Openbook social network - <AUTHOR> https://www.open-book.org <comment><USER2> I'm actually fine that it is not de-centralized. It is true that federated systems are too complicated for practical use. However, to go against Facebook, we need something like Wikipedia, not Facebook by some other guy who pinky promises that he will be good.

This right here kills it for me, and hopefully others too.

"Why is Openbook not a non-profit?

Making Openbook a for-profit was a hard choice to make. We love Wikipedia, the Ghost Foundation, Founders Pledge, Mozilla and many more. However we see the same struggle repeated over and over again. These companies struggle to grow beyond their profitability. These companies struggle to grow to the size and resources needed to compete with for-profit businesses.

When we need to grow exponentially, we need to be able to raise the large amounts of money needed to do so. Therefore we are officially a for-profit company.

But do note that when we do this, we will make sure the people investing in the company will be people with real interest on the platform, its core values of privacy, security, freedom, openness and its humanitarian nature."

NO NO NO NO NO!!! Why do you have to exponentially grow to be useful. Be the right service, and growth comes by that virtue. People love Wikipedia for what it is, not because it "grows exponentially". You're just another guy with good motives until you succumb to investor pressure.

I've been hoping for a Mozilla/Wikimedia like foundation to come up with a modern centralized alternative to Facebook, that just has it in their bylaws that prevents any creepy tracking from being implemented in the first place.

As they say, "False pretence of security is worse than no security because it makes you let your guard down". Don't dilute the community driven foundations by profit driven projects like this, please.

<comment><USER3> >People love Wikipedia for what it is, not because it "grows exponentially".

That's because Wikipedia is not a social network. A social network is only worthwhile if it gains a critical mass of users such that there are enough friends on it (or sometimes, i.e. Twitter, enough interesting people on it) to make spending time there worthwhile. Massive growth is more important to the survival of a social network than to any other business model.

<comment><USER4> Wikipedia is not a social network, but it definitely does get better as more people use it. Users-editors grow together, and wikipedia is a massive collaborative effort. It takes millions to make a wikipedia.

<comment><USER5> Define "better". On what metrics are you evaluating Wikipedia? Factuality, writing quality, etc? Wikipedia's process has driven away some of the most knowledgeable subject-matter experts into creating rival publications like Scholarpedia, and pre-Wikipedia incumbents like the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy remain stronger imho, despite having fewer (but more qualified) editors.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Not sure they have their priorities right. The last item in the list of goals (at $500,000, no less) are iOS and Android apps. I would think that should come first as without this very few people will want to use the service at all.

<comment><USER7> I am tired of Apps that really should just be websites. Unless you have some kind of real, functional need to access my phone's hardware or software I don't need you taking up space on my device. I'd much rather just save a book mark to my home screen and launch from there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> First of all, kudos for trying this.

So far I've only read comments that have a strong tendency towards the destructive or even pejorative end of the spectrum. I think that's unfair considering all the effort they are putting into this.

Having said that, I'd like to know what distinguishes this from e.g. Facebook in the long term. It's easy to put out a manifesto and pledge that you are never going to do bad things. It's also easy to come up with a vague theoretical business model that doesn't really say how it will work.

Let's assume they succeed with this – there is nothing that enforces these early statements anymore and soon investor pressure will lead to an outcome similar to the established success stories.

That's why I think you have to be much more different if you really aim to make a difference at scale.

<comment><USER9> They're not just trying this. They're asking for money from regular folks with no real sustainable revenue model apart from "we're crowd-funding" [0]. People are free to donate as they like, but I think the whole pitch is not entirely honest.

[0] [https://www.open-book.org/en/faq](https://www.open-book.org/en/faq)

<comment><USER10> You should read their FAQ on Kickstarter [1]. There they answer why their project is not federated, what revenue model they aim for, and why they aren't a non-profit.

Here's their take on the business model:

>Our business model is not and will never be advertisements.

>We will have a transparent revenue model based on a generic way for people to securely transact physical and digital goods and services inside the network. This will be done through an atomic digital unit of value. Although this initially reflected as a marketplace, our ambitions go way beyond that.

>Apart from this, we're also planning to help enterprise customers setting up their own internal, self-hosted and secure social networks with extra functionality such as projects, identity and access management.

[1]: [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1520156881/openbook- the...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1520156881/openbook-the-honest- open-source-and-awesome-social/faqs)

<comment><USER11> > There they answer why their project is not federated, what revenue model > they aim for, and why they aren't a non-profit.

No, they don't.

Federation-wise, there's not a single word on federation. They talk about decentralization, not federation. To quote my other comment:

> Instead of "Will I be able to run my own instance?", think: Will I be able > to follow an Openbook account from my Mastodon account?

As for the business model, I really need more than "atomic digital units of value" and "our ambitions go way beyond that". The last sentence does tell me something, but that something directly contradicts their stand on decentralization.

As for why they aren't a non-profit, they generalize pretty much every non- profit and say that they "don't grow exponentially" (without defining what they mean), and they mention names that do indeed grow year after year.

At the end, none of those three questions are answered for me.

<comment><USER12> In their (now archived) ideas repo, one guy suggested ActivityPub. But they rejected that specification as not fitting with their requirements. See: [https://github.com/OpenbookOrg/ideas/issues/1](https://github.com/OpenbookOrg/ideas/issues/1)

<comment><USER13> Very interesting that their main reason for rejecting ActivityPub is GDPR. Basically, you can't delete information after its been federated out.

This seems to go to far. Give the users control over their data in your system AND give them control over how their data is sent to other systems.

Edit: In the linked issue, OpenBook CEO said that you can't delete mastodon accounts, but Mastodon got that feature a couple weeks after his post:

[https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/3728](https://github.com/tootsuite/mastodon/pull/3728)

<comment><USER14> > This seems to go to far. Give the users control over their data in your > system AND give them control over how their data is sent to other systems.

Depending on how you define "system", being unable to track and/or delete data federated out might put you in a hazardous position around GDPR. It's not just about users controlling their own data. It's also about system operators being able to enumerate who they shared data with, what safeguards and processes they follow, and so on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It is worth mentioning that protocol-based social networks exist. Like [https://www.scuttlebutt.nz/](https://www.scuttlebutt.nz/)

<comment><USER16> Until they can work without installing additional app they will never be mainstream.

<comment><USER15> Snapchat is counterexample

<comment><USER17> Also Whatsapp.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Might be interesting if it was federated. Federation is AFAICT the only way to avoid network effects, which are why we're in this whole mess to begin with. (Many more people would have left Facebook after all the scandals if they could interact with their Facebook friends from another site.) There's no way of ensuring that Openbook wouldn't become as evil as Facebook once it had a big userbase.

</comment><comment><USER19> Today, everybody can build a social network. Apparently though building a social network that's actually used is quite hard and many failed. So I'd expect somebody who tries again to have some novel approach but it doesn't look like it. How does this compare to disapora or mastodon except the lack of federation?

I really wish them to succeed since I'd like to see somebody breaking the facebook monopoly, yet I'm quite sure this won't end any different than disapora, mastadon, app.net and the several ones I can't even remember anymore.

There is this common mistake of seeing these platforms as a technical challenge but in reality, unless you have a novel approach that people crave for, it's a lot of non-technical hustle.

<comment><USER20> I can't speak for the others, but Mastodon hasn't ended. I use it every day and still meet lots of new people.

</comment></comment><comment> phoe-krk Does it federate with other services? I have not seen anything mentioning this on the website and I consider it to be crucial for me backing the idea of this service. I don't want or need yet another centralized *book.

<comment><AUTHOR> Based on the FAQ I'd say it will not be federated, at least not initially, and in the FAQ they explain why. In short, they think that's where other initiatives fall short, and they want to sidestep the issue completely, and come back to it once they're profitable.

<comment><USER11> I don't think that FAQ entry answers the question asked by the parent comment.

They say that they don't want to decentralize the service (as in, everyone can run their own instance), and I can understand their stand on that. However, they say nothing about federation with other similar attempts that are popping up.

Instead of "Will I be able to run my own instance?", think: Will I be able to follow an Openbook account from my Mastodon account?

<comment><USER20> This is something I didn't know I cared about until I followed Blender's PeerTube instance account from a Mastodon instance. Pixelfed is working on it, and Plume, and...

It's something I've come to expect. If your hot new app doesn't federate, I don't care about it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> If it's not ad supported, how do they plan to keep the lights on once the Kickstarter funding gets exhausted and when they don't get any institutional funding? Somehow the following paragraph form the manifesto doesn't sound very convincing (it sounds like some messaging services that have said that they'll make money selling stickers):

> "We will have a transparent revenue model based on a generic way for people > to securely transact physical and digital goods and services inside the > network. This will be done through an atomic digital unit of value. Although > this initially reflected as a marketplace, our ambitions go way beyond that.

> Apart from this, we're also planning to help enterprise customers setting up > their own internal, self-hosted and secure social networks with extra > functionality such as projects, identity and access management."

This should also be listed in the FAQ.

</comment><comment><USER22> "drag and drop your old social media archive... import all your photos, videos, chats and more".

Photos/videos I can sort of understand, but 'chats' \- they're done _with other people_ , none of whom would have been granting permission for their content to be migrated to openbook. Am I being too literal here, or is this a privacy violation being promised on day one?

<comment><USER23> I don't think all parties of a chat need to consent for that information to be shared, aside from specific cases like doctor-patient and lawyer-client.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Here we go, another Social Network engine :) Just following the NIH syndrome, once again.

