Trade school, not 4-year college, is a better bet to solve the US income gap - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/10/trade-school-not-4-year-college-can-solve-the-us-income-gap.html <comment><USER2> I would simplify it and say that learning trade skills is a better investment for most people than attending a 4-year college. Trade skills can be learned at a young age, right from home, where there is room and time to explore and enjoy the learning process. Why we wait until after high school to teach kids in-demand skills boggles my mind. All the pressure in the world arrives after high school. It's time to start paying the bills and to grow up. It's no wonder most kids go off to college because they have zero marketable skills upon hs graduation and college is a way to get an extra 4 years to acquire some skills.

The sad part of that is all the kids that get caught up in the college wave. They get pressured to go to a 4 year school, take on a mountain of debt for a degree (if they are fortunate to graduate) they most likely won't use. So many students would be better off exploring the different trades and finding one that they really enjoy. There are hundreds of them.

I've been working on a project lately to help people explore and learn the trades online. Tradeskills.io It started as a side project for me a number of years ago teaching people how to get into the appliance repair trade. I've had over 600 students all across the country and Canada go through my training. The trades can be learned online and I think tech will need to play a big part in this area of education in the coming years.

<comment><USER3> Agreed+. This is anecdotal, but I tried recently to get roof repairs made in CA for a rental home I own. I called 20+ roofers none of whom are taking new projects. I was able to get one quote from a friend of friend for over $1k for about 4 hours of work -- but he made no commitment. Plumbers, AC guys, roofers are in incredible demand in CA - need an electrician? forget it. These guys all own their own companies, drive nice trucks, are booked until feb '18 and have rude secretaries. The future seems bright for them, not much competition (know anyone learning HVAC?), a push for new housing all over CA, and I have no idea how to outsource a plumber.

<comment><USER4> Honestly after a recent home renovation, I found myself a little envious I didn't take house building as a career. It's definitely skilled labor and in high demand.

It's not a "sexy" job - you'd be more likely to get a date telling someone you're a software developer than a plumber. But the low prestige of the job seems to make it worth .kre.

<comment><USER5> If you're using your job to get dates you're doing it wrong ;)

<comment><USER6> At least in the US, a person's job is a big part of both their identity and their brand. "What do you do" is one of the first questions that come up in most conversations, and everyone judges everyone else (at least subconsciously) based on the response.

Back in another life I did a lot of online dating and tested this hypothesis by telling some of my dates that I worked as a garbage collector for the city. Those dates pretty much always ended early. :) I had drastically higher success when I told them my real job: software consulting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I wish I'd taken my step-dad up on his offer and done an chippy apprenticeship when I was 17.

Instead I flailed around, did some c programming, some web development, never went to uni. I even managed to get myself that first job as a software dev, slowly trading upwards, but it always worked against me that I was a high school drop out and had no degree.

Later in life, I looked upon the lack of degree as an asset, I worked harder than the guys/girls who did have a comp/sci degree, because I felt I had to prove myself constantly, to out-do those with a degree.

But I always look back and think, man, I wish I'd just done a carpentry apprenticeship. It's not like the systems change underneath you ever few years, that you have to learn a new "circular-saw" to help you cut timber because everyone is using it, even though the job you're working on, you could get away with a regular hand-saw. The analogy is shit, but you get what I mean.

Any friends/family who ever say "I'm thinking of being a plumber/sparky/chippy" I wholly encourage them.

<comment><USER8> I come from a blue collar family. I was the first person in my family to graduate college. But that wasn't my plan initially. During summers in high school I worked installing HVAC systems. After graduating high school I started a plumbing apprenticeship. It was what I discovered during that apprenticeship that made me decide to go to college instead (during college I had a job doing carpentry as well).

I'm not saying all people in the trades are this way, but you find a lot of people who are alcoholics. It often does not impact their job, but people drinking a case of beer a day is not uncommon. If you can avoid drinking, the next problem is the damage you do to your body on the job. You are often lifting heavy things. You will be using dangerous power tools often. Any little loss of focus will lead to serious injury or worse. And even if you avoid that, there is only so much your body can take. Many people need surgeries or become crippled as they age.

Many of the people I once worked with have died from alcoholism, smoking, or related cancers. My own father is now forcefully retired due to back and knee issues. He can barely walk. He meets up monthly with the other people he worked with, who are now retired, and it is not a pretty site. I personally don't know anyone in this line of work who is happily retired and living the dream, so to speak.

The trades are very much about physical work and physical labor. Not everyone can take that kind of work for a lifetime.

<comment><USER9> Obviously not to discount your experience - but I come from a family of carpenters, on my mom's side, and do not observe the issues you describe in my family. My grandfather, for instance, is still extremely healthy in every way at 82 or so, drinks a glass of wine or pastis every few days, and is generally enjoying retired life.

The main difference is that I am from France, and as such my family enjoyed all of the socialist government policies like weekly hour limits, centralized healthcare, plenty of paid time off, etc.

<comment><USER8> Yes, my experience is in Midwestern USA. Other places may be quite different. Generally, the way it works here is that there are two main trade paths. One is as part of a union, which is mostly new construction. The second is non- union, which is often replacement and/or service of equipment.

If you're in a union, you basically pay union dues so that the union represents your interests. The power of unions vary widely in terms of healthcare, pensions, jobs available, etc. You get paid via a "scale" based on tenure. But in general, when new construction comes up (houses, skyscrapers, power plants, etc.) you get allocated to those jobs based on your tenure. You may work the same jobsite for years, or maybe a month. It just depends on how big the job is.

Alternatively, if your toilet is clogged, or a pipe is leaking, that is generally a service call. And that is handled, typically, by non-union work. With non-union work, you work specifically for a company. That company provides you with whatever benefits they offer (healthcare, retirement, etc.). When you work service, it almost always includes an "on-call" rotation. You get paid whatever hourly rate you can negotiate with the company and get paid overtime for off-hours work.

Unions are closest to what it sounds like you have in France. But trade unions here have lost much of their power over the years.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I reacted strongly and positively to the headline of this piece...and even more positively to the article.

Apprenticeship was once considered more important than academic degrees in many areas. The balance has gone too far towards academia, and blue collar 'workers' don't get nearly enough respect IMO

<comment><USER11> I generally agree with you, but I'm always hesitant when I hear the word "apprenticeship." Because in my experience that _usually_ means a union is stopping less experienced workers from undercutting their prices on the open market by forcing the less experienced worker to pay the union for the privilege of doing work. In this way it functions similarly to the way the college scheme works, only the college scheme is for white collar work rather than blue collar work.

Now, the word apprenticeship doesn't HAVE to mean that. In its simplest form it just means working with a more experienced person to get skills. That I definitely support. But if apprenticeship means stopping less skilled workers from entering the market on their own, I'm opposed to that.

<comment><USER12> Apprenticeships should be regulated (by the state). You should have some degree at the end that qualifies you to also work for a potential competitor.

Meaning they should teach you a solid but generic base of skills. And not just let you do manual labour that doesn't require much skill.

<comment><USER11> Why would you want the state to stop poor people from earning a decent living just because they haven't completed the full set of requirements for a state sanctioned certification? The going rate to have your main sewer line snaked in my area is $250. If that's the only thing you know how to do, why can't you just sell that service?

<comment><USER13> Because clients are rarely capable of judging competency. You can crack pipes with a snake. Furthermore, certifications typically come with a registration requirement, meaning clients have a mechanism for formally filing complaints. Similarly, there are often bond requirements, meaning you know that if the technician screws up a job you'll have a decent chance at recovering damages. Getting a bond without securing the full face value is probably easier with a certification, too, because otherwise how would the underwriter know their risk?

Certifications are a public service. It's no different than for lawyers, doctors, or all the drivers on the road.

In some states the requirements for some types of certification are obviously intended to limit entrants into the market. But that's a different matter.

<comment><USER11> ALL certification requirements are intended to limit entrants into the market. Whether or not that's worthwhile is subjective.

If a client is uncertain of their ability to judge risk, then they can hire from a trusted industry provider/union and pay a premium. I'd still like the ability to legally hire a poor person who may not have received a good enough public education to fulfill all of the state requirements for certification if the job is low risk enough. And I suspect the poor person would generally like to feed themselves or their family, so it's a win-win except for the incumbent wealthy who don't want their prices under-cut.

I don't need the government to tell me the electronics I buy are safe to plug into an outlet, there's private UL certification for that. I generally don't need the government to tell me who I'm allowed to pay for anything, even medicine.

<comment><USER13> UL certification requirements are often incorporated by reference into law. Which is one reason why there's not a proliferation of private standards in that space, with the concomitant race to the bottom.

_You_ might not need the nanny state to protect yourself from yourself, but many people do. In fact, pretty much everybody does, at some point in their lives, in some circumstances. (You just don't know when or where.) And because their loses are invariably externalized one way or another, society has an interest in providing minimum safeguards.

It's like taxes: taxes wouldn't work if everybody got to pick and choose where their taxes went. These solutions are intended to solve collective action problems, which by definition cannot readily and consistently be solved by everybody acting independently.

<comment><USER11> If anyone wants protection from a nanny, state or otherwise, they can pay for it. Offer all the certifications at the state level you want, just don't interfere with my ability to do business with anyone I please whether they're certified or not.

