Oliver Sacks: Sabbath - <AUTHOR> http://nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/oliver-sacks-sabbath.html <comment><USER3> As a Christian, I decided a few years back to start taking Sundays as a Sabbath. I don't have hard rules, but I mostly stay away from a computer/smartphone/email/etc. So no programming, browsing the internet, finances, none of the normal responsibilities/distractions. Instead I use the day to go to church, read the Bible and other books, pray, nap, spend time with friends and family, and do outdoors activities.

In retrospect, this has worked out fantastically for me. I love Sundays now - there is a sense of peace most Sundays which is great. I enter Mondays feeling refreshed and ready to work. I would recommend taking a Sabbath day once a week to anyone, I think it is beneficial regardless of your beliefs.

Two notes: First, the idea of a Sabbath is not an idea that condemns work. Christian theology holds working well as a moral virtue and something that honors God. In fact, part of taking a Sabbath, I believe, is working harder and being less lazy the other six days of the week.

Second, Whether taking a Sabbath is mandated for Christians is a debated issue, though I personally think it is not. The difference between the ceremonial, civil, and moral law of Judaism and the law's applications to Christianity is a complex topic. Christians are definitely not held to the ceremonial/civil law, but the command to keep the Sabbath is part of the Ten Commandments, and thus some view it as a moral imperative. I feel that in the spirit of Christian liberty (a freedom of action but still subject to God's moral principles), taking a day for a Sabbath is a personal decision.

<comment><USER4> I personally believe there's a strong pro-Sabbath argument to be made from the New Testament:

In the gospels, Jesus says he is the master of shabbat; how can a person be a master of something he is abolishing?

Again in the gospels, we read Jesus ruling it is lawful to do good on the sabbath - if he was aiming at abolishing sabbath, why talk about what's lawful to do during sabbath?

Then, in the epistles, the author of Hebrews writes, "There remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God."

Combined with the historical reality that the early Christians were almost all Jews who saw themselves within Judaism, it is probable the early Christians were sabbath keepers.

As others in this thread have noted, spiritual significance aside, the physical rest and ceasing of ahabbat is healthy. Its importance is amplified in our work-obssessed culture; more so in the startup culture.

<comment><USER3> I agree with you that the case can be made, although I don't know how much I agree with your case, and I still think the case is stronger against a mandatory Sabbath.

Hebrews 4 talks a lot about entering into Sabbath rest. But my interpretation of its main gist is that those who believe and obey the good news enter into God's Sabbath rest. I don't think it's speaking about a literal Sabbath day.

I agree that early Jewish Christians probably practiced the Sabbath, but did early Gentile Christians?

There are also passages in the NT, such as Romans 14 and Colossians 2:16-17, which support the idea that a Christian has freedom to practice an explicit Sabbath day or to not practice it.

So I concur with you that, in Christianity, taking an explicit Sabbath day is permissible and even beneficial. I just don't think it is mandated, and I think a Christian can legitimately believe that he/she shouldn't take an explicit Sabbath day.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm Jewish, observe the Sabbath in a traditional way, am married with three children, and am a self-employed consultant.

I'm delighted that for 25 hours each week, I'm unable to check my e-mail, be in touch with clients, work on pressing deadlines, or be connected to my phone, or watch TV and movies.

Instead, I spend quality time with my wife, children, and friends. I read. I play board games. I enjoy long, extended meals with equally extended discussions.

Can you do this without the restrictions of the Sabbath? Of course. Is this the only way to have quality time with friends and family? Of course not. Does it involve trade-offs, such as not being able to hike around in nature on weekends (which is arguably part of how we would want to rest and relax)? Yes, for sure. Everyone finds their own way to observe.

But in my experience, the traditional set of trade-offs is very much worthwhile. I work nonstop during the week, and while I love my work, it's fantastic to take a break, think about what's really important in life, and even catch up on sleep -- which is, let's be honest, another nice part of the Sabbath!

I should add that observing the Sabbath as an individual is almost certainly a ticket to loneliness and/or misery. It only works if you do it within a context of others -- family, and even more importantly, a community -- who are similarly inclined. I have, over the years, spent a handful of Sabbaths completely on my own, and those were freeing and meditative in their own ways. But I've long argued that a very large part of Judaism's success is that it forced the creation of close-knit communities. The Sabbath is one factor that leads to such communities, and it's then that the community gives back.

<comment><USER6> Exactly. But it was only when I entered the workforce full-time that I truly appreciated Shabbat. Especially in a world when I am expected to be on-call 24 hours a day, I honestly cannot understand how people do without a _real_ break once a week. On a personal level, it can't be healthy to constantly be on, 24/7, practically 365 days/year - and translated to a musing of more general applicability, that might lead to better / more productive business. Perhaps a worthy subject for experimentation by businesses (more than what some banks have done recently for summer interns and junior analysts).

<comment><USER7> > On a personal level, it can't be healthy to constantly be on, 24/7, > practically 365 days/year

It is also unsustainable. If your job expects you to do that, someone has a wrong idea of how the world works (but it is more likely you will get blamed when things go wrong, rather than the person who had the wrong idea).

If I were in your place, I'd look for a job that respects my off-time. 24/7 is acceptable (if compensated) once a month, maybe even once a week in some cases - but definitely not every day, and definitely not 365 days a year.

What do you do on vacation? On a plane?

<comment><USER6> 1\. In case I wasn't clear, I meant being on-call nearly all the time - <USER2> that I have actual work all the time. You generally get a fair amount of weekends off, but it makes planning difficult, etc. 2\. This is reality for a LOT of white-collar jobs today (wall st., lawyers, consultants, etc.).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> To me, the great value of the Sabbath as a day of rest is what Sacks calls "its utter peacefulness and remoteness from worldly concerns". Keeping a day like this affirms our absolute value as human beings, which is independent from whatever value we have economically, socially, or in any other way.

<comment><USER9> I think all value is subjective. What do you mean by 'absolute value as human beings'?

<comment><USER10> I'm not the GP, but I'll take a stab.

Human beings (and other sentient things) are special in that they are both subjects and objects of value. That is, human beings are both things that are valued and things that value. This means that human beings are capable of having value even if nobody else is around to value them--because they value themselves.

I suspect that GP only means that keeping the sabbath, and disconnecting from everything else one gets wrapped up in in the course of everyday life, helps to remind you of this.

<comment><USER11> > That is, human beings are both things that are valued and things that value.

I'm not convinced there's enough evidence to support the claim that humans are the only species that assign value to things. Maybe I'm missing something.

<comment><USER12> The statement that you quote does not seem to say the same things as your interpretation (it didn't say "only").

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I can't think of anyone I'd rather hear from on death. This man spent his life trying to understand and communicate what it was to exist as a human being, what it was to be conscious, how we see and interpret the world. He wrote some of the most entertaining, but also enlightening books I've ever read. He is now facing the end of his life with the sort of philosophical peace of Socrates.

</comment><comment><USER14> Those interested in an in-depth reflection on Sabbath practices might find this book interesting:

"The Sabbath World: Glimpses of a Different Order of Time" by Judith Shulevitz

[http://www.amazon.com/The-Sabbath-World-Glimpses- Different/d...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Sabbath-World-Glimpses- Different/dp/0812971736)

It's one of the more thoughtful books about where/how religious practice meets human needs that I've come across in a while, and getting a lot out of it doesn't depend on being a believer of any kind.

</comment><comment><USER15> This probably explains the massive movement that inspired a million Jews to experience and keep one Shabbat last year as part of [http://www.theshabbosproject.org](http://www.theshabbosproject.org) and will likely imspire millions more this year.

<comment><USER16> Thanks for sharing, haven't heard of the project before.

<comment><USER15> Sure. Heres a video about it. [https://youtu.be/S2EkDLqszHs](https://youtu.be/S2EkDLqszHs)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> It's ironic that this submission is taking off on a Saturday morning when fans of the (Jewish) Sabbath are presumably absent from HN.

<comment><USER18> Is it also ironic that I am an NFL fan, but I don't play football (professionally or otherwise)?

<comment><USER19> No it is not, but you've missed the point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The idea of giving yourself permission to enjoy any length of time without the guilt of not being productive is definitely good for you. It's tough going if your personality is wired to ruminate though.

But the idea of _scheduling_ down time for "being in the present" sounds worthwhile. I could do with this.

<comment><USER15> >It's tough going if your personality is wired to ruminate though.

This might be why Judaism has many rituals throughout shabbat. Longer prayers with more interactive singing. Three meals with family and friends and of course the most important part...an afternoon nap!

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> While being a non-believer (but raised in a Catholic family, when not working or shopping during Sunday was strictly observed), I still consider it "an ancient wisdom".

I am trying to have one day of rest (i.e. intended not working, not to confuse with "I wanted to work, but it turned out that I was slacking off"), but given that I always have some overdue projects, it's too tempting not to "observe Sabbath". However, I see that in the long run it's better to rest one day (and doing programming side projects is not rest in that sense) rather than have 7 days of reduced productivity.

