In the same vein, but I found <http://devour.com/video/moroccan-woodturner/> a lot more satisfying to watch.

</comment><comment><USER37> The thing that struck me about this film, is that he's not wearing safety goggles. Stupid move.

</comment><comment><USER38> Making something from nothing has always given me the greatest high. This video reminded me that it is that high that got me into software development.

When I was young (and had no money):

      - Made origami
      - Learned sailors knots
      - 3d sculptures of science fiction aircraft from index cards
      - Bow and arrows from q-tips and underwear rubber
      - Sailboats from 2x4's, coat hangers, plastic garbage bags, and fishing line
      - Skateboard ramps (usually bigger than I was capable of using and with
          none of the right tools)
      - A workbench
      - Peg board (hand drilled from scrap wood)
      - Dozens of hand drawn replicas of video game/anime art
      - Repaired the broken fin of a surfboard purchased at a garage sale (never used)

In high school I exploited my auto shop classes:

      - Replaced the rear differential on a 80's Mustang
      - Removed a motor from an early 90's Camaro
      - Built and installed a roll cage in an early 90's Camaro
      - Taped and sprayed flames on a fiberglass replica 32 Ford hood
          as a demonstration of a new paint line for local body shops
      - Completely dismantled the engine of 87 honda civic
      - Resurrected an 80's Volvo with 300k miles on it
      - Made a functioning 6" cowl induction hood for my 89 SR5 Toyota Corolla

From there I got a job at a hot-rod shop:

      - Teardown of a 52 Chevy Bel Air
      - Teardown, body work, and assembly of a split-window Corvette
      - And countless others

In college majoring in Mechanical Engineering (what a joke):

      - Built a marshmallow launcher
      - Convinced a big angry muscle man with a knife to my throat not
          to hurt me, and steal a keg from a party instead

Once admitted to college, I was given a computer:

      - Pirated software
      - Converted drawings to vector graphics
      - Made techno songs
      - Made 3d models
      - Designed album covers
      - Frankenstein'd countless scrap computers

After I dropped out of college I became a restaurant server:

      - Documented everything I could about HTML/CSS
      - Created custom MySpace themes (and never made a dollar for it)
      - Built my profile in Flash to overcome MySpace's limitations
      - Hid all of the generated MySpace content (minus comments)
          and built my profile from scratch

From there I became a developer. Software has been an incredible way for me to create and learn. Sadly, the projects my employers provide aren't always challenging enough. Additionally, the complimentary benefits of working with my hands versus sitting at a computer have drawn me to other projects:

      - Built an engine lift
      - Restored a 1987 19' Galaxy boat that I bought
          for $200 on CL (engine had collapsed into the floor)
      - Bootstrapped a prototype analytics app for the last year (not launched)
      - Insulated, ran electrical, and drywalled my garage
      - Built a workshop (bench, storage, etc) in the garage of my new house
      - Buy/restore/sell furniture on CL

Currently I'm restoring a pool table I bought for $100 on CL:

      - Built strong/true cabinet from cheap construction grade lumber
      - Carved, antiqued, and stained the cabinet to make it not
          look like cheap construction grade lumber
      - Built a slate sled for moving the 1" thick slate pieces up to the 3rd floor

<comment><USER39> Exactly. This is the sentiment I expected to see on HN, where there is always praise for the hacker "building" and sticking it to the man because he/she can make something on their own.

<comment><USER18> After reading books like "The Servile State" by Hilaire Belloc and "Birth as an American Rite of Passage" by Robbie Davis-Floyd, I think there _should_ always be praise for this sort of thing.

Our culture has become extremely centered on mechanics, whether social mechanics and processes of businesses or automation of manufacturing, and to make humans again the center of society will take a lot of effort, but I believe it is a worthy task.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> The parallels between Joel Bukiewicz's passion and many startups are striking. Some people understand that extreme amounts of money isn't what makes them happy, rather being able to completely explore their own medium in the ways they choose is where the love is.

Amazing film, very well done.

</comment><comment><USER41> In a similar vain:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGMj7o6AwnM> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM0VnL30rDc>

</comment><comment><USER42> Reminds me of the Irish TV series Hands, <http://www.irelandstraditionalcrafts.com/> . These programs were shot during the seventies and eighties and record traditional craftsmen at work. It was perfect timing because they were probably the last generation who lived off their trade.

</comment><comment><USER43> Hope you didn't have anything to do today:

<http://fuckyeahmadeinusa.tumblr.com/>

</comment><comment><USER44> There's a lot of similar material on <http://www.coolhunting.com/video>

There's actually one about this same guy from 2008: <http://www.coolhunting.com/tech/cut-brooklyn-kn.php>

</comment><comment><USER45> There's another great interview with Joel as part of the Chow.com Obsessives series (all of which are worth a look for themselves):

[http://www.chow.com/videos#!/show/obsessives/55121/obsessive...](http://www.chow.com/videos#!/show/obsessives/55121/obsessives- knifemaker)

</comment><comment><USER46> Aside: What is with the proliferation of vimeo usage? I've found it more likely to crash my laptop, making me reluctant to click. Never had a crash from youtube.

<comment><USER47> That's easy. Better video quality. More attractive controls/player. A community that enjoys this type of thing.

Note: Youtube has been improving with respect to the first two.

Also, does it really lock up your whole system?

<comment><USER46> Not the whole system, just crashes firefox. I also don't like that I can't reduce the resolution as finely as I can with youtube.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> The other video is here: <http://vimeo.com/28408829>

I can't view it through their website in IE8.

</comment><comment><USER49> These comments are so fascinating because they illustrate with a fair degree of uniformity, the personality profile of the HN crowd.

Two kinds of people we're all aware of: logical/rational vs. emotional/creative. That whole left vs. right brain stuff.

Remember, you need to think with both points of view to tackle the big consumer tech problems (where a looooot of the $$$ is) in the coming years... so

</comment><comment><USER50> It's important to remember that he's not entirely making these tools by hand. He's use mass produced drill presses, sand paper, lumber, and metal alloys. I think what he's doing is nice and pretty, but let's not wrap it too much of a handmade ethos.

<comment><USER38> Most crafts require tools. Where do you draw the line?

Even with bushcraft you start with a knife and axe which are likely manufactured, not handmade.

<comment><USER51> I'm reminded of Dick Proenneke <http://bit.ly/s2VFdu>.

Here's a start to "Alone In the Wilderness": <http://bit.ly/uAcBsD> , documenting his work and time spent building a life in Alaska, very much "handmade".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> Where can I see the price and/or link to buy a set?

<comment><USER53> <http://cutbrooklyn.com/home.html></comment></comment>