>society has an interest in providing minimum safeguards.

Requiring you to work at below market rates for YEARS is not in the best interest of society. Harming the poor or immigrant workers by not allowing them to earn a decent living is not in the interest of society. All of these things are in the best interest of the incumbent wealth, not "society."

If you want some protection, then you can easily pay for it. Hire a contractor through Home Depot, Sears, or some other trusted industry name where you'll get lots of contractual protections and the benefit that a multi-billion dollar corporation wants to keep a good reputation if it wants people to keep doing business with it. This works much BETTER than taxes because everybody DOES get to pick and choose where their money goes.

>These solutions are intended to solve collective action problems, which by definition cannot readily and consistently be solved by everybody acting independently.

These solutions are intended to maintain incumbent wealth which harms the poor. You keep trying to sell me on you protecting me, which you obviously know I don't value, without addressing the fact that your ideology keeps the poor in their place. There's two wealthy groups you're protecting here. First, as the property owner, I'm almost certainly more wealthy than the laborer. And secondly, you're protecting the wealthy incumbent workers who don't want lower skilled workers undercutting them.

<comment><USER12> > Requiring you to work at below market rates for YEARS is not in the best > interest of society.

But you are still in training. It's intended as something to do after middle school. Why should unskilled kids earn a full salary? They probably end up costing the company money during that time...

And also that's exactly where you need the regulation from the state! So it can ensure that you are actually properly training those people and not just using them as "human robots" to just do boring / unskilled manual labor.

<comment><USER11> You're still requiring a poor person to get the permission of a wealthy person to perform work they know how to do on the open market. Why would you cripple the poor in such a way?

<comment><USER12> How I'm I requering something from workers? A company can hire whoever they want. Where do you see that limited, by offering a special training for highschool kids?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I sometimes think, with deep regret, that most people living at or below the poverty line at 30, their chances of rising above that are quite low. At 40+ it's next to zero. This may also be very generous. The amount of education, training, and opportunities would have to line up perfectly for someone to pull themselves up. Multigenerational, the odds appear much better.

<comment><USER15> I agree, but I'd like to add my 2¢ and mention that it's not impossible either. Skilled trades _really_ are in short supply and the pay is still good.

My dad lost his job as a construction worker during the recession, in his 50s. At that age we knew it was going to be an uphill battle to continue to rely on his physical health for work much longer. So he hit the books while my mother continued to work part time, which allowed them to live off their savings longer at least.

Upon passing class and getting his license, I helped them bootstrap all the way through to his first customer. A simple website + a few hundred a month spent on google ads does wonders. My mother now spends her time answering customer emails/estimates/calls/paperwork and it's has become a self sustaining machine, and I have stopped running their ad campaign (Running off the good reputation/reviews).

Now their biggest problem is finding enough skilled/trustworthy labor to complete their bids in a reasonable amount of time. As well as capex (still bootstrapped, which means expensive equipment rentals that eat heavily into margins)

I'm not tying to trivialize this, it was/is an insane amount of work with much to do before one can consider that "he made it". Just pointing out that there is hope.

More details:

\- Bay Area

-Parents speak English as a second language and only went to high school

<comment><USER16> What class did he take and what license did he get? I couldn't figure it out from your comment.

Does being a contractor in SF require passing a class / license?

<comment><USER15> Since this is a throwaway:

CSLB-C8 (Concrete contractor)

<comment><USER17> Experience based licenses keep supply limited.

<comment><USER15> FWIW the experience requirements didn't seem too onerous for a profession. The rules seem to be in place to insure a standard of quality, not to limit supply artificially.

Furthermore, there are plenty of unlicensed contractors that we have to compete with, and a license requirement isn't stopping them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> > "There are too many four-year colleges serving too many students,

 _The Screwing of the Average Man_ [0] said that college used to be something the upper-class sent their children to so they'd have a leg up on the "uneducated" masses. Then the congress provided the GI Bill to subsidize college for WWII veterans. This kept disgruntled veterans occupied while the economy retooled to peacetime production. Thus began the college price spiral.

My great-grandmother played prohibition well, and sent all 4 of her children to teh college during the great depression. After WWII, the one grandfather didn't need any more college degrees and used the GI Bill to learn to fly small planes. My other grandfather had no interest in any college, so he didn't utilize his tuition credits... He certainly would've done better financially if he had...

[0] [https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0553129139](https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0553129139)

The only class I enjoyed in my public school experience was my 8th grade "technology" class. This semester was broken up into woodshop, welding/metal working, "computers", photography, and (don't remember). 45 minutes of appreciated learnings, 5 days a week, for one semester. Everything else was busy work. I learned a few things, here and there, but not enough to justify the countless hours of boredom.

College was kind of a scam. I have an expensive diploma that doesn't mean anything. I learned a few things, here and there, but not enough to justify the $100k+ spent on my behalf.

John Gatto [1] says it's better to skip as much of the early years of schooling as possible: some children learn to read when they're 2, some when they're 8, and by the time they're 12 you can't tell the difference. I met a man a few months ago that was traumatized by not being able to "read" on the teacher's schedule when he was in 1st grade. He learned to read eventually, in spite of his school's efforts to force him to read before he was ready.

Allowing young children to have experiences in the real world instead of more classroom time would be much more valuable than giving young adults a choice of a trade school vs. more academics at age 18.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14425760](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14425760)

edit: clarification

<comment><USER19> Sudbury and Montessori schools offer a model that seems to encourage students to learn at their own pace

Provides a positive feedback loop that seemed to have positive results in the real world as well

<comment><USER20> My children are in a Montessori school. There is no evidence that children from most 'alternative' teaching systems do better or worse than those in 'regular' schools. My children like the school and it's conveniently located, so we have no intention of changing; but it's not the teaching system that makes or breaks a student (well, the more loony systems like Steiner schools have documented worse outcomes than other systems, so it's not hard to make schooling 'worse'; making them 'better' than mainstream systems is quite hard - despite all the armchair opinions on this topic here every other day when this comes up).

<comment><USER21>
      There is no evidence that children from most 'alternative'
      teaching systems do better or worse than those in
      'regular' schools.

I'd be interested to know more about that - could I ask where you learned that?

<comment><USER20> There's a lot of research on this; I read a lot about it procrastinating in the university library when I was wrapping up my law degree, so that was 5 or 6 years ago. I don't remember details. Probably if you start on google scholar and make your way from there, you'll find a lot of studies.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Remove the social stigma of not going to college. Hardly any tv shows that show young non college grads as positive.

<comment><USER23> >Remove the social stigma of not going to college. Hardly any tv shows that show young non college grads as positive.

Or just make college useful and accessible. Give people the option of a European style undergrad where there is no liberal arts breadth, only technical courses. If we had accredited colleges doing 3 year bachelor degrees in STEM, the system would be much more efficient.

<comment><USER24> > Or just make college useful and accessible. Give people the option of a > European style undergrad where there is no liberal arts breadth, only > technical courses

So just turn college into a trade school? All that would do is make trade schools more expensive.

<comment><USER25> I wouldn't call a "European style undergrad" a trade school. The only difference is that for example a math 'major' in Europe spends 90-95% of their time taking math courses, while in the US they might spend maybe 60-70% of their time on math courses. Thus you can get through the same 'relevant' course load in 3 years instead of 4.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I attended a 2 year vocational program for CIS in High School. It was heavily focused on passing the CCNA exam but I spent most of my time working running the class websites and learning the ins and outs of the LAMP stack. I had unlimited access to industry standard equipment and the freedom to break things without the risk of getting fired. It provided me with a solid foundation of networking and infrastructure fundamentals.

I passed on going to college due to getting an incredible co-op. I'm quite fortunate that my lack of a college degree has yet to limit my career. I give back by volunteering and providing co-op positions for the students of the program.

High School students are pushed to go straight to college and get a degree even when they're not 100% sure what they enjoy doing. They're not often provided with information about alternatives like attending a vocational program.

</comment><comment><USER27> Isn't Germany, one of the more booming economies of Europe, a place that promotes the trades and provides educational tracks for interested students to easily get into apprenticeship programs? And where there isn't stigma against entering such a field?

<comment> barry-cotter > And where there isn't stigma against entering such a field?

This isn't true. Germany is the second most credentialist, title obsessed country in the world, with a class structure as obvious as in the UK, if different.

<comment><USER28> As an amusing factoid, Germany is the country where my spouse would be addressed as "Frau Doktor Doktor."

<comment><USER29> Those days are long over. The behaviour might still remain in some small circles (60yr old trophy wifes in a golf club) but is basically unheard and frowned upon pretty much everywhere else in society.

<comment><USER20> My last experience was 10+ years ago, so maybe there has been a drastic revolution, but I once worked on an 'account profile' page for a large, national company (in Germany) and one of the meetings went into this topic - should there be a 'doctor doctor' entry in the dropdown with all the titles someone could choose to be addressed as (so Prof, Dr, etc.). I, the barbaric foreigner, then proposed we just get rid of the field all together - more to fill in, more to get wrong, and who cares anyway? Jeebus, I might as well have kicked a puppy in the nuts right there on the table. How was a letter to Prof. dr. Mustermann ever going to end up in the right mailbox, if they couldn't specify whether it was Prof Dr, Prof dr, Prof or just Dr. Mustermann? These people spend hours coming up with the most ridiculous UI ideas of multiple comboboxes, check list boxes, what have you. So after a few hours I said 'then why don't we just put in a free form text field, so that people can just type whatever they want?'. Well that was the one suggestion I could have made that was even more ridiculous than leaving out the field. What if somebody would type in 'poopyhead' (or whatever the German equivalent is), and they would send a letter to Poopyhead Mustermann, and somebody would take a picture of that letter and send it to the newspaper, mocking the company for doing such idiotic things? (in those days they were more concerned about newspapers than websites).