> OpenBook is OpenSource

Yeah awesome. Like many other projects. Having the OpenSource stamp is not really an advantage anymore. Building and maintaining a community around it, with strong support and integration is something way more difficult to do.

> On Openbook you will not only be able to personalise your profile, but the > entire network itself! From changing the color of your homepage to adding > plugins, you can make it as unique as yourself.

So basically I can customize everything. On my instance? Is it federated/decentralized (doesn't seems so)?

> We don't track anything you do, neither monetize your information nor share > it without your explicit and informed consent.

Hopefully the GDPR has already cover all those things :)

> All applications will be reviewed by us. We will make sure they: only > request the needed information, have the exact location of your data > available for you, at all times, delete all your information if you'd revoke > the permission...

GDPR

> Some examples of the technology we'll be researching and developing: > > Cryptographically enforced data sharing policies > End to end encryption, > even on the browser > Public key cryptography on the browser > Post-quantum > cryptography algorithms and protocols

NIH syndrom, all those things are already covered by many other projects, why not reusing that? Also, "post-quantum" cryptography, looks like a nice buzzword thrown in there.

> Migrating to Openbook will be easy-peasy, with our simple drag-and-drop > system. Just download your data from your old social network1 and transfer > them to Openbook. Shazam!

Good luck with that. GDPR is indeed forcing social platforms to have a Data- Portability politic. Facebook is exporting the user content in HTML flat file with no proper identifiers or easy way to reconstruct the data structure.

> ...we're also planning to help enterprise customers setting up their own > internal, self-hosted and secure social networks with extra functionality > such as projects, identity and access management.

So basically they are developing another centralized Social Network engine.

<comment><USER25> I don't disagree with everything you said, but if this thing gets traction, this is the HN DropBox thread of the future :)

( [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863) )

<comment><USER23> Even that thread itself was the "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." thread of the future.

It's an interesting phenomenon that in the age of the internet there are easily accessible public records of how hard it is to tell what is going to be a big deal.

[https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple- releases-i...](https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases- ipod)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> A nearly empty webpage that lags like crazy is very bad promotion and makes me question whether they have the knowledge to create a high-traffic social network. Also, the quote of the founder:

Openbook is not only an evolutionary step for social networks, it's also a humanitarian project at world scale.

Makes me want to vomit. You're making a website, not feeding hungry children.

<comment><USER27> From their website:

>In partnership with FoundersPledge, we'll be giving 30% of our revenue towards projects for education, sanitization, climate change prevention and more.

<comment><USER9> From the FAQ on their page:

>Who's paying for everything so far?

> So far we have been completely self funded. However, this has proven to be > very hard. With most of us working full-time jobs apart from Openbook, it > could take us long time till we release the first version and even then, we > would not be able to afford the IT infrastructure needed to compete with any > of the established networks. As we wanted the project to be driven by people > and not capital, we decided to go for crowd-funding. We'll be launching our > Kickstarter campaign on the 17th of July.

They don't appear to have a revenue model. I'm not sure if they consider donations from kickstarter revenue, but so far its their only source. I don't think passing on 30% of donations to FoundersPledge is really changing the world

<comment><USER27> They are talking about future revenue generation. Kickstarted is being used as a fundraiser.

They are probably trying something similar to ghost blogging platform.

Whether they are successful or not is to be seen, but I am not enjoying how some people are unnecessarily shitting on their effort.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> A long long time ago (in 2010), Facebook sued a start-up called Teachbook for using 'book' in its name. Hope you don't get into that muddle.

[https://money.cnn.com/2010/08/26/technology/teachbook/](https://money.cnn.com/2010/08/26/technology/teachbook/)

<comment><USER29> I hadn't heard about this. They've sued several companies whose names end with "book". Apparently a lawsuit coming from FB is scary enough that they've acquiesced and changed their names, without standing up in court. Replacebook!

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Not knocking this effort, but why are all decentralized, open social networks that hope to compete against Facebook and Instagram so...dull?

Their marketing is all the same wholesomeness and positive messaging. There's no "rebellious" streak to it at all.

But wholesomeness didn't help Facebook, Snapchat and Instagram grow. Facebook was the "adults only" social network that required a .edu address when it was challenging MySpace. Snapchat was pretty much a sexting app. Instagram is basically semi-nude models in its search feed.

I get what these people are trying to do, but you're not going to do that by being boring and corporate.

<comment><USER31> I'd rather have a functioning, 'dull' project than an edgy 2kool4skool meme disappearing in a couple of months because the hipster userbase moved to the next cool socnet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> I built two working, bug free social sites and yet nobody cares about them. At the end of the day someone else comes with a vaporware manifesto and takes the discussion away from actual products.

<comment><USER33> Hi I'd be curious to see what youve built. Can you supply links?

<comment><USER34> I see two links in his HN bio.

<comment><USER35> Seems not everyone is aware so I'll just point it out:

The bio can be found by clicking peoples username.

From the bio you can also navigate to their comment history and also see what stories they have submitted.

<comment><USER36> If someone isn't aware of this they are not my preferred peer.

<comment><USER35> To add to my answer from yesterday: there is also no obvious way to see that usernames are links (at least for me, somewhat colorblind on a mobile device.)

<comment> g-b-r If it's any comfort to you, it's the same for normal-sighted (everything's gray).

They probably think that users like to have to hunt for the features of the site.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> > helping make the world a better place.

It's hard to take anyone seriously who uses that phrase... Especially in this sort of context.

That's been a joke for a long time now, everyone knows it's nonsense.

<comment><USER38> Same with

> Good for the planet

It all almost looks ironically done.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> as much as I applaud the effort, the next Uber or Facebook won't be a better Uber or Facebook but something totally different. I wish companies would stop trying to be better copies of existing services. Facebook had traction because it was radically different from anything that was before.

Also they have no idea how to finance and fund their growth:

 _> Our business model is not and will never be advertisements.

We will have a transparent revenue model based on a generic way for people to securely transact physical and digital goods and services inside the network. This will be done through an atomic digital unit of value. Although this initially reflected as a marketplace, our ambitions go way beyond that.

Apart from this, we're also planning to help enterprise customers setting up their own internal, self-hosted and secure social networks with extra functionality such as projects, identity and access management._

<comment><USER40> > Facebook had traction because it was radically different from anything that > was before.

How was Facebook radically different than other social media sites? In my opinion, it was almost exactly the same as the rest. They just leveraged some clever marketing.

<comment><USER41> The only major difference with FB was it limited your network to your college.

In terms of features it was a static page with the only dynamic capability being the ability to poke someone.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> The splash page is hideously slow and stuttering even on desktop. Is the CSS/JS just this bad, or is this site trying to mine cryptocurrency in the background?

<comment> g-b-r I think it's that "typewriter" effect, probably some endless loop without any sleep.

It doesn't help that javascript is required

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> At this point I don't trust the sunny promises of any for-profit that wants me to give them my data. Data is the new oil. If an organization can get it and legally profit from it, be assured that they will.

</comment><comment><USER44> While it's easy to point out at moral level that nothing is guaranteed that if this sort of project gets big it cannot just run off with investor money to go off on Zuckerberg hijinks which has no good reason to even exist at this point -- the notion that it is "too difficult" to implement federated social networking is not going to sway me away from my advocacy of it.

The most important identity system in the world -- the one that even the biggest websites in the world want you to identify yourself with is definitely your email. The protocols underlying your email are my vision for social networking: A common format that accurately sends a message to feature- complete implementations. There's really not any reason we can't have your federated social media be your email replacement barring that the W3C standard doesn't call for any sort of secure mailbox (Mastodon doesn't have REAL "private messages") but it's still a damn good solution to the problem of trying to work in the social media space: you need users. What if the users are already there?

Perhaps as the APub standard and implementations grow we can see them become standardized to the sort of SSO that we are used to when we "connect with Facebook/Twitter" but another closed-loop timeline-based for-profit social media won't ever have my attention because there's not a market.

Unless it's Vine.

</comment><comment><USER45> _«Making Openbook a for-profit was a hard choice to make. We check all the non-profits boxes and we love non-profits. We love Wikipedia, the Ghost Foundation, Founders Pledge, Mozilla and many more. However we see the same struggle repeated over and over again. These companies struggle to grow beyond their profitability. These companies struggle to grow to the size and resources needed to compete with for-profit businesses. When we need to grow exponentially, we need to be able to raise the large amounts of money needed to do so. Therefore we are officially a for-profit company. But do note that when we do this, we will make sure the people investing in the company will be people with real interest on the platform, its core values of privacy, security, freedom, openness and its humanitarian nature.»_ [0]

As a for-profit corporation's legal operational boundaries end at the financial interests of its shareholders, any corporation-defined "core value" may not and does not benefit from legal guarantees.

While a benefit corporation [1] may allow to balance the interests of shareholders and stakeholders, any form equal to a UK company limited by guarantee with "limited" exemption [2] [Section 60, Section 62] binds, secures a corporation's objects (or "core values") to interest-free legal requirements.

For trust to ensue and persist, any "for-benefit" alternative to existing for- profit corporation- or nation state-controlled platforms must state its "core values" as the controlling corporation's objects.

[0] [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1520156881/openbook- the...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1520156881/openbook-the-honest- open-source-and-awesome-social/faqs#project_faq_255412)

[1] [http://benefitcorp.net/sites/default/files/Benefit_Corporati...](http://benefitcorp.net/sites/default/files/Benefit_Corporation_White_Paper.pdf)

[2] [http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/5/chapter/2...](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/5/chapter/2/crossheading/required- indications-for-limited-companies)

</comment><comment><USER46> I have high end computer (i7-7700 with 32GB of empty RAM) with pretty good graphics card (GeForce GTX 1060)... and this site is lagging. I can't even scroll properly.

