Don't Call Yourself a Programmer, and Other Career Advice (2011) - <AUTHOR> https://www.kalzumeus.com/2011/10/28/dont-call-yourself-a-programmer/ <comment><USER2> > Do Java programmers make more money than .NET programmers? Anyone describing > themselves as either a Java programmer or .NET programmer has already lost, > because a) they're a programmer (you're not, see above) and b) they're > making themselves non-hireable for most programming jobs. In the real world, > picking up a new language takes a few weeks of effort and after 6 to 12 > months nobody will ever notice you haven't been doing that one for your > entire career.

In the real world this is (unfortunately) not how technical people are hired. The stack they are using seems to be the first thing hiring managers look at.

You would think it would be only clueless recruiters who would think this way, but my experience is that well-respected and successful entrepreneurs also operate along these lines. It is not clear to me whether their success is related to or in spite of this way of thinking. To give them the benefit of the doubt, startups often need to move quickly and those few weeks-months needed for people to become familiar with a new stack they're unfamiliar with may simply not be available.

<comment><USER3> Why would a company choose someone who doesn't know the stack they are using over someone who does? Let alone 6-12 months.

Knowing the ecosystem, best practices, frameworks, etc takes longer than a few weeks.

Sure I could learn Java or Swift in a few weeks, but does that mean I would be a competent Android or iOS developer?

<comment><USER4> > Why would a company choose someone who doesn't know the stack they are using > over someone who does?

If the two candidates are perfectly identical on every other criteria, sure. But that's not the case, the point is that most other criteria are more important that the specific tech experience when dealing with competent people.

> Sure I could learn Java or Swift in a few weeks, but does that mean I would > be a competent Android or iOS developer?

If you have web experience, I'm not too worried about your productivity on Android or iOS. If I'm hiring for Django and you have experience with any of Symfony, Rails, Spring, .Net or NestJS, the tech expertise is the least of my concerns.

<comment><USER3> You're not worried about their mobile experience until the app fails to work in a tunnel because they are expecting an always on connection or they have half their records on their mobile and half on their server and need to figure out which to use or they never had to figure out a syncing algorithm because you usually don't have to sync things on the web since you never expect long periods of not being connected.

Edit: and I forgot to mention the biggest UI failure I made when I did mobile development a decade ago on WinCE ruggedized devices. I didn't even think about actually taking the device out into the sun where are all of the field service techs would be working and seeing how the screen, colors and contrast looked.

<comment><USER5> I notice this a lot on apps in the subway (who doesn't) and the app just dies

A lot of problems in life can be simply avoided this is no different... If you're getting that tiny last bit of differentiation because you're 90% market share and you can afford to hire people to solve that exact specific problem then great. But that isn't most places. Most apps would do better to 100% avoid the problem and just say "No Internet Connection" if there's no WiFi or 3g. On top of that you get mobile developers who swore to God they solved this problem but guess what they actually have no idea what they are doing. They think it works but it doesn't because it's actually a database concurrency control problem. This [https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/mvcc- intro.html](https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/mvcc-intro.html) and what I expect for someone who claims to "solve the problem" not some "algorithm" they invented.

So I don't buy it, and I don't buy the business need for it unless it's an app specifically made for disconnected use. Unfortunately it sounds like one of those things people do to make themselves feel important or smart (no nice way to put it; I see it as bad as someone who invents their own encryption "algorithm" without realizing how ridiculous that is).

In short I would say don't do it. And if someone does it better be a real business requirement.

<comment><USER3> And you're kind of demonstrating my point - the difference between people who think it's an easy problem and the proportion who have experience.

Enterprise mobile apps aren't about the apps you download from the App Store. Usually they are distributed using an on-site mobile device management system.

1st use case: I worked for s company that wrote field service applications for ruggedized Windows mobile devices. Some had cellular, some had WiFi, and some had neither. You had to actually dock the device. The field service techs had to have all of the information they needed on the device to do service calls including routes whether or not they had connectivity. They would record the information and it would sync back to the server whenever they had a connection.

2nd use case: worked for a company that wrote software for railroad car repair billing. Repairs are governed by Raillinc ([https://www.railinc.com/rportal/documents/18/260737/CRB_Proc...](https://www.railinc.com/rportal/documents/18/260737/CRB_ProceduresManual.pdf)) all of the rules and audits had to be on the device and the record of the repair had to be available whether or not they had connectivity. It had to sync back with the server whenever a connection was available.

3rd case: software for doctors. Hospitals are notorious for having poor connections.

4th case: home health care nurses had to record lots of information for Medicare billing. Again you can't count on having mobile connections.

<comment><USER5> It's not an easy problem. It's a database concurrency issue and well beyond the skillset of most mobile devs. Database isn't even a required course for a compsci degree it's usually an elective.

My point is the problem you think you solved, you didn't and it will break under dozens of scenarios. Maybe the clients are happy and they think it works but you just haven't encountered the case where data goes missing or overwritten.

In other words what I am saying is it is wrong and hard to know it is wrong unless you directly attack it. The word "enterprise" is an euphemism for low cost and potentially low quality. It's a buzzword. I wouldn't take an Enterprise mobile developer over a B2C mobile developer just because of the word enterprise.

Not everything in the world should exist that leads to 737 Max. The word "sync" has implications way beyond the concerns of a mobile developer.

So I call bullshit; the fact the industry does it, that everyone does it, that you consider "real" mobile devs to require it, that customers want it doesn't mean it is a good idea or that it's mathematically or scientifically sound. It may cover most cases and nobody may notice the problems except once in a blue moon but that doesn't make it right because operational systems need full data integrity.

The correct way to handle such a request is not to "sync" but to collect data push it to the backend and let the backend sort out the mess. Not "sync" by whatever stretch of the imagination no matter what cottage industry or cult beliefs have been born of it.

<comment><USER3> So you're saying "it's not a good idea" to have software that actually fulfills the need? The mobile app that doesn't work in the majority of use cases to solve the problem that it was meant to solve is useless.

And yes "the problem" we solved, a mobile app that could route field technicians dynamically at a level of quality we needed we did solve.

 _The word "enterprise" is an euphemism for low cost and potentially low quality. It's a buzzword. I wouldn't take an Enterprise mobile developer over a B2C mobile developer just because of the word enterprise._

Again this comes from someone who thinks they have experience versus someone who does have experience. Did you read the link I posted about the industry required rules for repairing railway cars? That isn't even the entire regulation. If the typical B2C app doesn't work, oh well. For the railroad industry, if you don't submit your railcar repair just right - it gets rejected either by the interchange or the customer and you can only submit your invoices and rebuttals once per month.

 _The correct way to handle such a request is not to "sync" but to collect data push it to the backend and let the backend sort out the mess. Not "sync" by whatever stretch of the imagination no matter what cottage industry or cult beliefs have been born of it._

How well does "one way server syncing" when you're a field tech doing routes and the customer calls customer service and cancels one of your routes while you're in the truck? How well does it work when your back end system needs to calculate where each truck is on the road and needs to re-assign routes on the fly? How well does it work when one tech needs a part and they need to know where the parts are based on what other techs have already been at the warehouse and now they have the part? But wait, they went to the customer's house and found that they don't need the part at all and it's available on the truck a mile away? All of this involves dynamic two way syncing...

Again, the difference between someone who has real world experience and someone who thinks that because their Twitter app doesn't need to work in the subway nothing does.

<comment><USER6> > And yes "the problem" we solved, a mobile app that could route field > technicians dynamically at a level of quality we needed we did solve.

Just look for people good at handling split data updates and ownership, there are a lot of people working on that kind issues on the backend, I really doubt you find more mobile devs with those skills than backend devs with it.

<comment><USER3> What makes you think that the two are distinct?

<comment><USER6> What two are distinct? Yes you sometimes have conflicting data on two machines when you work on mobile apps, but that is the core of a lot of distributed computing problems. So if you only look for those skills in mobile devs you will miss out on a lot of people with relevant experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is fantastic practical advice for software engineers early in their career. Here's some more based on the common pitfalls I see,

\- Don't apply to 50+ companies at one go thinking only a % of them will call you. Choose ~5 companies, do a lot of homework about their business & write to key people at these places telling in ONE paragraph what you can do for their business. If it fails, choose next ~5 and so on.

\- Other things being equal choose team over company. E.g. working at core technology or customer facing team at a less-known growing business is much better than working at some internal tools team in Google. FAANG carries some brand value for future recruiters, VCs but you should really optimize learning rate early in your career.

<comment><USER8> What if you truly need employment and you are a run of the mill beginner? Is that 5 company application approach still optimal?

<comment><USER7> Yes.

With 50-company approach you increase the absolute number of first callbacks you get (hence everyone thinks it's optimal). With 5-company approach you increase the odds of actually getting through to a single job offer. Think about it.

<comment><USER9> >you increase the odds of actually getting through to a single job offer

You haven't AT ALL explained why your "~5 companies approach" is more likely to get you an offer.

It's not. That sort of approach would be _less_ likely to get you an offer anywhere that I've ever worked.

999 times out of 1000 you don't have a clue to a company's current business needs just by looking at public information, even if you had insider information, a random insider probably doesn't know the current business needs of anyone outside of their day-to-day job. Even if you did know the company's current business needs, unsolicited job applications from strangers to people who aren't recruiters mostly go straight into the trash bin. If I personally received unsolicited job application from a stranger, I'd probably just ignore it. The most I'd ever do is reply telling them to apply via our career site like everyone else.