I don't even remember what they choose in the end. I think just a dropdown box. I probably told them I'm make the list of titles to choose from configurable in their backend system and they could make it however they wanted later - which nobody probably ever bothered to do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Another idea, indirectly related, is to simply stop treating all university degrees equally.

The whole reason student loans are so broken right now is because they cannot be dismissed, so lenders are incentivized to lend with reckless abandon. In the worst case scenario the loan converts into a lifetime rent on an individual that automatically adjusts for inflation. On the other hand, the idea behind creating special rules for student loans is easy to see. By removing any risk in lending, that 'reckless abandon in lending' removes any real up front financial barrier to education and investing in your society's education is as good as investing in your society.

The problem here is people are then using this to get degrees that are more recreational than productive. In high school kids are taught that the key to a good life is to get a college degree. And so many people, who are otherwise unmotivated or unambitious, simply choose easy and interesting degrees. The 'soft' degrees absolutely have a purpose, but a person coming from no means choosing to major in a soft degree is not going to meaningfully change their expected earnings. All they're going to do is remain a person of no means who is now also deep in debt that can never be dismissed.

So the idea is to maintain the current system, but restrict lending just to degrees that are statistically likely to 'substantially' effect a student's expected earnings. When you remove the illusion of 'any degree is fine' you start to bring the connection between education and earnings back to reality. And you also push students towards a path of greater capability which is not only good for themselves, but also for the nation as a whole.

<comment><USER28> In my view, this idea runs the danger of creating a planned economy, with characteristic boom-bust cycles and scams.

The choice of which degrees to fund has to be made on either past data or some sort of current fad. The list of preferred degrees will of course create competition to get into those programs, but it may also encourage colleges to create watered-down or even fake disciplines that can absorb more students.

Hypothetical example: Assuming that computer science is on the "hot list," a low-tier college creates a fluff degree in Computer Technology Studies, that gains access to loan money but leads to marginal employment prospects.

Closer to home, the K-12 schools in my locale have a new program that creates career tracks at the high school level. The first track that has become available is health care. Granted, it sounds like a good idea, what can possibly go wrong?

<comment><USER30> Measurements could be organic and self adjusting. In other words schools are required to accurately assess the average earnings, including nonearners, of each and every degree. Degrees above some rate, adjusted for location, qualify for funding - others do not. It could be on a scale rather than binary. Too many health care workers, funding for more pursuing it is completely organically reduced.

Another cool feature is that this further aligns the motivation of schools (who greatly benefit from 'reckless lending') and students. Reckless lending is only possible when the degrees being pursued are provably valuable.

<comment><USER28> There still has to be a lag. When investment is a reaction to growth, and growth is a reaction to investment, you've got practically the perfect recipe for cyclic behavior.

Also, you can't just switch on college majors by switching on funding. The pipeline for some fields is years, for instance arguably for math intensive fields, or some performing arts such as playing the bassoon.

Here are the majors you can study. I hope you got interested in math 10 years ago, or learned to play the bassoon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I think there may be value in society providing some kind of fusion of these two things at universities. University has become a sort of coming of age ritual for young people, when they can manage to go. Craftsmanship and trades skills are certainly solid ways to support yourself, especially when paired with a decent, democratic union, but I cant help but feel that theres something about a college experience that is hugely beneficial to people. Even just the interpersonal relations you experience at university are deeply influential.

Maybe we could have universities run more traditionally trade school type programs as well as liberal arts, stem, art, and music curriculums? That way the philosophy students have the opportunity to take a class in engine repair and the students in the electrician's school can likewise take a class in Computer Aided Design or Astronomy Lab.

</comment><comment><USER32> Trade school is a great thing for the right number of motivated and capable students.

The problem is that the market can only take so many plumbers, electricians and tin-knockers before their pay falls off a cliff. I expect that this would occur long before the wage gap is actually closed. Moreover many trades are still unionized and resistant to new entrants.

I think that schools should focus more on getting the basics right. Most of us here on HN have enjoyed a priviledged journey through good to elite schooling. The sad reality is that in large swathes of the country high school education has become a shit-show with reprecussions that will last decades.

While it is good to continue to offer votech programs, I think that schools should just make literacy a priority. If you think that's 'aiming low' you haven't seen what goes on in schools today.

</comment><comment><USER33> One of my sisters and I both attended trade school and were quickly happily employed.

My other sister went for a psychology major and has since worked service jobs.

I went to a small trade school for "Application Development" circa 2005 that has since gone under.

They really got an undeserved bad rap, like a lot of for profit schools lately. I genuinely feel I received a quality education readying me for working in the industry. I had what I would consider some of the best educators of my life and lots of one on one time with them.

I know a handful of my classmates didn't really take it very seriously and the army was paying for them to be there, but honestly it's lead me into a career I enjoy and allowed me to earn more than I ever imagined.

</comment><comment><USER34> This seems rather odd to me. The article hammers on about manufacturing jobs while it has been reported that manufacturing ethos in other countries is better than the USA making it a really bad choice to manufacture there. It costs more, and you get less.

At the same time, this seems to be suggesting that _anyone_ could be doing a trade school type of education instead of college, while to me it seems that is is the lower entry into any form of education. If college equals trade school, then college in the USA needs to up it's game.

Learning a trade is only useful up to a point. As others have posted, there is no point in having 100 million machinists all being very capable of re- manufacturing tower crane gearboxes. Even a million would not make any sense. There is also a limit to what you can do with your time. While you don't need to be a millionaire to be happy, the limit to what you can earn is comparatively low when you are working at the practical side of things vs. what steering/planning/administrating and up can earn.

This does not mean that trade school is by definition 'stupid' and if you don't go to college or university (or is that the same in the USA?) you are therefore not smart, but it does limit your capabilities, at least in terms of growth. Now, if you are comfortable with a trade, if it gets you what you want, there would be no point in going to college. At the same time, if college is too hard, and learning beyond basic literacy and mathematics is not an option, you might be stuck at trade level.

One of the bigger problems with 'trade' or 'labour' type of skill is that it often is very limited in abstracted transferrable knowlegde. What if the way some thing are done are replaced. Say you are very good at cleaning chimneys, that's great, but nobody needs your skills. Or what if you are very good at shining shoes. Or driving horse carriages. Or digging holes and putting down outhouses. This is the same for most of the current trade type of work, it is only useful as long as people need you, and when they don't you can't really go do something else because you don't have the theory behind what you were doing to re-implement it somewhere else.

<comment><USER35> There's no point in having 100million "business" majors either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> I believe that nowadays - at least in developed countries - you can have a stable income way above average as a tradesman. The shortage of reliable people in these areas is unbelieavable. As an anecdote I knew a self-employed _poolboy_ that before crisis was earning more than most managers.

According my experience (I used to help my father during work peaks) I think that we arrived here because ALL talent is nowadays directed to academia. To complicate the situation this is not easily undone, once people get used to be intellectually challenged they see trades as a terribly boring job. And don't forget the stigma..

<comment><USER37> Sure, but manager works sitting in front of a computer making couple of phone calls per day sipping coffee. Poolboy scrubs dried shit off the pool tiles in hot sun.

People go to college because they dream of getting paid for sitting on their asses. Manual labour is for proles!

<comment><USER38> Actually, I think a lot of managers are stuck making fast food and working retail and can very easily mean doing a lot of physical work. This is particularly true if you decided to go into business management instead of business administration. Lots of those jobs are retail.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> As is often the case, the answer is built into how the question is framed:

If we frame the question as, 'what is the most efficient way to train people with directly salable skills', then college is inefficient and probably not the best solution.

But if the question is, 'how do we best prepare people for life, including critical thinking and knowledge about the world, and to improve our society', college blows away any trade school. Four years spent studying the leading thinkers, thinking, and critical approaches in a diverse array of fields, tutored by leading experts, is an incredible way to sharpen your mind, knowledge, and critical thought. Also, as most in IT realize, learning specific skills in IT is far less valuable over the long run than learning theory which then can be applied even as technology changes. Consider the liberal arts as the 'theory' of other fields.

Many people on one hand bemoan the political situation, the ignorance, and the inability to discern propaganda from fact; while on the other hand they dismiss liberal arts as useless. The latter has developed, almost precisely, as the solution to the former. Society doesn't just work; we need to advance it, which requires understanding the world, its problems and their solutions. These are very hard problems, and learning Java or physics won't solve them.

<comment><USER12> The problem is that most people are not actually that smart to profit from that. It just lowers the level if everybody basically HAS to go through college.

<comment><USER39> Using collegiate critical thinking skills, I wonder: What is that argument based on? Are 'smarts' really an important factor? Maybe it's just work, or opportunity, or preparation, or a million other things.