<comment><USER47> Based on wappalyzer, webpack & jquery are used on the website. But no other framework (React, Vue, Ionic) is detected... So it's just jquery + webpack?

<comment> g-b-r I don't know what you're looking at, but for sure they're using vue.

Most likely suspect is the typewriter animation, which ought to be done with [https://github.com/tameemsafi/typewriterjs](https://github.com/tameemsafi/typewriterjs) (but maybe it's just how they used it - or maybe something entirely different, I just had a quick look).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> There's a lot of marketing on here about honesty, fun, and being personal. That being said, none of these attributes are being applied to the social network part of the social network. In their current form, they're just buzzwords about the project.

For once, I'd like to see a project use these words in a meaningful way. Build a manifesto that isn't just "we are building a platform." Focus on actual social interactions and social behaviors that the platform should have. Build something that actually encourages honesty, openness, and fun posts over lying, fake personalities, and cynicism.

Normal users don't see benefits in switching away from Facebook to an equivalent platform with more honest caretakers. That's the sad reality of it. But if a social network pledged to only allow posts that are positive about things, or actively banned people for spreading lies, that would be totally different. It's an execution thing -- people would need to see policy in action -- but if pulled off, it would result in a fundamentally different and easily comparable platform to Facebook.

</comment><comment><USER49> I was thinking about making an open source social-network just this morning. I'm all about "for profit" in general but as has been echoed a bunch in the comments already, a lot of corporations start off on a good trajectory but ultimately wind up in a place we don't like. I don't want to stoke any political flames, so I'll just leave it at that. :)

The reasons I would like to see a project like this succeed would be to have a network that better protects privacy and has very transparent censorship. I'm not super well versed in open source and non-profit but my current thinking is that making an organization of similar style to wikipedia would be the best strategy. Open source the code, own the hardware and raise money through donations.

Do you think I'm missing something or would this be the best strategy? Also, is there already a project(s) like this?

</comment><comment><USER50> I can't click on any links, am I doing something wrong? The only links that are working for me, are the ones on the right side of the page.

Website looks like this for me: [https://i.imgur.com/7OkVlUz.png](https://i.imgur.com/7OkVlUz.png)

I am using Google Chrome on Windows 10

<comment><USER51> Same with Vivaldi, FF, and Edge on Win 10. Works in Safari on Mojave though

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> I'm not sure I can imagine any path to success here. Maybe focus on a small interest group or locale to begin with, then look to spread outward from there. A small college campus perhaps. ;) Still...this needs a hook other than the privacy angle, and a big one at that.

</comment><comment><USER53> If it made any sense to the common person, the front page shouldn't have "open source" in its description. Because your average grandma has no idea what that means.

It's an insanely hard market to chew into and thus I can say they've already lost.

<comment><USER25> It does not matter that the average grandma has no idea what that means. New products need early adopters, and the average grandma is not a potential early adopter, neither is the average grandpa or anyone average, really.

Any argument, including being Open Source, is good to get early adopters. Communication can change later on.

Too many products try to appeal to the general public too soon. This is not how user acquisition works.

<comment><USER54> > It does not matter that the average grandma has no idea what that means.

My 23 year old son and 18 year old daughter didn't know what open-source meant.

If you could build a social network around tech people we'd all be using Google Plus.

<comment><USER25> You don't build a social network around tech, you bootstrap it with a community. Bootstrapping it with Open Source enthusiasts is fine. If you say "we're yet another social network" you have no value proposition. Not that I think that "we're yet another Open Source social network" is good either...

Also, the fact that a grandma doesn't know what Open Source means doesn't really concern me, but the fact that the children of someone who posts on HN and works at Google don't, does. Maybe that's part of the reason why proprietary, centralized services are winning.

Anyway, I do have concerns along the same line, not because "Open Source" is on the front page but because:

\- The team is not diverse enough in terms of experience. The COO is an "information-security expert"; the CMO is a "security and international relations expert"; the Chief of Product is a "pragmatic software engineer" and "crypto-geek". This is a problem, even though not necessarily deadly.

\- They plan to allocate 70 % of the budget to software engineering, and basically 0 % to marketing / user acquisition / community management. This is the biggest red flag for me.

<comment><USER55> Just googled the COO, she is pretty big in the security community. Also was CISO at a Dutch Telecom, and they have Phil Zimmerman!

Im not worried about the budget for marketing, they seem to have managed to get themselves into a few leading publications already and the early backers will provide initial beta users + word of mouth marketing.

What remains to be seen is if the team can execute, I guess only time will tell. Overall good initiative though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> I like it that there are attempts to change the status quo and not accept Facebook in our lives as a fact, and push back against the monetization of personal information. But shouldn't this be backed up by an organization with some trackrecord in the domain of user's digital rights, free and open standards? EFF, FSF... join existing umbrella projects, even if not leveraging existing code... [https://www.gnu.org/software/social...](https://www.gnu.org/software/social...)? Like someone else said here already, today everybody can build a social network.

Btw they don't seem to even own openbook.org ...

<comment><USER6> It's a for-profit company so I doubt the EFF, etc. would want to back them. They might be open now, but as they grow and more and more investors own the company there's no reason to think they'll be any better than Facebook.

<comment><USER57> Take reddit for example. They used to release there code to the open but that is no longer true.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> What's the monetisation model?

edit: found this

"We will have a transparent revenue model based on a generic way for people to securely transact physical and digital goods and services inside the network. This will be done through an atomic digital unit of value. Although this initially reflected as a marketplace, our ambitions go way beyond that.

Apart from this, we're also planning to help enterprise customers setting up their own internal, self-hosted and secure social networks with extra functionality such as projects, identity and access management."

<comment><USER59> I think your question still stands.

"Atomic digital unit of value?"

Who writes this stuff?

<comment><USER58> If I didn't know I would have guessed it was an ICO for a new crypto.

<comment> g-b-r They're raising money so as to put together an ICO?? That's a new height..

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> I don't get it. Who is asking for another Facebook? Except for a few vocal minority carrying on over privacy and decentralization, none of which will even bother. The rest of the world doesn't care, Facebook is there for them already. When everyone inevitably tires of it, they'll move to a new idea, not another clone. Facebook knows this, that's why they continue purchasing upcoming services like Instagram.

</comment><comment><USER61> If it's not federated, there is little control already. If the business models for centralized networks are not aggressive right now, nothing stop them from evolving once there's more money on the table.

I wonder what folks here think about ActivityPub. I been craving for a federated protocol since Google Wave. I'm yet to go through it in detail and see if it really stands.

<comment><USER24> If you're looking for a real-time federated social-network (that is what I understood by "Google Wave") solution have a look at solutions based on the industry standard XMPP. I'm building one (Movim [https://movim.eu/](https://movim.eu/)) and started to explain how is made the architecture in this blog post [https://nl.movim.eu/?blog/edhelas%40movim.eu/how-s-made- movi...](https://nl.movim.eu/?blog/edhelas%40movim.eu/how-s-made-movim-part-i- the-architecture-CCA7If).

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> How are openbook going to fund this? It costs a lot of money to run a social network. I read through the material and the only thing I saw was a pi-chart, nothing explained their revenue model. Not to mention their privacy model seems exactly the same as facebook's.

<comment><USER63> I guess thats why the kickstarter! And if they get traction they can always later go for venture capital. I know its an uphill task but I'm overall positive. Kickstarter will also get them a lot of beta users right out the door so that was a smart move if you ask me

I think I saw something about their revenue model on their website FAQ.

<comment><USER62> The kickerstarter will only bring in a finite amount of money. Long term operations will surely require more than that. Why would anyone want to invest in this? Twitter/facebook etc can at least collect advertising information. There is some discussion about what seems to basically be a cryptocurrency, but its surely not sustainable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> Interesting project. But when I try the website in Firefox on Anddroid or macOS, scroll is jagged and links & css animations are slow to respond.

</comment><comment><USER65> Scrolling is choppy and slow on my phone. Haven't checked my laptop, though. But such screwed up scrolling means I'm not interested.

<comment><USER66> It was choppy on my beefy desktop on Firefox as well.

<comment><USER67> Me too. All they needed to do was profile their webpage in modern browser to see the glaring performance problems. Doesn't bode well for a more complex piece of software like a social network.

<comment><USER63> not sure why everyones complaining about performance, it seems to work fine on my macbook air. Plugins perhaps?

<comment> g-b-r It might work fine but (the homepage) is most likely draining your battery. Have you looked at your cpu usage?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> This site made my fan spin up like crazy (FF61). Happen to anyone else? (reproducible on my end)

</comment><comment><USER69> The website caused my tab in Chrome on mobile to crash each time I tried to open it.

</comment><comment><USER70> How do I sign up? Odd that a social network does not have registration form

<comment><USER71> It's a kickstarter. i.e. it's being built. The minimal €1 contribution will give you "early access".

</comment></comment><comment><USER72> Site is crashing and throws a million errors on the console.

</comment><comment><USER73> For profit and centeralized. Hard pass.

Is this the next Ello?

</comment><comment><USER74> Looks like there is something wrong with the site. Javascript crashes and nothing is visible.

</comment><comment><USER75> site doesn't work

</comment><comment><USER75> doesn't work

</comment><comment><USER76> A domain name with a - dash in it. This product fails at the very first step.

<comment><USER25> They address this in the Kickstarter FAQ.

