Startups Interviews Turn Hackers Off  - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/p/3561572c7620

<comment><USER2> Has anyone actually done the "trial week" thing and had it work out?

Maybe for a super-junior person who just finished a dev bootcamp kind of thing, but I can't imagine a full-time employed engineer signing up for a "trial week."

</comment><comment><USER3> Do any startups do it right?

<comment><AUTHOR> I think some do but it's rare. Stripe seems to be doing a good job: [http://www.quora.com/Stripe-company/What-is-the- engineering-...](http://www.quora.com/Stripe-company/What-is-the-engineering- interview-process-like-at-Stripe)</comment></comment>


Ask HN:Do you go back and change your code or let it be. - <AUTHOR>

After you learn better ways of implementing something do you go back and change it or let it be and make sure you do it the right way in the future.?
I ask this because I have this almost OCD urge to go back and change everything to perfection(or my idea of perfection at current!!).
EDIT: Added personal note. <comment><USER2> Depends on the situation. If it makes sense to improve my code (it's still actively developed or maintained, and changing the implementation does not introduce incompability (or if it does, then it outweights the trouble of updating dependent software), etc), then I go back and change it. Otherwise, unlikely.

</comment><comment><USER3> I cringe whenever I come across a piece of code I've written years ago, but you know the old saying 'If it ain't broken...'. It also reminds me of where I came from as a coder.

</comment><comment><USER4> Sometimes I do it to practice the new implementation and add/improve unit testing.

</comment><comment><USER5> Depends. If it brings "childhood" memories, then let it be :)</comment>


Ask HN: Retail startups? - <AUTHOR>

Hi,<p>Just wondering if there are any retail startup folks that hang out on HN? Would love to have a chat with you as we're building a service for retailers and wanted to learn more about the problems you face. <comment><USER2> If by retail you mean direct to consumer sales to customers then yes. If you mean "physical presence" (retail vs online) then no

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, what I meant was physical presence. I'm guessing you're more focused on e-commerce?</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How secure would this password be, practically speaking? - <AUTHOR>

So I currently have a rule for myself that I don't let any new passwords be shorter than my previous password. As you may guess, my passwords are getting quite long after a few years of having to change every N days.  This got me thinking.
I know it's low entropy, but as a guess on how most modern brute force attacks work, I was wondering how secure something like this would be, both conceptually and practically:
1aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa <comment><USER2> Not at all. I always use a password cracker that starts with a dictionary attack based on every word posted on HN. 1aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa will now be one of the fist passwords to go.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would say fairly secure based on length

Here is the reason:

1\. It is 101 characters. If I was brute force attacking I'd imagine I'd target passwords <32 characters. Probably more like 8-16.

2\. It has [a-zA-Z0-9]. This isn't bad, but isn't optimal. Add some symbols or non ASCII characters to really screw up brute force attacks.

3\. If for some reason this is the password on a system that is not hashing but encrypting and using a cipher in ECB then it is definitely not secure.

Honestly if this was a password on a giant list I'd skip it and move on to easier targets.

</comment><comment><USER4> According to [https://howsecureismypassword.net/](https://howsecureismypassword.net/), it would take A billion quinquagintillion years for a normal PC.

Not sure how reliable its calculations are.

</comment><comment><USER5> good luck typing it</comment>


Inside Hillary Clinton's Secret Takeover of the DNC - <AUTHOR> https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774 <comment><USER2> > I needed to have solid proof, and so did Bernie. So I followed the money

I wonder what she followed when she was passing debate questions to Clinton.

> as a cache of emails stolen by Russian hackers

What Russian hackers? What's the evidence for that. It keep getting repeated, I still haven't seen anything convincing on it.

> Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the > campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory > Fund—that figure represented $10,000 to each of the 32 states' parties who > were part of the Victory Fund agreement—$320,000—and $33,400 to the DNC. The > money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC > shortly after that. Money in the battleground states usually stayed in that > state, but all the other states funneled that money directly to the DNC, > which quickly transferred the money to Brooklyn.

How is that not a clear case of fraud and maybe money laundering?

> Yet the states kept less than half of 1 percent of the $82 million they had > amassed from the extravagant fund-raisers Hillary's campaign

So she is directly responsible for not having people on the ground in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin? Russians hacked her agenda apparently too and diverted her plane from there.

> Bernie was familiar with it, but he and his staff ignored it.

Why didn't they raise a stink? I am guessing the administration at the time who would investigate anything was headed by Obama and he was campaigning for Hillary. So stuff like this would have been squashed pretty quickly.

<comment><USER3> >What Russian hackers? What's the evidence for that. It keep getting repeated, I still haven't seen anything convincing

There have not been any alternative explanations. Crowdstrike, government intelligence agencies and Infosec professionals all agree.

<comment><USER4> Does a phishing attack and leaking that podesta's passwords were p@ssw0rd and runner1234 on to 4chan need explanation? I was monitoring 4chan when the password leaks happened. People were posting screenshots of tracking his iPad. Changing his bus schedule from NY to DC on Nov 8 to Nov 11. Tweeting that he converted and became a Trump supporter ( [https://archive.fo/Cv6hK](https://archive.fo/Cv6hK) \- note the "hi pol" this is a reference to the pol board on 4chan). And eventually wiping his iPad. Maybe the Russians downloaded a copy of all his emails during this chaos but trust me at least another dozen people did the same. He didn't realise his passwords were leaked onto 4chan for at least 12 hours. Quite honestly I do not trust any report that doesn't document what was happening on 4chan during these "hacks" as trust worthy.

So far I haven't seen any journalist go to the effect to document exactly what happened to Podesta on the day his passwords were leaked to 4chan.

Edit: I found this on slashdot from the time of the password leaks. [https://mobile.slashdot.org/story/16/10/13/2025257/4chan- hac...](https://mobile.slashdot.org/story/16/10/13/2025257/4chan-hackers- claim-to-have-remotely-wiped-john-podestas-iphone-and-ipad)

Edit 2: More proof that regular people gained access to his Gmail account. Seemingly whoever gained access to his twitter account did so via a password reset using his Gmail address. [https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/78662164964259840...](https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/786621649642598400/photo/1)

This for me is the ultimate card that the leaks weren't a grand conspiracy to elect Trump. Rather a security illiterate person got completely owned by trolls on the internet.

Edit 3: Further more, if the Russians were really behind the phishing to capture Podesta's passwords why would they leak on 4chan where they would end up losing their control of his accounts? A state actor would try to maintain access for as long as possible. A troll would rather see everything explode.