I tend to think that anyone who wants to do it can do it; they only have to work hard enough.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> > Researchers are investigating how the United States can become more > competitive in the manufacturing industry in the age of artificial > intelligence.

> Manufacturing employment has fallen in both countries, yet in Germany, > manufacturing's value added has stayed around 22 percent in the last 20 > years.

So Germany has done well even before the _age of AI_. But are they well prepared for the AI disruption?

Because currently the article seems to be relying on past data from Germany to predict a future solution.

<comment><USER41> It's a bizarre premise, because US productivity has outpaced both the EU and Germany over the last 25 years.

In 1995-1996, US and German GDP per capita were almost equal, at $30,000 to $31,000. Today the US is about 40% higher.

US manufacturing has grown substantially over that time. The vast gains in productivity are precisely the cause of the employment plunge in manufacturing. Real manufacturing output is up 78% since 1991.

Germany has maintained its outsized manufacturing export base in part through high degrees of protectionism and riding an artificially cheap currency (cheap for Germany, not for Spain, Portugal, Italy or Greece), to the detriment of Eurozone rivals.

<comment><USER42> Productivity is not the end all measure for the society. Suppose the Moser productive society would be made out of robots working 24/7 at high efficiency. Is that superior to a society where "inefficient" research happens?

Likewise GDP (even PPP) does not matter if it is distributed highly unequally. You get a handful of people with huge economic power, that's it.

Albeit in the case of Germany you're somewhat right (protectionism mostly designed to force manufacturing to happen locally), US productivity has not brought improved living standards where it should have.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> It should be pretty obvious to anyone who has ever been to college that the model there isn't exactly one of "efficiency." My first two years were a good time, but if you're a 45-year-old man trying to get skilled as quickly as possible to put food on the table, taking three credits of Shakespeare just seems silly (and I absolutely adore Shakespeare). Not to mention the fact that the notion that you should decide what you want to do for the rest of your life when you're 18 and have never worked or experienced a job market just seems completely insane to me.

The fact of the matter is we're going to need widespread adult re-education, and the current four-years-at-18 model is woefully inadequate for the future that we can all see coming. In fact, the future that's here. Why can't I be prepared for a job in 6 months or one year? Can I take just the part of a college education that helps me be skilled?

IMO the blue collar jobs of the future will be many of the white collar jobs of today. I actually include "coding" in that. Relatively simple programming is something most people can learn to do relatively quickly, provides immediate value, and has rising demand (even the code bootcamps flooding the market still, somehow, leave huge gaps).

My company, Lambda School, (shameless plug, I suppose - YC S17 [https://lambdaschool.com](https://lambdaschool.com)) is trying to solve some tiny portion of that by providing a live, online, skills-based education and job placement program that's completely free until you get a job. Soon it will be available entirely after hours. We've literally seen students go from applying at McDonalds to six-figure job offers; not because we're the best teachers in the world, but because they were already smart enough to become that person, they'd just never been given that opportunity, and for very practical reasons four years of college and expensive student loans were out of the question.

But we're still relatively expensive, still at the higher-skill-level-but- more-difficult end, and we can only cover a _tiny_ portion of the market. In the next 10 years I hope there will be a booming industry of college alternatives that can get people placed, so long as they're not crushed by licensing and regulation (neither of which I think are a bad thing in proper amounts).

If you can move people from unemployed or minimum wage to regular living wage, the value created in that movement is enough that you can take a piece and everyone is _way_ better off, and the cost of doing so is orders of magnitude less than college costs now. I really think we're going to enter a golden age of educational innovation, because the current system is broken enough folks are looking elsewhere. I would love to see someone do that at a serious kind of scale for high-paying trades: plumbing, welding, etc.

<comment><USER44> Well, the 4 year degree at 18 may give you a framework to hang the rest of your learning on - the learning that you're going to have to continue to do throughout your career. The problem is, as you say, that it's too inefficient (and therefore expensive).

Something like Lambda schools may well be the answer - if you can scale it. (You say you can only cover a tiny portion of the market. What scaling problems do you face?)

What I think is _really_ needed, long term, is something like an accredited institution that acts like a clearing house. You want a BS in CS? You need to cover at least this much material. Among the classes will be, say, advanced algorithms. For advanced algorithms, we recognize any one of this set of online classes as valid. That way, with the clearinghouse, you can get a degree that the wider world will recognize, purely online, from a variety of sources.

<comment><USER43> We can scale really well, but education is an _enormous_ market. 5m people begin college each year.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Trade apprenticeship + cultivated curiosity in tech = exactly what hold industries need.

Unfortunately, old industries tend toward new "talent" \+ degree in something cool sounding in hopes of disruptive "yahtzee". they, or at least mine, largely ignore the ones who know the business rules/needs the most in gavor of who "should know the future best". Oops.

<comment><USER46> What's "new" of today is the legacy codebases of tomorrow!

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> It's annoying when this is discussed, because people assume all there are only three skilled trades; plumber, electrician, or machinist of some kind. Machine Drafting, for example, was absolutely decimated by the rise of cad/cam, as was graphic design with the rise of desktop publishing and decline of print due to the web. We also have hairdressing, which is ok but shows that many trades are not open to women, nor can many areas not support a decent amount of tradespeople.

I went to a vocational high school myself, and many people wound up going to college instead, as maybe half the trades didn't have much of a future. And keep in mind, there were a LOT of tradespeople thrown out of work in the 90s in my area due to military budget cuts, too; many skilled tradesmen tend to piggyback on defense or government spending, which is not sustainable.

</comment><comment><USER48> Um, where are the statistics showing that wages in the trades are rising? Everything I have seen indicates that wages in the trades are stagnant which implies that they don't need any more people.

Dumping a whole bunch of people into a system already at close to optimum employment will not benefit _workers_.

<comment><USER2> They are rising all across the country because there is a big shortage, and it's only going to get worse. Boomers are retiring faster than they are being replaced.

Optimum employment? When someone wants to get a project built in Portland Oregon the wait time this past year was about 3 months until you were lucky enough to land a contractor. Contractors can't find enough skilled help so everything takes longer.

<comment><USER48> > Contractors can't find enough skilled help so everything takes longer.

No, contractors can't find enough _CHEAP_ skilled help.

If there is an actual shortage, wages will rise sufficiently to pull people into the field or cause people to move around to fill the holes.

The fact that these slots are not being filled says that they aren't paying enough _NOT_ that there is a shortage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> The real question is how can we reduce the cost of education (or training) while simultaneously better aligning training with the most valuable careers.

Trade schools are much cheaper than college. In addition, we don't have enough trained craftsmen.

<comment><USER2> There is a shortage of trades workers, and it's only going to get worse because the bulk of the workers are currently older and are retiring much, much faster than they are being replaced. We are just at the beginning of a crises level shortage. Labor prices will continue to rise and this will be absorbed by everyone.

<comment><USER42> In a supposed American model this means there should be more competition, right? And the companies will be happy to pay those increased wages to US workers?

(I'm being facetious devil advocate here.)

<comment><USER2> :) They are having to pay higher wages. The wealthy in bigger cities are able to absorb these higher costs. It has a much bigger toll on the middle class in smaller cities because they have the same shortages, but less money to pay the increased costs.

There won't be more competition in the short term because still, only 3% of graduating high school students are even considering a career in the trades. It's going to take quite a while for the ship to turn around.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> If people are going to make more money, where does the demand come from? Or is this about American manufacturers gaining market share from/in other countries?

I don't know much about macroeconomics, so maybe this is a silly question.

<comment><USER51> There are five electricians in town, they each make $40/hour. They have a hard time finding qualified apprentices.

After education, there are 7 electricians. The same 5 electricians still make $40/hour, but the two new electricians make $25/hour. Turns out there's a previously unserved market for a cheaper and less experienced electrician.

<comment><USER52> Or... there wasn't much of an unserved market, and all seven electricians make $30/hr.

<comment><USER51> Sure.

(I'm not sure about the specifics of whether everyone's wages go down or the two new electrician's can't find work, but for the purposes of an anecdote it doesn't matter.)

But in the bigger picture this will be a feedback signal to the next class of electricians and they will decide whether to stick with electrician school or look for some other demand gap to fill.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> A financial gap of any kind comes from unfair advantages in a vastly complex system. How could something like that be solved by attending another kind of school. Imo these are two totally independent things.

<comment><USER44> A different kind of school can leave you prepared to exploit a different kind of gap. If that gap is the one that is currently widening, then being positioned to exploit it can be a wise choice, in two ways.

First, it can be wise _for you_. There's a lot of money to be made in filling that gap.

Second, though, it can be wise _for society_. That gap is growing because there aren't enough people going into that area to keep up with demand. That is, society needs more people doing that. It can help society function to have people meet that need.

<comment><USER53> That sounds reasonable. But is a gap of capital really exploitable without capital?

<comment><USER44> Skills are a kind of capital.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> So, a bit like the "General and Vocational College" we have here in Québec, Canada. Three-year technical programs for students who wish to pursue a skilled trade at a modest price. The price per semester is a mere $132 and you even have access to scholarships & financial aid. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CEGEP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CEGEP)

</comment><comment><USER55> Relevant TL;DR summary:

> Note: Working papers have not been peer-reviewed or been subject to review > by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications.