[https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1520156881/openbook- the...](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1520156881/openbook-the-honest- open-source-and-awesome-social/faqs#project_faq_255412)

<comment><USER77> They are going to buy openbook.com with the money they raise from kickstarter. Seems like a complete waste of money to me.

Who types in a url any more?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER78> Valiant effort, I don't understand why the community is responding so toxic. Rather than assuming that growth will lead to this social network becoming the next corrupted Facebook, why don't we focus on the unique aspects that make this open-sourced network worthwhile to begin with?

Security - Privacy - Customisability - Compatibility with status quo. We can all agree that we lost faith in the monstrosity that Facebook has become, it doesn't mean that we can't place faith in other technology to produce a different outcome.

<comment><USER43> The code being open-source accomplishes very little in this case. It's what they do with your data after they get it that matters. Data is the new oil, and if a for-profit company can get it, rest assured they will use or sell it.

<comment><USER63> I get where you're coming from but data is the new oil in conjunction with machine learning/ big data algorithms. Thats the true evil. that part at least will be transparent with the open-source model IMO

<comment><USER43> Once they have the data, they can do whatever they want with it. They can run it through closed-source ML, they can sell it to other companies. I suppose people would know if they meddled with the news feed order, but that's about it.

<comment><USER63> Thats rather cynical... Sure!! The team of privacy and security activists backed by internet hall of fame member Phil Zimmerman who created PGP and fought the US govt are all actually closeted evil capitalists just out to get everyones data..</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Bitstamp problem and warm wallets - <AUTHOR> http://homakov.blogspot.com/2015/01/bitstamp-problem-and-warm-wallets.html <comment><USER2> The problem with a "warm wallet" is that the hot wallet of 100Btc might need refilling every hour and so if the attacker just sits draining the hot wallet, the admins might keep authorising refills letting the attackers take large amounts before the hole is discovered. If it must be done that frequently then admins won't bother to audit the hot wallet every time they refill it from the warm wallet, which makes the warm wallet a hot wallet.

If hot wallet refills are rare, the hot wallet must be sizable, but then the refills will be sizable too, so an attacker could steal hot wallet (sizable) and a refill (sizable) at least before discovery.

Each step adds an effective rate limiting step and a chance to catch the hole, but requiring manual intervention too often and the required auditing and manual checking will not be done. But any automation just pushes something from warm to hot.

<comment><USER3> Even with automatic transfers, I think there's a difference between wallets that are queued up and actively sending money out of the system, and wallets that are queued up to do so (or to refill that wallet). The difference lies in the fact that they do serve as an automated rate limiting point, and have different methods for the hackers to extract out funds from them.

An example: if you have one hot wallet with the keys loaded in to the system, and a secondary warm wallet (basically, a wallet that will be swapped in as the hot wallet when the other runs out), you can secure the details of the warm wallet better, meaning that certain read access vulnerabilities will only be able to target the hot wallet. Of course, an attacker can empty the hot wallet, and then the details of the warm wallet will be exposed when it is loaded because of the same vulnerability, but this forces the system to have a chance to validate the current state of the world before the second wallet becomes vulnerable, which is not the case if both were being used as loaded hot wallets.

There are meaningful automated sanity checks and rate limiting tactics that can be used with automated warm/hot wallets.

Of course, if you have a $5mil hot wallet, you should probably hire a "bitcoin banker" or "bitcoin teller" to sit at a workstation and manually deal with some of these kinds of swaps and oversee the audits. Even if you don't immediately patch all security holes, you'll have a much better idea of where you're leaking.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The "manually adds funds" flowchart block looks, to a banker, like a risk item. How does that work? Every hour or so, some clerk opens a safe full of USB sticks and takes one out? Now you have an insider theft risk. Did they copy one? Who has physical access? If you're operating 24/7, more than one person will need access.

A secure off-line "cold wallet" system is hard. Physically, it looks like a collection of storage media. Those devices need to be backed up. But backing them up means making a copy of the private keys, which means the backup medium and the backup machine have a path into the funds. How do you audit a cold- wallet device, short of sending the funds in it back to yourself? Looking at it visually is useless, and reading it out exposes the keys to risk.

Some of these problems have known solutions from bank currency management operations. But some don't. In currency management, you can count and recount bills. You don't have to worry whether some of them have been used and invalidated. Bitcoins in some stored form are not like that. Just because you have a sealed plastic bag with a USB stick and a label that says "1000 BTC, validated on 2013-04-21" doesn't mean it's still good. If there was a copy made at some point, someone else may have the keys to those BTC. Even if they haven't transferred them yet.

So manual handling isn't a magic bullet. Off-line vault operations for a sizable Bitcoin operation are going to be complicated and expensive to do securely, more complicated than bank cash vault operations. We've already seen what happens when they're not done securely.

<comment><USER5> There's also M-of-N multisignature and HSMs to prevent private keys from being copied.

<comment><USER4> Unfortunately, there's no vendor in that space with a track record in security. A major provider of hardware security modules ("hardware wallets") for Bitcoins was Butterfly Labs. Their Bitcoin mining hardware business did not work out well for their customers. (As in, forced by the FTC to shut down and refund customers who paid for hardware and didn't get it.)

There are some little startups selling hardware wallets, or trying to get funding for doing so, but nobody with a solid track record of protecting large sums of money has a product. SafeNet and Thales are absent from the Bitcoin field.

<comment><USER5> Existing HSMs claim to support ECC so I'd hope they can support Bitcoin. I wonder which HSM CoinKite uses.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The API with a single call "createWithdrawl" is very good.

Having code like this to begin with changes how all your future code works. It also is easier to debug, simpler to explain, etc. You think twice about adding new API calls, which makes you think twice before you add new bugs. Having the ability to muck around with API calls you shouldn't be making will catch you eventually.

I've posted this before, but web-app security in most startups I look at is so bad. If it's written in PHP, I can normally find every bug in the book in under 5 minutes. What is worse on top of that is many companies don't respond (and don't fix) when you report bugs. I'm talking well known startups too.

I really think the OWASP Top 10 needs to be required reading for startup founders (or technical leads).

</comment><comment><USER7> Essentially, start making exchangers look more like banks, with manual interventions to evaluate whether transactions are valid.

The bank system (and transaction clearance delays) evolved for good reason. I suspect that bitcoin will not achieve the validity of fiat until a similar set of checks and balances are put in place (at least for sizable transactions.)

<comment><USER8> Bank transactions are mostly reversible if someone screws up or commits fraud. (Edited for clarity)

<comment><AUTHOR> Isn't there protocol to call to another bank and ask them to send it back? Or at least get info about the account?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Relevant and possibly more in-depth: "Multi Tiered Cold Storage Scheme" [https://bitcoinsecurityproject.org/SecureStorage/MultiTiered...](https://bitcoinsecurityproject.org/SecureStorage/MultiTieredColdStorageScheme/)

// plug: check out Celery [https://www.gocelery.com](https://www.gocelery.com)

</comment><comment><USER10> I take issue with equating web developers and amateurs.

I understand his point. And I conceed that there is a lower barrier to entry for writing a PHP signup form than a Go systems-level program.

But please don't assume that all web apps are written by 2nd-year junior programmers. Some of us web developers have the experience required to write secure web apps.

<comment><USER3> I think the point is that most web developers (even very good, experienced ones) are amateurs at topics like server security or financial accounting/controls because those topics are outside of their domain knowledge.

It takes more than not being a "2nd-year junior programmer" to write secure, reliable code; it takes specialist knowledge to make a solidly audit-able financial control system.

<comment><USER11> Right, I've been programming for a living somewhere over a decade and while I certainly consider myself a professional, that's "enough of a professional to know I don't know nearly enough to write such a thing without expert help".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Proof of assets.

Proof of liabilities.

Leaks be instadetected.</comment>


US Congress employees found downloading pirated content online - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jan/16/sopa-congress-illegal-download

<comment><USER2> This article tries too hard. Employees of the US Congress are not special in anyway. They are people like you and me. Now, if a Senator or Congressperson pirated stuff, and they were the author of a SOPA-like bill or voted yes on it, THEN it could justify a big shit-show. But that doesn't seem to be the case here.</comment>


Ask HN: What's your best quitting story? - <AUTHOR>

I'm about to live the dream: leaving an in-house, menial technical position with an overbearing manager for a developer role with better pay, hours, management, benefits, everything.
I'll probably just tell my current employers that "It's been a great opportunity but this makes sense for me..." blah blah blah.
But of course part of me would like to go out, guns blazing, or just push the envelope to see how much I could get away with , George Constanza style, as a bit of a kiss off.
Anyone have a tale along these lines they'd like to share?
-Just so I don't seem too bitter... One member of the C-suite would publicly humiliate me every chance he got by awkwardly - and persistently - asking me to bow to him, which, because I'm junior, I did for the first two or three times until I stiffened my backbone and told him no.
He thought it was hilarious. <comment><USER2> Doing a nasty or snarky "I quit" may feel good in the short term, but it won't help your career goals. Don't bash your boss on the way out. Don't say a negative word about anyone if you have an exit interview. Stick to your party line of "I have a developer role, which is the right career choice for me. The pay is very good too."

Somewhere down the line, someone will formally or informally do a background check on you. You don't want to give someone a reason to subtly backstab you later. If you do something big on the way out, it can haunt you later, and you may never find out. Be as professional as possible, document everything you know that may help someone, and work full days during your notice period.

Now that I've said all this, you asked for stories...

\- A former colleague gave the minimal possible notice "because every day I stay costs me a lot of money." He was leaving to start a t-shirt company. (He was a great guy, and not as arrogant as the story sounds.)