<comment><USER3> All of the events you mention were in October after the emails were released by Wikileaks.

The spearphishing attack happened in March.

[https://wikileaks.org/podesta- emails/emailid/34899#efmAAGAAb...](https://wikileaks.org/podesta- emails/emailid/34899#efmAAGAAbAHLAIUAWxAXH)

Also his password was never p@ssword, that was his Windows machine default pass.

<comment><USER4> Nice, fill us in on what we don't know. I also think there is a lot of confusion as people aren't separating the DNC hacks and the Podesta email leaks.

From the Twitter hack it seems that people still had access to his Gmail in October. Unless they someone how got that password a different way. Or it was password re-use.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Interesting that Politico publishes this by Donna Brazile the week that the Mueller Manafort and Papadopolous news breaks. _Post hoc, ergo propter hoc?_

<comment><AUTHOR> Could you elaborate? While I can definitely see some intent behind the timing of this (even if just to sell more books), it doesn't really seem relevant to the content of the piece.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> WTF USofA? Does China win on democracy now?

<comment><USER7> Yes, why don't we just pretend that all other democratic systems are always perfect and have never had immense problems. That's obviously what Italian, Spanish, German and French history from the last 200 years would teach us, right?

The US has one of the oldest, mostly unbroken democratic systems in world history. Just go back to eg 1840 or 1890 and take a look at all the nations of the world and their government systems at the time. Nearly the entire world was more than century behind the US in adopting any form of representative government. It's a small miracle it still functions at all given the cruft that has been stapled on over two centuries.

<comment><USER8> Don't forget the English who recently promised Scotland so many things before the referendum and conveniently forgot them once they eeked out a narrow victory. Democracy isn't just about going out to vote. Easy to say but I feel like a hypocrite as well.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How Are You Curing Your Computer Eye Strain? - <AUTHOR> Is their a miracle eye drop or combo of ointments and techniques that can sooth our sore eyes?
I find the next morning still a bit sore. I guesss after all these years it was inevitable.
I already use flux and have a soft prescription for my new glasses.
Ice seems to help after a long day only. thanks! <comment><USER2> [http://www.workrave.org/](http://www.workrave.org/) \- add eye exercises</comment>


Udacity to offer entire CS curriculum, certifications to obtain a degree online - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/b/107809899089663019971/107809899089663019971/posts/ipuBzuy5o9h <comment><USER2> A good portion of a degree's value is in its branding/prestige value. It's not just about the knowledge, it's about the overall reputation of an educational institution. The material at Penn State is 99% the same as MIT's. If this weren't the case, MIT and Stanford would have lost their luster to public schools decades ago.

Unfortunately I don't see a degree from a website named "Udacity" garnering anywhere near the level of respect that a traditional university has. Step 1 to bringing down the university system: pick a decent name.

<comment><USER3> Udacity isn't a brand yet. Someday something like it or it will be. Then it won't matter.

I respect people who are resourceful and get stuff done. If you choose to go to college and wait out the great recession, I'll look down on you no matter if you went to MIT or Stanford. If you went to college for business or technology and you didn't produce anything during your time at college, you'll have a hard time convincing me to hire you.

It's only a matter of time before the rest of the world catches up to my way of thinking.

<comment><USER4> "I respect people who are resourceful and get stuff done."

Does getting a college degree not count as getting stuff done? Would you rather someone list every single problem set, proof, project, etc that they have done? I can vouch that a degree from some schools requires much more work/time/resourcefulness than making a couple of cool projects on github.

Also, as a technologist, my ultimate goal is to push things forward. Think SpaceX, Google, Intel, or even something smaller like Lytro or projects like Google's autonomous vehicles. These technology beneath these things (cheap manufacturing, PageRank, integrated circuits, etc) isn't invented by the people who make CRUD webapps; its made by those who master a field and have some insight to vastly improve their domain. That's what changes things.

Note, mentioning Apple or Facebook might seem like a counterpoint to my statement. I would argue Apple has pushed design forward in the same way Intel has pushed the semiconductor business forward. However, Facebook seemed to have no extraordinary technology at its core, but just capitalized on a hole in the market so much that it actually has changed how society functions.

Also, I'm not at all discounting the hustlers who get stuff done, by I think to really change things, one must be a hustler (or know one) and also have extraordinary technology.

<comment><USER3> I don't doubt that a degree can take much more time or work. In fact I'm sure it probably does, which is all the more reason to NOT go that route.

That's awesome that you want to push things forward. We need that, but what I'm saying is that nothing is going to help you except down right resourcefulness. You're going to have to go deep and master something to do that, sure.

Five years ago, I think you would have been right. The resources to get started weren't there. Today it's all changed and now resourcefulness gets you so much further than it ever has before.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Does anyone have a pointer to ow this company pans to deal with the Blackboard patents? A few years ago Blackboard patented various aspects of online classroom applications. They offer a free license to not-for-profit projects but it's unclear Udacity intends to remain entirely not-for-profit.

<comment><USER6> From what I understand Blackboard lost almost every legal case they filed with those patents, so as long as they have enough money to get through a lawsuit, they should be fine.

<comment><USER7> However, they still sue everyone they possibly can in order to still lock down their market. For a few years now, the barrier for hasn't been the patents but for the cost of standing up to them in court.

<comment><USER8> Isn't that illegal (IANAL)?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frivolous_litigation>

<comment><USER9> Theoretically this is illegal. In practice, it's hard to draw a sharp line between "plaintiff actually feels his patent should apply here" and "plaintiff doesn't honestly believe his patent applies, but is using the courts as an anticompetitive measure".

The US patent litigation process is a horrendously bloated system that favors lawyers and companies with deep pockets, and makes it possible for a sufficiently rich and motivated company to bankrupt an upstart competitor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> List of courses Udacity (www.udacity.com) is expected to offer in 2012:

1\. Theory Of Computation

2\. Operating Systems

3\. Computer Networks

4\. Distributed Systems

5\. Computer Security

6\. Algorithms And Data Structures

7\. Software Engineering Practices

8\. Building Web Applications

Courses that have been confirmed and starting on 20th Feb:

1\. CS 101: Building a Search Engine

2\. CS 373: Programming a Robotic Car

<comment><USER10> It would be awesome if they could compare (or map) this course list to what would be typically taught by a University-level Computer Science program...

I'm not interested in earning a degree/certification, rather I'd want to take these courses for general interest only.

I'm interested in understanding the depth and breadth of each course, vs. just going off the heading. If I can understand the value of each Udacity course as compared to the standard (eg: another University's program), I'm more likely to commit / buy into the whole Udacity approach.

i.e. "At Stanford, a typical 4/5-year degree has these X topics / competencies... and these 8 coures meet 50% of these competencies."

