Ask HN: I'm looking for a Spotify software engineer to speak to - <AUTHOR> Hey HN, I'm the author of a popular music plugin for streamers, http://sourceforge.net/projects/obsmusicstreamd/
My plugin takes the current playing song from several music players, and outputs it to a text file, so it can be shown on a stream. Spotify's most recent update broke compatibility with the plugin however, and now I'm being flooded with emails :(
Previously, it looked through all Windows using the win32api, and looked for windows with "Spotify - " in their title. Spotify's most recent update replaced the title with "Spotify Premium" however. And now I'm at a loss, I've tried contacting their support to connect me to an engineer, but they didn't want to.
I've looked through Spotify's Appdata/local and Appdata/roaming folders, but found nothing I could potentially scrape to get the currently playing song.
So now, I'm looking for either someone with a lot of experience with Spotify who can help me out, or a Spotify engineer with inside knowledge... <comment><USER2> If I remember correctly, the Spotify app creates a local web server with an API that can be used to grab the currently playing song, among many other things.

See:

\- [https://medium.com/@b3ngr33ni3r/hijacking-spotify-web- contro...](https://medium.com/@b3ngr33ni3r/hijacking-spotify-web- control-5014b0a1a360)

\- [http://cgbystrom.com/articles/deconstructing-spotifys- builti...](http://cgbystrom.com/articles/deconstructing-spotifys-builtin-http- server/)

\- [https://code.google.com/p/spotify-local- api/](https://code.google.com/p/spotify-local-api/)

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm definitely taking a look at these, they look very promising.

Thanks

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Spotify's most recent update has ruined a lot of things for a lot of people - you're not alone. I've had repeated conversations with Spotify Support about the various things the update destroys, and they have made it clear they will not escalate any requests in a way that involves letting me (or anyone, presumably) speak with an actaul developer - though they will say they've "forward[ed] your ideas to the dev team" if you complain enough.

Sorry :(

<comment><USER4> Just curious - what has it ruined?

I use the free version, and while I noticed it is a bit different since a few weeks, didn't really notice anything that would bother me.

<comment><USER5> The autohotkey script that pops up when you google "spotify autohotkey" broke, and that pretty much prevented me from listening at work for a week. Very annoying to not have a quick way to stop my music when a coworker taps me on the shoulder.

<comment><USER6> I've since downgraded, but for the day where I was using the new version I had to switch to something more clunky:

      SetTitleMatchMode 2
      IfWinExist,Spotify Premium
      {
        WinActivate
        sleep, 100
        send, {space}
      }
      SetTitleMatchMode 1

And alt-tab may also help, but it sometimes brings up the wrong window.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Have you considered the possibility that someone could get fired for helping you with this? If they didn't want to help you when you went through official channels, it would look really bad if some random engineer gave you inside information about how their proprietary software works behind his management chain's back. (And it's telling that you want to talk directly to an engineer, rather than someone who would actually have the authority to grant your request).

Looks like you might have to just use good ol' reverse engineering...

(As an aside, I'm amazed Spotify doesn't provide an API for this.)

<comment><USER8> _Have you considered the possibility that someone could get fired for helping you with this?_

In which case, the Spotify engineer would simply not respond. The Spotify engineer is going to be far more aware of corporate culture than the outsider who can't get any info out of them.

Let's not shame people for openly asking questions when they've already tried to solve the problems themselves and also failed when using the 'official' channels.

<comment><USER7> First, I wasn't trying to shame him at all. I thought it was an ill-advised thing to try to do, and was explaining why I thought that. That's nowhere near the same thing as "shaming".

Second, it's naive to think Spotify engineers are, as a class, immune to the sort of social engineering that would lead people to commit serious policy breaches. If people can be tricked into giving away their social security numbers over the phone, it's not unreasonable to imagine somebody not realizing something was serious that actually (for whatever reason) was.

<comment><USER8> _If people can be tricked into giving away their social security numbers over the phone_ isn't quite the same as a question asked openly on Hacker News, hence why I said "openly" \- open to community scrutiny.

I understand that you don't intend to be shaming, however that's what you're doing: "how can you ask this question, when it _might_ cost someone their job?". We can't all walk on eggshells in order to protect those people who are close enough to the technical core to give technical answers, yet naive enough to not be aware of phishing and/or draconian corporate culture.

In short, ask away. If there is a draconian response as a result of your questions, that onus is not on you. And it's not like other phishers will leave that naive person alone simply because you did; they're still going to be a weak link in the chain, and they'll get compromised by someone malicious, and they'll still lose their job next time around while at the same time exposing their company to a malicious actor.

Similarly, if we're talking theoretical situations, then how about Spotify management not being jack-booted thugs[1], and when the data breach is found, instead of firing the naif, they use the event to update their corporate policies and retrain all employees with access to privileged information about phishing threats, thereby strengthening the company against future malicious attacks? The naive employee then gains some valuable information on the nature of the world and the company ends up stronger after this benign 'scare'. Win- win all around.

[1] I don't actually know what kind of footwear they use

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> If everything else fails, maybe add support to last.fm? This way the user could just scrobble directly from Spotify to Last.fm and you get the song from there.

</comment><comment><USER10> @azeirah Just talk to this dude he helped me when I had questions in the past. gh: <[https://github.com/thelinmichael](https://github.com/thelinmichael) email: <email@example.com>

</comment><comment><USER11> You should ask support to escalate your request. To someone in marketing.

</comment><comment><USER12> Last.fm still continues to scrobble because it's a preferences setting not a client plugin(?)

But the Last.fm plugin no longer works: [https://open.spotify.com/app/lastfm](https://open.spotify.com/app/lastfm)

<comment><USER13> That hasn't worked for a while. Was never very good anyway.

<comment><USER14> I disagree, it was one of the few was to _discover_ music in the Spotify desktop app (with Mobile or Web, you are just SOL). I'm actually working on a webapp for personal use (integrating lastfm) to have some modicum of discovery with spotify. Their internal 'discovery' tools, much like their radio is for lack of a better work terrible.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Use a good old hex editor? Maybe one of the locations is stable enough. I took a quick look at the dump and it doesn't look too hard. Interestingly the js and css is not obfuscated.

</comment><comment><USER16> Just capture the title from another source instead of the title bar. Spotify is compatible with libre.fm, which is open source. I would use that.

</comment><comment><USER17> Have you thought about loading up an MITM proxy and seeing what's being routed where and why? That might lead you to a fist-pump or two ;)

</comment><comment><USER18> Non-premium users, like myself, have a window called 'Spotify Free' \- at least on OSX. Might want to look into that on Windows.

</comment><comment><USER19> Maybe I'm oversimplifying things, but couldn't you just update it to look for the new title string?

<comment><AUTHOR> The point is that the newest update -doesn't have- the song in its title unfortunately...

[http://i.imgur.com/nPoKDOR.png](http://i.imgur.com/nPoKDOR.png)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Just capture the title from another source. Spotify is compatible with libre.fm, which is open source.

</comment><comment><USER20> Try searching linkedin - its not that hard to find spotify engineering execs on there.

</comment><comment><USER21> Also if a spotify engineer is reading this email me I have some UI mocks for a few UX fixes in the mac desktop app

</comment><comment><USER22> I am not a Windows user... but if I were doing this on OS X or Linux, one could look through memory or look at open sockets, though these operations require special permissions.</comment>


Automagically convert text to 3D graphics - <AUTHOR> http://www.fugutalk.com/?p=134

<comment><USER2> Hey, that's a great find, thank you .</comment>


What is a linked list - <AUTHOR> http://cppbetterexplained.com/what-is-a-linked-list/ <comment><USER2> Many moons ago, when I was just a whipper-snapper of a coder, I was employed to write a DOS based accountancy package. Part of the brief was to develop a fast DB back-end that could support cross searching of all financial information recorded. Without a ready-to-roll DB engine, I ended up developing a complete set of DB modules, with extensive use of linked lists to tie the records together, and raw binary read/writes in/out of the DB file. End result is I still know way too much about DB design than I'd ever care to want to, and have very little patience for unwieldy DB interfaces.</comment>


Show HN: CronStorm – scalable cron jobs as a service - <AUTHOR> https://cronstorm.com <comment><AUTHOR> You can have a free play around with it using this API key: chronos</comment>