\- A friend at an investment bank (which was notorious for perp-walking people out when they were let go during the financial meltdown) quit, and gave his notice from his new firm's Bloomberg account.

These actually sound fairly lame. I wonder if ohters have better. :-)

<comment><USER3> "Don't save a negative word..." \-- what about the C-Suite that gets off on humiliating people? I have mixed feelings on this advice because it seems highly selfish when you consider that someone else will suffer in your place. Would the world not be better if more people took a stand against the inept and abusive? Of course, this is highly subjective and you have to be honest about the reason you are leaving. Is it just a personal problem, or are other people being wronged -- if other people, consider taking a stand.

<comment><USER2> Everyone else who is there is an adult too. If they don't like it, they can leave. There are better ways to make a moral stand in the workplace.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Unfortunately, I don't have any good quitting stories for you though I have quit jobs that sound like yours in the past.

Some of the best words of wisdom I received about negative situations like this: "If it feels good to say it, just don't." Be kind, honorable, and walk way as the bigger person...because that's the story you'll want to tell when you look back at this.

<comment><USER5> Well said! Fantastic advice.

I have been in the same spot a number of times, particularly early in my career. It is best to be honourable, kind, and a bigger person. Once there was a company that I really just wanted to tell off and walk out. But after giving my two weeks notice, despite being ridiculed and mocked, I kept my cool, finished my work and documentation, and left.

Years later I was doing some hiring for my own business and a resume came across my desk, the lead ridiculer from this previous job. I gave him my standard interview, only lightly touching on the fact that at one point he had been my bosses boss. The look on his face when he first saw me was worth every fake smile I had ever given him. He completed the interview, passed, and rejected my offer. I have never felt bad about my interactions with him or that company... but I think he did.

<comment><USER6> > _It is best to be honourable, kind, and a bigger person._

Or, if you're not feeling particularly kind, "it's better to just keep your mouth shut". As your story demonstrates, technology is a winding road along an island that's smaller than you think; you never know when you'll cross a bridge again. Better not to burn it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Not really a quitting story but...

My girlfriend had a god awful marketing job a few years back, and the new director was a bit of a sleaze. (Trying to book them in the same room on a business trip etc, etc.) Anyway, he seemed to be quite put off that she wouldn't play ball so to say, so he made up some bullshit to fire her. Being in the Czech Republic, this involves about 5 months severance pay. (Normally you'd have to work for a couple of months before going, but he wanted her gone immediately)

After she signed the legal paperwork for the termination she gave him a big smile and a thank you. She had actually been headhunted a few weeks earlier, for a great job in Italy for a good company at triple her salary. She was about to quit outright (and forfeit the 5 months pay) when he fired her.

Apparently the look on his face was priceless, the company lawyer was desperately trying not to laugh, and my girl said she would enjoy shopping in Milan with his generosity.

Good fun.

</comment><comment><USER8> This one woman I used to work with didn't just burn bridges, she nuked them from orbit. We were contractors on a military base. She was in configuration management. She was in a meeting with a bunch of the division managers, it was a stressful day.

In the middle of the meeting, she blurts out, "Fuck this. I don't need this shit."

She gets up, leaves the meeting, and walks back to her desk. She drops her stuff in a box, walks out of the building, and drops her base pass off at the main gate.

Nobody heard from her again.

</comment><comment> clark-kent I used to work as a tech support rep for a huge cable company and hated it. I had to do a 2 hour commute to work and deal with angry customers all day over the phone, my company often released products that don't work, like we rolled out a disastrous digital phone service, a video-on-demand service that should still be in pre-beta and it was my job to support all these bad products.

As I worked for the cable company, I also had a side project app I was working on. Soon my app started making money, in 6 months it made its first $1000. Then sales started doubling every week, in the next 2 months my app was making more than double my fulltime job's salary at the cable company.

I hated my fulltime job but i didn't want to quit a stable job. Unable to make the decision to quit, I called in sick one day, and then stayed home for 2 weeks, I was secretly hoping to be fired. I showed up at work 2 weeks later and no one seemed to notice I was gone. Some people thought I was just working a different shift. My supervisor didn't really notice. So I finally decided it was time to quit. Told my supervisor I was quitting because I started a new business I wanted to focus on instead. She was very cool about it, told me they like me and would hire me again if I every wanted to come back and that was it.

</comment><comment><USER9> I worked at a place where we all fit on two floors, so less than 200 people. The staff had to take the long way around to work because the CEO didn't like seeing "the rabble" walk past his sound-proofed frosted-glass office. Him touring the work area was an event to be feared. The pay was less than all our competitors, they let one of the original staff go (she had years of experience and did an excellent job) because she asked for a paltry sub-3% raise to make ends meet. She was the voice on the IVR so they had to pay more than her raise to get a new voice recorded once she left. You could work an extra 30-60 minutes every day and never be thanked, but don't you dare take an extra 3 minutes for lunch. High pressure? My manager left to go home one day and dropped dead on the pavement of a heart attack determined to be from stress (he survived).

I gave my notice politely and gratefully. I was late to my own leaving party because I worked a job through to completion. I was invited to take my old job back any time I wanted, and I got a great reference which helped me get a way better job. Nobody I knew still works there.

As good as it might feel, don't ragequit. Regardless of all the good you might have done before, people will remember the most recent big thing you did. You don't want that to be something negative and unprofessional. Companies can be soulless mean entities but a negative personal impression only hurts your future prospects. Your local industry is not as big as you think it is and people _love_ to gossip.

And really, if a company is so bad that people need to quit in a hilarious and scathing matter, is you leaving really going to change things? Unlikely. The best thing you can do is leave quietly with a smile on your face. Let them burn on their own.

</comment><comment><USER10> Day 1, Friday: Get a feel that it's not the right place. At the end of the day, get a comment I may not be back..somebody trying to be smart. Media company + software mix environment

Day 2, Monday: Ok Day

Day 3, Tuesday: Came in early at 7:30. Same media person querying about a new dev. who is late. This is a startup and they had said we have freedom to come and go. I went out at 10:30 for a doctors appointment, emailed them I will be back at 12. Got back to see the CEO emailed me saying bring back doctor's note.

Day 3, Quit via email from home. True feelings not shown. Never told them anything. Contract papers also seemed too strict with regards to joining competitors, never signed it though.

</comment><comment><USER11> Couple things.

1\. They hired you, and maybe you didn't fit or enjoy the environment, or even like the people, but you should at least be grateful that they hired you and paid your bills. Try to maintain that attitude upon leaving.

2\. You train people how they should treat you. Just because someone has a senior title means nothing. If I was asked to bow, I'd probably snort and smile, and be like 'haha hell nah!' \- inotherwords, straightforwardly (but not rudely) let them know who you are. Maybe, at your previous job, you trained people to treat you that way.

</comment><comment><USER12> The toes you step on today will eventually be connected to the ass you need to kiss tomorrow.

</comment><comment><USER13> One time I put in my two weeks notice then I worked those two weeks to make sure the transition was smooth for my co-workers.

It was crazy! So professional and mature!

</comment><comment><USER14> I sent an email why my boss was out one day saying, "I'm leaving at noon today, and this is my last day here." That was kind of fun.

</comment><comment><USER15> Always resign with professionalism. Never burn bridges.

</comment><comment><USER16> Bad to hear about your ambience in you're company, but stay professional!

Disclaimer: I do not always follow directly what's written bellow, because every case is different and not everything always apply. And sometimes you're bosses do not follow common sense :) Sometimes it's just quick call (actually it's always should be face-to-face call-first )

This is my perfect way to leave smoothly, if I am forced to do so. This works well when you don't have to start new job immediately.

1\. Find out when next stage of project you're involved in ends: for example new release, working feature etc. In case it's not specified directly or job is done "very" agile - other convenient date for company and your colleagues/boss. It doesn't have to be far away, month or two is max (also have to be compatible with agreement, of course), but make sure it would be sufficient for you to close your major planned tasks and share knowledge with others. Don't talk about this with anyone you're working with.

2\. Grab a coffee with your direct manager (or if it's start-up the CEO or other guy you report to) and have a talk about what you have done for project/company, what was good and what was not so great. Being honest (but nice!) is professional, because it gives company opportunity to fix things. I always tell what I learned in the place. Second step is telling that current opportunities and challenges does not seem so bright as when you started. Make clear that you're expecting to change job, if they cannot fulfill what you expect. Don't focus on money/benefits, but highlight what your work gives a company. Normally, after that this guy will talk with management or ask for few days to think about this. This is perfectly okay - go back to your things and act normally. Soon someone (probably same guy or his boss will offer your (if you're valuble) or tell you that's okay (if not so great). In both case make sure that they know about your conclusions from point and ask them if it's okay. They probably agree if you sound reasonable (in other case go you're way anyway, if it's legally okay)

3\. Then it's your turn to take some time. Close the deal with new company and say aloud your decision. I think that all-team (with boss) stand-up is best time. Avoid informing some folks you like and other not, or other half-clear solutions. Again, share your thoughts from point 1 and ask if it works for your colleagues and how can you help them to smoothly take over your responsibilities and all howtos.

4\. Do your job as always + share everything you know and do with as many connected with you guys as it's possible.

5\. In last week invite whoever your want for a beer or buy some pizzas to the office. Or make a cake. Just have few hours for informal meeting with those great folks you worked with. Connect with all of them on the linked-in or exchange non-enterprise emails' addresses. I do not connect with colleagues (even ex) on private social medias, but it' s good to have way to reach them.