</comment><comment><USER22> I was raised keeping the Sabbath fairly strictly, but not to the level of Orthodox Judaism. There were the things I "couldn't do" on the Sabbath that I really would have liked to do, but I always kept the Sabbath faithfully as a child. It seemed like a limiting restriction, but I did it anyway. After I graduated and entered the workforce, I started to appreciate the Sabbath more --probably for the same reasons that many commenters here recognize some of the positive aspects of the idea. It's a nice break from the normal routine, a chance to rest, rejuvenate, etc.

But now I do not keep the Sabbath any more. Somewhere along the line I rejected enough of religion that I didn't feel it was necessary even though I recognize the positive aspects of it. Now I work on Sabbath sometimes. I do side programming projects on Sabbath sometimes. I rest on Sabbath sometimes. Sometimes I rest, relax, and rejuvenate all weekend. I don't feel its necessary to take good guiding principles and observe them as strictly as Sabbath keepers seem wont to do.

But maybe that's just because of my personality. Maybe there are people who need a strict Sabbath to prevent themselves from overwork and burnout. I have a pretty high level of intrinsic motivation and drive myself harder than many, but I have a good internal burnout avoidance mechanism. I'm sure there are people out there who don't have that and for whom a device like the Sabbath might be very important. At the end of the day, I think there are very few absolutes, and I find that my life is happier when I'm not worrying about the Sabbath.

</comment><comment><USER23> Growing up a Seventh-Day Adventist, Sabbath was just the day that you weren't allowed to have any fun.

As with all things, if it works for you, great. Just don't force it on anyone else.

<comment><USER24> > As with all things, if it works for you, great. Just don't force it on > anyone else.

Here's a question, because this is a phrase I've encountered a lot, but I have often wondered whether this is somewhat a self-defeating statement. "Don't you dare force your beliefs on anyone else" is in itself a belief, that you are forcing upon another, is it not? Just because it is a belief about beliefs, or how someone ought to believe, does not excuse it, I have wondered.

<comment><USER23> I'm not making a philosophical statement. I'm saying if you cross this line, our ability to live peacefully together is going to end.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I've been shomer shabbat (observant of the sabbath) in the past and am still involved in Jewish communities full of observant people, even though I am clearly less observant.

When I first became shomer shabbat, the first thing I noticed was the peace. The best way to describe it is like the piece you have after the die is cast. If something isn't right, there's nothing you can do about it and there's no sense in worrying about it. The decisions have been made, the work has been done, and whatever will come will come. I'm sure that some of it is the relief to be done with the preparation for shabbat (which can involve a bit of a hurried last-minute pace leading up to it), but I think there's something real about feeling like there's nothing you can do about things.

I remember other students in college asking me if it felt like a disadvantage to studies. In fact, it felt like the opposite. Before being shomer shabbat, I would procrastinate (not overly so or in a damaging way, but procrastinate a bit nonetheless) and that procrastination would lead to worry. I _should_ be doing work now. The procrastination and worry would combine to zapping my energy when I would get around to work. Being shomer shabbat meant that there was no need to worry. The die was cast and there was nothing I could do. There's no reason to fret over something you can't change. Motzei (after) shabbat, I'd feel refreshed having not used (wasted) my mental energy worrying, obsessing, etc. over things I needed a break from anyway.

It also creates a great atmosphere of socialization - like in the time before technology. You walk to meet up with people around you, you eat meals with people, you talk in parks, etc. Without such socialization, shabbat would drag on. But the other people make it a positive, communal experience.

There's also something special about artificially limiting groups. In the modern world, we often flock to those who have the same ideological bent, same hobbies, same professions, and same income levels. While sabbath-observant Jews hardly qualifies as a cross-section of society, there's something special that happens when you need to rely on people who have different politics, different hobbies, etc. for a decent amount of your social life and free time. When a group is small enough (and perceived by those in the group as necessary), one has to be kinder with one's words and a little more flexible to make the group dynamic work in a stable way. It's certainly no ideal society or anything like that, but while a lot of modern society promotes mobility (the ability to take "take my ball elsewhere" if one wants something different), that's less of the case here. At least where I live. If I were writing from New York, I'm sure there's plenty more ability to take one's ball elsewhere and fracture communities over comparatively small things due to the high proportion of sabbath-observant Jews within walking distance.

It's also an interesting article to think about on the same day that the NYTimes has published its article on Amazon's working conditions. One of the ideas behind shabbat is that work is never done. You could work every hour of your life and never realize an end-goal because life has no end-goal. A few weeks back at work, the topic of Soylent came up. One coworker noted that many at their school saw it as important because they could save so much time that they could put to work. Another coworker critisized that notion arguing that life wasn't about work and that meals offer time to rest and socialize. The Amazon article had emphasized the drive to create which kept workers going through what could be daunting demands on themselves. I love creating. It's why I'm an engineer. But the creation is never done. I've never looked at something and concluded that it's just done. Is working such long hours merely chasing a "done" state that we won't ever catch? Maybe our schooling has programmed us with artificial "done" states with each semester and graduation just to set us up for a lack of them in the real world.

Like the end of a semester or graduation, shabbat provides an artificial "done" state. Even if your paper or exam isn't what you want it to be, it's done when the course is over and there's nothing you can do about it. Even if your work isn't completed to the state you want by sundown friday evening, there's nothing you can do about it. It's done.

In a world where we can plan so much and there are very few limitations on our use of labor, it's an interesting way to live. In antiquity, the lack of cheap, artificial light could limit work hours of the day; seasons would limit farming. The lack of easy vehicles to transmit and grow wealth into the future, the lack of easy mobility, the lack of distractions like television to avoid other people, etc. all make antiquity very different from modernity. In some ways, it makes shabbat feel alien to the modern world. You're not allowed to plan for anything after shabbat while it's shabbat. You live within the day. You live where you are and with those around you since you can't go far without a vehicle (which includes bicycles for most). You must find different ways of passing the time (reading, communal meals, outdoor activities). I'm not arguing that it's an ideal way to live, but it's certainly interesting.

I'm not sure I have any sort of conclusion, but I keep thinking back to something that happened the summer after my senior year of college. I was wandering around campus because it was shabbat afternoon and a walk seemed like a good distraction. I ran into one of my professors who was more of a socialist/atheist Jew who asked if I would help him carry things. This was acceptable given that there was an eruv (you can watch Wyatt Cenac's piece from the Daily Show if you want more information on what an eruv is). He hadn't known that I was shomer shabbat and it came up in conversation while moving things. He apologised for asking me to move things on shabbat, but all I could think about was how this was what shabbat felt like to me. I hadn't planned on helping him move things. It just happened. If I hadn't happened to run into him, it wouldn't have happened. It was this little island of time where something happened by coincidence that had nothing to do with anything that came before it or anything that would come after it. It was whatever came my way during the day.

And it was good and restful and meaningful.

<comment><USER26> Really appreciate your comment, and will have to digest if further. But, in the moment must say, thank you thank you thank you for being the one to mention the connection to the NY Time article about Amazon. Would think that was the de-facto immediate connection, and by all means, yes!

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> At first I wasn't sure why I clicked through but it was worth it. While not really "hacker", read till the end and you might find a bit of the rest and self-reflection offered bu the Sabbath.

<comment><USER15> I actually think this is extremely relevant to hacker.

The fundamental concept of sabbath is, "create and manipulate and be a slave to nature for 6 days...but on the seventh day you take a day out to reflect and appreciate what you created and become a king over your domain and appreciate your accomplishments and creation. In essence, sabbath is equivelant to shipping.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I can confirm from experience that restricting computer/electronics use on Saturdays does wonders.

Currently am going further and practicing to include fasting on Fridays and 'Village' on Sundays to complete the mystical triad.

Four-day week with the rest as my own personal projects! Yea!

Simple ritual hacks that help in keeping my feet on the ground.

</comment><comment> guard-of-terra "The Second World War decimated our Jewish community in Cricklewood, and the Jewish community in England as a whole was to lose thousands of people in the postwar years."

Why would that happen in the UK? Did they just skipped country while it was having war problems, or were there any oppression?

</comment><comment><USER29> I wish atheism had its enforced slack and rituals of inconvenience to temper the soul. Oh wait, it does ..</comment>


When the Great Alpaca Bubble Burst - <AUTHOR> http://priceonomics.com/when-the-great-alpaca-bubble-burst/

<comment><USER2> The authors of the original paper later revisited the issue here: [http://giannini.ucop.edu/media/are- update/files/articles/V15...](http://giannini.ucop.edu/media/are- update/files/articles/V15N5_3.pdf)</comment>


Best PR strategy for a brand new startup? - <AUTHOR>

Hello,
Our Team has been working very hard in the last few months to develop a new concept of social network. We have almost completed the beta testing and we are very close to the official launch of our project. We are eager to see if the public will appreciate our ideas.
Given that we are not experts of PR, I was wondering which one is, in your opinion, the best PR strategy for a brand new startup. Our guts tell us that we should prepare an press release, detailing the innovative aspects of our project, we should attach some screenshots and a demo link and we should send this email to the main tech blogs and websites, such as Techcrunch, Mashable, Venture Beat, Silicon Alley Insider, etc.
We wonder if this is the right approach or if it would sound unprofessional and if we should hire a PR agency to write press releases on our behalf.
What is your experience and advice?
Many thanks. <comment><USER2> What's your goal for the press? To get users? Investors? Customers?