Launch HN: Edlyft (YC W20) – Paid Support Program for CS College Students - <AUTHOR> Hi HN! We're Erika and Arnelle, friends since high school and co-founders of Edlyft (https://www.edlyft.com). We help college students pass their most challenging computer science classes, by offering them group tutoring sessions, study groups, and guidance from peers who've done it before them.
Arnelle and I came into college as freshmen not knowing how to code, but wanting to graduate with a CS degree. We found the steep learning curve discouraging, the lack of support frustrating, and felt like everyone else was always ahead. Impostor syndrome hit hard. But we made it through! In the end, what made the difference was connecting with students and mentors who had come before us. My junior year out of desperation, I wrote a letter to a grad student who was willing to meet with me weekly to review concepts and connect me with other CS students.  Without that support system, I probably would've been weeded out from the CS major and not here writing this launch today.
Despite almost being weeded out, Arnelle and I were fortunate enough to land internships and jobs at fine tech companies. However we kept thinking about all the talented people who could and should be succeeding and don't have access to the same tools that we did. If they'd had the same kind of support that we were able to create for ourselves, they could've not dropped CS and maybe pursued their dream job in tech. Finally we decided to quit our jobs to build the support program that can make this difference.
If you got into programming before college and/or grew up in an environment where you were encouraged to play with tech, it may be hard to appreciate what an enormous head start that is. For many people who didn't take that path before college, there's a huge culture shock in the beginning to learn the basics of computing. It's all too easy to get discouraged and think that you don't have what it takes, and the sink-or-swim culture of academia unfortunately encourages these outcomes. Just having access to someone who was once in your position and knows that you can do it--because they did it--can be a game changer, especially in STEM.
You might be wondering why universities don't provide this already. That's what we ourselves wondered while we were going through the experience. For a while, we were fighting within the departments to get more support implemented. But it turns out that the incentives just aren't there. Colleges mostly aren't incentivized to increase CS enrollment, as Professors want to focus on their research and budgets are tight. Instead schools cap the major and struggle to increase support as demand goes up. Students wait for hours in line at office hours to get help--sometimes as long as 6 hours. At Cal, almost half of students who take the intro CS class will not receive a qualifying grade for the major. For universities, this is just an attrition number, but we know that much of that so-called attrition is people who have every ability to succeed at the material but need the right kind of orientation and support. Given the incredible value and growing importance of CS in our economy, this is not a minor difference in outcome. This is a broken system that we're determined to solve.
Once a student joins Edlyft, they are immediately connected to a group of students in their CS class and an older student mentor from their school who has aced the class before. We hire compassionate and patient student mentors who host weekly group tutoring sessions and on-call q&a hours. Every Edlyft student gains access to up to 6 more hours of CS help per week and becomes a part of a larger community of CS students. They answer each other's questions over Slack, work together over Zoom, and rely on our growing school-specific playbooks that are kept up to date by the student mentors. This is the supportive ecosystem we wish we had.
We're currently launched at UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UC Santa Cruz. But the vision does not stop there; We plan to expand to other schools beyond California as fast as is sustainable and see a clear path to expanding into all high growth STEM fields, like Data Science and Pre-Med. We charge a monthly subscription for students to join, and offer need-based financial aid to ensure Edlyft is accessible and inclusive. Our hope is that the students who succeed through this program will become mentors to the ones who are coming up later, and make some money in the process.
If you have any memories struggling with Computer Science, please share them below! Although many people on HN were programming from an early age, we also know that there many who came late to computing and have done very well for themselves. We'd love to hear your stories and share them with our students to remind them that it's normal for CS to be challenging and they're not the only one.
Most importantly, if you know a college student struggling through CS, encourage them to find a mentor who can guide them through. And put them in touch with us! We'd love to talk to them.
We're excited to hear your thoughts on how we can make computer science better for college students! <comment><USER2> I studied CS at Duke. If students in your program can ask the mentor questions about their problem sets, I highly doubt Duke CS department will allow this. Our program was hyperaware of cheating. Most problem sets were supposed to be done individually. They were using software to audit our submissions to catch cheating.

I think students would pay to get help on their problem sets. I knew many students that paid for Chegg. I don't know many students will pay for general tutoring.

Also, keep in mind, a lot of people try CS and don't end up liking it. Most people I know would not want to be a programmer even if they were guaranteed to get A+s in all their college CS classes. It takes a certain type of person to love staring at code on a computer screen 8 hours a day. It's not for everyone.

<comment><USER3> Out of curiosity, what software were they using to catch cheating?

Was it MOSS ([https://theory.stanford.edu/~aiken/moss/](https://theory.stanford.edu/~aiken/moss/))?

<comment><USER4> You know, it's really easy to get around MOSS. You can just run it on your own code and figure out when it gives a result that appears to be "not cheating". That number will depend on how much starter code your assignment involves.

Like seriously, MOSS just filters out the kids who are bad at cheating from the ones who are good at it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Congratulations on launching. Getting my CS major was one of the hardest things I did. Not because the knowledge (it's hard, but not thaaat hard), but because of the perseverance you need to have in an enviroment as toxic as a college, with sometimes bad professor (and sometimes the best you could ask for), or bad colleagues / students (and also the best friends you could get).

<comment><AUTHOR> Congrats on making it through and thank you for sharing! Your story resonates so much with me and so many of our students. Often the content isn't the most discouraging part, but instead the environment. So well said!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm surprised you launched at Cal given your world-view of incentive alignment. I was there right when the department got slammed. Clearly, it wasn't an ideal situation but there was a ton of innovation in the department to meet demand. Additionally, Cal makes it very clear that Profs are expected to teach, and many who teach lower division classes certainly make it their top priority when teaching (thinking of mainly of DeNero, Hug, Garcia, Fox but would also include Babak, Sahai, Vazarani in this group as well).

DeNero led a ton of software development to help 61A scale (fuzz testing projects, automated hints, autograding). Cal recognized that lot of people taking 61A were actually business or biology majors who wanted to know how to code for their own industries, so they added an entirely new major, complete with new courses and its own building, to relieve pressure on the CS department.

A now-standard company (Gradescope) was launched to help TAs grade faster, often returning graded midterms just a day later. Not to mention Piazza, which became standard in all CS classes within one or two semesters.

And not only that, but tons of tutoring resources were available for lower- division classes from other student groups like HKN/UPE (spoiler alert -- most of these tutors were current or former TAs so you got the same level of knowledge without the waits) and ASUC.

I'm sure a lot of people who've given blood, sweat, and tears to scale this program in a resource-dearth environment _because_ they love CS so much would be upset with your characterization of the department's stance.

<comment><AUTHOR> Completely agree. CS departments deserve a ton of credit for having to adjust to insane levels of growth that are unlike any other department.

Also you're spot on about Cal. In fact, I too questioned whether or not it made sense for us to launch there at first, especially given that they have such a topnotch CS program with incredible resources. However when we spoke to 100s of students there before we launched, we quickly learned that the competitive environment still resulted in so many students slipping through the cracks. Moreover, we encourage Edlyft mentors to direct students to existing resources on campus as well. Edlyft should not be a replacement for these existing resources, but instead a supplemental option where students feel they can be a little more vulnerable.

Lastly, our characterization of the climate in schools comes directly from students' experiences and our own. Cal definitely has tons of resources that I only wished I had access to when I was in school. However many schools are still very far from getting there, leading to so much talent being overlooked. Edlyft should not have to exist and we're successful when it no longer needs to.

<comment><USER7> I think that the main reason that students want tutors and other resources is because office hours are slammed during projects, event though there are lots of TA's and readers. There are a lot of resources to help students with material in terms of understanding, but there are a lot fewer to help students debug projects, so I think that it's where a lot of the demand is. Unfortunately, I don't see Denero or Hilfinger allowing private debugging help for hire as a solution due to cheating and plagiarism risks. How do you ensure that the tutors are abiding within the honor code, and not helping students cheat?

<comment><AUTHOR> Wow! You highlighted exactly what we've heard from sooo many students: OH being slammed during projects as a major pain point.

To avoid helping students cheat, we have all Edlyft mentors agree to an academic honesty policy, go through mentor training, and all are interviewed before they join Edlyft. We've also considered recording sessions as well, but haven't gone that route yet.

But more than that it's been fascinating to watch some of our mentor sessions. What we've seen happen is some students actually prefer to use Edlyft to become an "excellent" CS student and hone their understanding of concepts vs. getting hw done just for the grade. My hypothesis on this is that our mentor sessions are unlike traditional office hours where you may only get 10min of TA attention. So, when students are able to slow down and really grasp concepts, doing hw on their own gets easier.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> "At schools like Berkeley, more than half of the students who attempt the intro computer science course will not meet the average grade required to actually declare the major. Without previous experience, it's incredibly hard to make it on the right side of that curve."

I don't think this is true, and find this wording to be _more_ intimidating to potential CS students, as it gives the false pretense that it is "incredibly difficult" to pass CS classes with no prior experience.

<comment><USER6> So I think their claim is _technically_ true but leaves out a lot of context. I assume they're talking about CS 61A, which last fall enrolled _over 2000 students_[0]. That's almost 1/3 of the entire freshman class. The average grade for CS61A is actually a B+[1]. However, to declare as a CS major as a Liberal Arts major you need an average GPA of at least 3.4, which is higher than the B+ GPA (3.3). Thus, their claim is technically true.