6\. Do not hold personal conflicts or allow them to reflect your relations with not involved. Someday, that other silent junior you loved to work with will be hiring for his startup :)

Good luck!</comment>


You can't patent movies or music. So why are there software patents? - <AUTHOR> http://www.vox.com/2014/9/16/6152655/you-cant-patent-movies-or-music-so-why-are-there-software-patents <comment><USER2> "Meanwhile, computer software is eligible for copyright protection, making patents unnecessary to reward software innovation."

Copyright protection doesn't provide the author protection from their ideas being copied and distributed by other entities. Copyrights only ensure that a specific embodiment of an idea (e.g. source code) is protected from being redistributed without the author's consent. Patents, on the other hand, do provide protection to an inventor for their ideas.

Movies and music as discrete, creative works are not patent-able. But novel methods for creating movies and music can certainly be patented. The same is true for software. The code itself isn't eligible for patent application, but the ideas behind them are. And I think the author of the linked article disingenuously conflates the two ideas in order to advance their argument.

Let's say a programmer invents a new method for quickly factoring prime numbers and develops it into a C library and begins selling it. I buy a license to use the library and eventually figure out how it works. Software copyrights prevent me from redistributing the original library, but I can create my own based on that programmer's idea and distribute it as my own. However, if that programmer patents their factoring process, then they have protection against my new implementation from undercutting theirs.

Patents can provide protection to entities that have invested heavily in researching and developing their ideas by preventing someone else from reaping their benefits. Likewise, they can foster innovation by forcing other entities to solve similar problems in novel ways. But that's not really what's happening with software patents right now. The system obviously needs to be modernized, but that can't happen without an honest debate from both sides.</comment>


Taking Cold Showers - <AUTHOR> http://www.jasonshen.com/2011/taking-cold-showers/?hn <comment><USER2> I'll be the meta-contrarian ([http://lesswrong.com/lw/2pv/intellectual_hipsters_and_metaco...](http://lesswrong.com/lw/2pv/intellectual_hipsters_and_metacontrarianism/)) and disagree. If you believe that it's important to deliberately suffer to build character, at least do something that provides some benefit like vigorous exercise, or even rejection therapy.

<comment><USER3> Talk about first world problems, it's almost embarrassing that you have to seek out discomfort and the only way to do it is to take a cold shower.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> As someone who has taken many, many, many cold showers in Iraq and other unpleasant locales, if your character is so underdeveloped that taking a cold shower builds it up, you should be taking bigger strides.

Edit: point being, cold showers are such an unbelievably mild form of suffering that suggesting they're "character builders" is painfully pretentious. Surprised this blogger of all people wrote this. He knows suffering.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hey Matt - thanks for your thoughts. I think mild is definitely in the eye of the beholder. Doing 50 pushups everyday would be a walk in the park for me - it might be absolute hell for someone else. A developer/designer might take 15 seconds to debug something that I could only manage after hours if not days of researching/Googling/struggling.

As I mentioned in the post - I really like warm showers and hate being cold. For me, it really was quite difficult to force myself to take a cold shower. It's now much easier.

You're right, I have gone through intense suffering - dislocating your knee, tearing all 4 ligaments and undergoing 5 surgeries will do that to you. So please have faith in me when I say that this activity was a challenge for me, was highly uncomfortable at first and required substantial willpower.

I offer my experience as something others can draw from and suggest that this might be worth doing.

<comment><USER5> I've been ending at least 80% of my showers with a minute or two of cold water since getting the 4 hour body a few months ago. It was definitely hard at first, then got easier, then got somewhat hard again (started to seem pointlessly masochistic), but all in all I feel it's been worthwhile.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Funny, I started taking cold showers about a month ago, without having read any article about it. I guess because I was feeling unhappy for some time and I was annoyed from having so much comfort, like good food and warm water around me and not being happy, so I decided to ditch hot water. At first I used pure cold water (this was still the tale end of winter, so it would actually numb my skin) and managed to keep it up for about a week. After that my bad mood past, however I decided to keep up taking cold showers at a moderately cold temperature (still cold so you shiver and shrink but not so that it numbs your skin.

So in conclusion I'll mention my results after a month. First of all, I feel good about it, and I never intend to go back to warm indulgent water. I feel like I got rid of an unnecessary comfort, second after about two weeks I felt like going back to warm water but the power of habit had already kicked in so I stayed with cold water. Third, Like mentioned in the article, the panic response to cold water is gradually going away, and soon I'll probably notice it flow into other areas in my life.

So I think It's a quick and effective way to develop discipline and even self esteem. I would recommend this habit especially to high school kids who bear the brunt of mass marketing from large corporations selling useless products.

<comment><USER7> _I would recommend this habit especially to high school kids who bear the brunt of mass marketing from large corporations selling useless products._

...expound?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've been in the army. I've taken cold showers every day. Our commanders woke us up in 2am for a long run while carrying a rubber boat filled with water to the beach almost every day. When we finally got to the beach, we had to do push ups with our head inside the freezing water. I ran 20km carrying a fat man on a stretcher, cursing him under what remained of my breath.

Guess what? I still read HN instead of getting shit done.

Tolerance is only built on the same vector.

<comment><USER5> Wow... interesting. For some reason I would have expected that discipline to carry over. How long were you in the army? I'd be interested in asking you a few questions if you're up for it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Sounds a lot like Kneipp's idea (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kneipp> \- was pretty popular in Germany when I grew up).

Having been forced to take a week of cold showers due to a malfunctioning heater I can't say it made me any stronger. It just made me feel pissed off and not properly clean.

<comment><USER10> Jason Shen said that voluntarily taking cold showers increased his discipline. Can you imagine a different experience if you chose cold showers instead of being forced to take them?

I don't feel like I've properly had a shower unless the shower has raised my core temperature, but I'm going to give this a try. The easiest life hacks are ones that don't require a time commitment and only minor changes in routine.

<comment><USER11> Taking a cold shower lowers your body temperature, then your hypothalamus kicks in to compensate. You get out of your cold shower, and your body heats up. If you take a warm shower, you end up cooling down after the shower.

<comment><USER12> Not my experience. Sometimes I take a cold bath (ice is involved) after running. With enough ice, I feel quite cold for many hours after getting out -- to the point where I get out an extra down comforter to sleep with, and am still cold.

<comment><USER13> That means you have lowered your core temperature and your body is simply unable to respond to that coldness quickly. It's vital that you feel cold at that point. Quick cold showers are just "tricking" your body.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> It needn't be a shower. Meditation, yoga, and some forms of martial art work just this way. Each of them trains you to accept discomfort without reacting to it.

There's a Buddhist story where a student asks a teacher about the secret of correct practice. The answer: "Don't move." Meditation hurts. A lot. Your legs ache and often fall asleep, your lower back gets stiff. But you're not supposed to move. Over time you do become more flexible, but more importantly you learn to accept the pain without needing to fix it. It turns out that if you can focus on the moment, the pain isn't so bad - it's actually the fear of the pain lasting into the future that causes you stress. As Shunryu Suzuki (founder of SF Zen Center) said: "Don't move. Just die over and over. Don't anticipate. Nothing can save you now because you have only this moment."

But there's nothing uniquely buddhist about this... My Berkeley tai chi instructor loves to have students hold postures for extended periods to the same effect. You move past this point where you think you're going to collapse and suddenly find a way to relax further into the form. And any serious yoga student will tell you that holding yoga poses for them accomplishes the same thing. Sounds like the cold shower had a similar effect for Jason.

It's not macho, magical, or new agey - it's just a practice - though one that may seem odd in our can-do, fix-it-now culture. As we grow we learn that not every problem can be fixed, and devoting time to practices like these can teach you to be okay with that.

</comment><comment><USER15> The way I see it, learning to be uncomfortable is beside the point; it's about finding the positives, not ignoring the negatives. If you learn to be uncomfortable, you become complacent, and don't do things to improve your life in real, tangible ways, like, say, negotiating a better salary.

If there's a problem you need to solve with a method like this, that's great, but I would hesitate to recommend that people regularly incorporate unpleasant things into their daily life for the sole sake of them being unpleasant. That ultimately leaves you with less understanding of not only how to lead a pleasant life but also of how to improve the lives of the people around you, this latter goal being the core of entrepreneurship. E.g. if you try to use nothing but `cat` to edit files, you will never design a better text editor. If you walk to work, you won't be able to contribute to advances in vehicle technology.

Ultimately I think our goal as humans is to reduce that sort of thing, not to increase it; otherwise we might as well revert to nomadic tribalism. To quote Edward Abbey:

 _One final paragraph of advice: do not burn yourselves out. Be as I am — a reluctant enthusiast... a part-time crusader, a half-hearted fanatic. Save the other half of yourselves and your lives for pleasure and adventure. It is not enough to fight for the land; it is even more important to enjoy it. While you can. While it's still here. So get out there and hunt and fish and mess around with your friends, ramble out yonder and explore the forests, climb the mountains, bag the peaks, run the rivers, breathe deep of that yet sweet and lucid air, sit quietly for a while and contemplate the precious stillness, the lovely, mysterious, and awesome space. Enjoy yourselves, keep your brain in your head and your head firmly attached to the body, the body active and alive, and I promise you this much; I promise you this one sweet victory over our enemies, over those desk-bound men and women with their hearts in a safe deposit box, and their eyes hypnotized by desk calculators. I promise you this; You will outlive the bastards._

<comment><USER16> I agree with you, except for

> If you walk to work, you won't be able to contribute to advances in vehicle > technology.