For a tech blog like you describe, don't bother with a press release. Best to send a short email describing why what you're doing is interesting. Most reporters prefer hearing from founders rather than PR people.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot for the suggestion. I had the feeling that a full press release could have been seen as pretentious. We are focused on creating a useful product and we are not interested in getting coverage just for the sake of it. Much better, as you say, to send a personal email from the founders to these blogs. Thanks again!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'm going to take a bit of a different tact than just saying "here's how to do it". The important thing may be "are you sure you're ready"??

You've been working hard, you're excited, but where are you really at? Have you gone through beta? Have you got some users? Have you gotten the feedback, is your messaging set?

I think you'll have a real challenge getting into the major tech blogs before you've got a social network with activity, and the activity you get from the publicity might not help your business to grow in the long run.

Specifically for a social network, if you get on TC and you have a social network without activity and content, you're not going to get very far.

My advice, is get out there and build the base. Make sure you've got the right amount of activity (you define that), find out what parts of your business are really resonating with people, and figure out the message/soundbite that makes a difference. When a few pieces fall together, you'll know, because writing to the tech blogs will be a piece of cake when you say "[original angle that resonates with users] provides [x]% growth over the last [x] time period" or something along those lines. That actually isn't catchy enough.

Another tactic is to not go directly for the big blogs. I got covered by a bunch of smaller blogs, and that's where TC and TechRadar found out about my site.

Another way is for you to basically write the article for the blogs, and let them basically edit it for print. The more work you do for the writer, the more likely they are to just do a quick edit and then post it. I haven't done this myself ,but I've heard of it done.

If you want to get some PR, you can also write an article about your industry which is not directly about your business. You'll see lots of these articles on TC. This may drive some people to check out your site, and help it to grow, even though you won't have your name in lights.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks a lot for the great advice. Our main goal right now is to get some users. The mechanics of our project work much better when we have a lot of users and we need to build a big user base first.

I loved your suggestion to go with smaller blogs and provide them with a description of the project ready to be published.

Thanks again and I'll keep you HN friends updated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> startupbook.net</comment>


The Pirate Bay Wants to Encrypt the Entire Internet - <AUTHOR> http://newteevee.com/2008/07/09/the-pirate-bay-wants-to-encrypt-the-entire-internet/

<comment><USER2> I think the most useful part of this article is the last paragraph, where the author notes that none of The Pirate Bay's lofty projects have come to fruition yet. Until there is something that I can download and install on my computer, this is just vaporware.

<comment><USER3> Except the biggest Bittorrent tracker one, and a few other finished projects.

<comment><USER4> Their projects only succeed if they use illegal content to push them.

This was also the reason youtube succeeded and right now they are only selling ads for about 4% of all content, because for the rest of the content, the original post doesn't own the copyright.

(only have german source [http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Zeitung-Google-von- YouTube-We...](http://www.heise.de/newsticker/Zeitung-Google-von-YouTube- Werbeerloesen-enttaeuscht--/meldung/110665))

<comment><USER5> Yeah it definitely didn't workout for the YouTube founders. Better luck next time I guess.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> John Gilmore (employee number 5 at Sun, and co-founder of the EFF and cypherpunks) tried something similar in the late 1990s: <http://www.toad.com/swan.html>

<comment><USER7> Just to add to the above - FreeS/WAN project was too heavy on an ideology and it had a major impact on their technical decisions. They refused to support DES, because it was weak, nor did they want to include X.509 (PKI) support, because it was a hierarchy "controlled by selected ones". This limited practical usefulness of the project and it was one of the primary causes of its demise. Others were the fact that it was hard to install (required patching and rebuilding the kernel from the source) and tricky to configure.

It was officially shut down in April 2004 - <http://www.freeswan.org/ending_letter.html>

There is a fork called _strongSwan_ , which is still being developed even though it's Linux-specific and there is a native IPsec implementation in Linux 2.6.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Well, we have to do something with all those extra cores we're getting courtesy of the hardware guys. We might as well encrypt/decrypt the data that we're using with the extra cores that we're going to have.

</comment><comment><USER7> In short - they are trying to re-invent IPsec (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPsec>).

<comment><USER9> Or IPv6, right?

<comment><USER10> IPv6 and IPSec are orthogonal. Despite persistent myths to the contrary, IPv6 is not encrypted by default.

<comment><USER9> I couldn't find a more authoritative source on very short order, but FWIW, here's the TLDP ([http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Linux+IPv6-HOWTO/chapter-encryption- au...](http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Linux+IPv6-HOWTO/chapter-encryption- authentication.html))

      Unlike in IPv4, encryption and authentication is a
      mandatory feature of IPv6. Those features are normally
      implemented using IPsec (which can be also used by IPv4).

Seems to me that if support for encryption is mandatory for IPv6, even if it's not on by default, using that somehow would be a better route than writing your own New Thing.

<comment><USER10> What does "mandatory" mean? What happens if you don't implement it?

I agree that the Pirate Bay should join forces with the IETF BTNS effort that is already underway, but this is still orthogonal to IPv4/IPv6.

<comment><USER9> The essence of IPSec is a mandatory feature of IPv6. I don't see how this could mean anything other than "packets don't have to be encrypted by default, but encrypted packets must be allowed to be sent and received at any time". That makes IPv6 very much not orthogonal to the topic at hand.

What I'm trying to get to is this: why are they trying to figure out how to encrypt the internet when they can just use IPv6 (presuming that existing implementations support all the "mandatory" features)? The only rational answer I can come up with off the top of my head is if they think governments will have backdoors for transparently observing the traffic unencrypted, but that wasn't mentioned in the article as a rationale for anything.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Too bad TorPark (aka xBrowser and a lot of other things) swayed too far from the Mozilla/Open Source path and into the hands of a semi shady privacy company.

Was a cool project.

</comment><comment><USER11> I'm not sure how this problem isn't solved by onion routing already

<comment><USER10> Onion routing solves a different problem: anonymizing traffic. This "project" doesn't aim to provide anonymity, just resistance against sniffing and some MITMs. Onion routing provides encryption as a side effect of anonymity, but it's massively inefficient compared to just encryption.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I love it ;)

</comment><comment><USER13> I really love this guys!</comment>


GNU Social - diaspora already has a clone that's usable and free software - <AUTHOR> http://www.gnu.org/software/social/

<comment><USER2> I'm sorry, but if Diaspora came out with something that looked like this, I'd lose any faith I had in their chance of success: [http://www.gnu.org/software/social/design- mockups/gnusocial....](http://www.gnu.org/software/social/design- mockups/gnusocial.html)

There's no imagination here. It's just blindly following the leader, just like the legions of Linux desktops that have used a Win95 start menu for the past 15 years.

I apologize if this comes across as unduly harsh, but it's mostly that I'm disappointed with the waste of talent. If the GNU Social team can build a working product, the people behind it are obviously capable of good things -- so why are they just making more of the same?

<comment><USER3> Don't lose faith - Diaspora looks pretty enough <http://www.joindiaspora.com/2010/07/01/one-month-in.html>

(As a side note, the GNU profile example using Sunny in Philadelphia crew is > funny than the Diaspora profile e.g. :)

<comment><USER4> I don't think the criticism was for prettiness, but just for aping existing social network look, feel and functionality.

Which the FAQ says up-front is one of their aims: _By default, we think it'll ship with a plugin to offer functionality that looks like the current popular social network sites, but plugins for other free software applications are expected._ [1]

For my 2c, Diaspora looks even more like Facebook in most of the UI design details.

I actually don't know if that's going to be an important factor in determining if either platform becomes popular, though. Creating a decentralised social networking service will be difficult. Doing it while also reinventing social networking's user experience is an order of magnitude more difficult, although if they succeed then that's a compelling reason for people to migrate.

[1] <http://www.gnu.org/software/social/faq.html>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I don't think the average non-techie user is going to get very far past:

 _You will need PHP5 (including the OpenID, gd and curl libraries) plus MySQL 5 or later. Apache 2 or later, or lighttpd are supported as web servers._

I guess the project is still in the very early stages, so it's probably a bit unfair to criticise them for that at the moment. Hopefully someone (or many people) will offer hosted versions.

<comment><USER4> _Hopefully someone (or many people) will offer hosted versions._

I think this is the thing. I also like the idea of techy types (like us) being able to host our own servers for small groups of our less techy friends.