[0] [https://www.dailycal.org/2019/09/10/cs-61a-course- enrollment...](https://www.dailycal.org/2019/09/10/cs-61a-course-enrollment- reaches-an-all-time-high-at-2000-students/) [1] berkeleytime.com (doesn't allow deeplinking to specific page)

<comment><USER7> Actually the context is missing but in a kinda different way. Berkeley CS has about 2000-2200 students in 61A each semester, and an average grade of B+ (3.33). Students need a 3.33 average in 61A and two other classes, 61B and 70. However, most students don't take the other courses ("Only" 1750 and 750 this semester in each of those). Cal requires 61A for other majors too (Cognitive science, data science) so a lot of students take that class but don't take others. In essence, Im agreeing with you, but just being a little different semantically.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Interesting idea. As a somewhat non-traditional CS student, I could definitely see this as a tool I would have turned to when I was starting out.

One of the most frustrating aspects of studying CS is that my professors would come up with problem sets and assignments on their own and their solution would require something not found in online resources. There were quite a few times where I could only find tangentially related information in very obscure places. Hopefully your service can address this issue effectively.

Also, it seems like the folks here on hn aren't your target demographic so the pain may not resonate here, but i think it exists in a deep way, none the less.

<comment><AUTHOR> Glad our service could resonate with you. Thanks for support!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I came in to my undergrad institution (Georgia Tech) as a CS major but switched out after the first year for reasons similar to what you've described.

A lot of my classmates had been programming for a while before coming to Tech for their undergrad and compared to my peers I was having trouble keeping my head above water with my CS classes and was struggling to access support.

Sometimes I wonder if I should have just stuck to the program but in retrospect I didn't really have the resources/guidance/support (in more ways than just academically) at that time.

I wish you guys success!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you so much for sharing!

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I think the idea of building a community is valuable, and reduces the risk of disintermediation if you were just a tutor-matching service. You might want to look into the idea of separate pricing for the tutoring component vs just being part of a community.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a great idea! Especially now that students are alone and off campus, the community aspect has become even more important.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This sounds overly specific, there are lots of places to find private tutors, so building one aimed specifically at undergrad first 2 years in a specific field - isn't it a bit too specific? I'm trying to count how many unicorns are there in the tutoring marketplace, and nothing comes to mind. I mean if there was a Tinder and you would be the tinder for pets, I get it, the main category is saturated so you find a niche, but what is the poster child of tutor finding? I used some app in the past and it tried to convince me to use the app to pay the tutor, it ended up just being a way for me to get their phone number, I pay them directly (tutor for my kids). I think you either go with care.com approach where you pay a fee, or mask sending emails / numbers, otherwise, tutors will figure they can cut the middleman and get paid directly once you start scaling and can't hire them directly. I wish you all the best and lots of good ideas get a lot of "it won't work" naysayers but I'm curious how you got YC to invest in this, what evidence you have that people will want to pay for it, and that they will use your service vs any of the other "find a tutor" places out there. Last question, how do you make sure it doesn't turn into a "do my homework for me" thing like course hero etc.

All the best, I'm just curious on how the business of this will work, and how you convinced YC to believe in it too.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're spot on; we were very intentional about starting niche in these intro weed out STEM courses because we recognized that there was a huge gap in the system and a "hair on fire" problem we could solve: 50% of STEM students switch majors & most who completed undergrad had no idea how much their major choice would impact their career. Dropping these intro classes often is the difference between graduating with a STEM degree & an in-demand job or struggling for a lot longer. This felt like a low-hanging fruit spot to make huge impact.

Some poster children for tutoring are: Chegg, Kaplan and Crimson Education. The way we avoid the "off network" issue (which I've definitely done myself before as well), is by offering group sessions. With this model, we're able to offer students way more help for much cheaper than paying an hourly 1:1 tutor fee. Edlyft Mentors also love tutoring for Edlyft because they are usually CS majors trying to build their resume and we are a YC-backed tech startup. To avoid "do my hw for me", we have all mentors agree to an academic honesty policy, go through mentor training, and all are interviewed before they join Edlyft.

Love the question on convincing YC! Our key insight was that 70% of coding bootcampers already have their bachelor's degree. This is way higher than most realize. Edlyft is tackling the Lambda School problem from a different angle that is much lower cost and higher margins, meaning we don't need to teach curriculum. Instead, we reach students when they are already in an environment for learning and have less responsibility (no kids or full time jobs usually). We give them the support they need to graduate the first time with the skills they would have paid an additional thousands of dollars for in the future.

<comment><USER12> Nice... great reply, I see why they accepted you guys. I assume now you have more tutors than students, but will you open it as a "gig economy" for tutors in the future? (e.g. join as a tutor). Sounds like something I'd be happy to volunteer doing, let alone get paid for as a side gig :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I had a very similar startup idea, it was less based on a niche though but the rationale is the same. I have startup ideas about education quite often because my vision on it is quite strong. If you want to chat about education, drop me a line (email is in the profile).

I created doodledocs.com for fun also to aid education as a side project. It's a purely frontend P2P app. I have ideas on education quite often and sometimes I tend to prototype them out.

</comment><comment><USER14> I am thrilled now to see such a service now exist! I am always want to learn CS myself, but always felt hard to dive into cuz I have 0 STEM background,I always think group learning is one the the best way to learn CS, let alone now it also provides us a mentor, really interesting and hope this service become popular, I will definitely try it in the future, bookmarked.

</comment><comment><USER15> Very interesting. Have you had any pushback from school administrators who may be concerned with wealthy students gaining an unfair advantage? Although I guess this is no different than private tutoring, which most schools are okay with as far as I know.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great question! We've built our model so that for every full price paying student, we can admit a need-based financial aid student.</comment></comment>


Why and How I Migrated from Posterous to Self-Hosted WordPress - <AUTHOR> http://blog.antoniocangiano.com/why-and-how-i-migrated-from-posterous-to-self-hosted-wordpress <comment><USER2> I have to say I'm not really a fan of wordpress either. Granted I am not a power user, in fact my knowledge of wordpress is crap, but that's partly because it's always taken me so damn long to figure out how to do anything.

Yes there are millions of plugins, and millions of themes and if you really now what you're doing it's a powerful CMS system that can look/feel how you like. But I've always found doing simple things to be fiddly (more often than not I've had to resort to hacking php), page response times are slow and adding your own themes requires expertise. Which you got to do otherwise it just looks like a theme, as polished as it might be.

What I really want to do is just write my own html from scratch. However then you gotta use some kind of webapp framework to handle page components, provide templating etc which has it's own overhead of course.

<comment><AUTHOR> In that case, you may look into Octopress (mentioned in the post): <http://octopress.org/>

<comment><USER3> Thanks so much! I was planning to switch to Jekyll, but was confused by the apparent lack of a default template to get me started. Octopress seems to be the missing piece.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> As a security aware person, wordpress self hosting is kind of terrifying. At the very least, keep it on a dedicated VM and away from anything you care about.

<comment><USER5> As another security interested person (who does not claim to be anything remotely near an expert), my suggestion is to have a static site, generated using something like Jekyll. Most blogs don't need server-side code running, and Disqus works great for comments.

<comment><USER4> Absolutely. Some people like wordpress for irrational reasons, but Jekyll is awesome (what I use).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Also see <http://rmurphey.com/blog/2011/07/25/switching-to-octopress>

Have to say, i also think Jekyll is a really nice compromise. Not something you could recommend to a client though...

<comment><USER7> I did the same thing. Using octopress on github pages now. <http://websymphony.net> Was earlier on Posterous. If you have decent knowledge of html + css, you can have lot of flexibility in look and feel of the blog. You also get to use Compass for managing css. Code highlighting is pretty neat.

Default theme is quite readable, not like posterous low contrast themes. And since it is hosted on github, you yourself don't have to worry about sudden surge of traffic or security stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Yes, I plan on doing the same thing with my blog (zappable.com). I didn't really see the point in Posterous as a blogging platform, so I guess it makes sense they're changing focus. However, there a re a couple of issues with a self-hosted blog, such as expense, security and ability to handle traffic spikes.

<comment><USER9> If you don't want anything fancy from wordpress, then running it securely is very easy: there is an autoupdate button which will update it for you with one click, the easier will be finding a hosted solution which will update wordpress for you (sometimes it might not work if you customized it).

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Tumblr is more flexible in my opinion. There's something to Posterous which makes it powerful for what tumblr was designed to do but Tumblr seems better for longer form content.

Posterous = BYOC (Bring your own Community) Tumblr = BYOC + Utilize Tumblr's user base and promotion tools.

</comment><comment><USER11> I setup a posterous years ago because it was the easiest way to share pics I took from my phone. It worked on my blackberry and android devices when the app markets were tiny. Now that wordpress has apps for all devices it is easy to share and post via the app if I want to put up a sunset picture and have it be tweeted out.

</comment><comment><USER12> Where are you hosting the blog now?

<comment><AUTHOR> In the cloud with SoftLayer.

<comment><USER13> "In the cloud" has come to mean "on the internet" nooooooo. God help us all :-)

<comment><AUTHOR> Haha. No, I actually meant a cloud instance and not a dedicated server. SoftLayer offers both.