Without understanding the value of each course as it relates to, say, another University program or competency map, I have a hard time understanding the value of Udacity.

This probably sounds confusing, so if there's anyone from Udacity that wants to chat I'm more than open to. I think what Udacity is trying to achieve is great.

<comment><USER11> Those course titles do sound very typical for an undergrad CS program, if a bit heavy on the practical subjects.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This sounds bold, but I think the success of Khan academy is simply due the fact that Sal Khan is a brilliant man, and so is Sebastian Thrun. The best teachers provide the best teaching experience, and the Internet allows everyone to have this experience.

<comment><USER13> The internet also allows everyone to avoid the crappy teachers, which is hugely valuable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I really wish they had chosen a name for their university that was not so Web 2.0. It makes it unclear to me whether this is a startup or an educational institution.

<comment><USER15> Yes, the name is very important, just look at the name google, that doesnt sound so Web 2.0 at all, I mean, who can even pronounce that?

<comment><USER16> Well Google is not a school, is it?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Is it far fetched to think of traditional universities meeting the same fate as Blockbuster?

How far can this go?

<comment><USER18> It is.

A university offers a lot more than just classes--one of the primary functions is just to bring together lots of smart people. Being able to talk to both other students and professors face to face is important; and having plenty of other like-minded students around is great for more than just classes.

On top of this, universities also offer research. Being able to work on something exciting while you're there is important. And research benefits both from having a high concentration of smart people and having the appropriate facilities. (It also sometimes benefits from having a university full of guinea pigs :).)

Also, while most CS classes are easy to move online, this does not hold for other technical subjects which need equipment and labs. An online-only EE or Bio or Physics class cannot reproduce the hands-on experience which is very important to understanding the material well.

<comment><USER4> I think its important to distinguish that a lot of EE, biology, or physics classes could moved into an online format because not all of these classes are labs. The demos would be easy to replicate just as part of the videos of the lectures.

<comment><USER19> I'm a graduate student in the sciences and every biology, chemistry and physics class that I took had a lab, except the evolution class. You could put the lectures online, but universities will never be completely replaced, as long as people want to learn science or do research.

<comment><USER20> >as long as people want to learn science or do research

Maybe this will create a large demand for amateur level/mass producable/cheap lab equipment and that would eventually lead to a situation like PC vs Server where even top notch servers are ~ comodity hardware on steroids. This would lower the barrier for innovation significantly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I've said this elsewhere. Good lectures, even good exams, must be matched with good projects and discussions with peers (refereed by a deeply knowledgeable teacher). I wonder if a cottage industry of local study groups will form around these lecture sources. Perhaps Udacity could even spearhead the creation of these and offer some kind of certification to vouch for the local teacher.

Then you have the best of both worlds: an internally consistent curriculum with good lectures and digested information paired with one-on-one instruction and project development / discussion which will serve individual students in their own unique ways.

<comment><USER22> would be great to start seeing "Udacity meetups" or something

<comment><USER21> I think community based schools will start cropping up. They'll align with some subset of online course material and there might be a local teacher to help coordinate but otherwise, it's the students themselves helping each other. The local tangible presence would not only allow for that interaction / project based element I'm so fond of, but also to help pool resources for equipment.

If we're going into this brave new world of private, decentralized education we may as well do it in such a fashion that your own financial status doesn't prevent you from participating.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> My 16 year old son took the online Introduction to AI class and liked it very much. I told him that Udacity plans to offer an entire online CS curriculum & certification, and he's now very interested in evaluating if he wants to get an Udacity degree instead of going to a more traditional university. I guess I will have to do some serious thinking before I decide if I should encourage him to get an Udacity education or a more traditional education.

<comment><USER24> I'd encourage him to get both.

At least in the short term an Udacity education is going to be considered the same as self-taught. A traditional education however is going to open up other opportunities that the self-taught cannot easily obtain. As long as Udacity is free however, there's no reason to not pack in some extra classes if he has the time.

<comment><USER23> I have a traditional education, BS in CS & EE, and it seems to me that it never has been relevant in my professional life. I'm not talking about what I learned in college, that part has been useful. I'm talking about the certification aspect. I finished college 29 years ago, and in all that time I've never had the issue of showing some kind of certificate come up when being offered a job. Maybe I'm an exception and I'm underestimating the certification aspect, but what I'm more concerned about right now is that he wouldn't experience meeting many different kinds of people if he stays at home to study instead of going to some campus, and that doesn't feel right to me.

I'm also concerned about how complete is the curriculum at Udacity going to be. I'm sure all the CS classes are going to be pretty good, but what about other subjects like math & physics? I wonder what they are going to do about that and who's going to teach them.

<comment><USER25> As someone who moved to the US for work, one important benefit of 'the certification aspect' is that it'll open up travel opportunities he'd otherwise struggle with: most work visas require a degree, sometimes 'or equivalent experience' but that's harder to demonstrate. If he actually wants to immigrate somewhere the degree may also provide points for that.

<comment><USER23> That's a good point. Thank you for telling me about that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> How will they combat cheating? I mean if it's all done remotely then what is stopping somebody completing the degree for somebody else?

<comment><USER27> There are plenty of online schools already. They usually either have you take tests at a local third party testing center, or they watch you through your webcam while you take tests.

Additionally there's plenty of cheating going on in traditional universities. I've even heard of people being paid to take entire classes for other people.

<comment><USER28> Taking the big tests at third party testing centers should be the way to go.

However, I would like to point out that an university does not merely comprise of lectures. The research projects, internships and even the interaction with peers cannot be recreated online. Traditional universities still have an edge over this.

<comment><USER27> If enrollment was high enough, local meetups for some classes would go a long way towards solving this problem.

What I would like to see eventually happen is for learning and credentialing to separate.

I'd like to see a university that was more freeform. What if instead of just offering 4 year degrees, you could take a 6 month AI program, or a 3 month probability and stats course.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I've received one of these emails as well. Almost makes you wonder how much would offline university degrees be worth in a few years.

Objectively, this is not a new idea. We have been talking about revolutionizing education for years - and free online education is pretty much the ideal. There is even enough material about most scientific fields and areas of study (some are more open than others, though) to become an expert.

So what is the problem? Becoming an expert with enough authority for people to actually listen to you. Easy enough to do it on your own in programming or entrepreneurship you might say. Not so easy in medicine or biochemistry (though I will admit I have no first-hand experience).