</comment><comment><USER56> It's the other way around - a college education should be at least as useful as trade school - i.e. decent employment shouldn't be a luxury

</comment><comment><USER57> I entered high school in California right as woodshop classes were being shuttered due to lower funding and also people wanting the students spend more time preparing for college, not in a woodshop.

I think some might have benefited more by going to woodshop classes. Who knows?

</comment><comment><USER58> Income gap has nothing to do with education, it has everything to do with power differentials. Education isn't going to counter the musical-chairs nature of the economy nor the outsized influence of a handful of ultra- wealthy.

</comment><comment><USER59> Let's see....

Learn programming in a trade school or study English at an Ivy League school?

My bet would be the programmer will make more money more consistently across a large number of people than the other. They will also probably have less school debt.

</comment><comment><USER60> Trade school get's you license. A medical degree or a legal degree get's you a license. A regular four year college degree is just an invitation to compete in a race to the bottom.

</comment><comment><USER61> a great one hour program on NPR 1a call-in program on the trades, apprenticeships here:

[https://the1a.org/shows/2017-06-12/how-to-earn-six- figures-w...](https://the1a.org/shows/2017-06-12/how-to-earn-six-figures- without-a-four-year-degree)

</comment><comment><USER62> Yeah, but from career politicians POV: we want liberal arts. STEM or trade skills.... that is risky. They may want a smaller gov. So no way politics will go this way. For example, the Dirty Jobs guy? His video is banned by Google. True.

<comment><USER63> Any source on Dirty Jobs dude and Google ban? Never heard about it.

<comment><USER64> [https://www.facebook.com/TheRealMikeRowe/posts/1680626875280...](https://www.facebook.com/TheRealMikeRowe/posts/1680626875280782)

<comment><USER65> > The gist of my argument goes like this: > 1) Passion is a critical component > of job satisfaction and overall happiness. However...

> 2) Just because you're passionate about something, doesn't mean you won't > suck at it. Which means...

> 3) Following your passion doesn't always lead to lasting happiness or true > job satisfaction. Ergo, my advice to graduates is...

> 4) "NEVER follow your passion, but ALWAYS bring it with you."

It's a shame it was censored. I could have used that advice. I've been considering a career transition into the trades, anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> We should close down business colleges in my opinion. Like learn a skill for fucks sake.

</comment><comment><USER67> It doesn't need to be one or the other. Just because trade schools are good doesn't mean we should ignore the needs of everyone who wants a 4 year degree or has a mountain of student loan debt.

<comment><USER68> It's even better than that. If trade schools can recover some prestige, and more people who would be happier and better off for going there do go there, then colleges can become better colleges, too. Colleges trying to be both is doing a disservice to everyone.

<comment><USER44> More than that: If the people who would be better off going to trade school go there, and so fewer people go to college, _the price of college can go down_ , just due to supply and demand.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> Germany is the country that lost the battle but won the war. I am not saying Germany is not full of hard working and smart people but consider this.

Germany wreaked havoc on its neighbors effectively killing huge % of their populations,destroying trillions of $ worth of infrastructure and industries and much more. Yet they only paid dimes to these countries because someone smart people decided they must be the balancing force against the Soviets.

Also consider this. Germany is effectively dominating the markets of its neighbors solely because of weak euro, its industrial scale, "open" (anti- protectionist) laws and ...corruption. There are many many other factors of course.

<comment><USER70> > Yet they only paid dimes to these countries

You seem to have been taught a rather selective history.

\- Germany was forced to cede _a quarter of its territory_ after WW2, to exactly the allied neighbouring countries in addition to the ones already ceded in WW1. In the east, Germans were ethnically cleansed from those areas. (The western parts were later given back to Germany because France and Netherlands found ethnic cleansing unpalatable.)

\- The Soviet Occupation Zone - the later GDR - was denuded of any and all industrial machinery and other items of value, which were all carted off to the Soviet Union.

\- The western allies took "intellectual reparations" and stripped German companies and individuals of their rights to IP - patents, copyrights, trademarks worth billions. (In violation of the Hague Convention which they all signed, but hey, _vae victis_.)

\- and of course cash reparations too, for countries who did not participate in all of the above (Greece, Israel, Yugoslavia).

<comment><USER69> Are you a german ? Because germans are usually the ones spreading lies like this.

\- Germany was forced to cede a territory to the Soviet union and the SU gave it to Poland. While Poland lost bigger land in the east.

\- Which happened to almost all countries under SU

\- Source ?

\- cash reparations ? Are you kidding me ? If you do the math it's like giving greece 10 euros while you took millions from them.

<comment><USER71> No one wanted to repeat the Versailles treaty after WWI. That is why they let Germany off the hook quite easily.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Effects of Pricing a Portion of the Lanes on Congested Highways [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~jdh386/documents/PI_from_LL.pdf

<comment><USER2> The paper is long and I'm not sure where the economic magic happens but to be able to trade waiting time for money is truly a good thing for all. Sometimes I really am in a hurry and am willing to pay for it, other times not, but by not being able to pay I'm frustrated and all of us are poorer for it.

This of course assumes that the money I pay does not become a profit center - two examples - \- If I'm at Disneyland and I can pay to cut ahead in the queue this is only good if the money I pay goes to those in the queue who wait longer, if it doesn't then everyone is suddenly paying more for the same ride \- This ties in with the work on Shoup and parking pricing. If I'm wanting to park my car at the kerb in many cities I cannot pay as the parking is time limited and popular and parked out. The only way I can get a park is to spend ages searching for for a free bay. Alternatively if the parking is priced appropriately I can trade off the search time for money.

I did cringe a bit where the author worried about protecting the poor. This argument is often put, but if the "lexus lane" on one day makes the difference between keeping or losing your minimum wage job it is helping the poor. What is forgotten that the amazingly low value that wage earners place on their leisure time, typically $3-$8 per hour of leisure time really distorts the economics in ways you might not expect.

<comment><USER3> Austin is currently in the process of expanding one of its major roadways to include 2 new toll lanes.

Drivers in a hurry can pony up a toll to skip traffic, but public buses can make use of the lanes as well.

More info: [http://www.texastribune.org/2013/11/29/in-austin-toll- lanes-...](http://www.texastribune.org/2013/11/29/in-austin-toll-lanes-may- boost-bus-service-riders/)

<comment><USER4> Buses are what really punches a hole in the idea that these lanes hurt the poor. By letting buses skip traffic, they are actually more likely to help the poor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> They are adding a Toll/HOV lane to 405 in the Seattle area. There will now be two HOV lanes and both will be converted to tolls for solo drivers. I couldn't wade through the article to see the conclusion. But I'm not exactly buying into it helping. Right now there are 3 free lanes, and one HOV lane. During rush hour the HOV lane is under utilized. So adding a second lane means only toll users will make use of the new lanes (i am sure HOV use will increase, but not by much, as it could increase today) So some people will chose to pay the toll, if traffic is bad. If it isn't, they won't as there isn't much benefit. The question is, is the cost of adding the second lane worth it? I would think that making the second lane free would be more beneficial, to the environment, and to the travel time. And how long will it take them to recoup the cost of adding the second lane? I'm not against making the single HOV lane also a toll lane, I just don't see how adding a second one is a win.</comment>


Ask HN: Do you know communities working on "the future of programming"? - <AUTHOR> I'm looking for communities that work on ideas similar to what Bret Victor [1], Chris Granger (Lighttable, Eve [2]) and so many others [3] have worked on over the last decades. While I already found a lot of individual projects, I didn't find a place where I could have general discussions about related topics, discover and collect knowledge from previous work and (possibly) collaborate on creating new projects.<p>If no such thing exists already, would anyone be interested in participating in a community like this?<p>[1] http://worrydream.com/#!/LearnableProgramming<p>[2] http://eve-lang.com/<p>[3] Gallery of Programmer Interfaces: [pdf] https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RPX_9u01MEU-QDWU4h-90QF9XqZo7PvH/view <comment><USER2> LtU is a pretty good resource on all things programming language: [http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/](http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/)</comment>


Lscpu for OpenBSD/FreeBSD - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/NanXiao/lscpu <comment><USER2> FreeBSD has dmidecode [https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=dmidecode](https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=dmidecode)

So you can do:

dmidecode -t processor -t cache

which produces the following output on my system:

# dmidecode 2.11 SMBIOS 2.6 present. Handle 0x0400, DMI type 4, 40 bytes

Processor Information Socket Designation: CPU1 Type: Central Processor Family: Xeon Manufacturer: Intel ID: 52 06 02 00 FF FB EB BF Signature: Type 0, Family 6, Model 37, Stepping 2 Flags: FPU (Floating-point unit on-chip) VME (Virtual mode extension) DE (Debugging extension) PSE (Page size extension) TSC (Time stamp counter) MSR (Model specific registers) PAE (Physical address extension) MCE (Machine check exception) CX8 (CMPXCHG8 instruction supported) APIC (On- chip APIC hardware supported) SEP (Fast system call) MTRR (Memory type range registers) PGE (Page global enable) MCA (Machine check architecture) CMOV (Conditional move instruction supported) PAT (Page attribute table) PSE-36 (36-bit page size extension) CLFSH (CLFLUSH instruction supported) DS (Debug store) ACPI (ACPI supported) MMX (MMX technology supported) FXSR (FXSAVE and FXSTOR instructions supported) SSE (Streaming SIMD extensions) SSE2 (Streaming SIMD extensions 2) SS (Self-snoop) HTT (Multi-threading) TM (Thermal monitor supported) PBE (Pending break enabled)

Version: Intel(R) Core(TM) i3 CPU 530 @ 2.93GHz Voltage: 1.2 V External Clock: 5860 MHz Max Speed: 3600 MHz Current Speed: 2933 MHz Status: Populated, Enabled Upgrade: Socket LGA1366 L1 Cache Handle: 0x0700 L2 Cache Handle: 0x0701 L3 Cache Handle: 0x0702 Serial Number: Not Specified Asset Tag: Not Specified Part Number: Not Specified Core Count: 2 Core Enabled: 2 Thread Count: 4 Characteristics: 64-bit capable

<comment><USER3> DMI is a pure software table provided by the BIOS and maintained by the system vendor. The linked tool looks like the output of CPUID reads, which are a processor hardware interface.