<comment><USER14> Why not use Amazon EC2? Their free tier (for a year) is more than sufficient for hosting a blog. After the free period is over, you only end up paying about $20/mo for a micro instance with 10GB of EBS.

Does SoftLayer offer anything more substantial than AWS?

<comment><AUTHOR> I run a series of blogs and sites on the same instance. The micro-tier wouldn't even remotely cut it. With SoftLayer I get 4 GB of RAM and it's enough thanks to nginx and caching.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Phishing site found on Sony's servers. Yes, it's been hacked AGAIN - <AUTHOR> http://thenextweb.com/industry/2011/05/20/sony-hacked-again-this-time-its-not-its-playstation-network/

<comment><USER2> There's a difference between PSN and some server in Thailand.

Let's stop with the hyperbole.</comment>


Eric Ries Digs Below the Surface of Lean Startup - <AUTHOR> http://hackingstartups.org/2011/09/eric-ries-digs-below-the-surface-of-lean-startup/

<comment><USER2> I hope everyone enjoys listening to this discussion as much I enjoyed having it with Eric. We went deep on a lot of issues, particularly refreshing given the media hype around lean startup right now.

We even talked about the type of dialog that happens about lean startup on Hacker News. ;-)

<comment><USER3> I especially like the part where you go into innovation accounting and investors. I think this concept (as simple as it might sound) will have a huge impact on the way investors and startups think about what they are doing.

<comment><USER2> We (Patrick and I) spent a lot of time talking about this afterward. Really fascinating to think about the help companies will need in solving these problems.</comment></comment></comment>


A Shakeup in Russia's Top Cybercrime Unit - <AUTHOR> https://krebsonsecurity.com/2017/01/a-shakeup-in-russias-top-cybercrime-unit/ <comment><USER2> Former Vice President Biden promised that the U.S. would take covert action to punish Russia for interfering with the U.S. election.

What better way to do that than to plant fake evidence implicating the IT people involved for treason and thus provoking doubt, fear, and internal conflict within the FSB?

The folks at the C.I.A. are perfectly capable of this sort of thing and would delight in doing it.</comment>


This app might become your new best friend - <AUTHOR> http://www.inc.com/aj-agrawal/the-app-that-will-become-your-new-best-friend.html <comment><USER2> I agree with the content, of the article, but not sure I understand how the app mentioned helps.

However, in the trend of "to a hammer, everything looks like a nail", it does make me think that I'm on to something with the site I built just before new years [http://bucket52.com](http://bucket52.com) \- It will hopefully entice you to do something special and unique every week and track it.

I really have no idea what Paralign does.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi bud, Thanks for this. What part is confusing? landing page or the app?

<comment><USER2> I don't have android or ios, so can't try the app. The confusing bit for me was what it actually does.

It wasn't until I just went to the apple store and saw

"With Paralign you're never alone. Journal your thoughts and feelings and Paralign will anonymously find thoughts that are similar to yours. Anonymously message anyone whose thought you resonate with and measure and group your thoughts over time with our timeline view."

A simple description of how it works, but that wasn't on your website anywhere.

I think you're site is really nicely designed, but I don't know that the taglines and quotes make it clear as to why I would use it. Just my 2cents. I didn't get it.

The quotes to me felt quite clinical, like maybe it was an app for people with mental health issues.

This quote doesn't even make sense "It feels like I was always relieved because I can post that bothers on my mind. Aside from that, Paralign enables me to be connected with like-minded people.", until the last sentence, which is all you need.

This one sounds specifically for people who are suffering in some way "I was helped by someone here in Paralign. Now, I am giving it back to others who might be struggling on the same problem that I had. I am giving this app, a "Life Inspiration" Badge!"

I guess I'm still not sure, I don't think you're targeting the mental health market, but for some reason it feels a bit like that.

The image of the app says "I just don't know what do, I have no one to talk with", not the most uplifting message to show people how you will connect with other people using your app.

Hope this feedback helps. I don't mean it to be negative, just trying to get the message across as to why I didn't get it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Brilliant feedback. Thank you. very helpful

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Clickbait title with a membership wall. Lacks sources, no credible assertions, just feel-good campfire hand-holding and false hopes.

This site is garbage.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi :) Are you talking about the website or the app? Talk to me!

<comment><USER3> I haven't looked at the app but I read the article and the premises are outlandish. It won't matter what other people think of you? That's the entire point of social interaction - satisfying our physiological needs for belonging, self-esteem, and self-actualization.

The future is about self-growth and self-expression? More than just followers? People don't use social media to grow themselves - we use it because it's addicting and rewards the pleasure centers for our psychological needs. That's how it is now and yesterday.

It's trying to hard to be "the future" of social media or the next Facebook when it's never going to replace it.</comment></comment></comment>


American parenting is killing the American marriage (2014) - <AUTHOR> http://qz.com/273255/how-american-parenting-is-killing-the-american-marriage/ <comment><USER2> While I think his insights on how we treat our children is amazingly insightful, and I love how it's described as a religion (the point that children are our sacred cows is very good in particular) his attempt to relate it to marriages seems shoehorned at best. There's a lot of problems with the way we treat children, but I think it's relation to marriage is the least of our issues.

But seriously, the whole "children as a religion" point is great. I mean, think of some of the bills and laws that get passed because "think of the children". It's not too different from religious laws.

<comment><USER3> I don't think he's being insightful at all. All his observations seem to be shallow and his conclusions are weak.

> parenthood became a religion in America...Nothing in life is allowed to be > more important than our children...a human achieves its peak value at birth > and declines thereafter

Most Americans tend to believe their children come first. This isn't a religion, it's an evolutionary instinct. A species can't continue if its organisms don't put enough effort into their offspring if their offspring are completely defenseless for the first decade of their life and only 3 are born to every female. If I kick a 40-year-old out of my house he'll find a hotel to stay at temporarily and be fine. If I dump a 2-year-old on the street, they'll be roadkill within the hour. Caring more about children isn't any more unique to this time period than it is to this species.

> Another sign of the parenthood religion is that it has become totally > unacceptable in our culture to say anything bad about our children, let > alone admit that we don't like them all of the time.

I grew up in a household where my parents weren't afraid to tell the truth to me and it was pretty brutal. There's enough negativity at school that it feels like people are surrounding you at all sides with insecurities. Honesty isn't bad but if your kid goes to public school he already knows where he falls short. Also, saying things behind your kid's back isn't any better. It'll come back around to them.

> Mothers are also holy in a way that fathers are not expected to be. Mothers > live in a clean, cheerful world filled with primary colors and children's > songs, and they don't think about sex.

I don't know where this is coming from. Maybe this was Jesus' ideal for a mom, but nowadays the ideal mom seems to be one that argues over who's carpooling next week and buys their 16-year-old birth control just in case. I think anyone who can could and do laundry probably automatically counts as a good mother nowadays.

I think the problem is the author treats kids more like a car than a living being. Your car's muffler isn't going to get fixed until you admit it's broken. You don't fix your kid by bringing him into the shop one day after work. Being a parent requires being a teacher, boss and friend at the same time. In no way is "owner" ever part of that definition.

<comment><USER4> > I don't think he's being insightful at all. All his observations seem to be > shallow and his conclusions are weak.

Thank you; you put it better than I could.

A small example that demolishes his crackpot theory: we just had a kid a few weeks ago. We have a cat, who has never been around children, and who has never had children. And yet, when the child cries, the cat comes running; and if the cries do not subside soon enough, she'll start howling. And then there's this example: [http://www.bbc.com/news/world- europe-30893297](http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30893297)

Is the cat following some religion too? Hogwash.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is both a great article and a mediocre article. I agree with others that the marriage aspect is the weakest part.

As a parent, I constantly think back to the 70s as a benchmark for open mindedness and freedom with my children. In my honest opinion, we've lost a lot of perspective and become much less tolerant. In Australia, someone called the police because children walked a short distance to the local park by themselves. Taking a photo at a swimming carnival is taboo. None of these attitudes were around in the 70s.

I felt the relationship aspects between adults missed the mark. Not only the relationship breakdown aspects, but the women and sex. That reminds me of the woman who runs she++ (a sexist business name that no one calls out) who said in a Forbes interview that sex was bad and a man thing. There is a social stigma in admitting that women can like sex. Even Sam Mechkovich from Ars commented about bond women not falling for bond in his Spectre review, because that's not a woman thing to like sex. My response to these people is "what's wrong with it?" Most of the women I know and respect are open about sex. That doesn't mean free sex, it means being open minded and confident in yourself to be free to speak your mind. My sort of people...

Ultimately, I lump all these social and parental problems down to Political Correctness. For the nay sayers, you can treat people with respect and not be PC. PC is a set of perverted rules that bully people into what to think.

<comment><USER6> >> Ultimately, I lump all these social and parental problems down to Political Correctness. For the nay sayers, you can treat people with respect and not be PC. PC is a set of perverted rules that bully people into what to think.