Plus what exactly would you say as a "run of the mill beginner" for "what you can do for their business" that would catch anyone's attention that a quality resume and cover letter submitted though the job portal wouldn't?

<comment><USER10> It's because E(#offers) = #applications * P(initial_contact) * P(successful_interview | initial_contact)

The ~5 companies approach tries to optimize P(ic) and P(si) at the expense of #apps.

The 50 approach optimizes only #apps because it assumes P(ic) is low, and disregards P(si).

Especially P(si) is very important because the interview's purpose is to determine that you're a good match for them. If they're just another company you spammed an application out to, that becomes very obvious.

The ~5 companies approach forces you to have already selected them because you think there's a solid business case for them to hire you. And you can make that case during both your initial contact and the interview, thus maximizing P(ic) and P(si).

> 999 times out of 1000 you don't have a clue to a company's current business > needs just by looking at public information

I'd say it's more like 9/10, but that absolutely makes the case for the ~5 company approach. You're filtering out the ones that have a poor recruiting process.

It takes a lot of time to put together a good application and you have to focus on companies that will not only be responsive but follow through all the way to the hiring decision.

So focus on companies that make it clear what they do and what the position entails will tend to maximize P(ic) and P(si).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Re: Profit Centers vs Cost Centers

I was once on a team that maintained a SaaS application that was in some sort of bizarre super-position of "cost center" and "profit center" a few years back.

The company technically sold the app and made money from it, but they also tended to give it away almost for free as long as the buyer was going to be paying lots of money for the company's $FLAGSHIP_BUSINESS_SERVICE that integrated with the app. (Think of it like a free mobile game with micro- transactions.)

The primary way customers interacted with $FLAGSHIP_BUSINESS_SERVICE (and generated micro-transaction revenue) was through our application. However because the application wasn't what the customer was actually paying for, the executives had an impossible time deciding whether to treat the app like a cost or a profit center.

Whenever the app was working fine and everybody was happy the executives were convinced it was a cost center and looked down on it. Whenever it wasn't working fine and companies began to get angry and threaten to take their business elsewhere suddenly the executives would realize that without the SaaS application they wouldn't be able to sell more $FLAGSHIP_BUSINESS_SERVICE.

Long story short, it was a strange and frustrating experience in many ways.

<comment> cool-RR My best conclusion is that there is no definition of "cost center" and "profit center" that makes sense. I challenge anyone to give me such a definition.

This is as good a place as any to put this:

 _Peter Drucker originally coined the term "profit center" around 1945. He later recanted, calling it "One of the biggest mistakes I have made". He later asserted that there are only cost centers within a business, and "the only profit center is a customer whose cheque hasn't bounced."_

<comment><USER12> Profit centers consist of people who can directly attribute revenues or savings to the work that they do. Everyone else is a cost center. No, it's not fair.

<comment> cool-RR The bullshit is hidden in the word "directly". You can define this word to mean whatever you'd like to mean. You can say a salesperson directly adds revenue to the company, but it's not really directly, the billing department is much closer to the actual money. You allow yourself to take the billing department for granted, but that's just because you don't work for the billing department. In the same way you could view the developers as the profit center, and take the sales department for granted.

I'll say it again, I'll be happy to see an objective definition of profit centers and cost centers.

<comment><USER13> Profit center: spending more money on it can make you more money. Cost center: spending more money will not be able to increase your revenue, hence the only way to improve your bottom line is by reducing costs.

A lot of the confusion on this thread was conflating necessary functions with profit centers. Billing and compliance are both necessary. Done poorly they can cost a lot of money. Done perfectly they can never increase the actual income of t he company. That is why sale and product development are traditionally the only parts of the business identified as profit centers. It doesn't mean the others aren't important just that they have different goals. Profit centers look to expand the business while cost centers look to increase efficiency through optimization.

They have different value during the life of a company. During growth, profit centers are the most valuable source of effort while for a mature company that has saturated its market cost centers are most valuable to focus on. The advice to stick to profit centers is somewhat equivalent to sticking to growth which nearly always has a higher return than optimization.

<comment><USER14> If compliance are doing a good job they protecting engineering from late changes in projects which might give a better product and more revenue.

It's symbiotic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I received this advice quite a bit and it took me a while to understand it.

Early in my career I worked with a few folks who had PhD after their names. I don't have a PhD so I was completely unaware of what that really meant and how to value it. Almost exclusively they were pompous, sucky programmers and dbas, and project managers, and other roles common in profit center tech companies making software.

I thought PhD was a signal for dummy based on my super small sample of 20 or so people.

I eventually got to work with a ton of awesome PhDs and realized that I was wrong and scientists working in their field leveraging their life passion of study is very different than someone having a PhD and working outside their element.

I think this is the basis for how many people view programmers. They just see the person who cranks out a billion lines of SharePoint and costs them a lot and don't even get to experience a world where a programmer creatively removes the need for a billion lines of SharePoint.

So there's different kinds of programmers. My current idea is to call myself a programmer and describe my roles and outputs in a way that people can assess if that's something that helps them or not.

I generally don't think labels and titles mean too much by themself and actively want people who think that to avoid or misinterpret my profile as I probably don't want to create something with them.

</comment><comment><USER16> I think the author is going out of his way to try and sound like a grizzled veteran of career pragmatism, but I think he's just giving advice on how to make your life harder. He's basically trying to find some idealised description of "how things are" and adivising you that, well, that's how things are and you should shut up and suck it up, or you'll never go anywhere in your life.

Well, what kind of advice is that? You should just blindly follow what everyone else does, regardless of whether you like it or not? That's just self-limiting.

Burnout is a thing because people who want to do something radically different convince themsleves that their only option is to work for a profit center, or something equally soul-sucking and don't use their brains to find a worthy alternative and make it work.

There is nothing to be gained by limiting yourself to what seems like "how things are" and trying to do what it looks like everyone else is doing. That way you can only hurt your prospects for personal development and progress.

>> Co-workers and bosses are not usually your friends

Oh wait. Now _that_ is solid advice. That is 100% true.

<comment><USER17> The advice given in the blog is colored by the author's life experiences: they had a job they weren't satisfied with in Japan, tried their hand at an ISV (this is what start-ups were called back then), then at consulting and found what I assume to be success with that. This happened over the last 15 years I think.

The funny thing is that calling oneself anything except X programmer has become pretty common. In fact, with more and more money flowing into programming, there's no shortage of bullshit artists and self-promoters.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> On the other hand: [https://yosefk.com/blog/do-call-yourself-a-programmer-and- ot...](https://yosefk.com/blog/do-call-yourself-a-programmer-and-other-career- advice.html)

<comment><USER16> Good read- thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> > ... just like how most good candidates aren't on offer.

I know this is a minor statement (and not really important to the advice otherwise), but I liked this discussion that there can be various reasons why good candidates would struggle to find a job: [https://danluu.com/hiring- lemons/](https://danluu.com/hiring-lemons/)

<comment><USER20> Thanks for the read... That was exactly how I've felt only I was not able to articulate it so well.

The best dev I know didn't go to college (he tried to be a traffic controller when other people would have been at university). He's exactly the kind of person who would be doing "elliptic curve partial nonce bias attacks" over the weekend.

I've seen him have to explain stuff like endianness to people with masters degrees.

I don't know him well enough to ask, but I think he is stuck working for us because 80% of jobs are off-limits without a degree.

</comment></comment><comment> non-entity > Read ad. Send in resume. Go to job interview. Receive offer." is the > exception, not the typical case, for getting employment

Oddly of all the jobs I've gotten most have been via that route. I've never had recruiters do anything but waste my time and trying network has always seemed to land me among people who are looking for a job as well.

<comment><USER21> It really depends. People with well-defined specific skills can often get jobs through essentially keyword searches.

WRT "networking" I agree if, by networking, you're referring to "networking events" which, as you say, probably tend to be attended by people passing out business cards and looking for jobs. But every job I've had since my first one out of school has come through emailing people I've known professionally at aa company I've been interested in working for.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> There's no shame in the word programmer and there was no need to culturally appropriate the word engineer from another profession. Bring back the word programmer.

<comment><USER23> More and more I think the word programmer has come to mean nothing and will continue to lose meaning. More and more people need to program for their work and would not call themselves "programmers" (Scientists, Marketers/DevRel, other Engineering fields, Support, Ops, etc).

BTW, there are people who definitely "Engineer" software they are rare, but they exist, especially at the FAANGs. There are lots of people who have the word "Engineer" in their title that shouldn't, a fine alternative is "Developer".

What's the difference? A developer is implementing a known solution in a specific domain. An engineer is dealing with a significantly unique problem space that has only been addressed by theory, if that. Engineers spend a lot less time programming than Developers do, because their primary occupation is solving tough problems with their colleagues through documentation, RFCs, etc. They often are not the ones who even implement their own ideas. Wait, isn't that a Software Architect? No. Software Architects plan and documents in known solution space, they aren't solving unknown problems.

Most people that I've worked with in Software have never worked with a Software Engineer before.

<comment><USER24> "Engineers spend a lot less time programming than Developers do, because their primary occupation is solving tough problems with their colleagues through documentation, RFCs, etc."

Sorry but 100 times no. Engineering is about understanding and using the laws of nature in scientific terms (mathematics). Strength of materials, thermodynamics, hydraulics, that's the stuff engineers study and do.