<comment><USER6> Exactly this.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I know its trolling to say "Eww, PHP", but every time these days I see yet another project that runs on it, a little part of me dies inside. :(

<comment><USER8> It wouldn't be trolling if you actually explained why you thought PHP was not appropriate for this project. The developers already covered the reasons why they are using it in the FAQ - <http://www.gnu.org/software/social/faq.html> :

 _Why are you using PHP? Ruby/Python/Perl/A GUI in Visual Basic would be better!_

 _Better for who? Look at the success of phpBB and Wordpress -- PHP is pretty much everywhere, and while maybe your favourite language is more elegant, PHP is largely ubiquitous._

<comment><USER9> PHP doesn't do enough to encourage building maintainable software. The vast majority of code I've seen "in the wild" grows from a thin, simple layer of logic & SQL queries into an insatiable maintenance monster.

Note: I'm holding back a lot of language nerd rage, so I'm keeping this post very short.

<comment><USER10> So use a framework. Php's problem is that it doesn't come with an structure. The plus is that you can use any framework that works for you. I use <http://www.yiiframework.com> and it has shaved 70% off my dev time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It was announced a few months ago, but I only recently found out about Tonika (via wmf's blog):

<http://5ttt.org/>

It's not directly comparable to Diaspora or GNU Social, but to me it's much more interesting than either: a distributed, secure framework for building an ecosystem of HTTP-based social networking services, rather than simply a free software "clone" of Facebook.</comment>


The OPM hack explained: Bad security practices meet China's Captain America - <AUTHOR> https://www.csoonline.com/article/3318238/data-breach/the-opm-hack-explained-bad-security-practices-meet-chinas-captain-america.html <comment><USER2> _Cotton began providing software and services based on a handshake agreement. OPM racked up more than $800,000 in bills from CyTech—but no contract was executed and CyTech was not paid._

Wow. So I guess one lesson here is to never provide help to the government in an emergency without something in writing. That's just sad.

[EDIT]: The linked article describes this in more detail: [https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/07/how-opm-bilked-a- securi...](https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/07/how-opm-bilked-a-security- contractor-that-confirmed-a-major-hack-cytech/)

<comment><USER3> Given this bit -

>"Since this was a task more suited to Cylance Protect, they rolled out that tool in a free trial mode, and it "lit up like a Christmas tree." At this point, OPM began using Protect extensively in its diagnostic process, despite not committing to license it from Cylance; they eventually agreed to do so on June 30th, a day before the trial period was set to elapse. Cylance did not actually receive payment for months."

\- it seems that the takeaway is even more devastating. Don't start work unless they have already paid.

<comment><USER4> Just a note,cylance is infamous for false positives.

<comment><USER5> What does that matter? The current standard is millions of false negatives.

<comment><USER4> Because they said it "lit up like a christmas tree". Couldn't find the virustotal stats page comparing vendors but Cylance had ~5x higher than the next false positive leader. It's not bad if you can filter them out and have contextual awareness but lighting up like a Christmas tree means little.

<comment><USER3> On the other hand, if you know something is bad for false positives then unless it is so bad as to be unusable, you would expect that, on average, getting a few results is dubious, but lighting up like a christmas tree probably means something is actually there.

<comment><USER6> That's really not a safe assumption — an incorrect result repeated thousands of times does not become correct — and it definitely means that you now have a big problem of reviewing and validating tons of noise which will delay the time before you find whatever valid results are present.

I've seen multiple tools in this class — code scanners, IDSes, or web app scanners — which caused security problems by training everyone to assume that the results are always false-positives until they missed something real or soaking up so much human time that nobody made progress on the major improvements which would have prevented a breach.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I wrote about this one three years ago: [https://caseysoftware.com/blog/opm- background-check-hack-a-d...](https://caseysoftware.com/blog/opm-background- check-hack-a-different-angle)

Basically, what if a secondary goal of the hack was to modify the data? Who was denied or granted a security clearance after the attackers got access?

If you were a State-sponsored actor, making sure your guy got into the key position would be easier if you could taint the competition.

</comment><comment><USER8> If you haven't frozen your credit with the three credit bureaus (whether you were part of the OPM hack or not!) you really should.

Actually from a fraud standpoint Experian was much worse. Whomever hacked OPM was probably a state actor and more interested in the data for other purposes.

Credit monitoring is useless. It just lets you know earlier (maybe) that you have a mess to clean up. What should be criminal is the utter lack of real security/identity validation from banks, financial institutions, the IRS, etc. that causes the mess after these breaches.

<comment><USER9> > Actually from a fraud standpoint Experian was much worse.

I think you meant Equifax.

<comment><USER10> (not the op but) Experian was hacked too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Incredible how underplayed this story has been in the media. When it comes to the US government, there is nothing that China doesn't know about everybody who's anybody.

That seems like it ought to be a bigger deal than it is. Instead, it doesn't see to bother many people, and it's not as if anything could be done about if it did.

<comment><USER12> The lack of ability to do anything about it is probably why you don't hear much about it, but a lot of the people who were affected by it are still salty. One thing that you didn't mention though, is that the info included a ton of info about non government people. The background investigation forms include names, addresses, contact information, etc., for the families, friends, co-workers, and neighbors, of people who worked for the government. The hack was a trove of information that could be used in social engineering attacks against anyone who was within 1-2 degrees of separation of anybody that worked with or for the government.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Books for soon to be Software Engineers - <AUTHOR> I just graduated college with a degree in CS and took a job as a SE. I was curious to know if there were any books that would be valuble to help me bridge the gap between school and industry. Thanks for your suggestions. <comment><USER3> I read these two books in the first few months at my job with a book club that included the other new hires and a good mix of more experienced developers.

      * The Pragmatic Programmer [1]
      * Apprenticeship Patterns [2]

I would highly recommend both.

[1] [http://swanson.github.com/writeup/2010/10/25/pragmatic- progr...](http://swanson.github.com/writeup/2010/10/25/pragmatic- programmer.html)

[2] [http://swanson.github.com/writeup/2010/10/26/apprenticeship-...](http://swanson.github.com/writeup/2010/10/26/apprenticeship- patterns.html)

</comment><comment><USER4> Rule number one is you can't learn EVERYTHING from a book. I'd suggest contributing to open source projects and reflecting on what you learned...

</comment><comment><USER5> I strongly recommend both of these:

      * The Practice Of Programming (co-authored by the 'K' in C's K&R)
      * Code Complete 2

</comment><comment><USER6> Code Compete 2

Software Estimation: Demystifying the Black Art

Pro GIT

Debugging by Agans

</comment><comment><USER7> Peopleware by Demarco and Lister is one of my all-time favorites. The Pragmatic Programmer is also great.

</comment><comment><USER8>
       Code Complete
       Being Geek

<comment><USER9> +1 for Being Geek. It's essentially a well-laid out rehash of Rands' blog posts over the years but I've found it good reading, even with the enormous amount of typos. I'm in the same situation as the OP, so the strategic career advice is much more relevant now than when I read it in the past.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> If you will be programming in Java, these books will serve you incredibly well:

      * Effective Java
      * Java Concurrency in Practice
      * Head First Design Patterns

<comment><USER11> If you will be programming in Java, my condolences. (yes, I'm ready for the downvotes).

I'm sure there's some nice Java code out there. I recently agreed to do a Java project, and the 6 months I was at it sucked the joy of programming out of me.

I've spent the last few years doing Python, C and K, and in comparison, Java is so bureaucratic that I felt like 10% of my work was advancing towards my goal, and 90% was bureaucracy (compared to 20% bureaucracy in C, 5% in Python and 0.001% in K)

And as for books, I recommend Jon Bentley's "Programming Pearls" series, Steve McConnell's "Software Project Survival Guide" and DeMarco and Lister's "PeopleWare". The last two have more to do with project (and people) management than with software engineering - but you will need these skills much earlier than you'd expect, perhaps even in your first couple of months of work. And PeopleWare is a short and enjoyable read, you could put it in the "leisure" pile.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> The Passionate programmer [Pragmatic series] - On how to develop yourself as a programmer

Coders at work - For inspiration

</comment><comment><USER13> Code craft is the book I normally recommend for people starting out. Code Complete which several other people recommend is a great book, but it's one of those books that make much more sense after you've been programming for a year or so.

</comment><comment><USER14> I am sure you'll get enough suggestions on technical books so I won't bother suggesting one. But make sure to pay extra attention to communication. A huge part in software engineering is communication.

</comment><comment><USER15> * The Pragmatic Programmer (Read this once every 6 months until it's obvious)

* Head first design patterns

* Agile Web Development with Rails

It's not obvious, but the rails book is a great introduction to test-driven development in general.

</comment><comment><USER16> hopefully your new company will be ok with using opensource components - <USER2> for sure read The Cathedral and the Bazaar by ESR

</comment><comment><USER17> Clean Code

</comment><comment><USER18> A Few Good Men from UNIVAC</comment>


So you got a YC interview? Now what.. (from the founders of Snaptalent, YC winter 08) - <AUTHOR> http://blog.snaptalent.com/?p=5 <comment><USER2> It's a really well-written and interesting article Sumon, thanks.

</comment><comment><USER3> Very insightful - thank you.

</comment><comment><USER4> > _1\. Product advice: Paul Graham is one of the most astute product advisers > i know._

I am sure this is true, but _how many_ product advisers do you know?