Obviously they should match, but if they don't, DMI is going to be the one lying.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is neat and all, but I'm not sure I understand how it's better than 'less /var/run/dmesg.boot'? Which is not to say that this doesn't have any merit, I just don't understand it.

<comment><USER5> A trivial inspection of my FreeBSD 11.1 system's /var/run/dmesg.boot shows that it doesn't contain all the information displayed by lscpu. So what's hard to understand?

lscpu displays CPU information in a predictable, concise format whereas 'less /var/run/dmesg.boot' requires you to read through a log file that contains a subset of the same information that also happens to be interspersed among unrelated log entries?

It'd probably be more fair to discuss the merits of lscpu vs some invocation of grep '<some regex>' /var/run/dmesg.boot that produced similar output.

<comment><USER4> As far as I can see (and comparing with the output on the github page), the only thing missing from dmesg is the amount of cache and byte order within the first 20 or so lines. One depends on CPU purchase, the other depends on the ISA. Either way, they're not something I can do anything about even if I need to know them - which, most of the time, I don't.

I'd argue that the reason you think lscpu is predictable and concise is that you're used to reading it.

<comment><USER5>
      As far as I can see (and comparing with the output on the github page), the only
      thing missing from dmesg is the amount of cache and byte order within the first 20 or so lines.

Well, yes. A subset of the information and interspersed among unrelated log entries as I stated.

      One depends on CPU purchase, the other depends on the ISA. Either way, they're not something
      I can do anything about even if I need to know them - which, most of the time, I don't.

Great!

      I'd argue that the reason you think lscpu is predictable and concise is that you're used to reading it.

Actually, I've rarely used that command (probably a handful of times in the past 5 years) so you're about as wrong as you can get when it comes to using the familiarity argument. :)

I actually based my statement on:

      lscpu -> gives CPU information
      less dmesg.boot -> contains CPU information mixed in with other log entries

lscpu is more concise than the dmesg.boot log file

      lscpu -> fields have fixed fieldnames
      less dmesg.boot -> unstructured log entries

lscpu has predictable output compared to the dmesg.boot log file

In my world parsing output from command line tools that use predictable identifiers in their output is easier than parsing similar data out of unstructured logs.

<comment><USER6> > lscpu has predictable output compared to the dmesg.boot log file

The CPU info appears in the same place each time, assuming no other changes took place. Even if something did it would effect only it's relative position.

And yes the extra info provided by lscpu is very irrelevant for nearly all use cases.

> In my world parsing output from command line tools that use predictable > identifiers in their output is easier than parsing similar data out of > unstructured logs.

Sure, but if your argument is that you can't easily do this without the reinvention of the wheel, I disagree.

<comment><USER5>
      The CPU info appears in the same place each time, assuming no other changes took place.
      Even if something did it would effect only it's relative position.

The initial blob of CPU info, sure. I never really argued otherwise other than to say the log file is unstructured data and the relevant CPU information is not grouped together.

      # grep -n CPUs /var/run/dmesg.boot
      21:FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 4 CPUs

I don't have a ton of other FreeBSD machines handy to check. Is the number of cpus always line 21 of the dmesg.boot log? I mean sure, if it is there is some consistency there but that information isn't grouped with the other.

      And yes the extra info provided by lscpu is very irrelevant for nearly all use cases.

Maybe for your use cases? Seems a little presumptuous to declare what information is irrelevant for other people's use cases.

      Sure, but if your argument is that you can't easily do this without the reinvention of the wheel, I disagree.

That wasn't my argument at all.

<comment><USER7> Not always line 21. Some stuff can appear before CPU info — like hypervisor info and some weird errors:

        …
        SRAT: Ignoring memory at addr 0x80000200000
        VT(efifb): resolution 1024x768
        Hyper-V Version: 10.0.15063 [SP0]
          Features=0x2e7f<VPRUNTIME,TMREFCNT,SYNIC,SYNTM,APIC,HYPERCALL,VPINDEX,REFTSC,IDLE,TMFREQ>
          PM Features=0x0 [C2]
          Features3=0xed7b2<DEBUG,XMMHC,IDLE,NUMA,TMFREQ,SYNCMC,CRASH,NPIEP>
        Timecounter "Hyper-V" frequency 10000000 Hz quality 2000
        CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700 Eight-Core Processor           (3000.00-MHz K8-class CPU)
        Origin="AuthenticAMD"  Id=0x800f11  Family=0x17  Model=0x1  Stepping=1
        …

but it's always in the first part of dmesg.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Very nice. Hopefully, a "lsblk" will follow, as that is one of my favorite Linux commands.

<comment><USER9> am out of date on freebsd, but IIRC you can 'camcontrol devlist'.. openbsd not so much.

<comment><USER9> this doesn't give fs-on-disk info however

<comment><USER2> you can use fstyp command [https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=fstyp](https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=fstyp)

<comment><USER7> doesn't recognize ZFS :D

<comment><USER2> "When the -u flag is specified, fstyp also recognizes certain additional metadata formats that cannot be handled using mount(8), such as geli(8) providers, and ZFS pools."

[https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=fstyp](https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=fstyp)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is cool don't get me wrong but why Linux-ify the BSDs when you can just adapt to the BSD way and use already existing tools (many of which are mentioned in previous comments)?

<comment><USER11> What you ask is what many outside the Linux community are so annoyed and frustrated with. The Linux communities complete inability to look outside their echo chamber. Constantly reinventing the wheel poorly and in a broken screw portability way. Instead of hacking together cgroups and namespaces they should have simply ported the jail framework. Instead of epoll they should have simply adopted kqueue. All they see is Linux only.

<comment><USER7> To be fair, cgroups appeared before we got rctl/racct.

More actual disasters though: signalfd ([https://ldpreload.com/blog/signalfd- is-useless](https://ldpreload.com/blog/signalfd-is-useless)), ALSA, wireless_tools/iproute2(ip command)/iw (was it SO HARD to just keep improving ifconfig?!), procfs/sysfs & udev.

<comment><USER11> If I logged on to a UNIX box, and ifconfig was not there I would install a real UNIX. Seriously I am not going to hunt down or figure out why basic UNIX tools, interfaces, or APIs are not there. I'm just going to write the OS off as a busted trash fire and fix it using the above fix.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Related: x86info (which produces some similar information on x86) is cross- platform, and works on FreeBSD (and likely OpenBSD).

</comment><comment><USER2> FreeBSD has the dmidecode command [https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=dmidecode](https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=dmidecode)

      eg. dmidecode -t processor -t cache

which on my system produces the following output:

      # dmidecode 2.11

SMBIOS 2.6 present.

Handle 0x0400, DMI type 4, 40 bytes Processor Information Socket Designation: CPU1 Type: Central Processor Family: Xeon Manufacturer: Intel ID: 52 06 02 00 FF FB EB BF Signature: Type 0, Family 6, Model 37, Stepping 2 Flags: FPU (Floating-point unit on-chip) VME (Virtual mode extension) DE (Debugging extension) PSE (Page size extension) TSC (Time stamp counter) MSR (Model specific registers) PAE (Physical address extension) MCE (Machine check exception) CX8 (CMPXCHG8 instruction supported) APIC (On-chip APIC hardware supported) SEP (Fast system call) MTRR (Memory type range registers) PGE (Page global enable) MCA (Machine check architecture) CMOV (Conditional move instruction supported) PAT (Page attribute table) PSE-36 (36-bit page size extension) CLFSH (CLFLUSH instruction supported) DS (Debug store) ACPI (ACPI supported) MMX (MMX technology supported) FXSR (FXSAVE and FXSTOR instructions supported) SSE (Streaming SIMD extensions) SSE2 (Streaming SIMD extensions 2) SS (Self-snoop) HTT (Multi-threading) TM (Thermal monitor supported) PBE (Pending break enabled) Version: Intel(R) Core(TM) i3 CPU 530 @ 2.93GHz Voltage: 1.2 V External Clock: 5860 MHz Max Speed: 3600 MHz Current Speed: 2933 MHz Status: Populated, Enabled Upgrade: Socket LGA1366 L1 Cache Handle: 0x0700 L2 Cache Handle: 0x0701 L3 Cache Handle: 0x0702 Serial Number: Not Specified Asset Tag: Not Specified Part Number: Not Specified Core Count: 2 Core Enabled: 2 Thread Count: 4 Characteristics: 64-bit capable

<comment><USER13> What about platforms that don't support DMI?