I have been told, "You can't say that, we have to be open minded here" when expressing the belief that political correctness does more to damage discourse than almost any other idea in western society. Way to provide a demonstration of my point!

<comment><USER7> Isn't the perverse fairness of giving equal time to clearly unequal opinions (/science/facts/etc) worse discourse than political correctness? Of course PC can and does wade into over sensitivity but it also includes the idea that you should err on the side of safety when using words that can be terribly hurtful to some people. It's not our place to decide that it's not in fact hurtful.

<comment><USER6> Yes, the idea that we must be fair to all opinions, no matter how silly, is also a bad one.

<comment><USER8> But it must be countered by the fact that some valid opinions of today were the silliest of the past.

Consider how many things we accept as valid today (say opinions related to equality) were once almost blasphemous to mention. It would be arrogant of us to assume we are not making similar mistakes.

<comment><USER6> You raise a good point that I hadn't thought about.

I suppose the lesson is to keep an open mind, but not so open that our brains fall out.

<comment><USER8> I'm just worried that among progressives of the past, many open minded positions of today would have been 'opening your mind til your brain fell out'. Consider what people would've said a century ago if you brought up homosexuals marrying or transsexual acceptance. What today seems a strange to use as those concepts seemed a to progressives a century ago?

<comment><USER6> Any ideas for how we can guard against this?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "Ayelet Waldman, where the author explained that she loved her husband more than her four children."

Recently did some pre-marital counseling where they recommend that you put your spouse above your children. Seemed really strange to me and counter- intuitive. I don't know much about marriage at all, but if you think about it, the trickle-down effect does seem to make sense as setting an example is a good lesson for kids.

I think the takeaway is to keep a balance. Also, it's not like Ayelet Waldman is a revolutionary, as other old-school practitioners seem to have been recommending that advice for years.

<comment><USER10> _counseling where they recommend that you put your spouse above your children_

I believe this is incredibly important for a lasting, loving relationship. I've observed a few relationships where one partner's priority shifts so much to the children that the other partner is left with little love or consideration and their bond quickly degrades.

I could understand this behavior in a place where there's a shortage of food and resources, but in developed countries with an abundance of food and relative safety people are sabotaging their happiness and adult bonds by elevating developing humans above the person they originally committed to.

Additionally, some adults infantilize their household culture to the point where adult activities become a sort of taboo. I think we short-change children by not exposing them to regular adult behaviors and conversations. Certainly there are some things children should not be exposed to but the household should be as accommodating for old and young as possible. A healthy balance needs to be struck.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I never understood the sentiment of valuing babies over all else. To me it always seemed obvious that fresh college graduates are most valuable to society, since we just finished investing a ton of money into them. Babies on the other hand are easily replaced.

I get this is mainly an emotional argument, but it's still startling to me how opposite it is to the purely economic argument I made above. In fact usually people think I'm just trolling when I'm stating my opinion on the matter but I'm dead serious.

<comment> nommm-nommm > fresh college graduates are most valuable to society

This seems to be a popular opinion on here and I really don't understand that. In fact its kinda fucked up. I can only guess there's a lot of fresh college grads on HN.

It takes all kinds to make the world go 'round. I certainly don't want a society made up of fresh college grads who think they know it all.

<comment><USER11> I strongly agree that we need a healthy mix. However, for fresh college graduates there is more time left to pay off the investment we made in them as a society. In fact I believe they will be at their most productive a little later than that. But they get there as they get older.

Edit: Typos

<comment> nommm-nommm Meh... I don't think there is really much difference from your average fresh college grad and your average non-college educated 22 year old.

I guess from an economical sense college is expensive but... I don't know... how many college grads actually use their degree?

<comment><USER12> I think the more important question is how many college grads actually _benefit from_ their _education_ (modified words italicized). A degree in, say, forestry should still be useful for someone working in sales because of the experience dealing with diverse opinions, processing new information, and studying a range of subjects.

<comment><USER13> This is anecdotal, and not a very controversial opinion, but many people in my family and group of friends are sociology majors. After watching them grow and knowing them pre and post degree, I can without a doubt say that education is beneficial. What you learn is unimportant. Becoming acquainted with the process of learning is the true benefit of education.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> For anyone who's interested in the rise in divorce rates, I highly recommend the book "The Two Income Trap". It basically tries to prove that the transition to dual income households damaged the financial security of many families. Pair this with the fact that the number one cause of fighting and divorce is money, and you have a better explanation than what this article provides.

<comment><USER15> _I highly recommend the book "The Two Income Trap". It basically tries to prove that the transition to dual income households damaged the financial security of many families_

A great book. It can also be read profitably in conjunction with Matt Yglesias's _The Rent is Too Damn High_. School districts are weirdly tied to real estate in the U.S.; many places with good districts also have severe land-use control laws that prevent the creation of new housing units on a given parcel land; and, consequently, people will pay a lot of money for scarce housing that comes bundled with good school districts. Two-earner households make paying for the housing easier, but two-earner households are often also more economically fragile (especially considering the prevalence of divorce).

<comment><USER16> > but two-earner households are often also more economically fragile

Can you elaborate on that? It doesn't make sense to me. When we were on a single income in my family, it felt _a lot_ more fragile than now that we have two incomes.

<comment><USER14> It's explained in the book I mentioned. You would also need to educate yourself on personal finance by reading some other books to get a more holistic picture (The Millionaire Next Door is a good place to start).

There's three things you need to understand about personal finance:

1\. The first is that shit happens and most people don't plan for it (because they haven't been educated on personal finance). Most resources suggest that you keep an emergency fund of 6-12 months of living expenses saved up for when shit happens. We know that most people do not have this. I'm not even going to bother providing a source because there are so many sources on how Americans don't save.

2\. The number one expense for any given household is going to be housing (whether owned or rented).

3\. While you can cutback on many things, you cannot cutback on a mortgage. So if there are permanent setbacks to your finances: someone loses their job and gets another one that pays less, someone gets hurt and can't work for a while or ends up on disability, someone has to stay home to take care of an unhealthy relative, etc, then you can be pretty much shit out of luck unless you're house has equity on it and you can sell and downsize (although most people will just take a loan out against their equity lol).

So these are the characters of our stage. If you get a mortgage based on 1 person's income and something happens, there is another person there to step up. This provides a powerful safety net for the family. If you get a mortgage based on both people's incomes, you are putting yourself at greater risk because if something were to happen to either person you would not be able to afford to keep your 15-30 year agreement. And the cost of getting out of that agreement is enormous (as we saw with the recent housing crash).

I encourage you to read more on personal finance. It's incredibly fascinating.

<comment><USER17> You realize the reason people move to 2 incomes is because they can't afford to live off one?

You realize that a lot of people don't have savings because they live paycheck to paycheck trying to survive?

<comment><USER14> Both of your questions would be answered by reading the aforementioned books and by learning more about personal finance.

Also: [https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance](https://www.reddit.com/r/personalfinance)

<comment><USER17> So no, and you will just continue with the condescending assumption that anyone questioning you doesn't know anything?

<comment><USER14> I'm not sure how you would like me to answer false assertions? Especially since my post is clearly about people with a mortgage (as is the book I recommended). The best I can do is point you in the right direction to properly educate yourself.

<comment> nommm-nommm Personal finance books are often a lot of garbage with a little bit of wisdom thrown in that requires effort to extract.

[http://badmoneyadvice.com/2009/03/whats-wrong-with-the- milli...](http://badmoneyadvice.com/2009/03/whats-wrong-with-the-millionaire- next-door.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> nommm-nommm Call me callous but I always thought one of the most important lessons a child should learn is "its not all about you."

I am so amazed when I see parents nowadays devoting their entire life to making sure their children are spared of any tiny little inconvenience. These children will be very poorly adjusted and these parents are rarely happy.

<comment><USER18> What if you were to engineer a situation with your kids where you a) teach them how to do something useful, and then b) put them in a situation where that useful thing needs to be done. If they don't take the cue, no problem. If they miss it, maybe have a 3rd party (like an aunt or an uncle) pitch in. Then maybe have that 3rd party ask the child if they know how to do that thing - and get the kid to get in the habit of volunteering their effort if it's helpful to those around them. (It's important that the prompts not come from the parent since the action becomes "acquiescing to authority" instead of "pitching in for the common good".)

Of course, there's an unfortunate prisoner's dilemma in that if two kids are involved, and one is volunteering all the time, the lazy one thinks, "Ha, sweet, I'm so clever I never do any work and things still get done!" Not really sure how to get around this - perhaps develop a turn-based cooperation game where two siblings take turns helping, effectively coopting the helpfulness of one to blunt the selfishness of the other. If they both defect, then I suppose you have to create an "existential baseline" that they don't want to endure, involving a) no toys, b) no freedom, c) bland food. But that's problematic because it turns you into a jailor, and it turns cooperation into "that thing you do to satisfy authority" again.

<comment><USER19> Always going to great lengths to teach your children important lessons like this is another form of putting them first (or at least up there).