When I look at that last batch of acceptees... I am very surprised at some who made the cut. I'm not sold on YC's judgement. I think they may hit a few home runs just due to taking a lot of swings rather than due to an ability to identify the good pitches, and get lucky that a couple hundred fair pitches are proffered every time. Which leads into the next point...

> _Pg and co get so many applications and have so little time to read them > that you should expect that the YC partners don't have any idea what you do_

...Which means you're giving ownership to people who don't care enough about what you do in particular to spend time on it; this is a big mismatch if you've spent a lot of time on your project, so their approach is more aligned with people who come in with ideas sans code. They have dozens of other start- ups to deal with, not to mention all the time some of them spend on this site.

So the main value in YC seems to be demo day -- getting a stage to present to a large number of moneyed interests at once, plus the news coverage, so you either get the real investment dollars you need or get acquired.

All the information _you_ get is pretty much replaceable -- you can find it other places -- but YC takes the write-protect tab off the floppy so instead of just you being stuck in read-only mode you can write out information that is seen by people you want to see it.

At least that's what it appears their primary value is to me.

<comment><AUTHOR> To point 1: YC backs teams not ideas. Smart early stage investors back teams.

To point 2: AT Interview stage, from one application form how familiar do you expect someone to be once you've read 500 forms. This is a pretty selfish viewpoint. Once you get into YC and get to know everyone YC (in particular Jessica) works extremely hard for you and care about what you do.

Some companies like rescuetime and heroku were well past the idea stage when they did YC. So your comments are a bit of an overgeneralisation.

<comment><USER4> > _YC backs teams not ideas._

Every team works on an idea. A lot of the last batch are underwhelming:

[http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/14/y-combinator-demo- day-r...](http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/03/14/y-combinator-demo-day-roundup- for-spring-2008/)

> _AT Interview stage, from one application form how familiar do you expect > someone to be once you've read 500 forms_

If they're flying you in for an interview you're no longer in the pool of 500 forms. If they are asking questions that make it clear they aren't paying attention to the information you've already given them it just goes to show that your grandiose plans are fairly inconsequential to them and they're only tossing their spare change at you.

> _Some companies like rescuetime and heroku were well past the idea stage_

Companies that have a lot done already are the ones that are going to run into the mismatch I talked about. Here's this great thing you made; now you're giving ownership to people who don't feel about it the same way. There's not a lot of investment of money, time, or emotion on the part of YC. So it seems to me that the exchange is equity for exposure -- basically you've started off your marketing budget at the 6% that YC takes.

<comment><USER5> _Here's this great thing you made_

The mistaken assumption shows in the use of the past tense. The fact that a product's launched doesn't mean it's done. In most startups, most of the work happens after launch.

<comment><USER4> The mistaken assumption is reading things into the statement that aren't there. I'm simply talking about having done _something_ concrete and functional rather than only having a proposal. You're leaping to conclusions by projecting some kind of finality onto that.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Manager making me jump through hoops, is it worth it? - <AUTHOR>

I am working in good "fortune 500" company. I have had this job for past 1.5 years. Now its time for long-over-due hike and promotion, but instead, giving the deserved hike,  my manager dangling a new carrot in front of me each time I start this discussion. This is getting stupid. I mean, I like the company and possibly if I play the game I may get the hike, but somewhere I am not comfortable doing all this.
I want to know your views on this are, is it worth it or should I just move. <comment><USER2> I would recommend reading [http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais- principle-o...](http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or- the-office-according-to-the-office/) and then evaluating your goals and the people you are dealing with very carefully.

</comment><comment><USER3> The following can be summed up as: Move up, or move out. But keep the current market in mind and have a firm landing established before taking the leap.

This is based upon years of personal observation. On the other hand, I'm not the most successful person in this environment. I've done very good things, technically, and have done very well interacting with people on a peer and ad hoc level, at all levels of various organizations. But I've never fit in too well, politically. I don't match the personality type that pre-dominates in corporate management.

0) (Cautiously) try to determine where this behavior is originating. Is it initiated by your immediate management, or is it coming from higher up? Is there a pay freeze or budget constraint that your immediate management can do nothing about? Are they going to bat for their reports, or just rolling over, either not requesting the increase/funding or not pushing back when first told "no".

(I had one manager who seemed to find some combination of necessity and pride in keeping his department budget low. He repeatedly screwed over his reports to make himself look better (in his eyes; maybe also in his management's eyes, depending on how lame they were -- underpaying and abuse are not good long term strategies). He probably could have obtained a budget increase (or maintained what he previously had) to avoid some of these situations, but he didn't try.

Later, at the same company, I had a different set of managers who produced double digit increases for me at a time when that "simply wasn't happening". They went to bat for me (after I pulled some proverbial rabbits out of hats). When there subsequently was a pay freeze, they found a way -- on their own initiative -- to pay for a conference trip I was already intending to pay for personally.)

1) Whether it's starting a job hunt, continuing your education, or something else, take some action that appeals to you and places you, in your own mind, on an equal footing with your manager/management. Don't allow yourself to feel caught indefinitely in their regimen.

2) Don't let this situation continue indefinitely. Either they take action to end it, or you do. Their action: Promote you and treat you like an adult, or terminate you. Your action: Grow within the position, or leave.

Think about it in terms of a learning experience. And from their perspective, what are they learning if/as you allow it to go on indefinitely? That they can jerk you around. Is that really what you want them to learn?

Further, if they "learn" this about you, your future with them is likely significantly diminished. Their eventual decision, if you leave the decision to them, is more likely to be to leave you parked where you are (or in very "incremental" growth), or to terminate.

(By the way, the means by which I moved from the first set of management to the second was by taking advantage of the open door policy of a new senior manager, after determining it to be genuine, and telling him without threat but plainly what had been going on and that I'd had enough. I already had the other management team interested in me; the senior manager simply removed the red tape preventing the move. This actually made life easier for him; he could simply let me move, rather than having to formally address my grievance. Though he did correct the situations of a couple of other department members while they remained in their positions. And having three or four members of the same department approach him with similar grievances very likely made a strong impression and influenced the outcome. The "quiet" people finally spoke up.

He deserves credit; it never would have happened, or happened so effectively, without that open door policy. Credit also to the one non-quiet department member who acted first in approaching him and thereby showed us the way.)

The job situation (in the U.S., I'll assume) is terrible. So I wouldn't just jump ship without having a firm landing established, and I would be very cautious about communicating this perspective directly (or passive/aggressively) to them. Short term, you may have to take it. But work and plan to establish eventual exits from it, one way or another. You'll likely feel significantly better. Regain some measure of control.

I hate to sound like I'm promoting an expressively aggressive attitude as the means to success. I've seen too much of it, in excess. But passive doesn't work well, in the corporations I've seen. I've watched time and again as moderately competent (sometimes perhaps marginally) but self-promoting people have passed by truly competent but "quiet" people. Or perhaps it's that the former have focused on the competency that matters more with regard to career advancement: Politics (and all that goes into it, which is a considerable effort including identifying what attitudes and results matter to whom of importance and focusing primarily on producing these, or the illusion of same).

I don't mean to sound too judgmental in this: It's what the system appears to require. Be sure in evaluating your own situation to consider this perspective.

</comment><comment><USER4> move

<comment><AUTHOR> That makes more sense. Thanks.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: I'd like to start taking amphetamines. What do you recommend? - <AUTHOR> I've just read about Paul Erdos and it made me think about something I've been considering for a while.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Erdős
"After 1971 he also took amphetamines, despite the concern of his friends, one of whom (Ron Graham) bet him $500 that he could not stop taking the drug for a month. Erdős won the bet, but complained during his abstinence that mathematics had been set back by a month: "Before, when I looked at a piece of blank paper my mind was filled with ideas. Now all I see is a blank piece of paper." After he won the bet, he promptly resumed his amphetamine habit."
What do you recommend? I drink coffee, I don't do anything else. What are others' experiences, both legal and illegal? I'd like to be able to get long stretches of difficult work done with greater concentration and faster thinking. Legality and supply in different countries is a factor. Please forgive me anonymously registering a handle to ask this question, and please feel free to yourself if your usage patterns are something you feel is private. Thanks. <comment><USER3> Perhaps his lack of concentration when he stopped for a month wasn't because the drug helped him concentrate, but rather that his dependence on it made him not be able to concentrate without it anymore - that is, when hes on the drug, his concentration is at the same level as those not on the drug.

Now, I don't know if this was the case or not, but its worth thinking about before starting this.

Personally, in the past I've used large quantities of energy drinks to get me through long project or study sessions. While it worked in keeping me awake, and more alert than I would have been without, I did notice my performance drop. That is, if I was well rested and worked for some number of hours, I'd get MORE work done that if I worked twice as many hours, but substituted rest for energy drink.

Sometimes the trade-off is worth it (eg because the deadline is earlier than it would take to get it done with rest; quality is less important than time etc etc), but other times its not. I bet amphetamines are similar, though I've personally never tried.