<comment><USER23> Yeah, sorry I omitted what you just said, but computer science is a theory driven branch (of mathematics?) that can be incredibly difficult to implement as much as other engineering fields struggle to implement new theory breakthroughs in other branches of science.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> > There's nothing wrong with this, by the way. You're in the business of > unemploying people. If you think that is unfair, go back to school and study > something that doesn't matter.

Andrew Yang brought this up in his interview with Joe Rogan a few months back; how people in The Bay will basically say, "Yes, we're trying to automate away these jobs." And to some extent, we're trying to automate away jobs in the tech industry as well.

Look at the Sears (Willis) tower. That building was originally dedicated to all the manual processing needed by Sears Roebuck & Co to process store and catalog orders; logistics for the largest retailer in America .. the Amazon of the early 1900s. A few decades later and the tower was mostly rented out to other customers. Even when things were still going good for Sears, they were able to drastically reduce the number of people they needed using machines and automation.

<comment><USER17> His assertion is wrong, by the way, only some programmers are contributing to job losses in other domains. I expect that many of us are just building products.

Perhaps that's their way of making themselves feel better, when they say that _everyone_ 's doing it.

<comment><USER26> Some programmers create jobs too. App stores for iOS and Android created an entire mobile app industry, as one example.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> If you like your job, call yourself a programmer and build stuff you like. This article is marginally good advice for your pocket but bad for your soul. Don't be a programmer and act like a lawyer. It's one of the few jobs where it doesnt matter if you 're a dog. You create value, easily, you don't just extract it. It's part of the reason why i m a programmer and not an e.g. academic.

<comment><USER28> You do realize academia is where a lot of the research for programming comes out of, right? Seems like an unfair way to characterize academia.

<comment><USER27> not CS-related academia for me. But yeah academia requires a lot more politics, networking etc nowadays in the way that the "industry" doesnt

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I think if you call yourself a programmer you can do consulting at a relatively high rate for companies who need to get some project for their profit center done. You do that, demonstrate your worth, leave with lots of money, and they might just call you again next time they need to do something for their profit center.

There's definitely ways in which being a programmer can be part of a rewarding career.

<comment><USER30> The point is that you should _call_ yourself a consultant or businessperson, even if you want to _be_ a programmer.

<comment><USER31> That depends on who you want to be hired by. Some companies already know exactly what they need - they need some specific software written so they are looking for a programmer.

<comment><USER30> I mean, that's sort of Patrick's exact point - you should avoid being hired as a generic "programmer" as you'll make far less income. Instead, if you frame yourself as an expert in a particular business problem (and have the data to back up your results), you're far more valuable to the average manager at BigCo, or to any business in general.

A good example of this is the acquihire phenomenon. BigCos often acquire small startups purely to hire the people working there. Half of the time, they shut down the startup and throw away the code. The objective is to hire smart people whom are also domain experts in a particular problem.

<comment><USER32> You can as well argue that you are expert in programming that your expertise are not limited in a solving a particular business problem. This way you open up yourself to more company or any business in general.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Is it relevant to bring up that time major tech companies stole ~$8B from their programmers, more-or-less because they could?

[https://pando.com/2014/01/23/the-techtopus-how-silicon- valle...](https://pando.com/2014/01/23/the-techtopus-how-silicon-valleys-most- celebrated-ceos-conspired-to-drive-down-100000-tech-engineers-wages/)

Oh my, I just now saw this follow up: [https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed- apple-and-googles-wage...](https://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and- googles-wage-fixing-cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million- employees/)

> Confidential internal Google and Apple memos, buried within piles of court > dockets and reviewed by PandoDaily, clearly show that what began as a secret > cartel agreement between Apple's Steve Jobs and Google's Eric Schmidt to > illegally fix the labor market for hi-tech workers, expanded within a few > years to include companies ranging from Dell, IBM, eBay and Microsoft, to > Comcast, Clear Channel, Dreamworks, and London-based public relations > behemoth WPP.

So, anyway, yeah, don't be a chicken, be a fox. But better than being a fox, be a human being.

</comment><comment><USER34> Some solid advice, some not so much. I do call myself a simple programmer. That is how I introduce myself either. Helps a lot when dealing with people whose job title require a third of A4 page to fit.

>How do I become better at negotiation? This could be a post in itself. Short version:

He misses the most important thing. The most powerful thing into negotiation is to know you can stand from the table and leave.

<comment><USER35> Yea but you're selling yourself and all of us short -- you're either a hacker, a poet or a craftsman, haven't you heard?

<comment><USER36> And it's really all of those, or none...

<comment><USER35> Yes! Add to that fixer, tinker -- as knowledge workers, our role is to create knowledge and disseminate it into the organization which is frankly the hardest task in the world, especially when we're working against our own selves

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I call myself a programmer to avoid people thinking I want to be a manager or spend my days in meetings. I want people to expect 90% of my output to be code.

If this is good for a career? Don't know don't care. It's what I do and enjoy, and there are many slippery slopes to not coding and becoming rusty, and ending up on the M train by default.

<comment><USER38> I've met many programmers/engineers who are terrified of becoming management and make (what I believe to be) poor career choices trying to avoid it. Instead they get passed over for pay raises and interesting opportunities because they're seen as being difficult to work with. When times get lean, I've seen those people get laid off first because no one likes working with them.

I work on a team of 50 employees. For those 50 people, there are two managers. 1 out of 25 isn't great odds of being accidentally promoted into management without your consent.

Your working style may be right for you, I'm not questioning that. But in a thread targeted at career advice for junior engineers, I thought it'd chime in from the other side. The chances of accidentally ending up as a manager are very slim. Don't destroy your career and miss out on interesting opportunities to avoid something that's not likely in the first place.

<comment><USER39> If only we could retroactively demote all the managers who suck at it!

<comment><USER40> If you're at a healthy organization, they support managers transitioning back into engineering.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> This is genuinely really good advice.

However, I want to caution against one interpretation: When you focus your attention on projects to cut costs (and risk) and grow revenue, it is possible to put that as your top priority. It should be your second.

Your real top priority should be the health and stability of yourself and your family. Ideally, this is aligned with focusing on visibly-profitable work for your employer. This is often true, but not always.

—————

Example: Suppose you are working at a company that takes code quality and automated testing seriously. This has real business value because it means that you are able to quickly execute projects which accelerate the sales team and unlock partnerships. So far, so good.

Then suppose there is an opportunity which involves taking over a codebase written by another company. The business case is strong—by taking several months to make UX improvements, you can significantly raise revenue. But, the codebase is in a poorly-documented PHP framework, has haphazardly inconsistent naming, and no automated tests. Should the company do the project? Maybe. Should _you_ do the project? Maybe not.

Here's what can happen: Your team agrees that its going to suck but you're all in this together. You start on the project and you find it much harder to make progress. Because of the new toolset and lack of tests, you find it hard to maintain focus. You also lose the ability to create reasonable estimates, so your communication with internal stakeholders erodes—taking trust down with it. The number of noisy automated alerts that come in also increase, also decreasing your focus. You try to find time after work to focus on working through a PHP book, but its hard. The noisy background of your open office combines with your lack of understanding of your toolset to mean you feel useless making day-to-day progress. You talk to your manager and team lead about this. They care, but they are overworked. Its not like they they can change the open office anyway. Don't worry—The project will be over soon. Everyone is in the same boat.

At the end of several months, you need to fill in your semiannual self- evaluation. You choke—words aren't coming out. You're caught between knowing you need to brag about your accomplishments and...not feeling like you have none. You're bad at lying. After spending 2 full days on your self evaluation, you submit it mostly empty.

Soon, you are searching for a new job.

—————

So yes, when thinking about how the company views engineering, look at revenue and costs. But before that, look at the things that _you_ need in order to be effective. Keep your mise-en-place. Use tools that fit your brain. Learn to zealously advocate for what you need.

<comment><USER42> Nit / friendly amendment: _mise_ en place

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

<comment><USER41> Thank you

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Top two posts on hacker news today -- [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21302498](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21302498)

^ this is the other one, wherein the second line of the article states: 'As programmers...'

</comment><comment><USER43> Much of what he says about business and programming is all true, at least in theory for well run, competitive businesses. But, for instance, sometimes in govt, they never actually calculate the ROI of a project or employee. They just think: well, we have money that needs spending, let's higher some people to build some seemingly useful software. Determining what's useful and what's not ahead of time is harder than it seems.

But, the part about most programmers not being able to implement FizzBuzz is incredibly false based on my experience. I've worked for over half a dozen average companies (plus some government too!) in the bay area and I've never once met an engineer who couldn't implement FizzBuzz. They're able to program FizzBuzz and much much more complex things, far more than job requirements need. Not only that, but I've never even met an engineer candidate (i've interviewed dozens) that couldn't do either FizzBuzz or other basic programming tasks. So, I really don't know how you people are finding all these unqualified candidates.

<comment><USER44> Don't be in the bay area, that's how. That's why they pay bay area peeps the big bucks: the standard of skill is higher here, because of the community and other factors.

<comment><USER45> Nah it's just harder to fix wages low when you can job hop so easily.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Even if I am an registered engineer (civil), when asked, I say I am programmer because that's what I do. Absolutely nothing wrong with it.

<comment><USER46> Yep. It doesn't seem to matter much in the US, but in other parts of the world you can't call yourself an Engineer unless you are a P.E.

I typically call myself a software developer because everything I do that isn't actually writing software (documentation, design, system stuff) is in support of that.