In that regard, certifications are a significant next step, provided that they get wide enough acknowledgement. That is the next battlefront, I think - convincing industries, governments and academia that online education is the way to go.

<comment><USER30> I think this will highlight differences among fields of education (?).

Programming is a very pragmatic field. Your ability to code is at its core judged by whether you can program something that works. Don't have a formal education? Whip up several interesting programs / websites on your own, and less people will care about your degree. In addition to that, it's becoming increasingly easy to learn the subject on your own.

Not many other fields are like that. Medicine for example. Sure, you can learn the names of the bones in your body, understand the use cases of different drugs in the market, but can you diagnose a patient? To learn that, you need access to training in real hospitals which are only given to students enrolled offline.

Same thing with biochemistry (needs access to labs and direct mentorship), law (access to courtrooms? or certification from proper boards). Many of these other disciplines are based on initial trust. It takes time for a biochemist or a lawyer until their work results in something. Having an actual (offline) degree places some kind of 'proxy' for the work result, until they actually appear.

I'm not that certain that they can be replaced / revolutionized by online classes. I'm all for revolutionizing education, but I don't think this new approach is able to revolutionize all fields of education.

<comment><USER31> > but can you diagnose a patient? To learn that, you need access to training > in real hospitals which are only given to students enrolled offline.

There are medical simulation tools that teach you to diagnose patients, train you in surgery , etc.They seem to be very effective as a training tool. One can imagine a certification process that tests you using this tool, and verifies that you have good diagnosis and prescription skills , and maybe part of the treatment skills.

That might be a good enough basis to admit you on a trial basis as a resident, or to a pre-residency short program.

Maybe in a similar fashion, one could build a simulation software that can train biochemists affordably ,and test to see you're qualified enough to work in a lab.

<comment><USER30> Call me a skeptic, but I don't think those simulations can ever replace real- life situations.

The human body is bewilderingly complex that it it still a subject of thousands of researches worldwide. How can you simulate something you don't completely understand?

Plus, in the case of medicine, one needs to know also how to interact with a patient. Is he/she telling the truth about his/her symptoms? Is there something the person's not telling that might affect your diagnosis? What about educating the patient about the disease?

These are real day-to-day situations that can never be simulated.

<comment><USER31> How can you simulate something you don't completely understand?

Many medical diseases are reasonably understood, at least at a level we know to associate symptoms with tests and treatment processes.And there is real simulation software that being used in teaching med students, so it must have passed some quality assurance.

Yes , simulations might have a hard time replacing human interactions, but as far as i understand , you learn patient interaction in an environment external to the university(a hospital). There's no reason well educated online students won't have access to those experiences.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Certifications for free? I mean, that's certainly what it sounds like. Talk about disruption!

<comment><USER33> There's nothing that says the certification will be free...

<comment><USER34> It doesn't have to be free... it just has to cost less than 20k a year to be disruptive. This has the potential to be very disruptive.

One of the things that excites me the most is not only the potential to eliminate the massive load of debt that your average graduate inherits when they're finished with college, but it also lowers the barrier of entry to classes. So a person who already has graduated can study a cross-discipline a lot easier. I think the amount of people have an expertise in very different areas is going to increase. A lot of potential opens up if/when that becomes a trend.

<comment><USER35> State universities if you're a resident of the state don't cost $20k/yr. Mine cost me $4k/yr.

<comment><USER36> Which state are you in? Even the cheapest state schools here in PA are closer to 4k/semester.

[http://www.sru.edu/financeandadministrativeaffairs/studentac...](http://www.sru.edu/financeandadministrativeaffairs/studentaccounts/tuition/Pages/UndergradIn- StateFees.aspx)

<comment><USER35> California. Attended California State Universities. They have gone up a bit since I graduated about 7 years ago but not that much.

Average for all CSU's - $5,285

Link: [http://www.calstate.edu/budget/fybudget/2011-2012/documentat...](http://www.calstate.edu/budget/fybudget/2011-2012/documentation/14-mandatory- fees-table.shtml) Link 2: <http://www.calstate.edu/sas/costofattendance/>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> As someone who is extremely interested in getting started in the e-learning space, what are some ways to offer credentials to people via your e-learning company?

I imagine there is a host of options, ranging from formal university credits (which would require teaming up with some educational institution) to just an email saying "congrats, you done it bro". I'd imagine the interesting options lie somewhere in the middle?

</comment><comment><USER38> How do they make money if the courses are free?

</comment><comment><USER39> Also, checkout <http://www.9slides.com>, which is not an university experiment.</comment>


CVE-2015-1427 Remote Code Execution in Elasticsearch - <AUTHOR> http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2015-1427

<comment><AUTHOR> If you're running a vulnerable version, (especially world-accessible,) you should upgrade and firewall off ES as soon as possible.

I found about 10 different local privilege escalation exploits sitting in /tmp and a handful of reverse shells running this evening =(</comment>


Explore the Early Years of Technicolor Film in 40,000 Documents - <AUTHOR> https://hyperallergic.com/394673 <comment><USER2> I've always found the story of color film development fascinating. It's a good way to learn how standards take place and beat out groupthink.

What's just as interesting are the competing color formats, and just how awful they were. The competing formats were all disgusting hacks compared to Technicolor, but Technicolor required an expensive filmmaking process. Technicolor won because it required no special projection equipment, and didn't have horrible flicker.

I even remember seeing a sample "standard" color film format that divided the frame up into three parts, one for each color. It just goes to show that standard formats usually don't go far when a proprietary format is so much better.

It just makes me wonder how long automakers are going to push their stupid charger connectors instead of adopting Tesla's elegant solution.</comment>


Ask HN: Do you monkey test your web-app? If not, why not? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> What is monkey testing?

<comment><AUTHOR> In software testing, monkey testing is a technique where the user tests the application or system by providing random inputs and checking the behavior, or seeing whether the application or system will crash. Monkey testing is usually implemented as random, automated unit tests.

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

<comment><USER2> Similar to fuzz testing?