In the past, I have tried a drug for concentration purposes; not quite sure what it was exactly, some sort of legal cannabis alternative which contained small amounts of valium and other similar ingredients. Large amounts would put you to sleep, but small amounts really did help concentration a lot and a lot of great ideas came from this (including a project which myself and a friend came up with, designed and built a prototype and it is now being used by a certain university for research purposes, after rebuilding our prototype with proper manufactured parts). So, it certainly is possible to use drugs to enhance performance, but I'm wondering at what cost. I'm not convinced that prolonged use is safe and would be pretty skeptical.

You'll have to decide for yourself if the risks and trade-offs are worth it for you.

</comment><comment><USER4> My advice, Don't. Taking them will not turn you into Paul Erdős.

Someone had to say it.

<comment><USER5> Aye, but you are comparing apples with oranges here.

To compare the poster with Paul Erdős is a fallacy, you should be comparing Paul Erdős without amphetamines vs Paul Erdős with.

It's a relative thing, not an absolute thing. And since the poster is anonymous you can't really make any qualitative statements about his mental capabilities (other than the ones you inferred from his posting).

<comment><USER6> I think he was trying to say that the magnitude of the mental boost from using amphetamines will not compensate for the health risks, and that if your mental skills are not already extremely sharp without amphetamines (like those of Erdos), then the drugs might not give you the effect you expect.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Don't.

As someone who used them for a long time I can tell you:

They are not physically addictive - I could also have easily stopped for a month. When I did stop the problems were psychological like the fact that most of my "friendships" were shallow and drug based

It destroys your judgment. I once wrote a programming language (a scripting language for an app I was working on). It didn't support minus numbers - something I hadn't spotted until someone complained.

It turns you into an arsehole - speed users are arseholes, unreliable , untrustworthy and self centered.

On the plus side if you accept that you are going to do it and manage yourself (make sure you have nutrition , plan for coming down, learn to deal with the myriad of problems - getting stuck in a "groove" - ie fixated on one small (and often pointless) task, memory issues etc.) you can be extremely functional on it - I took it for years.

The being an arsehole thing is the main reason I stopped - I haven't touched it for more than a decade now. I have had some good results with Adrafinil which gives great focus, has less of the bad stuff and if you work with your body clock even lets you sleep pretty normally. If I need to sprint on something I take it for a few days and get loads done.

</comment><comment><USER5> Beware of the downsides...

I knew a guy (singer) that would use 'speed' like others smoke or chew gum, he burned out before he was 50.

Now, this guy was a pretty heavy user and I guess that is what it is all about but any kind of substance use can slide into abuse.

Don't get burned. Please.

I'm not going to lecture you or question your motives, but you have to be aware that everything has a price.

</comment><comment><USER8> > I'd like to be able to get long stretches of difficult work done with > greater concentration and faster thinking

The question I would ask is why?

A lot of my friends complain about wanting to work longer hours etc. but I dont always understand the desire. If your working to a tight deadline then fair enough - but if your constantly working to a tight deadline then perhaps the whole job needs assessing!

I used to work quite long hours with little sleep (as I slept badly for many years) and constantly felt drained (even when using stimulants), lethargic and somewhat confused. Now I strictly limit how much work I do and force myself to have down time and i find the work I do do is finished faster and is better - and I am healthier for it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Right now, I'm curious to what the effects will be like. I think my work is important and enjoy doing it. I'd like to do more of it, sharper, faster. I've seen the effects of good diet and exercise: Very big. I've seen the effects of caffeine: Also very big! But scary withdrawl too.

I'd like to slowly wade into other performance increasing things to see how it works for me, how it changes my work and the rest of my life. Hopefully I can do this fully aware of risks and downsides, which is why I ask here. Lots of brilliant people here who have work and lives similar to mine.

<comment><USER8> How long do you work for at the moment and what are you aiming for? Some details about your current and hoped for day structure?

I've done a lot of personal work on improving these things naturally (after taking a huge dive off of a caffeine high and flunking the end of year exams for my second year of uni).

To give you a rough idea of my day now I usually work 10-13 hours of the day, sleep for 6-8 and socialise for 4-6 (all variable - usually I work 13hrs 3 days and 11hrs 2 days extending my social time for the shorter days)

All of this is on limited caffeine (4 coffees and 4 teas MAX) per day and mostly reliant on fruit juice as the stimulant :) (and discipline)

<comment><AUTHOR> 20-70 per week, depending on how you define work. These days, my day is almost completely unstructured by nature: I have to structure it myself with scheduling and journals.

Would you care to elaborate on how you put in 10-13 per day? That would be wonderful.

<comment><USER8> I get up around 7: exercise, shower and eat (in that order). Wake myself with OJ not caffeine (much more effective I find).

Work from 9am to 5pm in my day job - lunching at 2pm. Work from 6pm at home on personal projects / my personal company / consultancy. Till sometime between 8-11pm. Usually pause for 1/2 an hr for dinner at 9:30 if I am not already stopped working by then.

Religously in bed by 12pm if at home. If socialising (in, say, a pub) religiously home _and_ in bed by 1pm (usually the next day is one I work 10hrs). Light Alcohol consumption only.

Weekends I work 8 hours (10am to 6pm) and keep incredibly strict to that timetable. Sundays I will sometimes work the mornings only.

last week I worked a total of 2 12hr days, 1 13hr day, 2 10hr days and 12 hrs at the weekend (69hrs). That is typical.

One thing I found was that it was about discipline and then developing some habits to help you concentrate.

I meditate for 10-20mins before I go to bed. I also make sure I read for around an hr before bed to wind down.

Cardio exercise first thing in the morning seems to keep me stimulated and awake for most of the day (I use wii sports and do some boxing). I also replace caffeine with OJ because that has a better effect for me.

But it is discipline that really does it: up at 7am every day with a simple but set routine for the first hour ensures you wake up really well. And being strict about bed time (and winding down before bed) ensures your fresh.

Good meals are another benefit. A good breakfast keeps me going till 2 (which is a good portion of the day gone!). A late lunch at 2 gives me energy for working at home and dinner at 9pm (the smallest meal) is just to boost energy levels slightly and to give me a simple break to the work.

I refuse point blank now to work longer hours at work: before I was working till 9pm and getting to bed straight from my PC at about 1am. But the thing is it's not a problem anymore - I am getting 50% more work done during the day right now than I did before so overtime isnt required :D

Be prepared to work hard though - it took me about 6 months to train myself into the basics and a further 18 to cement it. However this did involve finishing university and starting work (at the 6 month mark) meaning I had to reorder the routine setting me back quite a bit (I slumped for about 3 months as I mentioned before getting back on track)

EDIT: I should add about the 10hrs thing. I made this choice deliberately to limit myself to 13 hrs max but try my best to stop and do other stuff before I reached then. If I finish at 9pm for example there is loads of time to go hang out with a friend or just flake in front of the TV. I find this one of the biggest contributors to my heightened activity and concentration. Ive also taken to reading non-fiction like crazy in this time: stuff lik popular physics, sociology, body language, politics are my current fad :)

Also this clearly wont work if you have a partner - I am coming up with a routine to fit that situation though (as a relationship is on the horizon :)).

<comment><USER9> Do you use an alarm clock to wake up? If so, are you sure you're not sleep- deprived?

What do you eat for breakfast? I'm usually hungry within 2-3 hours after eating cereal, oatmeal, or a banana.

Where do domestic tasks fit in? Weekends only? I can't cook, eat, and do dishes in half an hour, and if you're cooking fresh vegetables, waiting a week between grocery trips seems to be suboptimal.

<comment><USER8> > Do you use an alarm clock to wake up? If so, are you sure you're not sleep- > deprived?

Originally for a few months to train me into it. Now I wake up automatically at a few minutes to 7 :)

I never slept much before anyway - 7 hours is the best I have slept for years. I cant physically sleep for more than 8-9 hours (I will always wake up - <USER2> it :))

Weekends I wake up at 8-9am (I make that a bit flexible; basically just rely on my body to wake me up when it feels like it) and the lie in is a great "weekend feeling" boost (part of feeling a lot more positive).

> What do you eat for breakfast? I'm usually hungry within 2-3 hours after > eating cereal, oatmeal, or a banana.

Cereal. Then either a bacon sandwich, or a boiled egg or a bagel with cream cheese and smoked salmon. I eat a BIG breakfast and lunch but a small tea.

> Where do domestic tasks fit in? Weekends only? I can't cook, eat, and do > dishes in half an hour, and if you're cooking fresh vegetables, waiting a > week between grocery trips seems to be suboptimal.

I do have a slight confession here: in that I live at home (an annoyingly necessary arrangement for the time being) so my family shares the cooking. I cook maybe twice a week and those are my 10hr days. Chores I do in the morning before work - im less than 10 minutes walk away so I basically have 2hrs for "doing stuff" in the mornings. Other domestic chores give me my breaks

I pick up fresh veg on my way home every few nights (and because I only live 10 mins away I have an hr to get home, do chores and chill till I start to work again).