<comment><USER21> >but in other parts of the world you can't call yourself an Engineer unless you are a P.E.

I've been told the same is true in some US states--or, at least, the licensing boards would like people to believe it is. (e.g. Texas) But, in my experience, hardly anyone pays any attention.

You do need a P.E. for certain things--mostly when dealing with regulators, etc.--but my understanding that in software specifically, the exam has been discontinued because essentially no on e was taking it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> barry-cotter I'm not sure Patrick would entirely stand behind this as written anymore, just because the long term trajectory of just a programmer looks better than when he wrote this.

[https://mobile.twitter.com/patio11/status/117561737079606886...](https://mobile.twitter.com/patio11/status/1175617370796068866)

An under remarked-upon trend: SFBA/NYC engineering wages are starting to drive engineering wages in the rest of the US as these companies open other US hubs and print remote offers, in both cases keeping salaries in relatively tight bands for e.g. internal fairness reasons.

If you were going strictly by geographical market standards you could have a $200k new graduate in SFBA reporting to a 15 year veteran EM making, hmm, $120k or so in Chicago, but since nobody can tolerate that, that EM gets offered $250k.

"Are there enough engineers from SFBA companies for this to matter nationally?"

There are approximately 3 million software engineers in the US and approximately, finger to wind, 300k work for AppAmaGooBookSoft alone, and that number increases by 50k per year.

The modal software engineer in the US is still working for a digital marketing agency or midwestern insurance company but capitalism is starting to say "Look if you can paint pixels on a web application and you presently work in a cost center, that's unacceptably inefficient."

<comment><USER47> I would argue the opposite: the trajectory of being a programmer has been really good for the past 10 years or so, but we've pretty clearly reached Peak IPO and a correction is on the way. And if/when it does hit, the person with the skillset "can increase revenue or reduce costs" will be in much better shape than "can program mumbo-jumbo".

<comment> barry-cotter I'm pretty sure the entire startup "industry", companies like Stripe and Airbnb which are well past finding product market fit and the risk of death included has less employees than Microsoft. AppAmaFaceGooSoft probably hire more people every year than every YC company put together ever employed, at their peaks for those that went to startup Valhalla.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> In other words, be a servant.

> There's nothing wrong with this, by the way. You're in the business of > unemploying people.

Grow a damn backbone, man. Sprout some values. You'll find life more worth living. Have some pride in your work.

</comment><comment><USER48> >In the real world, picking up a new language takes a few weeks of effort and after 6 to 12 months nobody will ever notice you haven't been doing that one for your entire career.

I've always been a bit baffled by notions like that. How in the world one becomes a professional in a foreign programming language tech in 6 months? It feels like every modern realworld battleworn programming stack (ecma, c++2x, .net, jvm w/e) is filled with nuances and quirks which, as it turns out, an engineer _must_ know about to be able to bump revenues a little bit and to call themselves a professional. Hell, even inside _one_ stack there are a lot of special interest fields. Is every C++ programmer a graphics programmer? Can a C++ programmer become one overnight? Highly doubt it.

>If a Python shop was looking for somebody technical to make them a pile of money, the fact that I've never written a line of Python would not get held against me.

How? How is that possible?

<comment><USER49> Because companies don't care about how 'clean' you code is, what design patterns you use or what cool new technology you are using. They just care that you manage to release quickly so the company can start making money.

So even if you don't know the best way to do things or the best pattern to use, as long as you can hack something together that works reasonably well for some time then you're good enough. Sure, it might be flimsy, break easily, unreadable etc. but if the company is making money then business is happy.

Think about it...code becomes legacy so quickly. 2-3 year old code is considered legacy, especially if it's not used/modified much. You could have spent 15% more time to make it more maintainable but it will still be considered bad code by the next guy who had to work on it because he has absolutely no idea how the code works and what it is meant to do. Chances are, it would be re-written anyway even if you spent that extra 15%. The in the meantime the company might have missed their initial release date and some potential revenue.

Not saying I agree with it but that is how it is unfortunately.

<comment><USER5> Depends on the business model. If you sit on the bleeding edge all the time maybe (even if you don't you should strive for the newest possible for the skills and budget if only for retention and hiring).

But if the whole point of the company is to build some generic software that's configurable then absolutely the inside and code matters because it's a hard requirement. You could build specifically to one type of configuration but it would not solve the other. And that means generic, abstractions, reuse as part of the business case not just some nice to have for clean code.

So it very much depends. It's also possible to take it too far. As for internal release dates I have always considered them bullshit ever since I heard executives talk about how they pad the time. The more layers of management the more padding and if everyone works separately in different teams the more the padding. Developers are better off ignoring internal release dates and building the best software they think possible to not compromise on quality. They can cut scope but at the end of the day the software better work. The only thing you shouldn't ignore is warning people if it will go over time. Since 50% of software goes over time that's expected.

Either it's good or it isn't either it works or it doesn't and the timescale devs are used to (sprints, days, stories etc) don't have any bearing on reality. If it takes a month more because it has to that's how long it takes. The concept of "MVP" or feature set is totally separate from a good piece of software; once you get there you can release and iterate and improve. And it's called "minimal" for a reason if you stop there your software is sunset. The features and improvements have to keep rolling.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> "Engineers are hired to create business value, not to program things." Yup writing software should be the _last_ recourse and only to be used when all the other solutions to problem are not viable.

<comment><USER32> Then who program the things? Yup thats right: programmer.

Program things and create business value can be two separate thing. Each in itself can be really hard and require different expertise.

<comment><USER50> Yes programmers program but the point was that programming new software should be the last option in solving a problem and only done as a last recourse.

<comment><USER32> >programming new software should be the last option

Sure, but thats not the concern of programmer.

<comment><USER50> Often it is when unfiltered business requirements come down to the engineering department and individual programmers. Then the first thinking should be: how can I avoid solving this problem? If the problem needs to be solved then the next question is "how do I solve this without writing a single line of code". If software is required then the question is how to use and apply already existing software. If there's still need to write code then finally we can start thinking howto write the least amount of new software.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> Sure, this post might objectively get you to a higher paying software job, but good God I hope I never start seeing the world like this guy or ever have to work with people who do. Am I really reading the same article as everyone else? The one I'm reading is filled with these sociopathic gems:

> Add revenue. Reduce costs. Those are your only goals.

> You're in the business of unemploying people. If you think that is unfair, > go back to school and study something that doesn't matter.

> A good engineer has a track record of — repeat after me — increasing revenue > or decreasing costs.

> Much of Fog Creek uses the Microsoft Stack. I can't even spell ASP.NET and > they'd still hire me.

> You should be a good person to everyone you meet — it is the moral thing to > do, and as a sidenote will really help your networking

> Strive to help people. It is the right thing to do, and people are keenly > aware of who have in the past given them or theirs favors.

> This is how the game is played. If you feel poorly about it, you're like a > batter who feels poorly about stealing bases in baseball: you're not morally > superior, you're just playing poorly

> Social grooming is a really important skill.

There are some bits of the article I agree with, but I can't help but wonder what happened to this person to make them see the world in such a brutally transactional way, where being kind and genuine are just hat tips towards your humanity while ultimately serving to further your career. I can see this guide as maybe useful for someone who wants to use software engineering as a means of clawing their way out of poverty, but on HN, where I'd imagine most people have a genuine interest in tech outside of or in addition to its potential to make them money, I'm terribly disappointed to see the majority of people here agreeing with him.

<comment><USER52> Elsewhere in this thread, someone posted this rebuttal to the article, which I think is much more nuanced and well thought through. It also emphasizes the value of relationships and kindness in a way the original article does not: [https://yosefk.com/blog/do-call-yourself-a-programmer-and- ot...](https://yosefk.com/blog/do-call-yourself-a-programmer-and-other-career- advice.html)

I wound up subscribing to that blog's RSS feed, because the articles, though infrequent, seem to be generally interesting and thoughtful.

Edit: I also completely agree with you re: TFA.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> I find it unfortunately that most of the advice here is good. That said, contrary to what the author claims, the result of rolling a d100 falls within the range [1, 100], not [0, 99].

</comment><comment><USER25> I've always called myself a Computer Scientist when people ask me what I do for a living. Not a software engineer or programmer, but what my actual majors were. I have a bachelors and masters in it, I've published three papers (although in Geography Journals .. because .. eh it's a long story), so I might as well claim it.

</comment><comment><USER54> > Remember engineers are not hired to create programs and how they are hired > to create business value? The dominant quality which gets you jobs is the > ability to give people the perception that you will create value. This is > not necessarily coextensive with ability to create value.

Sadly true. Its all feel good effect that trumps the genuine effort.

</comment><comment><USER55> This advice is is all well and good but to me it seems to optimise for someone with an already successful career. Those of us with multiple long streaks if unemployment can't really pick and choose when it comes to the next contract. Nor can we really negotiate because we can't walk away from an offer.

<comment><USER56> 1\. You can always walk away from an offer.

2\. Nobody wants to hire a loser, especially as a consultant.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> I tend to agree with this guy, BUT, the gatekeepers are low-level HR people who do not think "increase costs" and "decrease revenues" they are looking for boxes to check. You have to get through AI and HR firewall before you can talk B2B strategy.

<comment><USER4> Part of the point of the author is that if you're talking to the low-level HR people, you're not talking to the right people. That's not how interesting people and interesting jobs find each other.