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

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, but I would say fuzz testing is intended to test APIs whereas monkey testing is intended to test UIs instead. It's quite subjective though.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Alpha release of Age-tool – A small command line encryption utility made in Go - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/filosottile/age <comment><AUTHOR> Live coded by Filippo Valsorda (Google) on [https://www.twitch.tv/filosottile](https://www.twitch.tv/filosottile)</comment>


Cooling of levitated nanoparticle–10x8th atoms–to motional quantum ground state - <AUTHOR> https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/01/29/science.aba3993 <comment><AUTHOR> [https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/01/levitating-sand- esca...](https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/01/levitating-sand-escapes- classical-world-enters-quantum-ground-state/)</comment>


Ask HN: Where do you get your images from? - <AUTHOR>

I am currently trying to put together the landing page for my project, but I havent ever realized before how hard it is to find images for a commercial website. I have found a few that charge, have limited stock, or simply dont have licensing information. What sites do you guys go to? <comment><USER2> flickr limited to CC comercial usage [1]

stock.xchng used to be better but you can still find the occasional gem with a usable license [2]

For graphics, Icon Finder is invaluable [3]

[1] [http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=people&l=commderiv&ct=0&mt=a...](http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=people&l=commderiv&ct=0&mt=all&adv=1)

[2] [http://www.sxc.hu/](http://www.sxc.hu/)

[3] [http://www.iconfinder.com/](http://www.iconfinder.com/)

<comment><USER3> I built an interface to #1. Before the flickr redesign, it was a lot nicer, but provides some simple attribution markup that I find useful.

[http://imager.io/](http://imager.io/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've been in the position of having to pretend to be a graphic designer countless times, so please learn from my mistakes - just bite the bullet and spend ten bucks at istockphoto.com. You'll get by far the best bang for your buck, and you'll spare yourself hours of sifting through the free options some of the other HNers are recommending, searching for a diamond in the rough.

Some of the other stock photo sites that are being recommended here can set you back $50-100 an image - sometimes much more.

</comment><comment><USER5> This was posted a few months back on HN, looked promising so I bookmarked it. Hope it helps and it is what you're looking for.

[http://unsplash.com/](http://unsplash.com/)

Website Title:

Free (do whatever you want) hi-resolution photos.

10 new photos every 10 days.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for that link! Although the supply of photos is largely unusable for my purposes, I really enjoyed looking at them anyways!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> 500px: [http://500px.com/](http://500px.com/) wallbase: [http://wallbase.cc/toplist](http://wallbase.cc/toplist) desktopwallpapers: [http://www.desktopwallpapers.co.uk/](http://www.desktopwallpapers.co.uk/)

</comment><comment><USER7> Often I find something on [http://flickr.com](http://flickr.com) on the advanced search at the bottom I click "Creative Commons" and "Find content to use commercially".

</comment><comment><USER8> I take help of google image search.....try to locate free one and use them. Make sure you read license terms before using them. It's fast and easy.

</comment><comment><USER9> [http://morguefile.com/](http://morguefile.com/) is my personal favorite...

</comment><comment><USER10> [http://www.shutterstock.com/](http://www.shutterstock.com/)

<comment><USER11> As of July 27, 2013, there is a 30% off code - "tnt7" \- for all new account sign ups.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> [http://www.istockphoto.com/](http://www.istockphoto.com/)

</comment><comment><USER13> [http://www.thenounproject.com](http://www.thenounproject.com)

</comment><comment><USER14> [http://pixabay.com/](http://pixabay.com/)

</comment><comment><USER15> I make them myself.

</comment><comment><USER16> we pay for getty images.</comment>


Ask HN: Site is growing over 500,000 users/yr, to VC or not to VC? - <AUTHOR>

I have posted here a few times discussing my startup, http://spaceindustrynews.com . We've had a few talks about bringing in VCs to help fund the site.
I'm still open to VC help but I'd like to test the waters and see what you think about going it alone or with content partners ( I've gotten a few since last we talked ) and doing it 100% myself with a little help from my friends.
I have a day job that pays my hosting bills. The site is gaining traction and has grown since last year. The first year from June 2012-June 2013 brought in 500,000 unique users. This year ( June 2013-October 2013) so far I've reached 240,000 users already, putting me ahead of my first year by a bit.
The burning question is, how to make more money from ads on the site and where I should take it in order to get to the next level which I am aiming for, 1,000,000 users/yr.
My budget allots a little bit of $$ for advertising on other sites/facebook/twitter/BSA, which will raise awareness. I'm slowly cultivating fans with this ad money.
In your opinion, what would you do in my situation? Hold out for a little longer and see if a VC approaches? Or go it alone and be a successful 1 man show?
Thank you for your time, I appreciate all of your opinions and help. <comment><USER2> Let's be clear, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you don't have 500K users, you have 40K uniques.

When we say users, we mean people who have signed up for accounts. Uniques are unique visitors as measured by Google Analytics and such. Uniques are reported monthly, never annually. The numbers you mention are vanity metrics, the real number is 40K uniques, and it's a fairly low number.

For a content site, until you have at least 1M uniques and growing very fast, there is close to zero change you will find a VC interested in you.

As to your burning question: until you have 1M uniques/month, you will make low ad rates, perhaps $1 or $2 CPM. Once you get over 1M uniques/month, you could theoretically make higher direct sales ad rates, up to $10 or $20 CPM. But this requires sales people.

Advertising on other sites most likely is a waste of money. Instead you should pursue social media and traffic deals for distribution.

Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> I have 500k Unique users, sorry. I should have clarified in my post.

I am far from 1M uniques/M at this point, but I plan on getting there some day. My CPM is around $2 now.

I'm investing a lot of time in social media in the next 2-3 months so I hope that works well :)

Thanks for your time and insight!

<comment><USER2> You have "500K unique visitors a year". Just want you to use terminology that means what others think it means.

$2CPM isn't too bad for remnant. Good luck growing the traffic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Quick question: Do you have an email newsletter? I didn't really see anything on your site. If not, start one RIGHT AWAY - and promote it via a popup that comes up after about 10 seconds. Email your subscribers once per week, with links to highlighted stories from that past week.

Your subscriber base will start out small but grow large over time, you will thank me profusely when that time comes.

P.S - I've created 4 different sites that have each attracted over 1 million visitors per year. Secret weapon in all of them has been email newsletters.

<comment><AUTHOR> I use feedburner for my email form now, but am changing over to mailchimp ASAP.

As far as the popup goes, I've read that the popup method makes people frustrated. Have you found this to be true?

Thanks!

<comment><USER3> I've never had an issue with the popup. It may frustrate some users, but the pros outweigh the cons by a factor of at least 1000:1 (in my opinion).

Besides, you need to test things out and see for yourself. Remember, the popup is not an advertisement. It's a special alert to let your true fans know that a newsletter is available. Whoever is frustrated with it probably isn't a good target for you anyway.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a good way of thinking about it, as a service. Good call.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Great job so far!

Funding decisions should always be about goals. What are the goals for raising the money here?

VC's want to see how a 1x investment turns into a 5x return. If you can't communicate that now, it might be a rough pitch.