<comment><USER2> _cpuid dumps detailed information about the CPU(s) gathered from the CPUID instruction, and also determines the exact model of CPU(s) from that information._

[https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=cpuid- etallen](https://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=cpuid-etallen)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Is this basically what `cat /proc/cpuinfo` is for Linux?

<comment><USER15> It is what `lscpu`is for Linux (which provides output quite similar, but not identical to `cat /proc/cpuinfo`).</comment></comment>


SF startup lets would-be tenants bid for apartments - <AUTHOR> http://www.sfgate.com/technology/article/SF-startup-seeks-to-auction-off-rental-apartments-7467415.php <comment><AUTHOR> For those that might complain about how this will make the rental market even worse -- you're absolutely right.

On the other hand, this happens already, just much less transparently. I'm a bay area landlord, and had a bidding war for my place last year. I literally had people throwing money at me (take this $20 in my wallet and I'll be back with a cashier's check in 20 minutes!!).

However, since I have a conscience, I ended up renting to the group that I thought would make the best tenants instead of the ones with the most cash. Most landlords I suspect are not like this.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Their pricing model is strange though -- charging the _tenant_ each month seems odd. It seems like it would make a lot more sense to charge the _landlord_ 25% of the extra, but I guess by charging tenants it makes it more appealing to the landlords who are already getting multiple bids anyway.

<comment><USER2> Presumably this might change depending on market condition. In my experience (in Brooklyn and Cambridge), when the market is soft, landlords are sometimes willing to split a realtor's fee, but when the market is tight, those fees are all on the tenant. Similarly, landlords vary incentives such as free month's rent and other freebies depending on how tight the market is. So, when the service opens in places like Dallas, the terms are likely to be different.

Around here, there's been so much construction at the high end of the market, there's not really a shortage of rentals if you afford the top rents. Landlords won't get bidding wars for that. It's the middle-income folks who are getting the shaft.</comment></comment>


Build your own Basecamp Breeze in 5 minutes - <AUTHOR> http://sebastian-rupp.com/build-basecamp-breeze/

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey! Thanks for your comment. I tried to keep it as simple as possible. I wanted to show that you don't need any coding or use of API keys to copy the whole functionality of Basecamp Breeze.

</comment><comment><USER2> nice article.

But you should really obfuscate things like api keys and mail adresses.</comment>


Ask HN: Patreon for open source? - <AUTHOR> Hey guys,
I'm participating in an hackathon and had this idea: users of open source github repos can contribute $X for every commit the developer contributes, with a monthly cap. It's a recurring donation based on development activity.
Give some love to open source devs.
What do you guys think? <comment><USER2> As others have pointed out, platforms to fund work on open source projects already exist, and the best part is: they're open source themselves, so you can contribute! In fact I was the top developer of Gratipay for a year myself, and now I've created a fork called Liberapay (the reasons were the legal difficulties Gratipay faced in the US, and the decision its founder made to turn it into a non-neutral platform).

Links:

[https://liberapay.com/](https://liberapay.com/) [https://github.com/liberapay/liberapay.com](https://github.com/liberapay/liberapay.com) (Python)

[https://gratipay.com/](https://gratipay.com/) [https://github.com/gratipay/gratipay.com](https://github.com/gratipay/gratipay.com) (Python)

[https://salt.bountysource.com/](https://salt.bountysource.com/) [https://github.com/bountysource/core](https://github.com/bountysource/core) (Ruby)

[https://snowdrift.coop/](https://snowdrift.coop/) (not operational) [https://git.snowdrift.coop/sd/snowdrift](https://git.snowdrift.coop/sd/snowdrift) (Haskell)

<comment><USER3> Are there collaborative translation services for open source apps and products? One could of course use google translate, but it would be nice if the translation is done by humans who actually use the product/service they are translating.

<comment><USER2> Liberapay uses Weblate: [https://hosted.weblate.org/projects/liberapay/core/](https://hosted.weblate.org/projects/liberapay/core/)

Gratipay uses Transifex: [https://www.transifex.com/gratipay/gratipay/](https://www.transifex.com/gratipay/gratipay/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Paying per commit seems as sensible as paying per LOC (related story: [1]). Simple recurrent monthly donations as one can easily set up (eg. on Flattr) make more sense, in my opinion.

[1] [http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Negative_2000_Lin...](http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Negative_2000_Lines_Of_Code.txt)

<comment><USER5> Issues closed is probably a better metric, though there's no actually good metric for software development.

<comment><USER6> "Released Versions" would be a metric more in line with other creative arts on Patreon (finished comics, finished short stories, finished songs, ...). You can still game what constitutes a "released version", for instance including every patch release kicked off by a CI system, but if you stick towards something more like semver's definition of a minor release as your goal you have something of a benchmark idea of what constitutes a "finished release".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "Give some love to open source devs."

It turns out that many users of open source projects (especially libraries and packages) are other developers !

It is hard to find a piece of modern software which doesn't depend on some open source libraries. Those libraries might depend on other libraries and so on. Just do an `npm ls --depth=4` in a node-based project to see what a nice tree that is. Same thing with cocoapods, carthage, rubygems, pip, cargo, leiningen, etc.

In my view, money should follow the project structure - developers should donate part of the money they receive to the project dependencies and the devs of the dependencies should do the same thing, recursively and that's how you really spread the love !

I've started working on a prototype a year ago, but got discouraged after someone showed me that there are literally hundreds of projects trying to 'spread the love' and as a consequence no love is being spread :)... so I kind of gave up on it for now, but still think this is how it should be done.

</comment><comment><USER8> I like the idea of using Patreon for Open Source, but I dislike the idea of tying it to the number of commits, because it creates the wrong incentives.

I've also got the impression that most patrons rather prefer a predictable, monthly amount over a varied amount, even if it comes with a cap.

<comment><USER4> That's why I like Flattr's model - my monthly budget is consistent, even if I occasionally tip projects outside of my regular contributions.

<comment><USER9> which is also how Patreon works -- you choose how much you pay per month

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Here's my idea for getting more money to open source. Someone please implement it, I'm too busy right now.

Central repository (database with website and API frontends) that contains links to donation pages for all open source software. This is crowdsourced information. So if you search for "spark", apache spark appears with link to donation page, and of course more obscure packages will be added as well.

Then a CLI tool is written that scans your code base. This is an open source tool, so for node it will look in NPM packages, for C projects it will look at the make files, etc. Developers can write custom code to detect their own packages if it's not standard.

The output of the CLI tool calls an API at the central repository that creates a report, so you can go to the URL and see all the open source packages you use and links to donate to them.

Now, here is the final piece that would make it so much better, but is more difficult: the central repository itself is a non-profit organization, so instead of having to go to each library's donation page, you donate directly to the central repo (perhaps a set amount every month), and once a month the central repo donates all of the amounts taken in. So if you only want to donate $10 a month, but use 500 open source projects, that's OK, because once a month the central repo will add up all the donations and donate one lump sum. Of course you can change the ratios of donations if you want, so some projects get more of your donation per month than others, and you can remove projects you don't want to donate to even if you use them.

In this way, individuals and companies can fairly compensate all the developers of the open source software they use, easily and fairly, in the amount they can afford.

At the end of the year, you only have to write off your donations to the central repo, and not the hundreds of open source projects, as the central repo is a non profit.

Thoughts?

<comment><USER11> I think this is a great idea. I would love to build it, but don't think I have the breadth of knowledge necessary. Does anything already exist like the CLI tool to determine what OS packages are in your project?

<comment><USER12> Stackshare could be a basic source, as an example, check Airbnb:

[http://stackshare.io/airbnb/airbnb](http://stackshare.io/airbnb/airbnb)

(so a company imports its Stackshare profile & you make a list of the open source projects they're using, and if you have donation information from those projects you show it)

<comment><USER10> That's a superb idea, but I think that would happen after first getting the basic donation information. I will set up a website to gather this with a description of what the project is trying to accomplish, and see if it gets any traction.

<comment><USER12> Yes, let me know, I'll be happy to help and/or continue the brainstorming You can ping me: matias AT insaurral.de :D

<comment><USER10> Thanks! I'll shoot you an email

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Exists:

[https://whispersystems.org/blog/bithub/](https://whispersystems.org/blog/bithub/)

Snowdrift looks interesting too:

[https://snowdrift.coop/](https://snowdrift.coop/)

<comment><USER14> I am not sure about Snowdrift. Although the project has an interesting take on crowd funding, it has been in development since late 2013 and does not seem to be making any significant progress. As far as I can tell, it is still in alpha stage and without a working payments system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> [https://gratipay.com/](https://gratipay.com/) exists already, and it's mostly (all?) open-source as well.

<comment><USER16> Patreon is more popular, though, and used by a lot of artists. You'll need more arguments than "well it exists too" to convince users to sign up for both.

<comment><USER17> It seems to not be there now, but some months ago, patreon's entry page listed out the types of "creators" that one could sign up as. As I recall, this list seemed to take actual pain to _not_ mention open source software, among an otherwise exhaustive list of creative endeavors including not just art, music, writing, but technical endeavors as well as such as research. I always took this to mean "programmers not welcome". This was about the time that there was a mass exodus of bloggers from Gittip (what gratipay was called at that time) to Patreon so they almost seemed related.

edit: finally got through their registration. You get: "Which category fits what you make best?"