Actually the last few weeks i have been slipping. Prior to last week I spent a month on standard 8 hour days and (unusually for me) a lot of time in bed due to a tooth and ear infection. It's been really useful to find I can get back into my rythm really quickly again :D The onyl downside is I felt awful those few weeks of illness - more so than I should have. I think I was actually "crashing" because of being out of the routine (a doctor friend has confirmed this is something he has seen before) so some of the caveats as with the drugs apply! I suspect my recovery was extended substantially because of feeling like I did. Which is something interesting I need to explore.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> There have been a lot of thoughtful threads here that offer pros, cons, and the variety of personal experiences. In particular: note that the impact on someone with ADHD (maybe Paul E was one such?) are likely to be different that for a non-ADHD person.

searchyc.com seems to be down right now but a google on ritalin at HN will give you a lot of starting points:

[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=ritalin&as_e...](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&as_q=ritalin&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=10&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=news.ycombinator.com)

</comment><comment><USER11> If you feel that the only way you can achieve what you want is to take amphetamines then I would hope that what you are working on is very important (for you at least). The side effect from overuse are enough to take years off your life.

Also I suspect that no doctor would willingly supply you with amphetamines just so you can work harder. Doctors write prescriptions for medical conditions and not life style.

Ask yourself how long this difficult work can be expected to last, if it is essentially your job then you'll probably have to take amphetamines for as long as you have the job.

Paul Erdős only gave up for a month so I suppose we can call him an addict. And you are no Paul Erdős.

<comment><AUTHOR> "If you feel that the only way you can achieve what you want is to take amphetamines then I would hope that what you are working on is very important (for you at least). The side effect from overuse are enough to take years off your life."

It is very important to me, but I'd rather not lose years of my life is possible. Hence, asking for input here.

"And you are no Paul Erdős."

Not many accomplish on that level, but anyone who wishes can aspire to. I do.

But lifestyle judgments aside, I would be fascinated by some personal anecdotes or places to start learning more before jumping in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I would discourage the use of amphetamines without a real mental need, they do have some very serious side effects. However I have found due to a combination of mental disorders - mostly depression related - I am unable to function without amphetamines during certain times of the month.

As an alternative to stronger amphetamines I have found provigil - <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modafinil> \- to be a wonder drug. It doesn't stay in the body as long, yet gives you enough umph to get going on those real tough days.

</comment><comment><USER13> A good doctor will help you optimize your focus and creativity without you needing to self-medicate or do anything illegal. I'd spend some time setting up an appointment- he/she may find that you suffer from ADD/ADHD and prescribe something- maybe not. If you decide to do something (IMO stupid) illegal, you'll want to know that doctor's phone # and have at least one appointment behind you so that you can call if you screw yourself up. (Doctors are confidential - for your life's sake, talk to a doctor regardless).

</comment><comment><USER14> I used Dr. prescribed Amphetamines (Dextroamphetamine) for six years until 9 months ago when I gave them up in order to quit smoking. During that time I was the happiest and most productive I have ever been in my life. If you can get a Doctor to prescribe them go for it, but to take them (even pharmaceutical grade) without a doctor's ongoing advice is foolhardy at best and life ending at worst.

</comment><comment><USER15> Check out this New Yorker article on "neuro-enhancing" drugs: [http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/04/27/090427fa_fact_...](http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/04/27/090427fa_fact_talbot)

It has some info on Adderal (an amphetamine) and other drugs used to increase mental performance.

</comment><comment><USER16> Check out Ritalin via your doctor.

</comment><comment><USER17> You mean meth?

Then I recommend watching:

[http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=videos&search...](http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=videos&search_query=%22faces+of+meth%22&search_sort=video_view_count)

</comment><comment><USER18> To reiterate other sentiments on this site: don't. Just. Don't. And if you're going to do it, get a prescription for Adderall. A physician is a valuable resource, even if you have to go out of pocket. Your average street dealer is guaranteed to sell you cut goods, even if he didn't do it himself. Plus that street dealer won't cut you off if things go pear-shaped.

Read Erowid. You'll see that it just changes your brain's chemical balance slightly; it doesn't change you any more than you change you. In the case of speed, it'll push you toward being a clenched-up asshole who gets OCD about stuff. A lot of young academics / independent programmers are already that way without speed. Carefully weigh your choices here.

There exist other options, as well, all of which I recommend. Physical activity changes how your noodle works. Group therapy (or, not that I'm into it, religion) might change your brain's chemistry. Probably the most-mentioned factor, diet, has a huge impact on how your brain operates. If you aren't considering these things before putting drugs into you, then you're probably not making a rational decision.

The downsides of pumping yourself full of speed are: you will jettison your girlfriend/boyfriend if you have one, your heart muscle will work overtime, you will have less energy (but be awake for longer) and you'll gain a bit of weight once you get off the stuff.

On a related note: jeez, kids these days...</comment>


The Internet Was Built for This - <AUTHOR> https://www.cloudflare.com/builtforthis <comment><USER2> Not happy at all to see that cloudflare has aggregated averages of data usage by search type.

Don't look through people's private traffic.

<comment><USER3> _Not happy at all to see that cloudflare has aggregated averages of data usage by search type._

They don't, though.

<comment><USER4> Correct. This isn't looking through traffic for search information. It's just aggregates based on traffic volumes to our customers' properties. So based on their domain and nothing else.</comment></comment></comment>


Just-In-Time Knowledge: Learn What You Need, When You Need It - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/just-in-time-knowledge-learn-what-you-need-when-you-need-it-a48f77043287 <comment><USER2> This model underestimates the importance of unknown unknowns.

Generally speaking, the best solution is one of the solutions not yet explored (simply because it requires a juxtaposition of ideas that are distant in conventional semantic space). Both conventional curricula and just-in-time learning follow conventional paths & therefore double-down on both path dependence and intellectual monoculture.

A fairly straightforward way to break this pattern is to simply invert it: discover what your peers already know, and go out of your way to learn things that your peers don't know. If something is concretely important and your peers know it, they will explain it to you (or point you to resources, or take care of it) -- the collective understanding is more important than the individual understanding -- and so filling in the gaps in order to cover more total ground is a low-risk high-reward endevour.

Concretely, what does this mean? It means that if you are writing Javascript and C++, you ought to learn PROLOG, COBOL, and MUMPS. If you're writing webapps, you ought to study the culinary history of the ancient near east. If you're doing QA, you ought to study midcentury continental philosophy. If you're working with databases, you ought to study professional wrestling.</comment>


A Brand New Interview with David Foster Wallace - <AUTHOR> https://electricliterature.com/a-brand-new-interview-with-david-foster-wallace-71c03223294b <comment><USER2> Thank you for sharing this. For those who haven't read and/or watched DFW in any capacity, you really should. His thoughts on modern western society are just so fascinating and multi-faceted. His perspective is one of great depression, yet his points are eye-opening and remarkable.

One of my favorite interviews of his is this one [1]. You can tell just how deeply he thinks about each question.

[1] [https://youtu.be/FkxUY0kxH80](https://youtu.be/FkxUY0kxH80)

<comment><USER3> Thanks, but I'm waiting for the right person to tell me to get into David Foster Wallace [http://reductress.com/post/why-im-waiting-for-the-right- man-...](http://reductress.com/post/why-im-waiting-for-the-right-man-to-tell- me-to-read-infinite-jest/)

<comment><USER2> this is hilarious. thanks for sharing.

<comment><USER4> The Beth Newell & Sarah Pappalardo episode of Hollywood Handbook was a big let down, which was so disappointing given the quality on Reductress.

I am so puzzled that the intersection of People Who Nail David Foster Wallace Satire and People Who Don't Get It As Hollywood Handbook Guests is non-empty.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > "Most of the journalism I read in America right now is interested in how the > internet is going to affect the business of publishing. I personally think > that the internet represents simply an enormous flood of available > information and entertainment and sensations with very little assistance to > the consumer in terms of choosing, finding, discerning between those choices > and this sort of rabid, capitalist fervor with which the internet is being > not just developed but invested in. I don't have to tell you about the .com > stock market explosion and all that. It seems to me, as just a layman and an > amateur, that the internet is almost the perfect distillation of the > American capitalist ethos, a flood of seductive choices. It's completely > laissez-faire, with no really effective engines for choosing or searching > and everybody being much more interested in the economic and material > aspects of it than some of the aesthetic and ethical and moral and political > questions attached to it."

From the interview.

<comment><USER6> A similar sentiment is expressed by Neil Postman in "Amusing ourselves to death". He closely examines the impact of a visual medium on communication, as opposed to written work, and how it affects the messages that we can communicate. Ultimately the messages and ideas that we communicate shape our culture. The internet wasn't big at the time of the writing, but he is very insightful as to what it means for out communication.

Side note: the types of conversation that take place on HN are not surprising when you take into account the lack of photos and emoji as opposed to say FB that has "like" features.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> > You know, a very simple answer would have to do with the idea of constant > movement but within a rigidly defined set of constraints and also with the > idea of two and twoness and things moving back and forth between two sides > in such a way that a pattern is created.

Huh. Never thought about that before.