It sounds like you're on the right path, see if you can squeeze a revenue stream from advertising and continue to iterate on that. If you can prove (to yourself, first) that an investment in advertising your site will significantly change those revenues then you can start considering VC capital.

I would suggest reaching out to partners that can help you with traffic first and foremost, a VC will want to know that you can manipulate the growth levers, not just organically.

In the meantime, keep up the hunt for an angel who's as excited about the space as you are, they're the best fit because they'll share your vision, invest in infrastructure, and be a little more patient.

Remember, funding means added pressure to perform, and milestones that need to be hit. Make sure you're ready for those pressures before you take the check!

Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the honest reply. I'm working with different ad rev streams right now, CPM, affiliate, in-image and soon to be providing more videos as well. I believe opening up a multimedia portion of the site will attract those with a short attention span (like myself) and grow "sticky" content.

My father always taught me that slow and steady wins the race, therefore I'll be investing in this site for the next 5-10 years. I'm in it for the long run.

To be honest, I haven't even started the hunt for an angel yet. I don't really know where to begin, except here on HN. Which seems like a great resource. I'm trying to focus on making my product as good as it can be, and then making it even better.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Wiiliam you should email me at tom at buysellads.com

We can def help you out on the monetization side of things.

Plus we are bootstrapped and profitable too. We love helping other self funded startups.

</comment><comment><USER6> Go it alone as long as you can.

<comment><AUTHOR> Why so? I plan on going it alone for the next 5-10 years. This is my true passion and I don't intend on stopping any time soon.

<comment><USER7> Why do you need investors? Is a lack of funds holding you back at the moment? I run a site with 6 million uniques a year, and half a million registered users. I do it alone.

Investors sounds like a headache. Right now my site pays for itself, and my life. If I want to take a month long vacation, I go on vacation. If I had an investor, I go back to having a regular job, and answering to someone else. That has very little appeal to me.

This works in my situation because my project is fairly polished at this point, and the content is entirely user driven, so I simply work on sorting out the occasion bug, managing the servers, and carefully planning the direction to take the site, and features to develop. More money, more offices, more employees wouldn't bring anything to the table, aside from more stress. If you have a project that needs people out there selling, that needs people writing content, that needs more developers, or that needs more capital, then maybe you do need an investor. This isn't always the case though.

<comment><AUTHOR> The reason I'd like investors is to bring on more content creators. At this point I don't need them, but in the future I know this will become overwhelming so I'm thinking ahead.

<comment><USER8> I was astonished to hear what my friend paid his content writers (on a millions/month user celebrity gossip site)... let's just say it's around minimum wage.

You don't need a VC for that, even if your topic takes a bit more edification.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Subsidized Electric Scooter Startup Takes Aim at Bird, Lime - <AUTHOR> https://www.tryshared.com/scooter-rental-business/ <comment><USER2> Well this is one way to offset the cost of scooters and build some potential sense of ownership over the scooters that are deposited into the streets. Still seems kind of risky.

<comment><AUTHOR> The cost distribution of this model and rapid scalability through decentralized ownership seems to make more sense as well.</comment></comment>


Shopkick Sees Big Traffic, Engagement Bump After Major Redesign - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/20/shopkick-sees-big-traffic-engagement-bump-after-major-redesign/

<comment><USER2> Why is the person's hand and phone keep shaking/vibrating?</comment>


Will The Social Compact in the United States Remain Valid? - <AUTHOR> http://www.whattofix.com/blog/archives/2009/06/will-the-social.php

<comment><USER3> We the people of HN, in order to form a more perfect community, do not ordain and establish articles about politics.

<comment><AUTHOR> What can I say? I tried to make it a long-term, big-picture post. Nothing about current politics, parties, leaders, or anything.

I like complex systems, and observations about complex systems. It was interesting to me, and I could have a discussion all day long without bringing up any political party or current event. Now -- whether the board could do the same? Probably not! So point taken.

It'll probably just die a quiet death, david. After all, it's not nearly as exciting as Erlang innards!

<comment><USER3> > After all, it's not nearly as exciting as Erlang innards!

Au contraire - it's _more_ exciting to more people. That's the problem - <USER2> attracts a lot of people who are only marginally interested in Erlang innards and who want to keep posting articles about Obama or Berlusconi or Sarkozy or whoever. I think it'd be quite fun to talk politics/economics with many people here - over a bottle of wine, though, not on the site. Anyone from here who makes it to Padova and/or Venice is in for free drink(s), BTW.

<comment><AUTHOR> E-gads man, you're right.

I just can't bring myself to read another Ask HN post about "how long do you sleep?" "What types of vegetables go with hacking?" "Do you pick your nose with your left hand or right hand?" "Was Big Endian really much better than Little Endian?" or worse, the 158th post about Wave.

Ok. Now I've ticked off half the room. Sorry about that.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


An MRNA Vaccine Against SARS-CoV-2 – Preliminary Report - <AUTHOR> https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2022483 <comment><USER2> This looks like great news, but I have zero medical knowledge, so I'm still left scratching my head. Rather than read what doctors have to say about these results, I instead decided to see what these results did to Moderna's stock price. Including the after-hours pricing, it looks to be up a whopping 40%! Looks like Wall Street is convinced that most of us will be willing to roll up our sleeves in 2021.

</comment><comment><USER3> > Before vaccination, no participant had detectable 80% live-virus > neutralization at the highest serum concentration tested (1:8 dilution) in > the PRNT assay. At day 43, wild-type virus–neutralizing activity capable of > reducing SARS-CoV-2 infectivity by 80% or more (PRNT80) was detected in all > participants, with geometric mean PRNT80 responses of 339.7 (95% CI, 184.0 > to 627.1) in the 25-μg group and 654.3 (95% CI, 460.1 to 930.5) in the > 100-μg group ().

This does really sound good.</comment>


The Rise and Fall of Thinking Machines - <AUTHOR> http://www.inc.com/magazine/19950915/2622.html <comment><USER2> It reads a lot like Google, with the gourmet chef and the catering to hackers. Only the outcome is radically different.

</comment><comment><USER3> Substitute "Amtrak" and it's basically the same story.

<comment><AUTHOR> Amtrak was a subsidy to keep old technology around because that old technology employed lots of people; Thinking Machines was supposed to be new technology that would replace lots of people.

Governments are too schizophrenic to be consistent.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> totally unconnected from my world. but thought provoking - the kings and queens of hitech.</comment>


Plan 9 from Bell Labs - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_9_from_Bell_Labs

<comment><USER2> Although I am a fan of plan 9 in general, I don't really see how posting a link to the Wikipedia article is useful.