Are you implying that walking to work is an 'uncomfortable' thing like taking a cold shower? I may be misunderstanding you there, but I , for one, _hate_ sitting in a car and suffering through morning-hour traffic jams. I hate searching for a parking spot. I much rather take my bike to work. You know, not to work out, but to breathe fresh morning air for once. To enjoy the sound of birds. Riding your bike, or walking, is exactly what that nice quite of yours is recommending.

You can advance your vehicle technology as far as you like, but if that vehicle will be used for a distance that you could easily _walk_ , it will never be effort well spent.

<comment><USER15> >Are you implying that walking to work is an 'uncomfortable' thing like taking a cold shower? I may be misunderstanding you there, but I , for one, hate sitting in a car and suffering through morning-hour traffic jams. I hate searching for a parking spot. I much rather take my bike to work. You know, not to work out, but to breathe fresh morning air for once. To enjoy the sound of birds. Riding your bike, or walking, is exactly what that nice quite of yours is recommending.

No. I just needed to pull out some example. There are some situations in which driving is more pleasant than walking -- consider someone who works at a ski resort in the mountains, in the winter -- and situations in which walking is more pleasant than driving. Either way, by doing what you can to improve your living conditions you build an understanding of what "improved living conditions" might look like.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Interesting idea. Maybe I'll try it. I fear, though, that it'll just end with me lying in bed for an extra twenty minutes every day, not wanting to get up and face the cold shower.

Some say that willpower is like a muscle, and that the more you use it the more you develop it. On the other hand, maybe willpower is more like... a muscle, and if you use it too much on any given day then it just gets worn out. Will a cold shower before breakfast be followed by donuts for lunch?

<comment><AUTHOR> I taught a course on the Psychology of Personal Change in college and there are papers that suggest that willpower resembles a muscle - in that it can degrade over time. But there are also other studies that suggest it can also be built up over time - like a muscle.

Would you say that doing pushups in the morning is a bad thing? Yes, you're more tired later in the day, but if you keep doing it, you'll get stronger and stronger.

<comment><USER17> Yep. Of course there's no particular reason to think that the muscle analogy needs to be accurate either way, though.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, actually there is: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego_depletion>

<comment><USER18> Hmm, it seems like the research is pretty thin at present. I'm going to file this under "slightly more likely to be true than not" until I see more information.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> First there was Rejection Therapy and now this. I'm sure there's merit to this stuff but how many of these practices can one adopt before they transition from conqueror to masochist?

<comment><AUTHOR> Fair question. I don't intend to come off as masochistic but I can understand if it appears this way. I'm just sharing something I've found to add value to my life and suggesting that others try it and see if it also gives them value.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I asked a friend of mine why he kept hitting himself in the head with a hammer. He replied "because it feels so good when I stop".

</comment><comment><USER21> Cold showers just make me feel great. Never suffered of those.

I also use them after workouts, as described here: [http://paleohacks.com/questions/995/what-is-the-deal-with- co...](http://paleohacks.com/questions/995/what-is-the-deal-with-cold- showers/1019#1019)

"Invented by the French and used by virtually every elite athlete on the planet, it is often confused with some kind of torture. Right after working out, hop into the shower. First, cook yourself for no longer than 5 minutes in hot water, relax, get those blood vessels well dilated. Then slowly add cold water to the mix until it's so cold you can't stand it. Endure it. Focus the water on the back of your head and the muscles you just worked. Feel the blood vessels constrict. Stay under it for as long as it takes to really cool off - 2 to 3 minutes. The time it takes to cool down will increase as you adapt, and the temperature for cooling will decrease. Then, switch the hot water back on. The blood vessels will dilate, and inrushing blood will flush the lactic acid out. Start the cooking process again. Repeat at least two cycles and finish on cold. This induces a tonic effect and you'll rebound, flushing again as your body warms up in your clothes."

</comment><comment><USER22> Alternatively, take 20 seconds to wet yourself with water. fill a small bucket. Turn off water until the final minute when you wash off.

You don't have to keep the water running to stay cold, and you can save a bit of water in the process.

</comment><comment><USER23> I applaud the general concept here but I think you're doing yourself a disservice if this is the extent to which you take this. Go take up rock climbing (toproping in a gym doesn't count), whitewater kayaking, or some other activity that will get you outdoors doing something involving real risk assessment and nontrivial consequences.

If you're anything like me you'll find your attention to detail increases dramatically. Your ability to shrug off daily stresses will also increase. Compared to being gripped out of your mind 120 feet off the ground it's pretty hard to take some guy cutting you off in traffic seriously.

Whatever you do, keep pushing your boundaries. Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER24> I don't know, I've tried turning the water icy cold for the last few minutes of the shower (based on an Art of Manliness article), and it seems like trying to artificially create meaning in something very trivial.

I think there's value in changing things up so you don't get too comfortable, but to me this is about as meaningful or important as changing which brand of deodorant you use. Instead, I'd recommend things like going to see a play, listening to a new genre of music, taking cooking classes, etc.

</comment><comment><USER25> Timothy Ferriss' book, The 4-Hour Body, suggests cold water showers in the morning as a mechanism to rev your metabolism and burn more calories throughout the day.

</comment><comment><USER26> Suffering is completely the wrong concept when one is considering the benefits of a cold shower. The biggest plus of a cold shower is the shock-effect that makes you alert and awake.

</comment><comment><USER27> The true "character building" exercise here is publishing this article and letting the internet tear you a new one.

<comment><USER28> not merely publishing on blog, but then self-posting to HN and meticulously fielding questions. i guess it's all part of "character building" / entrepreneurial self-promotion

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> My dad used to tell me about the time he was in a cold, remote location (military), and he was the only one in their group who would take cold baths (from a snow-fed stream nearby); the others would warm up water and then bathe. The entire year he was there, he never fell ill; though the rest of the bunch came down with cold/flu with regularity. I know this is not scientific evidence, but just anecdotal.

Thanks for the article; I had forgotten about his story, and now will try to work in cold showers slowly.

</comment><comment><USER30> I've been ending my showers with cold water forever, but that's just because it's good for your hair (I have a lot of hair). I have not experienced any other appreciable benefits.

</comment><comment><USER31> I consistently take cold showers, and I actually really enjoy it. Has nothing to do with being tough. I just happen to feel a lot more awake post-shower, it's a lot more satisfying to dry off after (and when you get out of the shower, you aren't as cold), my skin feels better and Im quite possibly in a better mood. Also, if I have had a few drinks the night before, a cold shower is far superior than a hot shower.

<comment><USER32> I agree, I take cold showers because I enjoy them - they are far from torture! I think the bloke that wrote the article totally missed that. In winter I even take a cold shower - and always feel far warmer after - even if the water is like ice.

I run hot showers occasionally too. Though I never have any compulsion to leave the shower, I just want to stand there. The other thing is it never feels hot enough!

Try it, just start with cold. You might even like it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> A lot of commenters suggest to do something else instead of taking cold showers. I don't see the need to trade cold showers with anything as you certainly are able to e.g. lift weights AND take cold showers! Why not get the benefits of both?

If nothing else, taking cold showers at least prepares you to having a swim in cold water (in a hole in the frozen sea) while attending sauna during winter time in Finland.. :-)

</comment><comment><USER34> I've tried this twice in my life in the US. Both times I came down with fever. In India, you really want cold showers during the summer.

<comment><USER35> Indeed, it depends on the weather. When it's warm summer weather here, I take lukewarm showers. When I was in Italy, I took cold showers. What a relief!

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> If you're having problems loading, here's the google cache [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2N7uwSF...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2N7uwSF5M8sJ:www.jasonshen.com/2011/taking- cold- showers/+jason+shen+taking+cold+showers&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&source=www.google.ca)

<comment><USER37> Thanks. I wish people would learn how to cache their own blogs so we don't have to depend on Google.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I have a normal warm/hot shower to actually wash, and then at the end I switch off the heat and have a cold shower for a minute or two. I definitely feel the better for it afterwards, although the effect wears off after half an hour or so.

The only problem is that in the summer, the `cold' water isn't actually very cold.

<comment><USER39> [http://artofmanliness.com/2010/01/18/the-james-bond- shower-a...](http://artofmanliness.com/2010/01/18/the-james-bond-shower-a- shot-of-cold-water-for-health-and-vitality/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> The idea upon which this is based is called hormesis. See:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hormesis> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caloric_restriction>

The basic idea is that our ancestors were under stress so often that we evolved beneficial processes that kick in during times of stress, and only times of stress. Without the right environmental cues our bodies won't do the right thing. Imagine having to red-line your car for a few seconds in order to start the automatic oil-change.

</comment><comment><USER41> "life coach" baloney

<comment><AUTHOR> Would you like to share some specific reasons why people shouldn't engage in cold showers? Or are you just going to make a personal attack that doesn't relate to anything I said?

<comment><USER12> _Would you like to share some specific reasons why people shouldn't engage in cold showers?_

Would you like to share some sort of _science_ proving that taking a cold shower has some health benefit over talking a hot shower?

<comment><USER42> Well, not exactly what this is talking about, but after serious exercise, cold showers are better than hot showers for recovery purposes. Same reason applying ice works to reduce inflammation. It's basically a milder form of an ice bath.

That said, taking cold showers and bragging about is kinda... dunno. In my mind, cold showers are something to be paired with other physical discomforts (like beating your body up to the point where the physiological benefits of a cold shower actually matter), not something to just do for the sake of doing. It's kinda like discipline gravy. Wonderful along with something, but disgusting by itself. But this is coming from an athletic background. I guess whatever makes you feel like a boss, makes you feel like a boss.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's interesting. I didn't think about cold showers as a way to reduce inflammation but it's possible that the cold water acts as a mild anti- inflammatory.