I don't put loads of time into my kids to save them every inconvenience, but to give them a thirst for knowledge, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Being a foreigner I do recognize the dynamic described in the article on some level, merely by observing the American culture from the outside, but I hadn't realized it's such a serious and pervasive sentiment——or is it?

Maybe there's a bias such as the overmothering behaviour being overpresented in the media yet most families and mothers are absolutely regular people as parents, and possibly feeling bad themselves about never reaching the impossible expectations set in the media?

I'd happily read personal experiences here to figure out how much truth there is in it.

<comment><USER21> Most of this article reads to me like a description of a foreign country, or an alternate universe. Maybe it is my own experience which is not representative, rather than the article, but I don't see parents having trouble criticizing their children when there's cause for it or admitting that they sometimes want to do things without their children.

Most of the article is handwaving. The one part of it that's actually based on a specific event is the writer who got persecuted after saying she loved her husband more than her children. But this is the standard sort of nonsense that happens any time anything catches the attention of fringe crazies. Do something with national reach, and if 0.01% of your audience thinks you're a scumbag for it, you will suffer even if their opinion is not representative. You could write an essay about how chocolate is delicious and you'd still end up getting hated on, no doubt with lots of references to Indonesian fires and such. But there is no American chocolate crisis.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> 1) This comparison to me says more about religion than it does about parenting. Unconditional love and devotion to your baby? The feeling is physical, and the baby is real. To be able to invoke the same feelings for a deity appears more magical to me than parenting, especially for those who have never experienced having a child.

2) American parenting isn't killing marriage. Marriages are killed one at a time by the unique parents that choose to do so. And that's the problem with statistical conceptualizations. It rarely applies to you for those dealing with it at the present. Only in hindsight do the numbers compile anyway, so it really isn't all that helpful.

Anyone in a marriage knows that the will to be together is sacrosanct. Once two capable independent adults decide to part ways, nothing could be easier. The past could have been wonderful, and it's easy to feel good about what was good. But for many couples, divorce is the choice, and often a good choice for them. In other cultures, there are more bonds holding couples together. In the US, it's far easier to be independent or marry again. It's easier to live your life on your terms than on that of social perception or social dogma. Is this a good thing? Who are we to judge? If you feel the stats are tilted in the wrong direction, then we can try and tip it the other way with our own marriages. But "for the stats" is not usually what crosses our minds when we're not getting along.

This is a classic case of "is as does". Nothing is killing anything. This is the shape of the new American marriage.

<comment><USER23> I'm not so sure that "Once two capable independent adults decide to part ways, nothing could be easier." Particularly when children are involved, it can be very messy, very ugly, and ruinous for one or both parties, mentally and financially. Even in an ideal DINK relationship, depending on the state you live in, it can be difficult to come to a clean, amicable break, without ongoing obligations.

It certainly is easier to live one's life on one's own terms. Indeed, that might be the _only_ way to live one's life, in the long term. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance when choosing a partner to make sure that both parties have compatible terms.

<comment><USER22> It's true that having kids does make everything more complicated, and they provide a reason to stick together. But it isn't stopping parents from divorcing completely, just less than if they didn't have children. And seeing all of those divorced with children, it makes it more difficult, but not difficult enough. For better or for worse, we do it anyway.

Of course, the opposite is also true. When two capable independent adults decide to stick together, there really isn't anything that could keep them apart. Isn't that the beauty of it? This has been at the heart of the western philosophy of marriage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I love my kids and I think they each have unique things about them that make them great. I also think they can be amazingly compassionate and caring little people. But let's be real: By and large kids are at least a little bit sociopathic assholes. It's that behavior that you spend the better part of their early lives trying to excise from them.

Does anyone remember being a kid? Regardless of whether you were the victim, perpetrator, instigator or bystander just think back on how cruel bullies could be both verbally and physically.

</comment><comment><USER25> We've spared the rod for too long, IMHO. Not saying we should abuse our kids or even reprimand them physically necessarily, however seeing a two year old as anything more than a terrorist whom cannot be negotiated with, can have detrimental consequences in their adulthood. Boundaries must be drawn early on or else....

<comment> vezzy-fnord Your statement is a performative contradiction. Your proposition is that a two-year old is akin to a terrorist who cannot be negotiated with, but your suggesting boundaries be drawn as a resolution presupposes that in fact they _can_ be negotiated with (negotiation necessarily implying the setting of boundaries), hence negating your point.

<comment><USER26> Wait, are you saying you can negotiate with terrorist or with 2 year olds? I have no experience with terrorists, but I have five kids. There are absolutely times when a two year cannot be negotiated with. And there are times children have to be taught that under no uncertain times their current behavior is acceptable. And that time is a temper tantrum.

<comment><USER25> I've 2 kids... and you catch my drift - they act (sometimes) like terrorists, and that is when you cannot negotiate, meaning, your word is absolute. Otherwise, any negotiation when they are acting like terrorists usually would end at their peril (yours too, probably), for they not know what they do. This is what I mean, "don't negotiate with terrorists".

Of course, at other times you can negotiate, and they get the tradeoffs rather than being absolute in their attitude, sticking to their guns, without thinking.

It is an ongoing commitment, a 'battle' of staying present, guiding them, drawing a line when necessary, and letting them win too... It is absolutely through contradictinction they will learn the most - what worked once, may or may not work again, behavior wise.... of course, there are absolutes - don't kill or hurt others, don't lie, cheat or steal...those are usually easier to teach. And then there's wisdom...that's lifetime learning.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> It's just anecdotal, I've found that my siblings and friends with kids are pretty up front about the negative attributes of their kids. So the "parenthood religion" isn't necessarily universal.

I think it's still a good article. It comes down to balance in the end, I think. Kids are just another thing in your life that you have to balance—more plates to spin. If you're only spinning your children's plates, it seems obvious that your job and relationship plates are going to eventually fall...

</comment><comment><USER28> Marriage first, children second. If you and your wife/husband make a happy couple, you will likely raise a happy offspring by creating warm, healthy and balanced environment.

</comment><comment><USER29> This does seem a little extreme. I don't know many parents that are so child centric that they "have nothing left to say to each other".

On the other hand if you compare parenting in th 1970s there does seem to be something to the argument that parenting went from an occupation to a professional sport, where people compete at it. I object more to the tiger parenting where kids have to be at the top of their class, get in to MIT or Stanford, all that pressure. It's not healthy.

</comment><comment><USER30> I don't understand this at all. Blame divorce on kids? What?

If anything, the American spending habits are killing the American marriage. Financial issues are the source of countless divorces.

</comment><comment><USER31> I always thought "Baby On Board" caution signs were placed on cars and minivans as a courtesy to other drivers.

These signs let other motorists know that the sign-toting car will swerve wildly, stop unexpectedly and misbehave drastically because a self-centered, totally implacable baby is present inside, jealously and continuously demanding the driver's attention by screaming, vomiting and pretending to fatally gag on nothing in particular.

Now I know I was wrong.

Thanks HN!

</comment><comment><USER32> read history boys at 18 or even younger can be generals and nowadays they're still treated like toddlers, our parenting method is wrong in my opinion, the key is that we babysit them too much for too long.

</comment><comment><USER33> I agreed with pretty much everything until the following:

"Mothers are also holy in a way that fathers are not expected to be. Mothers live in a clean, cheerful world filled with primary colors and children's songs, and they don't think about sex. A father could admit to desiring his wife without seeming like a distracted parent, but society is not as willing to cut Ms. Waldman that same slack. It is unseemly for a mother to enjoy pleasures that don't involve her children."

Uh, are we living in the same society? Moms are more sexualized today than they ever have been. Have you ever been to a daytime CrossFit class? Lisa Ann has been the most popular adult film actress for years, for God's sake.

I agree there is much progress yet to be made in resolving a variety of gender-equality issues....but the argument that society's increasing valuation of children is driving a newfound societal demand for Victorian prudishness in mothers seems to fly in the face of all available evidence.

<comment><USER34> I'm not sure your observation is at odds with the assertion made here. We could sexualize mothers while keeping the taboo on mothers themselves being sexual i.e. desiring sex. In fact, the sexualization could even feed off that very taboo.

<comment><USER33> I see what you're saying in theory, but by my reading of the article it's clear that the authors are saying that societal expectations around mothering are effectively inhibiting women from existing both as mothers and as sexual beings -- and this assertion does not square with what I observe in the real world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> > child-centric lives can lose touch with one another to the point where they > have nothing left to say to one another when the kids leave home.

there are couples like this because the way they made kids + 2 careers work on middle class salaries is by dividing the day in half and each parent spends one half the day with the children and the other works. after ten years of this, you don't actually know your spouse any more - they've been living some life, but not one that you've had time to be a part of between your own career and your children.

this seems like an equally plausible explanation for this phenomenon, because when you sacrifice that much it must be for _something_ and when someone else insinuates that maybe the sacrifice wasn't worth it, well, that would really piss you off...