<comment><USER3> A lot of people don't know anything about Plan 9.

<comment><USER4> Sure, but is Hacker _News_ really the place to learn?

<comment><USER3> Sure. It's been stated many times that Hacker News is for anything that might be interesting to hackers, not just "news" (anything that happened relatively recently.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So...this is news?

</comment><comment><USER6> For those who are interested in Plan9, you may be interested in checking out the following:

* Plan9port (Plan 9 from User Space) ports a number of the Plan9 programs to Linux: <http://swtch.com/plan9port/>

* wmii (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wmii>) is a tiling window manager that allows configuration through a Plan9-like filesystem. A number of people I know (myself included) were first introduced to the power of Plan 9 through wmii's extensive configurability.

* Go (the language) has borrowed a number of elements from Plan 9. One of the two main compilers (gc) traces its origin in the plan9 toolchain.

* Acme/Wily (the text editor). I'll have to confess that I never took to this much (as a Vim user), but give it a shot.

<comment><USER7> Plan9port claims to be a port to Unix like systems, not just Linux. The site lists OS X, SunOS, and several BSDs in addition to Linux.</comment></comment>


Broken health care system is causing rampant burnout among doctors, nurses - <AUTHOR> https://m.sfgate.com/news/article/Broken-health-care-system-is-causing-rampant-14556273.php <comment><USER2> My wife is a nurse, and the lack of well thought out scheduling contributes greatly to this. It seems like many systems lack any logic behind creating their shift schedules. The long 12+ hr shifts combined with poor weekend structuring for night shift staff make it extremely hard to focus on self-care and your relationships. If it's "your weekend" you work Saturday and Sunday night, and have to consequently sleep most of the Saturday morning and afternoon to be ready. If it's not "your weekend" you're on the schedule for Friday night, causing you to have to sleep most of Saturday. It's a lose-lose either way.

Combine this with anti-union practices, dangerous staffing shortages, and a general anti-employee attitude, and no wonder you see so much burnout.

The leeches in the healthcare environment (insurance companies, executives & administration) take too much away from the people who do the actual work (doctors, nurses, janitors, and other support staff).

</comment><comment><USER3> The ratio of doctors/nurses to patients in 3rd world countries is 1:300. 1 doctor for every 300 patients. In the united states the ratio is higher than 1:1000. Real healthcare reform would address this issue. Obamacare, Medicare for all and other proposed legislation do absolutely nothing to fix these problems, one reason why they're doomed to failure from the onset.

<comment><USER4> This a real issue. The American Medical Association lobbies to artificially limit the number of residency spots funded by the federal government. No change in compensation structure will change the fact that every dermatologist in my city is booked solid until next June, but allowing more of them to be trained might.

What's interesting is that the market seems to be coping with this by giving more responsibility and autonomy to mid-level providers like PAs and CRNAs - and tons of physicians are livid about it. As a patient, for many health issues I'd prefer to be diagnosed and treated by someone with the rigorous education and training of a board-certified physician rather than a mid-level whose degree includes less than 1 year of clinical experience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Just change the headline to "broken health care system" to "broken economic system" and "doctors, nurses" to "all employees" and it'd be even more accurate. Most jobs seem to try and drain every drop of energy they can get from their staff, instead of giving them realistic workloads that are sustainable. I feel like as a society we've crossed the Rubicon from being efficient to being downright sociopathic and self-destructive. I guess this is the end result of unchecked capitalism. You definitely don't see the same extremes in Europe, but at the same time there is less opportunity. Maybe that's a worthwhile trade off?

<comment><USER6> The question then is who is the opportunity benefiting? It seems like one class of workers are being squeezed for the benefit of middle managers, administrators, and above. Of course businesses would prefer that over Europe's higher taxes and welfare.</comment></comment>


Facebook tests 'pay to promote post' tool - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18033259 <comment><USER2> Does anyone know if this would be useful for businesses?</comment>


Google Pacman - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/pacman/

<comment><USER2> So we're linking to one of the google homepage graphics, because you know no one who uses HN will have _ever_ seen it.

<comment><USER3> The post probably wants to show that there's now a definite place for it, /pacman/, even if the homepage doodle changes.

<comment><USER4> That, and it's not just a graphic.. it's an actual, playable HTML5/JS game.

<comment><USER5> The other thread said that it wasn't HTML5.

<comment><USER4> You're right. I assumed canvas but it's just document elements and Flash for sound.

<comment><USER6> Explains why there is no sound on my Nexus One.

Too bad it won't play with my trackball or something...</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Bike Is the Vehicle of the Future - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/vehicle-future-bike/ <comment><USER2> Bikes are nice, but the bike lovers keep writing pieces like this. Don't get me wrong. I like them, but I think we should balance our love with these points:

* Only fit people can use the human powered ones for more than a short distance. If you've got cardio issues, a bad knee or worse, it's not for you. * eBikes help but even they're not powerful enough for many situations. If you take someone moderately obese and put a hill in the way, the bike is in trouble. 40%++ of America is obese. * Many jobs require commuting in the dark during the winter. Bikes are much less safe in the dark, even if there are no cars around. * You can't carry very much on a bike at all. Oh yeah, a few have clever trailers but even they can't carry much. * It's not so easy to carry a toddler. Sure, you can carry a baby -- if you can find a baby helmet that fits. But a toddler is too big to share a bike but too small to ride a separate one. * Bikes are dangerous, even without cars around. Bikes toss people over the handlebars all of the time. The tires lose traction and people crash. Cars make things worse, but getting rid of cars won't make bikes safe. * Rain, snow and ice are danger multipliers. Take all of the danger of a sunny day and multiple by a large fraction. * Many people live too far away to bike to work. My job is a 60-80 minute ride each way. Driving takes 25 minutes. Guess which one I choose? * Bikes are unfair to the poor. Poor people live further away. That's how real estate works. If the rich people don't have time to ride, the poor are going to be riding even longer.

The bike riders can dream. They can claim it's a future. But none of my objections will change in the near term. They can keep putting out propaganda. But the Americans are not buying for good and practical reasons.

<comment><USER3> I would like to re-balance out your balancing:

If you ride a bike every day, you probably won't be obese for long. Decent e-bikes do fine even with obese people, the motor is not the primary motor, it is only meant to assist your pedaling.

Powerful LED-based lights for bikes exist, and will absolutely both make you visible to anyone, and let you see any potholes etc.