Video & Film

Music

Writing

Comics

Drawing & Painting

Animation

Podcasts

Games

Photography

Comedy

Science

Education

Crafts & DIY

Dance & Theater

.. it's clear that programmers (unless you're a game programmer) are not welcome.

<comment><USER9> patreon engineer here! we are very welcoming of open source programmers, and have quite a few on the platform. Many of them, we actually use their code in prod (and pledge a fair amount).

it's pretty impossible to have an exhaustive list of all the kinds of things you can create.. so we've been talking about ways to let people put in their own categories for a while now, but that also has its own set of UX complications.

<comment><USER17> good to know! thanks

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm using Patreon for Cachet[0] and it works well enough that people can donate, but discovery lacks for projects which aren't media based. Also, I can't setup another Patreon page under the same account, so what about filling in the voids there?

The idea works, the implementation could be improved.

[0] [https://patreon.com/jbrooksuk](https://patreon.com/jbrooksuk)

<comment><USER19> You could bring your work over to Baqqer. You can create multiple projects and have each one funded individually. Also trying to make discovery and community more robust is part of our core values. Hit me up if you decide to check it out, I'd appreciate your feedback.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> patio11 has written before on why tips or especially "donations" are a bad idea, or at least not the best idea:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10863939](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10863939)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=659396](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=659396)

businesses have a much greater incentive to ensure continued development of projects than individuals. Personally there's at most a handful of projects I would support with my own money, but my employer's money would be very well spent supporting at least a dozen different OS projects.

</comment><comment><USER21> What I'd really like to see is some sort of business account for Patreon or one of the others. Lots of companies use open source projects as an integral part of their day-to-day work, yet it does not seem straightforward to set up a monthly contribution to this work for a company. Obviously, they can use one-time grants to the Apache Software Foundation or someone else, but sometimes it is really just a single developer or a couple of developers that develop a crucial software package (webpack and others). Would be great if a company could support this easily as well.

</comment><comment><USER22> I don't actually know how well it works, but there is exactly ONE way that I've managed to financially support open source software: offer a version with licenses.

For example, my company pays for OpenVPN Access Server not because it offers a ton of value over OpenVPN (it really doesn't, for our use case), but because they provided a way for me to give them money that's acceptable within a corporate budget.

</comment><comment><USER23> Do your prior work investigation and try to take the good and avoid the bad.

Some prior work from top of my head:

\- Bountysource \- Gratipay \- Patreon \- Flattr

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Woah - received some amazing feedback here! Thanks everybody.

So I'll definitely look at all the other, similar/identical products. Another takeaway is that this idea probably won't work on a per-commit basis - what's a good way to make sure recurring contributions correspond with actual development activity?

</comment><comment><USER24> Might work better if you build a unit test and create a bounty for it.

</comment><comment><USER25> I already donate to Vue and Laravel via Patreon. Per-commit seems like a return to the line-of-code as a metric that was disastrous for obvious reasons.

<comment><USER26> Yeah, Vue.js is quite successful on Patreon: [https://graphtreon.com/creator/evanyou](https://graphtreon.com/creator/evanyou)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> There is [Gratipay]([https://gratipay.com/~Gittip/](https://gratipay.com/~Gittip/)) which is based on donations. You might look into that as well. A commit I think is not representing anything apart from the fact that it is a (hopefully) compound piece of code. You might want to pay for finished user stories which are estimated properly.

</comment><comment><USER28> > $X for every commit

Even if you're supposedly giving money to reputable developers that are the percentile less likely to commit fraud, there's still a risk of it happening.

A more reasonable approach would be a monthly or a "version" contribution.

Even better than that would be a "fund" where you pledged your money to developers/projects, and it would be distributed equally or by a clear metric.

<comment><USER2> There is no perfect metric to determine how much a contributor deserves, but there is another simple solution: let each member choose how much of the project's income they take! This is how Liberapay teams work, and how they used to work on Gratipay (they're working on bringing that feature back).

If you want to know more, the second part of [https://medium.com/liberapay- blog/a-new-platform-to-fund-wor...](https://medium.com/liberapay-blog/a-new- platform-to-fund-work-on-open-source-projects-a97fac218cc7) is a short introduction to our teams system and contains a few additional links.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> There is Tip4Commit: [https://tip4commit.com/](https://tip4commit.com/)

</comment><comment><USER30> You should check out Gratipay(Formerly Gittip) - Although we currently aren't back up to speed (with working payments) it's an open source project/company.

[https://gratipay.com/](https://gratipay.com/)

</comment><comment><USER31> [http://www.backerpass.com](http://www.backerpass.com) would work well as it doesn't require backers to signup for an account like Patreon. (disclaimer: i know the guy who created it.)

<comment><USER32> Thanks for the mention! In case anyone is interested here's an example of an OSS project using BackerPass: [https://backerpass.com/tomatoes](https://backerpass.com/tomatoes). If anyone wants beta access shoot me an email: email@example.com

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> That's what we're doing over at Baqqer.com ([https://baqqer.com/](https://baqqer.com/)) - come over and add your project!

If you're interested in helping out you should join us. :)

<comment><USER33> Was curious what you guys do, but honestly, every page redirects to a signup/login page.

"A social community of makers building, selling, and crowdfunding together"

There is no clarity as to what you actually do.

<comment><USER19> Which page redirects you back? Even the explore/about/tos pages? We're working on redesigning the front-page right now to solve the messaging problem. Thanks for the feedback Jason.

<comment><USER33> Sorry, redirect is probably a bad term? It seemed like all links off the main page that I were interested directed me to a signup page.

For example, links under build your dream and sell your product both bring me to a Create Your Account page. I don't want to create an account. I want to know what the heck you do.

Also, your headline: "Welcome to Baqqer A social community of makers building, selling, and crowdfunding together" doesn't tell me anything about what you do, or more importantly, the problem you are solving.

If it's "Let users give you money for your open source project" then just say it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Side tangent: if you want to know how Patreon creators are doing: [https://graphtreon.com/top-patreon-creators](https://graphtreon.com/top- patreon-creators)

</comment><comment><USER34> If you measure wrong thing then you will get wrong results. Do you want programmers to think about "how many commits this issue is worth"? Just publish your Bitcoin address in readme file.

<comment><USER35> Patreon produces money. Payment information in a README doesn't. They're not comparable.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX_pF03vCSU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX_pF03vCSU)

<comment><USER34> "Produces money"? "Payment information"? I think we misunderstood each other. If you want a way to receive donations, you can publish Bitcoin address. If you want an elaborate way to enforce payment and produce money out of voluntary but unconscious decision - yes, Patreon is the way.

I know that the best thing you can do from SaaS perspective is to get customer's credit card and permission to bill small non-defined amount indefinitely, but I find it morally wrong.

Still, I don't think that WinRAR would have many paying fans on Patreon.

<comment><USER35> "If you want a way to receive donations, you can publish Bitcoin address."

Yes. If you _want_ payments, you can publish a Bitcoin address, or anything else you'd like (my point here is not about Bitcoin specifically). To a first approximation, you won't actually _get_ any payments, though.

That's the difference.

We don't live in a world where people haven't ever tried this brand new donation idea. We live in a world where a lot of people have. Their reports are almost uniform... they literally write blog posts when they receive enough money to pay for a meal in a month or a year, because that's how rarely it happens. It's not a functional mechanism for making money. It doesn't even rise to the level of paying for a hobby; it tends to run at donation rates roughly comparable to what the author could get walking down a busy street every day and keeping their eye out for loose change, and well below the rate of "collecting bottles out of the trash" in any state with a bottle deposit.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Isn't it strange that TFOOT must be placed between THEAD and TBODY? - <AUTHOR>

In an HTML <table>, the TFOOT element must be placed between THEAD And TBODY. http://htmlhelp.com/reference/html40/tables/tfoot.html. What could be the reason behind this? <comment><USER2> So that if the tbody is set up with its own scroll bar, the initial parts of the tbody can appear between the thead and the tfoot before the tbody has finished downloading.

<comment><USER3> This was exactly my answer, before I realized that "webuiarchitect" posted the question 3 times. :-(

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Note: <tfoot> must appear before <tbody> within a table, so that a browser can render the foot before receiving all the rows of data.

^^I saw that on my first google search.</comment>


IPhone sales pass 1.7 million in just 3 days - <AUTHOR> http://ipadwatcher.com/2010/06/28/iphone-sales-pass-1-7-million-in-just-3-days/ <comment><USER2> It would continue to appear that you are submitting every other article from your blog.</comment>


Getting Started with API Testing by Using TestMace - <AUTHOR> https://hackernoon.com/testmace-getting-started-4v19k361q <comment><USER2> Does anyone have any experience how this compares to soap UI?

<comment><AUTHOR> Compared to soapUI, TestMace has the following features: \- You can use it as simple rest client (such Postman) as powerful api tool to test API \- Easy to create as simple requests as complex scenarios with tests \- Autocompletion variables, headers, protocols in almost every input \- Syntax highlight in inputs \- Modern interface</comment></comment>