<comment><USER58> Not everyone can be as famous as Patrick. That's not how celebrity works. Tens of thousands of people get great jobs the normal way by joining a company as rank and file and working their way up, and then getting invited to join their former co-workers' new companies later.

<comment><USER59> Patrick wasn't _that_ famous when he wrote this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER60> For most programming jobs experience in the the tech stack is the defining factor, as most programming jobs do not require deep domain expertise (whatever the domain is: computing, business, etc).

Of course general problem solving ability is still valuable but it is more difficult to assess than a candidate´s experience in some tech stack.

So, for the general programming market the tech stack is the defining factor. The only way you can navigate between jobs with different tech stacks is by having an insider that guarantees the hiring manager that you have what it takes to learn the new tech stack without trouble, or by finding some company which is desperate enough to take the risk.

You can label yourself what you want.

</comment><comment><USER61> In my experience programming interviews are done by programmers, so they usually aren't about "the value you created in the past job".

</comment><comment><USER62> This article is to me quite brilliant and hits most of the right spots. I liked it. Then I see the picture of the author and cannot help but think: practice what you preach. I would not be caught dead wearing a red tracksuit on a bad hair day when posting a blog post about, among other things, how grooming well and wearing a suit helps you make more money.

<comment><USER58> The bias goes the other way now. A lot of people with a lot of money wouldn't hire a tech consultant in a "phony" suit with a stock photo -based website. They prefer "authentic" people who focus on their work, not their clothes.

<comment><USER62> I guess it kinda depends. Usually engineers do not get hired by 'someone with a lot of money'. They get hired by mid-level managers or a committee of stakeholders. I can understand that some scaleups in social media where hoodies are part of the corporate image are like that though. but would a tracksuit be appropriate even there?

But I am going to be 'consulting' for my countries tax authority soon. I wore a blazer to the take-in interview. I don't wear full suits myself as it is above my paygrade, but people expect to see at least business-casual in that kind of environment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> I just realized "Engineer > Developer > Programmer" seems to be the case with most people. Understatement, where you at?

<comment><USER64> It doesn't matter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> "Writing bug-free code is not a goal. "

Debatable. A poorly written software will generate as much cost as a manual labor if not more.

<comment><USER66> > Debatable. A poorly written software will generate as much cost as a manual > labor if not more.

Debatable. There's lots of poorly written and buggy software out there that still saves people time. Fixing it might not be worth the cost.

And, on the other hand, for some company, fixing bugs is generating them money. Broken window fallacy much? Yeah, someone has to pay.

It's sad to see that in our industry, selling pristine and flawless windows is difficult once the party who has to pay sees its cost. Turns out it's often much easier to sell a cheap window made by duck taping pieces of broken glass, nevermind if there are some gaps and holes in it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> On the other hand I have come across people who describe themselves as "react programmers" etc... And would seriously not touch a different framework or just plain JavaScript.

And I don't understand it

</comment><comment><USER68> You shouldn't be able to call yourself an engineer unless you have a BEng, personally. Some places actually have laws against calling yourself an engineer without one.

<comment><USER69> I have a b.sc and a m.sc in mechanical engineering. Can I not call myself an engineer now anymore?

<comment><USER68> Where I live, no, you need a professional engineering designation. It's a license, sort of like a lawyer or doctor has, [http://www.peo.on.ca/index.php/ci_id/2057/la_id/1.htm](http://www.peo.on.ca/index.php/ci_id/2057/la_id/1.htm).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> > "Programmer" sounds like "anomalously high-cost peon who types some mumbo- > jumbo into some other mumbo-jumbo."

Stereotypes. So it's all about titles and appearances? Who cares about such things? Don't you think people should learn how to code instead of pretending they don't like code because they hate math or something?

Your company builds software or it doesn't. Ultimately being able to use a computer should not be limited to using word and an internet browser, people should be able to learn how to code some python or other scripting languages.

</comment><comment><USER71> Good advice on how to be a successful corporate drone.

</comment><comment><USER72> A great article I read before every time I interview or change jobs.

</comment><comment><USER73> Fuck you 2011, I'm a programmer.

</comment><comment><USER74> An oldie but a goodie.

</comment><comment><USER75> Some interesting things are there.

</comment><comment><USER76> Is my coworkers aren't my friends, how do job openings travel at the speed of beer?

</comment><comment><USER77> Tough read, but some solid nuggets of wisdom in there.</comment>


Tower for Windows beta - <AUTHOR> https://www.git-tower.com/p/windows-beta <comment><USER2> Tower is the best git client out there, glad to see it coming to Windows.

<comment><USER3> thank you!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> First, NetSpot [1]

Next, Affinity [2]

Now, Tower [3]

I'm just curious is does some kind of wave new apps to Windows from Mac or what?

\</comment><comment>

[1] [http://www.netspotapp.com/netspot- windows.html](http://www.netspotapp.com/netspot-windows.html)

[2] [https://affinity.serif.com/en-gb/windows/](https://affinity.serif.com/en- gb/windows/)

[3] [https://www.git-tower.com/p/windows-beta](https://www.git- tower.com/p/windows-beta)

<comment><USER3> When we launched Tower for Mac a few years back, we didn't have any plans for a Windows version. However as we received more and more requests from our users, we finally decided to commit to it. As we're bootstrapped and a small team, it took us longer than expected. But now we have a 100% native app and even so it's still in beta, we are really happy with the result. It's also great to see that other Mac apps are making the move to Windows as well. This might also have to do with the new leadership at Microsoft and their efforts in supporting developers. So far it's been really great working with them and they've been very supportive.

<comment><USER5> I'm curious, Is it a UWP app?

<comment><USER6> Does it make a difference as a developer oriented piece of software?

<comment><USER7> Yes. As a developer who really likes Windows - I don't touch UWP apps or anything that comes from the Windows Store unless I am forced to.

I do not support Apple-style lock-down on Windows.

As a matter of fact, I am fully prepared to leave Windows if Microsoft continues to push this effort. I used to enjoy building Windows desktop apps with WinForms and then WPF, but once Windows 8 came out I saw where Microsoft was headed and I decided to focus on Web development. Now I pay my bills with Angular, Node and Ionic/Cordova/PhoneGap.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> awesome - any way to get an invite? trying to convince team mates to all use Tower but have a guy on Windows that is the goto excuse for us not all adopting it.

<comment><USER3> please send us a quick email or use our contact form: [https://www.git- tower.com/support/contact](https://www.git-tower.com/support/contact)

<comment><USER8> Thanks... just did - used 'sales' for the category. ;)

<comment><USER3> perfect. Just replied :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> good to see more new dev tools coming to Windows</comment>


Shipped: Isuru, Ignition Sequence, Beyond Curie and Other Side Projects - <AUTHOR> http://shipyoursideproject.com/shipped.html <comment><USER2> I put together Ignition Sequence, a guide for parents who want to inspire curiosity and creative tech exploration in their kids, created by veteran programmers and teachers.

I'd love any thoughts from the HN community!</comment>


To Progress and Back: The Rise and Fall of Erdogan's Turkey - <AUTHOR> http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/turkey-under-erdogan-is-becoming-politically-riven-a-1054359.html <comment><USER3> That article is from 24th September. So much has happened since then - <USER2> could have been a different eon.

And Edogan's turkey is far from fallen. He is also rogue autocrat protected by Article 5 of NATO. And from what I observe he has cleaned the state from people that were believing in Ataturk's Turkey. So the secular people will have an uphill battle against him.

And we have the Kurds (that might suddenly begin to receive a lot of russian weapons and training soon)

So much wrong could happen with Europe and middle east now - I envy the people in the Americas - it is good to know you are on a different continent.

<comment><USER4> I'm still hoping that Erogan (and, very similarly, Putin) has overstretched his luck. The HDP is still quite strong after the recent elections, NATO only hesitantly supports his adventures vs. Russia and based on some of my friends there, there's a large and energetic generation of young secular students who see their future in Europe. It's hard sustain an autocracy based only on the rural, old population and with no support from the intellectuals/business leaders/journalists etc.

Syria is now Putin vs. Erdogan vs. Al Quaida vs. ISIS vs. Assad vs. Hisbollah (+ EU, US). It'd be fantastic to watch them _all_ lose if there weren't so many innocents involved.

<comment><USER5> Don't forget Rojava (YPG), the most successful fighters against ISIS. Right at Turkey's border — and as Putin made it impossible to ignore, Erdogan supports ISIS. (Apparently Erdogan has dreams of being Caliph.)

[http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/magazine/a-dream-of- utopia...](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/29/magazine/a-dream-of-utopia-in- hell.html?_r=1)

In my view, their society has ethically surpassed anything in "the West". Obama's in the absurd position of supporting Erdogan against them, despite YPG being the US's most effective ally against ISIS. ("Contradictions of empire", it's maybe called.)

<comment><USER6> > Erdogan supports ISIS. (Apparently Erdogan has dreams of being Caliph.)

Please, do not succumb to this kind of statements. Erdoğan does not support ISIS, but he does not support YPG or PKK either. So when he did not take active action why is he portrayed as ISIS supporter? Did not Turkey do enough to host and feed people from Kobane and treated the wounded Kursdish fighhters? Turkey simply did not want to enter the mess deeper (But we are already in anyway..)

He knows that he cannot be a Caliph or such, maybe he had the melancholy of the Ottoman times, but that's past already.

<comment><USER7> _Please, do not succumb to this kind of statements. Erdoğan does not support ISIS_

But he at the very least used to collaborate. ISIS is Sunni, they fight Assad, Iran and the Kurds and needed someone to take their oil off their hands.