You can carry plenty on a bike. For instance there are panniers and pannier bags front and back, bike trailers, backpacks made specifically for biking. Go further and you have cargo bikes, both trikes, reverse trikes and bakfiets/Long Johns. Beyond that, there are specialized moving "van" e-bikes, which I've seen used in the Netherlands.

Toddlers can ride trailer bikes, which attach to your own bike, and lets them pedal and help out, preparing them to ride their own bikes.

Bikes don't toss people over the handlebars "all the time", only when people have absolutely no feeling with the front brake and just jam it on as hard as they can. Learning a bit of basic motor skill completely prevents it from happening.

In 30+ years of cycling, I have never lost traction once. It's basically impossible to force the rear wheel to slip unless you jam the brake for a sweet powerslide. For the front wheel, just steer around any gravel or other loose material in corners, it's a very basic bike-riding skill.

Distance is a factor, that is a tradeoff you make for a less expensive house, but also a significantly longer commute. This is where bikes work great in tandem with public transit. You ride the bike to the station and bring it with you and ride the proverbial last mile. It does take a little bit of effort to optimize for better cycling conditions, but the payoff is absolutely worth it. And it won't be a perfect solution for 100% of people, because it doesn't have to be. As long as we get a significant percentage of people to bike, that's a victory!

The bicycle is one of the greatest mobility-increasing inventions of human history. It put entire populations on wheels, let them transport their produce much easier and much farther than simply carrying it. They're inexpensive, simple to repair and DIY.

Millions of Americans in cities like NYC, LA, SF, Seattle love their bikes. The reason they are not more popular is due to the overall infrastructure in the US being hardcore focused almost entirely on cars and cars only.

<comment><USER4> In places with colder climates, icy roads/sidewalks can easily cause traction loss. Where I am, Edmonton, Alberta, -20°C is common for months of the year. This is combined with icy roads, and deep snow in the side streets.

<comment><USER3> Mountain bikes with knobby and even studded tires exist, and a great thing about bikes is that they're relatively inexpensive and don't take up a ton of space.

I know many people have beater cars for winter, so have a beater bike instead.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The bike maybe the vehicle of the future for many young downtown city residents who live close enough to use it.

Mass transit still owns the crown of vehicle of the present and I would suggest perhaps still vehicle of the future.

Bikes for me represent the vehicles of my past.

<comment><USER6> Funnily enough I actually see it the other way around (maybe because of the peculiarities of where I live).

Biking sucks for downtown urban areas due to crappy drivers, bike thieves, and more accessible public transportation.

However, for those who aren't well served by public transportation it seems like a great way to solve the last like problem. On foot, a train station 2 miles from your house isn't practical. On a bike it is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> To even sort of make sense, you have to have high population density. That's looking less and less like a good idea right now.

Even without that, _xhkkffbf_ 's points pretty much demolish this idea.

Bikes are great and a nice occasional complement to cars, just as flugelhorns are a nice occasional complement to trumpets. But replacement? No.

<comment><USER4> I can't imagine doing my 20KM commute over bike in -20°C (very common here in Edmonton,Alberta). It's sub-zero temperatures for easily 5 months of the year, with large amounts of snow. Even to the nearest train station would be quite an adventure in -20 with snow drifts.

<comment><USER7> I did such a commute in Los Angeles for a number of years. Weather was fine. Sweaty, but doable. But it just plain soaks up your time, which is your life.

Some people would be cool with that, but it certainly shouldn't be forced on people. And really, it was only possible for me because I was young, single, childless, and had close to no life. To say that everyone should do this is the height of narcissism.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The bike is the vehicle of the present.

</comment><comment><USER9> If only it wasn't for all those young, old or sick people /s I sometimes imagine how my city would look like if there were no car lanes and pavement but grass and trees along the middle of the "road". Then I remember I can't physically be outside 6 months of the year due to asthma and allergies so I have to use the car

<comment><USER10> air pollution exacerbates asthma as well as increases the chance for new-onset asthma. So the relationship here is more complicated. Just how lack of movement feeds into obesity which feeds into less mobility.

So better not be so quick to put the cart before the horse here. A lot of people don't use cars because they're sick, they're sick because we've built unhealthy environments in the first place.

Also as far as young people are concerned, not sure I've you've ever been to the Netherlands but biking with kids is perfectly fine.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> The bike is the vehicle of the present in many places around the world (Netherlands!). As for bike-shares - they have their place, but it's limited.

The story itself sounds like some marketing copy for some get-rich-quick shared-bike provider.

PS - Remember, though, that some cities are built on hillsides (e.g. San Francisco), and are not very bike-able.

</comment><comment><USER12> As far as dockless last-mile transport goes, I'm actually a big fan of those electric kick scooters... but I acknowledge I'm an imbecile and they're really dangerous.

One issue I have with that model in general is that for many of the distances I'd like to use a share bike or scooter, it would take longer and cost money to walk to the vehicle and unlock it. It's frequently faster and free just to walk to my final destination.

</comment><comment><USER13> In the future there will be no rain, there will be no snow, it will never be 100 degrees F, there will be no prostate problems and everyone will be 28 years old forever! All happy on bikes.</comment>


Who wrote this mysterious book satirizing tech startup culture? - <AUTHOR> http://fusion.net/story/146648/who-wrote-this-amazing-mysterious-book-satirizing-tech-startup-culture/

<comment><USER2> Very amusing. As far as the source, I suspect Madrigal is on the right track looking at literary people, as it smells non-technical ("shouted commands in Unix" rather than "shouted Unix commands").

<comment><USER3> While that might be the case (that the author is non-technical) you could also argue that the wording "shouting commands [at the dog] ... in Unix" has a nicer flow to it -- than "shouting Unix commands [at the dog]"

The first starts off as a perfectly normal sentence: "he shouted commands" and then ends with a funny surprise: "in Unix!" The second doesn't quite have the same punch. So if you want to favor the writing instead of the tech, even if you're a technical person, you might word it like the author did.

<comment><USER4> Agree; this is just better/funnier prose.

The author is indeed probably "non-technical" but the specificity of the 1999-2000 Web 1.0 references indicates he/she has been steeped in this culture for a long time. I suppose you could just google "Pixelon" but... nah.</comment></comment></comment>


Facebook is keeping you from being an asshat in comments - <AUTHOR> https://plus.google.com/111091089527727420853/posts/cdZQPUiMp9b

<comment><USER2> Based on the anecdotal comments, it seems like there's a very high correlation between posts that get flagged as inappropriate by Facebook and those that mention Google+ or link to it. Which seems absurd, on the face of it, but I am going to have to experiment.</comment>