I was a gymnast for 16 years but alas my "beat the crap out of myself" days are over for now and I don't need to multiple parts of my body before walking out of the gym. I guess part of the reason why I like cold showers is that I miss the opportunity to struggle with and overcome strong feelings of discomfort.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> I've done cold showers at times (for medical reasons). I loathe them and only take them in desperation.

Trivia that the HN crowd is unlikely to know: Ending showers with a brief bit of cold water is supposedly something French women do to keep themselves perky.

</comment><comment><USER44> I live by the beach, and every morning I get up and surf for 30 minutes to 1 hour. Getting in a hot shower after that is AMAZING, especially during the winter months.

Would highly recommend over a forced cold shower.

</comment><comment><USER45> I frequently take cold showers between sauna sessions. Both are extremes, in the sauna I like the feeling of hot steam making my skin shiver just after a splash of water on the heater. In a cold shower I like the initial gasp for air and the shiver down my spine before I get used to it.

I do remember reading something about intensive chilling would improve my immune defense, but that just made me start doing this. Now I do it because it feels good to have some ice cool water after 10 minutes in the sauna giving you a slight fever.

</comment><comment><USER46> To find resources on the positive (or otherwise) effects of cold water, search for the term Dousing: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dousing>

There are scientific research on the topic as well, i.e. [http://thesportjournal.org/article/impact-cold-water- immersi...](http://thesportjournal.org/article/impact-cold-water- immersion-5km-racing-performance)

</comment><comment><USER47> Hilarious! Anyone read the Wikipedia article about "The Junction Boys", a college football team that Bear Bryant took to the town of Junction, Texas in the middle of summer? He made them do grueling practice in the blazing heat, and withheld water in order to toughen them up. At the end of this brutal regimen, the players who were left went on to... continue to suck and lose almost every game in the season.

</comment><comment><USER48> For about four months in 2007 I took cold showers. Over time I found I was touching the water less and less and was developing hygiene problems. Additionally, I was taking longer and longer to jump in so the time savings were eroding. So, I stopped. To this day I do prefer less warm water than I did before the experiment, though.

</comment><comment><USER49> There was a study I read about where a large group of people where divided into 2 equal groups. The non-control group was had their body temperature lowered. The study showed those with a lowered body temperature got sick more frequently. I googled to try and find a reference, but couldn't locate it.

So, on the cold showers thing... no thanks.

</comment><comment><USER50> Character building aside, I have always been baffled why people take hot showers during the summer. It's hot out. I'm hot. So I take a cold shower and it feels great.

</comment><comment><USER51> When i grew up in india taking cold showers was very common, infact my dad till to this day shower mostly in cold water.

</comment><comment><USER52> I wish I could take cold showers. Here in Florida, the water doesn't get much below 80 degrees unless you add ice.

</comment><comment><USER53> Every time I take a cold shower, I get a raging boner.

Is there any physical basis for this, or is it a purely a mental thing?

<comment><USER13> Increased blood circulation in response to the cold could be a factor.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> You're doing a reverse of the James Bond shower, which has you start warm and then turn to cold at the end.

</comment><comment><USER55> I love sticking my head into a shower stream of cold water. Gets me really pumped at any time of the day.

</comment><comment><USER56> Or lift weights. It has more benefits.

</comment><comment><USER57> This layout of this page feels like they are trying to sell you something.

Also now their database is down. Oops.

</comment><comment><USER58> My dad was a Marine, he said they took cold showers every morning. Toughened him right up.

</comment><comment><USER59> What will happen when cold shower feels as good as hot shower, will you start sit on ice all day, find new ways to suffer to "grow stronger"?

Cold water itself might be healthier or not but without data, this practice sounds pointless and if we generalise the idea and boil down to suffering to grow stronger it sounds down right ridiculous.

</comment><comment><USER60> Coincidentially I had just taken a cold shower before reading this. But then, it's 95 degrees out; it's 75 with high humidity in the earth-sheltered house, and in these conditions a spring-fed shower is very welcome.

I'll bet this guy is going from an aggressively airconditioned room to a cold shower. No wonder it's unpleasant.

</comment><comment><USER61> I love this. Somebody decided to invent and plant a meme and see just how gullible people are.

I'd image than several months later the authors will be laughing their posteriors off reading all the retweets, blog posts, and journals about people following the "procedure".

</comment><comment><USER62> Good luck getting a clean shave under those conditions.

It sometimes amazes me what people think constitutes adversarial conditions, and testing oneself. Reaching down and turning a knob, then telling yourself that you're building character? Odd.

By the way, I loved the comments. They read like something I would have written as a twelve year old. "I'm like a Navy SEAL because I beat myself up every day with a cold shower! I'm tough!" My favorite is paleo guy:

 _But I also do it due to the paleo/primal lifestyle I've been adopting—the fact that we didn't evolve bathing with the convenience of hot coals or temperature faucets and and that our bodies are probably designed to buck up and shower in less-than-ideal conditions._

Except that you'll find that frequency of bathing, and bathing as a social and relaxation mechanism, directly correlates with availability of hot water. Where there are hot springs, there are happy, relaxed locals.

<comment><USER63> I wasn't suggesting that taking a cold shower makes you like a Navy SEAL. I was suggesting that if you were training to become one, taking cold showers would help you prepare for the shock of BUD/S training.

But I guess you couldn't be bothered to read my post properly. For someone who has such strong opinions, you sure do lack reading comprehension skills. Removing context in order to make your argument more valid....real classy.

<comment><USER64> The story is that Alcatraz had very warm showers for the inmates to prevent them preparing for the long cold swim to freedom.

<comment><USER5> Sounds like a benefit for the other 99.999% of inmates. Win/Win?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> The ability to discipline yourself with nothing but the power of your mind is one of the single greatest skills a human can have. Put the ice cream cone down, and pick up a book, then go to the gym then finish up that big project you started 3 months ago. It is the art of taking control of your own body even though it hurts. It's what separates kings from bums lying around on the side of the road.

<comment><USER66> "It's what separates kings from bums lying around on the side of the road."

Since kingship is, by definition, hereditary, I'm pretty sure that what separates kings from bums is largely a mere accident of birth.

Just as we have evolved with an unrealistic perceptual bias to see lions in forest shadows - thinking you see one where there isn't one is low cost, failing to see one when there is one is a potentially lineage-ending move - we've also evolved to think that we have much more influence on the course of our lives than we do.

We have limited self control; our conscious minds can really only inhibit unconscious impulses, and that only to a limited extent. Nevertheless, we've evolved to believe that we have much greater control than we do so that we continue to try to exercise the limited control that we do have, rather than not trying at all because we see our distinctly limited self control for what it is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> Don't know why it's not mentioned, but it will also reduce your penis to subatomic lengths

</comment><comment><USER68> Taking a cold shower _because_ it's unpleasant makes as much sense as cutting yourself.

<comment><USER69> Except for the physical scarring and potential for infection.

<comment><USER68> Why is physical scarring bad? Why is infection bad?

Humans dislike infection for the same reason they dislike cold showers. Pain is bad. Avoiding pain is good.</comment></comment></comment>


Internal tools should be sold or killed - <AUTHOR> http://mdswanson.com/blog/2016/01/25/sell-or-kill.html# <comment><USER2> Thank you for writing this article. I believe you have good ideas in it. Regards, Ryan.</comment>


Ask HN: How do file sharing sites generate money? - <AUTHOR>

specially those without ads.
My guess is they generate money by trying to get subscribers and using ads heavily.
But there are so many programs available to skip the page and automatically download (JDownloader, for instance), that I fail to see if they are really getting money.
Also, I'd love to know if anyone has real figures. <comment><USER2> I know guys in file-sharing industry making over $10 million a year. They wouldn't want me talk about this is public. You can contact me in private to talk more about it :)

My contact information is in my profile.</comment>


AllenNLP Interpret: A Framework for Explaining Predictions of NLP Models - <AUTHOR> https://allennlp.org/interpret <comment><USER2> Awesome, I love to see how there's coming more and more frameworks for interpretability. It's incredibly important, especially when selling your solution to higher-ups.

There's another solution named LIME which seems to take a similar but more general approach, I like this more tailored idea as it'll probably give a better interpretation of the NLP questions.

<comment><AUTHOR> LIME's authors came out with a new method called Anchors last year:

[https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~marcotcr/aaai18.pdf](https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~marcotcr/aaai18.pdf)

[https://github.com/marcotcr/anchor](https://github.com/marcotcr/anchor)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Wow this is amazing. Check out their interactive demo that lets you see visualizations for various tasks: [https://demo.allennlp.org/coreference- resolution/MTA3MDQ4Nw=...](https://demo.allennlp.org/coreference- resolution/MTA3MDQ4Nw==)

Interpretability is super important... first for technical debugging, and even more important for giving domain experts a view of the model inner working (otherwise they have to just trust the ML model blindly).

<comment><USER4> Very interesting demo. Thanks for sharing. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to parse Winograd schemas[0] correctly

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

<comment><USER5> >>> The city councilmen refused the demonstrators a permit because they [feared/advocated] violence.

I fear that quite a lot of humans won't get that either - am i being overly pessimistic?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Slightly off topic, but the analogy of this to Deep Thought having to design a system to explain what the actual Question was is pretty amazing. Douglas Adams was incredibly prescient.</comment>