That whole terrorist thing and delusions of world domination aside, from Erdoğan's perspective what's not to like?

<comment><USER6> Is there anybody ISIS does not fight? Turkey lost 130 people with suicide bombings in last 6 months. What were you expecting? Entering Syria with tanks? It is easy to talk from an armchair when you are far away from the fire.

<comment><USER7> I'm not merely talking out of my ass here - it's an open secret that Turkey has been complicit:

[http://www.dw.com/en/is-supply-channels-through- turkey/av-18...](http://www.dw.com/en/is-supply-channels-through- turkey/av-18091048)

[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/26/isis-syria- turk...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/26/isis-syria-turkey-us)

<comment><USER6> "Every day, trucks laden with food, clothing, and other supplies cross the border from Turkey to Syria. _It is unclear who is picking up the goods._ "

It is a well known fact that Turkey aided Syrian opposition and people live under attack. Perhaps IS might have seized some goods. It is hard to dispatch anything when there is a war. But this news piece starts with a silly assumption. Completely loses the value.

For the second:

" From mid-2013, the Tunisian fighter had been responsible for _smuggling_ oil from Syria's eastern fields, which the group had by then commandeered. Black market oil quickly became the main driver of Isis revenues – and Turkish buyers were its main clients."

Smuggling. So Turkish government is perpetrator because there are oil smugglers? Please. IS sells oil to black market and smugglers (probably even Syrian Government) takes it. How is Turkish government is a supporter of IS here? Smuggling is a decades old problem in south east Turkey (Mostly Kurdish area). They tried to prevent it with special high tech chemical marker dyes and strict controls but you cannot stop it.

Also keep in mind that Guardian always use anti government sources for Turkish news. (Mostly left leaning, pro-kurdish or Gulenist.).

<comment><USER7> Remember Joe Biden talking about Turkey shipping weapons into Syria that ended up in the hands of Jihadis?[1]

They actually have been caught red-handed[2], and allegedly it's still ongoing[3].

I do not believe all accusations are merely propaganda by the West, Russia, the Kurds or his internal political enemies. Sure, that does happen, and I would eg take the accusations of Bilal Erdoğan's involvement in the smuggling of ISIS oil with a grain of salt. But supplying the enemy of your enemies with weapons and politicians trying to make deals with the devil? That's old news.

[1] [http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/05/politics/isis-biden- erdoga...](http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/05/politics/isis-biden-erdogan- apology/)

[2] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_National_Intelligence_Org...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_National_Intelligence_Organisation_scandal_in_Turkey)

[3] [http://www.todayszaman.com/_raid-on-koza-i-pek-media- group-c...](http://www.todayszaman.com/_raid-on-koza-i-pek-media-group-comes- after-reports-on-transfer-of-weapons-to-isil_397966.html)

<comment><USER6> [1] This is same deal, even ISIS seized something it was most probably not intentional. And he apologies for his comments. Nothing to see here.

[2] This scandal was the work of Gulenists. Most likely those weapons were headed to Syrian opposition but because of the on going war between Gulen and Erdoğan, Gulenist media presented this as if ISIS was the receiving side. Surely ISIS may intercept and seize some of weapons (Hey, they even took US sent weapons!) but portraying this as "ISIS aid" was purely according to Gulen's agenda. They made this propaganda especially in the foreign media to strengthen their attack.

[3] Today's Zaman is the most active Gulenist propaganda press. Starting from mid 2013 their sole aim is to throw Erdoğan from his position. Their credibility is even lower than pro-Government media.

I am a skeptic and a non-interventionist but I have yet to see any decisive or convincing proof that Turkish government actually aided ISIS deliberately and intentionally. I believe those news are mostly result of extreme confirmation bias, or blatant anti-Erdogan propaganda. There may be some individuals or group of people in Turkey supporting ISIS, or there might have been some Logistics screw ups so ISIS took stuff that were meant for others. But that is it.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Startup Challenges Murdoch's Daily to Drop the App and Try the Web - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/02/onswipe-daily/ <comment><USER2> Congratulations on hitting Wired (and smart PR move on The Daily). What made you think to challenge Murdoch's The Daily and can you talk about how you got Wired's attention to run an article like this?</comment>


The Art of Doing Something Well - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120658371177467629.html?mod=2_1167_1 <comment><USER2> Quick Summary: Richard Sennett's book is about the difference between workers and makers (craftsmen).

He says that modern technology makes us less able to know the distinction, but still finds examples in modern day, e.g. Japanese.

WSJ says that "postindustrial prosperity has helped craftsmanship to thrive," citing wine improving because of global competition... and (you guessed it) hackers who are leading the way in "capitalism's most dynamic sector."</comment>


The Rails Girls Summer Of Code project - <AUTHOR> http://railsgirlssummerofcode.org/

<comment><USER2> This is really nice. In the wordpress community alone I'm seeing more and more really good plugins and forum support come from women. And it's support groups like this that give people the support to grow and unleash their full potential in the community. I can't wait to see what the programming world will be like 20 years from now when this generation of girls grow up.</comment>


Russia Releases Photos of Its Submarine Fleet - <AUTHOR> http://defensetech.org/2014/09/09/russia-releases-photos-of-its-submarine-fleet/

<comment><USER2> Looks like they are doing it wrong...</comment>


'I dye my hair brown to be taken more seriously at work' - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-41082939 <comment><USER2> One point not mentioned in the article, but obvious from the photo: her natural hair is black, and the blonde hair was also dyed.

<comment><USER3> That also stood out to me. She is just changing already not-original look from trying to be more attractive to be more serious. I really don't understand how this is interesting enough for full article.

<comment><USER4> It's most probably a placed piece.

It's unlikely that it's coincidental that the article is a diversity story about someone who runs a company in the diversity field in a news outlet that is currently running a diversity campaign. Also, sexism in SV is topical so her coming from the Bay area probably helped.

I might be being too cynical but I doubt it. I mean, it's the BBC. They hardly needed to cross the Atlantic to find blonde women who dye their hair to avoid unwarranted attention. In fact, I know a Swedish lady, who worked for the BBC for a while, who does this regularly.

<comment><USER5> This thing happens yearly as BBC runs their BBC 100 Women series.

As much as I love the BBC for their news reporting, their gender diversity reporting tends to be very contrived.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's interesting how capitalism is able to monetize everything even social justice. This story could be entirely made up, it fits perfectly in her narrative. I find it unlikely that the BBC reporter contacted her, most likely the PR firm recommended to her by the VC that "told her" to dye her hair arranged for that profile.

<comment><USER7> I'm going to post a slightly mean reply. Do you question every story you hear?

My wife is a successful blonde female academic (more successful than me). I often go with her to events she is invited to and there is always some people who assume she is my "dumb wife" that I've brought with me.

At every event at some point I usually have to say to someone "Don't ask me, I have no idea. Karen is the person you should be speaking to", and they are always surprised. I've had people accuse me of lying when I say my wife is better at some academic topic than me. Yes, genuinely. That isn't an exaggeration.

I can see it's annoying being a blonde and female academic. Far too many people just seem to have hard-wired that "blonde female = stupid".

<comment><USER8> > Do you question every story you hear?

Do you not?

Edit: I feel a bit awkward about being on the same side as the "this is bullshit" people. I think the general message that it's harder for women to look "appropriate" in a business setting is probably fair, at least based on some of the conversations I've witnessed among my male co-workers.

<comment><USER7> OK, I worded that badly.

I more meant "Do you reply to every story on news.ycombinator says "This story could be entirely made up", I mean that's true of many, many stories, but I'm sure I've noticed a pattern that that kind of message appears more on stories about females. However, I should probably do a correct survey on that claim!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> My wife dyed her hair blonde once and noted a noticable change in how she was treated. She described it as people being nicer to her but also sort of taking her less seriously. She also got hit on a lot more. She went back to her normal brown pretty quickly.

It's not just the obvious things like race. There are thousands of little prejudices. For guys I've read studies from sales about how men with broader shoulders or more prominent chins land more deals.

I find this stuff profoundly depressing. We are not really intelligent beings, just clever apes.

<comment><USER10> It's only depressing if you've been told lies all your life to the contrary of reality.

For most people these things are rather obvious.

It's why business men wear suits instead of plain t-shirts (or worse, hoodies).

<comment><USER9> Oh sure you can hack these things. That's why the woman in the article dyed her hair brown and got glasses.

It's depressing that it's necessary. If two people present something to me I should be evaluating the something, not the shoulder girth of the people presenting it. But inside my head there is a monkey that doesn't know what geological epoch this is.

<comment><USER10> Well, these are signals. Our minds are programmed to send signals and expect others to do the same. These signals helps us understand where we stand with people and where people stand in relation to us and each other.

You might think we don't need these signals anymore, but I think you would be gravely mistaken to assume that. Instead, it's better to (re-)learn these things and adopt them. Think of it as a form of power. By understanding the instincts that drive human behaviour, you can hack it, by controlling how you present yourself in different situations.

I don't think it's something to complain about.

<comment><USER9> What if the signal is something you can't control?

Sucks to be you then, eh?

<comment><USER11> What can you really control though? Your genetics and your environment determine who you are. Nature and nurture. We all have to make do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Wow, this article has almost no content. Maybe wearing baggy clothes, thick- rimmed glasses and brown hair makes her behave differently? It's impossible to tell - you can't do double blind tests and repeating experiments in social situations is impossible. Also, n=1. There also counter examples, like Marissa Meyer or Thereza Holmes.