<comment><USER36> > the way they made kids + 2 careers work on middle class salaries is by > dividing the day in half and each parent spends one half the day with the > children and the other works.

Who sets up their schedules like that in the middle class? Middle class jobs don't (typically) allow that one parent could work from 7-4 and another from 4-1am.

<comment><USER35> one parent does shift work and the other doesn't, i.e. medical residency / EMT or something in network operations that does a swing shift.

<comment><USER37> That situation exists, but it seems far from the majority situation for 2-income middle-class households.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> An article about american parenting and a picture of new born babies in munich, germany?

</comment><comment><USER39> I would like to understand the relevance of this article to Hacker News. Perhaps it would be helpful if I could see a demographic breakdown of visitors: marital status, age, and number of offspring.

"Once our gods have left us, we try to pick up the pieces of our long neglected marriages and find new purpose. Is it surprising that divorce rates are rising fastest for new empty nesters? Perhaps it is time that we gave the parenthood religion a second thought."

So divorce rates for empty nesters are the kids fault or kids are holding together marriages that were doomed before they left the nest? This article is garbage.

<comment><USER17> Anything is relevant to Hacker News. It's in the rules.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> He's generalizing way too much. There are so many different subcultures, which each have their own style of parenting, and even within them parenting varies person to person too much to generalize like this.

</comment><comment><USER41> >The origins of the parenthood religion are obscure

"The Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits any United States citizen from being denied the right to vote on the basis of sex. It was ratified on 1920."

Womens suffrage has to reverb through political sphere. As a whole it's not good or bad, just different. Another thing coming from there: time passed since women gained vote seems to correlate with welfare spending.

I don't think religious fervor can be avoided in a society. It's just a matter of where it is directed.

</comment><comment><USER42> This _is_ extreme. I read this article when it made the rounds last year, and I hated it just as much this time around. Disclaimer: I'm a parent, and I love it. I also love being in a relationship with someone I trust and with whom I can talk about 'grown-up' shit.

Granted, there are definitely parents who hover, worry, or interfere with their kids', but, at least in the circles I run in, these are the exception more than the rule and most certainly don't represent parents (or marriages) at large.

</comment><comment><USER43> A. Teller is probably more interesting to HN folks because he's head of Google X. This seems incongruous a little bit and then you see how people in Palo Alto parent...

<comment><USER44> This is related to the "obnoxious Little League Dad" phenomenon. Most of us have some disappointments about our lives. The way that some parents deal with those is to imagine that their children will succeed where they have failed. Once parents pay more attention to the image of a child than to the actual child, craziness ensues.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> Interestingly, I've asked many of my female friends, including my last few girlfriends, given the hypothetical choice of saving their husband or their child, who would they save? Almost all of them said their children.

Ask the men, however, and it is almost always the wife.

And none of these folks were married or had kids yet. It is something ingrained from before that occurs.

<comment><USER46> Dad here. I would save the kids, for several reasons:

1\. They have more life-years ahead of them. 2\. If I saved my wife, she would hate the choice I made and be plagued by survivor guilt or resentment. It's not clear that my marriage would survive this. But the kids are young enough that they would probably accept the choice, to the extent that they could comprehend it.

</comment></comment><comment> vezzy-fnord Not every day you see a major publication questioning natalism.

See also Judith Rich Harris' _The Nurture Assumption_ : [http://www.amazon.com/The-Nurture-Assumption-Children- Revise...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Nurture-Assumption-Children- Revised/dp/1439101655)

</comment><comment><USER47> Being a parent today seems so awful, especially if you are expected to make the household income on top of doing 50% of the parenting.

</comment><comment><USER48> I have a suspicion that these parents are using children as mirrors for their self-obsessions. The self is the true religion here.

</comment><comment><USER49> Hmm, wouldn't have expected "But think of the chiiiiildren" to be a shitty argument even when applied to marriage.

</comment><comment><USER50> If this article were true, how can you explain lower divorce rate in Asian countries?

China? S Korea? Japan?

<comment><USER51> Divorce rates skyrocketed when they started having dual incomes like ours.

The reason for less is cultural....plus, it's a bit easier to cheat and still stay married....most places aren't so hung up on "he cheated, let's divorce!" thing like the USA.

<comment><USER50> So it wasn't because of over parenting in Asia?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> Perhaps replacing real religion with a false one is unwise.

</comment><comment><USER53> This isn't a bad train of thought, though I wonder if this says more about Millennial narcissism than it does about the "religion of parenting".

I think this has more to do with a kind of ethical posturing ("I am holier than thou") than it is about a sacred cow. There are parents who will give up their own interests for the sake of their children's interest, and not because there is peer-pressure to do so, or as a way to gain status within the community, or to be tyrannized by a cultural myth.

So thinking about it more, I think this article is BS -- not because the issues it raises are not true, but because it focused on the wrong thing.

There is also a spiritual and psychological transformation that takes place with becoming a parent.

Philosopher Ken Wilber had written extensively about modernity, and the way it throws pre-modern ideas such as the Great Chain of Being out the window, leaving members of modernity disconnected with their place in the universe. That's not to say that pre-modern ideas where they just told you where your place is a good idea. On the other hand, existential angst and a constant wondering of your place in society, in the world, in the universe as a whole is a constant them in the cultures of modernity.

What does this have to do with parenting? The idea of the Great Chain of Being is a kind of stand-in, or abstractions, that Ken Wilber claims ties the pre- modern religion together. They disagree on a lot of things, but one thing that is present in the religious teachings is putting the human experience in context of the cosmos as a whole. The search for the meaning of life was a search for your origins, of where you came from -- a search for who you were "born" from. It might seem obvious that your body was born from the DNA of both of your parents; however, where did they come from? If you trace things up your lineage, you still come to the question, "Where did life originate from?"

To use the mythic language in the context of the Great Chain of Being, you were "born" from the universe.

To become a parent is to experience -- just a little bit -- of what it is like for the universe to give life and creation. It might be accidental or intentional. Someone might enter this stage with naivete or with great wisdom. There are a lot of things you might have railed against growing up, but now as a parent, it makes you think and wonder.

My point is that, if you were to strip away the ethical posturing and political correctness, what you are left with is not a re-examination of parenting, that there is a sacred cow to be slaughtered. Parenting is an re- examination of your self and your place and purpose within the universe. Your growth does not stop there. You might gain a better appreciation of how things come together.

</comment><comment><USER54> "Think of the children" is a cliché</comment>


How to Increase Your In App Sales Revenue: Mobile App Marketing Secrets - <AUTHOR> http://dombracher.com/mobile-app-marketing-secrets-how-to-boost-your-in-app-purchase-sales/

<comment><AUTHOR> Is anybody else experiencing any other great ways of increasing their conversion rate of free to paid users?</comment>


Android is the new Windows CE. - <AUTHOR> http://blog.calbucci.com/2013/02/android-is-new-windows-ce.html

<comment><USER2> This is a pretty low-content rant based on the author picking up what appears to be a Nexus S (!) and complaining that it isn't as good as modern phones. We all know Android had teething problems, but none of his rants seem relevant to my Nexus 4. The interface is beautiful, I've yet to have an app crash, "Browser" has been Chrome for going on two years now... I'm really not sure what the author is hoping to achieve by incorrectly predicting the future of Android based on a 2 year old phone.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's a Galaxy Nexus ([https://play.google.com/store/devices/details/Galaxy_Nexus_H...](https://play.google.com/store/devices/details/Galaxy_Nexus_HSPA?id=galaxy_nexus_hspa&hl=en)). I see the picture has the Chrome as the browser, but somehow this phone doesn't. It's running Android 4.2.1.

<comment><USER2> Well you're running the same version I am, then, but I can't say I've experienced any of the issues you describe. I came over to Android from iOS with the release of the Nexus 4, and while the Android UI is certainly more complex (which seems to be your chief complaint), it's eminently more useful as well.

Your complaint that "it has a desktop" seems particularly curious, as there's no functional difference between it and the iOS home screen. Sure, your apps "live" elsewhere, and you can make folders and shortcuts, but what's wrong with that? Beyond "it's PC-like", is there some UX disadvantage it entails?

PINs - I use the pattern, which I find much easier. Actually, that's a nice segue into the biggest improvement I find over iOS - the keyboard. I thought it was a gimmick at first, but the pattern-swiping style of typing is bloody brilliant. I'm consistently amazed at how well Android guesses what I'm trying to type. In fairness, though, this is really only useful for touch typers who know where the key they want to hit is on the keyboard. My buddy, who's a hunt-and-pecker, just found it frustrating.

Photo Album is Gallery - and Apple calls Internet Explorer "Safari". The fools.

Poor synching on GMail - actually, I find the mobile GMail app works better than the web version. I'll consistently get notifications of new emails in my inbox on my phone 5-10 minutes before getting them in-browser. Sure, it doesn't tell you when it last updated (and it could), but it's not really a practical problem as it seems to be constantly up to date.