Wonder what connections to this idea that I am missing in the deeper themes of Infinite Jest. Does anyone know if there are any good websites for this kind of literary analysis? I'd be interested if there's a hub where people go to share the task in putting in the kind of "work" required to understand deep fiction that Wallace talks about. It would be nice to be able to read about the many other deeper symbolic connections that I missed...

<comment><USER8> Literary academia does that, but I've not yet developed a habit for it myself.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I got into the behemoth (Infinite Jest) fairly recently. Have not finished it yet though. Every time I open the book, I end up starting again and gain perspective all over. A behemoth, but a tasty one nevertheless. Highly recommended.

</comment><comment><USER10> Nobody has mentioned "This is water" from a commencement speech [1] at a college yet, so let me do that.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhhC_N6Bm_s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PhhC_N6Bm_s)

<comment><USER11> If you have seen _Paterson_ by Jim Jarmusch, you might also like this analysis of the film with supporting arguments from Wallace's "This Is Water": [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RnGvWTRQ9j4](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RnGvWTRQ9j4)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've yet to read any DFW books. I've heard much about him, and saw couple of his videos on youtube. Any recommendations on which books of his I should start off with?

<comment><USER13> In my opinion DFW is a much better essayist than novelist, so I'd recommend you start with his essays to see if you like him and then move on to his fiction if you feel like it. Many intelligent, well read people (including literature professors) dislike his fiction, so know that it's not just you if you don't enjoy it.

Consider the Lobster is a good collection of essays to start with. The essay on Joseph Frank's biography of Dostoevsky is probably my favorite DFW essay.

<comment><USER14> If you like short fiction, I really recommend "Little Expressionless Animals". It's not as much of a complete head-scrambler as some of his other short fiction.

If you like journalism, some of his pieces on tennis are astounding, eg "Federer as religious experience" or the one where he follows some guy who's worked his ass off his whole life and is one click below the top tier and will probably never make it (forgotten that one).

If you like criticism, "E unibus pluram" (on TV) and "Fictional Futures and the Conspicuously Young" (about postmodernism, irony and the whole clique of people around Brett Easton Ellis) are both outstanding.

For novels, he only wrote 3 (as far as I know) and they're really great. I personally read "Broom of the System" first because I like reading things in order (I've done this with a number of other authors I like). It's a really cool book, very funny and not quite as huge a commitment as "Infinite Jest". So don't feel you have to start with Infinite Jest, you really don't. It's great though, as is "Pale King". Had he lived to complete "Pale King" I think it would easily have been his greatest novel, but in the state it was published in, it's still outstanding.

<comment><USER15> Maybe the tennis journeyman's essay you referred to is the one about Michael Joyce

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I highly recommend listening to the interviews Wallace did with Michael Silverblatt on KCRW's Bookworm.

[https://www.kcrw.com/people/david-foster- wallace](https://www.kcrw.com/people/david-foster-wallace)

<comment><USER17> Silverblatt is an amazing interviewer of authors, and a deep but totally unpretentious reader. He's been interviewing writers for almost 30 years and still does every week. I'd recommend the podcast version (or radio, if you live in the US) to anyone who wants to improve their experience of reading fiction.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I wonder what DFW would've thought of Tao Lin.

<comment><USER17> As someone who really admired Lin when I was younger, I now think that he embodies exactly the kind of ironist DFW criticised, too afraid of being seen as uncool to ever publicly care about anything.

<comment><USER18> It's interesting, I've always taken Lin at face-value -- I don't think he's being ironic at all. Especially in _Trip_ , I see someone who is trying to full-on embrace and figure out life w/o a hint of detachment or irony in a way DFW would've appreciated.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Where you apply new technologies after leaning them? - <AUTHOR> What you do after learning a new technology. As we all have limited time. I have learnt new technologies but where to apply them. On my job I am limited to my technology.
I lost motivation to learn new technologies as I can not able to apply them anywhere in my work.
I am wondering what is your motivation to learn new frameworks and technologies. What you do after learning it.
Explanation: I am iOS developer and learned android, react, angular in past but can not apply any of them in real world. What benefit you get by learning them. <comment><USER2> As you said, "As we all have limited time". Mostly I'm not learning anything without having a use case for it in mind before learning it.

When I have an idea to build something, I start researching which technologies exist to solve my problem. I spend quite a long time comparing different solutions. I check the activity for a technology on GitHub, StackOverflow, etc. I also check the google trends.

Once decided I which technology I want to use I start learning it and write a blog post about it at the same time.

Mostly I then don't complete my original idea but I end up with a dozens new ideas.</comment>


Apple introduces 14-day return on iTunes in the EU - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/dec/30/apple-introduces-14-day-return-on-itunes-scaring-coders-and-musicians

<comment><USER2> Meanwhile Apple continues to take a 30% cut from all app developers. For a distribution channel to have so much leverage over creators is unhealthy.</comment>


GoPro Unveils New Devices as It Faces Heat from Smartphone Cameras - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/gopro-unveils-new-devices-as-it-faces-heat-from-smartphone-cameras-1506623263 <comment><USER2> On the shop, 749 euros seems pricey [https://shop.gopro.com/EMEA/cameras/fusion/CHDHZ-101.html](https://shop.gopro.com/EMEA/cameras/fusion/CHDHZ-101.html)</comment>


Show HN: Remote Work Encyclopedia – a tactical guide to working from anywhere - <AUTHOR> https://www.remoteworkencyclopedia.com/? <comment><AUTHOR> When Emma and I started Moonlight two years ago, remote work was still a new concept. We figured it out the hard way while freelancing and traveling. Since then, we've seen remote become more mainstream and successful. But questions still remain - what makes a company remote? How do you get a remote job? How do you manage a remote team?

To answer these questions and more, we wrote the Remote Work Encyclopedia! Our goal is to help more companies take advantage of the new, global development market, and to educate knowledge workers on how to ditch the office for a more flexible career. We started the book - but open-sourced it so that everybody can contribute [1].

Take a look, and let me know how we can improve it!

[1] [https://github.com/moonlightwork/remote-work- encyclopedia](https://github.com/moonlightwork/remote-work-encyclopedia)

<comment><USER2> > two years ago, remote work was still a new concept.

You should have added ' to us'

<comment><AUTHOR> Maybe we should be more specific about tech startups there. In 2017, it was a liability to be a remote company. In 2019, it's become an asset.

<comment><USER3> I think a lot of it is your perspective. To many people a remote company is still an insane idea. To other people a remote company is just common sense if you have business that can make it work (the company I work for even has home workers in their _call centre_. It's amazing!) Where you are on that spectrum depends a lot on your experiences.

Like others, if you saw the shift happening from 2017 to 2019, then you were experiencing things very differently than me. I don't think that's unexpected though. If you speak in a way that assumes your reader has the same experiences as you, you will create some dissonance and I think that's the feedback you are getting now. You can choose to write in a way that shows your personal perspective, or you can back off a bit to be more inclusive of people with other perspectives. Either way will work, I think.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> As a remote worker, I fear the hype. I am glad that remote work is becoming more and more acceptable and normal, but I think that we run the risk of it becoming a new fad, start being adopted in a rush, in a cargo cult fashion, and that the inevitable failures would lead to a backlash against it.

I would hate to see remote work become another agile.

</comment><comment><USER5> I stopped reading at the part where all they recommend to use is Apple hardware.

<comment><AUTHOR> We try to keep this guide as tactical as possible, which means we talk about what we know.

Administering different operating systems remotely is hard. If a computer gets lost or broken, Apple is the easiest to quickly replace.

I'm speaking from experience - I had my laptop stolen from my Airbnb while in Barcelona, and I could buy a new laptop the next day to get back online.

The guide is open-source - we'd appreciate contributions to add more resources and perspectives!

<comment><USER5> How is Apple is the easiest to quickly replace anywhere? There are remote places far from large cities where Apple has no shops and no businesses, and all you can actually get your hands on is a PC. not everyone lives in Silicon Valley or in a large metropolis especially when they work remote.

<comment><USER6> Apple has on multiple occasions shipped me replacement hardware next-day Air. This service definitely does not require proximity to a brick and mortar Apple store.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Unfortunately remote working is not yet universally accepted even when (1) you're not a fan of cities and (2) only go through the commute to do your job at your desk while communicating with everyone around you on Slack. When a recruiter or company reaches out I always ask if they have any remote position to fill. Even when I'm not interested at all. If everyone did that they might start thinking more seriously about it.

</comment><comment><USER8> Really wish there were some numbers! Did you find any data about how many remote workers there are in the US and worldwide?

</comment><comment><USER9> I love it.

Thank you for all the hard work!</comment>


What Austen Allred from Lambda School Did to Survive in Silicon Valley - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/Austen/status/1131222995962220544 <comment><USER2> So, I don't really get what stories like these are supposed to be... Are they supposed to be inspiring? Because I don't think "I had to live as a homeless person in one of the richest areas of the world and got into disastrous financial trouble as soon as the tiniest thing went wrong" is an inspiring anecdote, I think it's just depressing.</comment>