</comment><comment><USER13> "Links for the intellectually curious, ranked by readers."

This link does not seem to target the intellectually curious, nor does it seem to be picked by a ranking algorithm.

<comment><USER14> I sometimes upvote crap articles, because I'm interested in what HN has to say about the topic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wear a shirt to be taken more seriously at work.

<comment><USER16> I put my pants on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> This story is very weird and either I'm missing the point or it only shows that everything is broken. Eileen Carey a CEO of a company that focus on software to empowering a diverse workforce dyes her her to be taken more seriously.

</comment><comment><USER18> Yeah, I dress according to the people I am meeting and what I hope to get out of the meeting. News at 11.

I am all for a meaningful debate about equality for all, and the barriers to this, however there is an increasing amount of bullshit like this around the topic that weakens and dilutes the overall debate, and that is a pity.

</comment><comment><USER19> My take - someone willing to modify their hair to find a route to success is also likely to modify other aspects of their behaviour and strategy to find a route to success.

Sad it has to happen this way but unlikely to stop this individual

</comment><comment><USER20> It amaze me how usually most schools for children don't have a class called "Logic 101" or something like, where we can teach people about Confirmation bias and that "Correlation != Causation".

God knows how many BS like this we could save if only people treated stereotypes as such, simple narratives easier to understand when we tell in stories, but aren't truth when applied to individuals in the real complex life we are.</comment>


Bridge Comes to San Francisco With a Made-in-China Label - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/business/global/26bridge.html?_r=1&hp=&pagewanted=all

<comment><USER2> I went to visit the Golden Gate Bridge[0] for the first time a year ago. Standing in Marin county, overlooking the Golden Gate, there is a nice little park with a number of plaques rattling off various tidbits of information. Two items struck me in particular. One, the Golden Gate took four years to complete. And the other, the Golden Gate was completed underbudget. Now, cast your gaze a touch behind and you see the utter failure of the new Bay Bridge. A bridge that is overdue and over budget - and made in China to boot. And this, my friends, is why America is going out of business. When we can not even manufacture the ingredients in our national infrastructure projects it is an absolute shame and travesty.

Here are some choice quotes from the article:

      "I don't think the U.S. fabrication industry could put a project like this together," Brian A. Petersen, project director for the American Bridge/Fluor Enterprises joint venture, said in a telephone interview. "Most U.S. companies don't have these types of warehouses, equipment or the cash flow. The Chinese load the ships, and it's their ships that deliver to our piers."

And

      ... they note that with the full financial force of the Chinese government behind its infrastructure companies, the monumental scale of the work, and the prices bid, are hard for private industry elsewhere to beat.

Basically we can not even build these projects anymore. And why? Because the Chinese government, with the help of our enfeebled government, has eroded our capability to do so. The Chinese unfairly financially back bids for projects against private firms. Chinese firms get financing directly from the government at favorable rates that allow them to submit bids that private firms can not match.

I ask you this, if we had to win the next World War, where would the manufacturing for our Liberty Ships and B17's[2] come from? I, for one, do not welcome our Chinese overlords and hope we in America wise up before the final nail is in the coffin.

[0]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Gate_Bridge>

[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ships>

[2]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-17_Flying_Fortress></comment>


Museum of Soviet Calculators On the Web - <AUTHOR> http://www.taswegian.com/MOSCOW/

<comment><USER2> This reminded me of the excellent Museum of Soviet Arcade Machines: [http://www.15kop.ru/en/](http://www.15kop.ru/en/)

Here is a blog about a visit to the location:

[http://35summers.org/2010/01/05/the-museum-of-soviet- video-g...](http://35summers.org/2010/01/05/the-museum-of-soviet-video-games/)

There is also a Museum of Soviet Synthesizers (quite a number):

[http://www.ruskeys.net/eng/synths.php](http://www.ruskeys.net/eng/synths.php)

The Electronica Stylophone is (I think) a copy of the 1967 Stylophone, modern copies of which are still available.

<comment><USER3> I loved that museum. Had a blast on my first visit in 2011. 2013 I went back - had some fun, but was by myself, and it wasn't quite as fun as having someone to play the race car games with :) And "sniper 2" is way better than "sniper". I wish I could've understand more Russian...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I bought my HP11C in 1987 for $89.00. It's still useful. That was the engineer run HP of the cold war. Not today's MBA run company that bamboozles it's way to profit via overpriced ink.

</comment><comment><USER5> [http://xkcd.com/1095/](http://xkcd.com/1095/)

<comment><USER6> The longer I live the more I realize this is true. When you really get into a certain topic, sport, hobby, you realize there are always people above and below, there is no top or bottom. But directories of information like this are what really make the Internet a great place. I love looking at this stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Damn, I had an MK calculator when I was a kid. I was always fascinated by it. I think I took it apart to see how it worked and was unable to put back together. Those pictures sure bring back some memories.

</comment><comment><USER8> Really wish they hadn't used phpBB to host this :/

</comment><comment><USER9> Crap. I was hoping for emulators.

<comment><USER10> Emulators for many of the Soviet calculators here: [http://www.emulator3000.org/c3.htm](http://www.emulator3000.org/c3.htm)

<comment><USER11> That this exists, is awesome.</comment></comment></comment>


Hey Twitter: Give us our Tweets - <AUTHOR> http://zachholman.com/2010/09/hey-twitter-give-us-our-tweets/ <comment><USER2> If I whisper the most beautiful poem over the telephone to my lover today, am I going to complain about the phone company not archiving that call properly when I want to revisit it 20 years from now? You go into Twitter knowing it's about the ebb and flow of current conversation, not about what was said when it first came out. If Twitter wants to eventually offer that, that's cool, but that's not the case right now, and you shouldn't expect it any more than you should expect 7-11 to keep their security footage of you for your perusal indefinitely into the future.

edit: from Twitter's Terms of Use (<http://twitter.com/tos>): "This license is you authorizing us to make your Tweets available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same. But what's yours is yours – you own your content."

You own your content. You are responsible for it.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree, for the most part. But there's some subtleties:

1\. Yes, Twitter's real-time just like the phone, but it's not _only_ real- time like the phone. You can revisit any tweet you like. They support viewing old tweets, they support listing old tweets. My only concern is that they place limits on _how much_ they list.

2\. Yes, we're responsible for our content, but the significance of services change over time. Tomorrow's Hacker News startup might be interesting, you might drop some content in, but most people aren't going to immediately create an offsite backup. Likewise, the tweets we made in the first two years of Twitter's life probably seemed worthless to us at the time, but now their value has increased. It just would be nice to have access to that.

<comment><USER3> They place limits on how much they list for, most likely, technical difficulties with guaranteeing full history access.

This means that if you want a full history of your tweets, then it's your responsibility to maintain it. Would it be a good service to its users if Twitter maintained full history? Yes, but that's not your argument. Your argument is that it's a user's _right_.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is precisely why I built <http://tweetsaver.com> ... I wanted a nice way to search through ALL my old tweets AND keep them around. I'm always retweeting awesome content, favoriting interesting things, and sometimes I just want to remember what I said without having to click MORE MORE MORE MORE for 100 pages to find it on twitter.com. Maybe someday Twitter will turn on a feature that kills my app, but for now I think it's the best way to archive, organize and search the great content that flows on twitter.

<comment><USER5> $120/year is not worth it to me. $10/year would be. Just my feedback. :-)

<comment><USER6> You can run Tweetnest yourself <http://pongsocket.com/tweetnest/> so that's free, here's mine: <http://tweets.rythie.com/> for example.

There are other solutions around if you look.

<comment><USER7> Seconding Tweetnest. It doesn't save the favorites, unless they're by yourself, but it's a nice compromise.

And it's worked without a hitch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> mike-cardwell Point rss2email at the rss feed of your twitter account, and then set up your mail server to filter those emails into a special twitter folder. Job done.

</comment><comment><USER8> Archival of 'cloud' data is an issue I've been thinking a lot about lately. People are putting so much of their lives on the internet these days without generally giving too much thought to permanence and availability. Twitter's only been around a few years and people are already running into retention issues. The tweet from the article will still be valuable 30 years from now - will twitter even be around then? Will all the tweets from the current system have been migrated to whatever tools we're using in the future?

I've been playing around with a project to locally archive a bunch of data sources that interest me (email, instant messaging logs, Twitter, SMS, some blog and social news comments) in a straightforward and open data format. Unfortunately this type of tool might be something that most people don't realize they need until it's too late.

<comment><USER9> It's not local, and not in an open data format, and not free, but you might like <http://www.backupify.com/>, they have a nice list of services that they can back up for you (haven't used it, so wouldn't know how good they are in practice).

<comment><USER10> Backupify works, but the formatting is odd. Your Twitter stream is packaged as a PDF book.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I value my past tweets too but twitter is having a hard enough time keeping the service up as it is. Id rather they focus on making the api more reliable before working on giving access to older data.

</comment><comment><USER12> It really is a shame they haven't provided any mechanism, even if it were less convenient than the standard API interface.

I've seen a lot of talk from Twitter that "you can trust us", "we still have all of your tweets", but it really doesn't help much if there isn't any way to get at them. Has there been any discussion from Twitter that this is even on their radar as a near-term priority?