Anyway, I'm sorry you weren't impressed with your Android experience. I've been an iPhone guy for the last 3 years, but recently made the switch to Android and my only complaints are with the N4 itself: glass back and small battery.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Your article is poorly constructed. It is called "Android is the new Windows CE". It's a very catchy and intriguing title. But it's a scam.

You start by stating your conclusion: "while iPhone and Windows Phone are revolutionary smart phones, Android is the closest thing I ever seen to an evolution of Windows CE."

However, your have only one argument in the whole article defending your conclusion. The only point of comparison with windows CE that you develop is that they "supposedly" share a desktop as a common feature. Wow! I should have stopped reading there.

Then you proceed with various complain about the system

1/ The UI design is poor, that it lacks consistency. Sure that can be a fair point. It's also a matter of taste, but I agree that iOS and Windows are an order of magnitude more consistent. However, what has this to do with Windows CE ?

2/ Google is over-emphasized on Android. Sorry? You are an iPhone user, and you complain about the fact that the company behind Android is too present on it. I would say Android, is much more detached from Google, than iOs devices from Apple or windows from Microsoft. And you are contradicting yourself at the end of your article, by stating that Android is successful because it is customizable. And I would add, that Google has a strong presence in search, maps and emails... So many non-Android users would anyway install Google Apps on their devices.

3/ You could not find the app store easily. Why because it is not called "App Store"? Would someone new to iOS intuitively go to Safari, a compass, as a web browser? If I wanted to read this kind of non-sense, I would read my Grandma's blog. Not someone from the tech industry.

4/ And then random rants. Pin number, News & Weather, Photo Album is called "Gallery" (omg) ... are you serious? And what is has to do with CE?

</comment><comment><USER4> "For me, Android doesn't work because I'm way too much focused on getting things done fast"

Says the guy checking email every 3 minutes who unlocks and jailbreaks his phone just to have a mobile hotspot.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's exactly why I get things done fast. Always connected. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Why is creating shortcuts to apps a bad design? You can list all of the apps in any screen you want. Or you can choose not to. With iOS? They are all there, even things you don't use constantly. The UI is basically an app selector.

I don't think the app icons are designed badly..

Google Earth, Google Maps, and Navigation are all different apps. Would combining them into one be better UX? Why? Gmail and Email are different apps. The Google app is Google Now. I don't understand your issue here. Btw, the Messenger app you're referring to is probably Facebook Messenger...

The reason Google can't use App Store is because Apple patented App Store. Look it up - they sued Amazon for using the term.

The Downloads app stores your downloads.

I agree with GMail giving poor indication of syncing.

I just searched Yelp and it was the first result.

Browser and Chrome are not the same thing.

<comment><USER6> > Why is creating shortcuts to apps a bad design?

Why should I have to create shortcuts?

> With iOS? They are all there, even things you don't use constantly

What does this even mean? You put the apps you use the most on the first page, and the apps you use the least on the last page. There are no restrictions as to how many apps you can have or must have on each page, other than the size of the grid. If you want, you can have exactly one app on page 1 and all remaining apps on page 2. You can group apps like how the "Google" app on Android 4.2.1 works if you want to touch instead of swipe.

<comment><USER5> So somehow moving apps is less difficult than creating shortcuts?

<comment><USER6> Creating a shortcut doesn't accomplish the same thing moving an icon does; you still have to move it.

Also, moving is generally unnecessary on iOS if you install the most important apps first.

Oh, I almost forgot: Yes, moving an app on iOS is less work than creating a shortcut on Android.

<comment><USER5> I disagree. To each his own.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Android also has Widgets. And even the plain shortcuts can do various things... you can have shortcuts to do a specific action like play a specific playlist. You can also have an indication (on both Ios and android) with a number or other information... for example, missed messages.

Also, on Android you have the ability to use the desktop to pick a specific organization for your applications. You can have your workout programs on one screen, then swipe to work apps. Combining that with widgets, you can have controls for music on your workout screen, and a calendar on your work screen.

That's the use of the abstraction, the ability to organize the items into sets for use in tasks and localize them.

The app drawer contains all your apps... but if you only had an app drawer, you'd still want to organize it.

</comment><comment><USER8> I feel you are making a assumptions on how "users" will feel about the experience, based on your personal experience, and past experience using another device which you are familiar with.

I experience the same confusion and frustration whenever I quickly pick up an iOS device. Spend some time with Android and you may experience a difference, especially after you have customized it to achieve your tasks quickly.</comment>


FreeSense: Indoor Human Identification with WiFi Signals - <AUTHOR> http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.03430 <comment><USER3> This is a type of passive identification I hadn't imagined before. It's pretty impressive to see 90% identification for a set of 6 users.

I can't imagine it's accurate enough to use for secure verification. I could see it's application for a shared entertainment system (ps4, netflix, etc) where identification is primarily for configuration purposes, not security.

</comment><comment><USER4> Note that this isn't all that dissimilar to Xandem's tomographic motion detection. Their "Xandem Home" product makes a Harry Potter Marauder Map style overlay on a map of your home showing where all moving people are in realtime. It is really cool stuff that I'm about to have installed in my own home:

[http://www.securityelectronicsandnetworks.com/articles/2014/...](http://www.securityelectronicsandnetworks.com/articles/2014/06/24/xandem- tmd-tomographic-motion-detection-review)

[http://www.xandem.com/motion-detection](http://www.xandem.com/motion- detection)

Compared to crappy PIRs from companies like ADT, it is great stuff.

</comment><comment><USER5> Very cool, and somehow very creepy! This is how we will be hunted when the machines rise up ;)

</comment><comment><USER6> The only good application of this work I can come up with is to reduce the danger that comes from surprised cops in no-knock warrants.

Still kinda evil though.

<comment><USER7> Useful for detecting if aged or ailing family members haven't moved in a while, and check on them.

<comment><USER8> A team from MIT has created a product for this specific purpose using a very similar technology: [http://www.emeraldforhome.com/](http://www.emeraldforhome.com/)

<comment><USER9> Not using WiFi, but their own RF spectrum. Very cool though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> There was a good/creepy article in The Atlantic about FreeSense and WiKey, which was covered a few days ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12353605](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12353605)

</comment><comment><USER11> How would a person be able to avoid this?

<comment><USER12> That's one scary implication: they can't.

<comment><USER11> No seriously. Maybe wear some kinda suit?

<comment><USER13> Run Ethernet throughout your home and hardwire 100% of everything. Disable all wireless radios in your house. That will stop your own gear from being used like this, but unless you turn your home into a faraday cage someone could probably blast your home with 2.4GHz externally to achieve similar results. If as you mention, perhaps you had some kind of suit that is completely absorbent to wireless spectrum, though that in itself could be used as an identifier most likely.

<comment><USER14> You can buy coating for your windows that blocks RF.

e.g. [http://www.scottishwindowtinting.com/residential-window- film...](http://www.scottishwindowtinting.com/residential-window-film/window- film-blocks-radio-frequency-rf-radiation/)

Can usually get in via custom order from anywhere that does window tinting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Is this much different to FIND?

<comment><USER16> FIND author here.

It's not doing internal positioning with Channel State Information (CSI), but there are folks that are [1]. The approach in FIND is different [2] - <USER2> just uses RSSI+MAC information which works great on mobile devices and simple esp8266 chips and doesn't require code for the specific network interface. As far as I know you have to write some network card specific code to be able to use CSI.

[1] [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.07080.pdf](https://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.07080.pdf)

[2] [https://github.com/schollz/find#about](https://github.com/schollz/find#about)

<comment><USER4> Still no IOS support yet I take it? I was so excited about that before realizing it only worked on Android.

<comment><USER16> Sorry! Apple is very restrictive. iOS 9+ is supports access to WiFi RSSI, but requires permission and approval from Apple. We requested permission 3 weeks ago and no word yet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12353605](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12353605)

</comment><comment><USER18> I building a business around this stuff in boston. If anyone's interested send me an email (in my profile)

</comment><comment><USER9> Hi everyone! I'm VP Product at aerial.ai. We are using some of these techniques for presence, activity and identification. We have 7 patents in this area.

Happy to answer any questions!

Edit: We're hiring DSP, ML and Growth people

</comment><comment><USER19> MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) did this last year:

[http://rfcapture.csail.mit.edu/](http://rfcapture.csail.mit.edu/)

</comment><comment><USER20> Can this be executed from phones (which can act as WiFi router, for tethering purposes) by this ubiquitous baseband RCE vulnerability I always hear about on HN?

<comment><USER9> Some of these WiFi statistics used in this paper are typically not exposed at the user level. You would need to have a modified driver. May or may not be easy to do for an iOS or Android phone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Wasn't this what wifi slam worked on at Stanford?</comment>


The MIT Red Balloon Challenge Pyramid Scheme - <AUTHOR> http://balloon.media.mit.edu/carpdiem/

<comment><USER2> it's not a pyramid scheme. if you read it carefully, it's actually an inverse- pyramid scheme. the payouts are limited and well defined.</comment>