I was sort of surprised that the Library of Congress work did not include some sort of web.archive equivalent that allowed anyone access to the entire database — Twitter has shown a willingness to let other people solve hard problems it didn't want to, including when it pointed developers to a 3rd- party firehose for a while.

</comment><comment><USER13> Well, I think you just found a way for Twitter to make some money. Remove the theoretical access and Web limit for accounts or increase limit to impossibly high number.

It is much akin to NYT charging for access to old articles.

They may have to store more tweets in the current database or charge a retrieval fee to obtain it from the archive. They could give it away for free too...

<comment><USER6> That's like what Flickr do by letting you browse the last 200 photos unless you get a pro account.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm going to plug Anil Dash and Gina Trapani's open source PHP project ThinkUp (<http://thinkupapp.com/>). It started off as a pet project by Gina Trapani, but now it's used by the White House to try to engage the American public more.

ThinkUp can archive your tweets to your server for any reason you want to. Not only does it archive tweets, but it also allows you to view some nice analytics such as a map of where replies to a tweet came from, a chart of your followers over time, who your most active friends, etc.

But wait, there's more! If you check it out right now, we'll throw Facebook integration, for absolutely free! That's right. For absolutely nothing, you can archive your Facebook statuses, and preserve all those precious memories.

You can get all this for $0.00. That's right, $0.00. Just go to <http://github.com/ginatrapani/thinkup/> and download the code today. You can create plugins for it, modify it, and do anything to it the GPL allows you to do.

</comment><comment><USER9> Yeah, this is a frequent pain point for a large number of users. If you search twitter for "how can I see my old tweets", there's thousands of people wanting that feature.

No wonder dozens of services (or even curl-based shell scripts or tutorials) are available to back up the tweets (shameless plug for my own <http://sparrw.com/>, which focuses on easy searching of past tweets and treating tweeted links as sort of auto-bookmarks, which is what I'm often using Twitter for).

But all this works only if you're quick enough, and set up some sort of backup system before the magic 3200 limit :(

</comment><comment><USER15> Be careful what you wish for, Zach. One of the defining features of real-time is that it's very spur-of-the-moment. Unfortunately, that often leads to poorly thought out posts. In the current scheme of things that weakness is mitigated by the fact that sufficiently old posts are effectively inaccessible.

Can you imagine the implications of an account's entire tweet archives being open to the public? A prospective employer could look up every mention you ever made about them or their industry. Venting tweets would be forever inscribed in history. That's not good. It's bad.

</comment><comment><USER16> Preservation of Twitter and other real-time services is definitely important, but not just for personal use. I'm also interested in viewing the tweet history of my friends, evolution of certain hash tags, etc.

My startup <http://keepstream.com> is involved in this real-time curation (Twitter now, more services later). I would love to chat with anyone interested in the subject; my contact information is in my profile.

</comment><comment><USER17> There is also <http://jetwick.com> where you can search your (and also others' !!) tweets. If you searched the first time you probably won't get results for a user. But please ;-), come back 10 minutes later. Then 50 tweets are searchable and stay searchable a long time. What long time is depends how popular you make this service ;-) I.e. if you are using the service regularly you can create a free (!) archive. Again: no payment necessary (this is important for us!). and even no registration at the moment.

There are a lot more features read through the about page (e.g. filter via dates, languages, sort against date, query dependent trends, ...)

</comment><comment><USER18> Check out <http://pongsocket.com/tweetnest/> .. it's open source, free, PHP (easy to install), yada yada. It's a simple PHP Twitter backup system that also presents your tweets in a reasonably attractive archive on your own site. Example: <http://peterc.org/twitter/>

(Yes, there's also <http://thinkupapp.com/> \- but it's more complex and has more features/supported services. I found TweetNest crazy easy to get started with though.)

Thankfully I took a CSV dump of my tweets 2006-2008 but I'm missing quite a few in the gap :-(

</comment><comment><USER6> The library of congress has them, if we could get a copy we could index it all somewhere to re-construct a copy of people's early timelines [http://blogs.loc.gov/loc/2010/04/how-tweet-it-is-library- acq...](http://blogs.loc.gov/loc/2010/04/how-tweet-it-is-library-acquires- entire-twitter-archive/)

I was thinking recently about getting all the tweets from 2006, it should be about 2 million tweets, so should be possible to fetch by sequentially walking through the ids.

<comment><USER19> This is great. It's going to be a goldmine for historians in a few years. Twitter is becoming a finger on the pulse of the world.

<comment><USER20> Only in that we'll be able to look back and, definitively, say that, yes, we have _always_ been as stupid as we are now, with no discernible difference.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Heatmap of your foursquare checkins. I'm sure these guys would be up for doing it for geotweets.

<http://www.weeplaces.com/>

</comment><comment><USER22> Incidentally, the limit of 3200 tweets via the API is the same as the 160-page limit on the website. 20 tweets per page * 159 additional pages = 3180.

</comment><comment><USER23> i like it that tweets are ephemeral. its good that way. why the need to archive every-fucking-thing? imagine how shit the world would be if everyone could browse everything they ever said? rather than the things memorable enough to remember. or memorable enough to someone else that they'd remember? imagine how many useful people would become lawyers?

WHAT ARE YOU THINKING!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????????

<comment><USER24> Historians & archaeologists value having an unfiltered look at what people were doing & thinking, because it's more honest than, well, looking at memorable events in retrospect with 20/20 hindsight, filtered through biases that only happened later.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> You can always favorite those really important tweets, or even resort to printing them in a compendium by Tweetbook.com. Some of my earliest tweets in a book form that I can go back and reflect on.

I agree that Twitter can do a better job of allowing us to search tweets by topic, but that's a 3rd party app waiting to happen. In the meantime, take a screen shot and post on your web or in flickr.

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm glad Twitter _doesn't_ keep a record of my tweets. Perhaps for what you want, they could make it an opt-in service, but for invasion of my privacy, I'd just as soon not. And for their service load (media needed to store your tweets and server bandwidth time needed to make them accessible to you) I can well see how it might be a payable service.

<comment><USER27> Who said Twitter DOESN'T keep a record of your tweets? What's been said is that Twitter doesn't let users access any archive of your tweets they may well have, and that they may well continue to mine. Your point makes me want to revisit the standard terms under which users license their original tweets to Twitter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Um. Hand on a sec... on the bottom of the same page you link to:

      Twitter still maintains a database of all
      the tweets sent by a user. However, to
      ensure performance of the site, this
      artificial limit is temporarily in place

So maybe you can't do it now - but its not lost (yet).

<comment><USER29> Hmmm. Long ago I sent examples of the "NULL" issues for Twitter status URL's that I had bookmarked (possibly before favorites were available) as replies to the Twitter team -- not sure where any of that went but while a database is likely to exist, a guaranteed and representative content store may not be as likely.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> I recommend using The Archivist, which is free and will automatically save your tweets forevermore, for easy download at any later time. I've used it a couple of times to dig out old tweets of my own! <http://archivist.visitmix.com/>

</comment><comment><USER31> They could simply slap a 'last visited' flag on ever tweet and discard those that had not been looked at after a year or two. You always have the option of backing up your own data, how much storage is it going to take to periodically scrape you tweet history in to a text file?

</comment><comment><USER32> I recall hearing that its due to scaling/db limit. Something like they cant actually go back further due to memory limits. Ive no idea if this is true or not. If the Twitter team skype in at the next uk #devnest I shall try and remember to ask.

</comment><comment><USER33> I've heard (second-hand) that Twitter isn't discarding users' tweets after they hit 3,200, they just don't provide API access to them. They're still sitting in a DB somewhere, just inaccessible currently, until Twitter provides access to them.

<comment><USER34> Yes, back when they were using an RDBMS they said that once they had moved over fully to Cassandra, the 3,200 limit was going to be lifted. Someone I know that works at Twitter now was always going on about Twitter archiving and had written Python scripts for backing tweets up... So there might be some hope.

Keep on banging on at Twitter about it as users. It is your data, so demand it back from Twitter!

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I had always assumed that this would become a feature of Twitter if they ever offered a pay version of the service (higher API limits and complete access to past tweets). I imagine that some people would pay for that.

</comment><comment><USER36> I agree, I save old emails, old letters, old receipts - it sucks that I don't have access to all my twitter messages, wtf? And please don't tell me that "you're entitled to a full refund" crap.

</comment><comment><USER37> I've been using <http://www.backupify.com> to backup my twitter account. It was really interesting to go back over my first tweets.

</comment><comment><USER38> I completely agree. I saved the link to a tweet from Biz Stone about an app i launched 2 years ago (twootball), but now it's gone.

<comment><USER16> Found it! Googled "biz stone twootball" <http://twitter.com/biz/status/976238704>

<comment><USER39> "The website at www.twootball.com appears to host malware – software that can hurt your computer or otherwise operate without your consent. Just visiting a site that hosts malware can infect your computer."

<comment><USER38> sigh... yeah I need to take that project back to life. The iPhone app is still alive but the site was put on hold because we didn't have enough resources.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> It's just a technological failure (because it requires too much cpu power to dig through a non-indexed non-relational db) and they don't want to show their shame of poor design.

Can you imagine any other service surviving where you cannot lookup older data?

BTW Google has a social search that indexes twitter and facebook but it's not complete by any means.

</comment><comment><USER41> as a journalist -- I loved this post. there is a lot we could mine and then synthesize. really need better ways to try to tell more _meaningful_ stories and cover all this 'now, now, now' content.

@coryhaik washington post

</comment><comment><USER42> Didn't someone recently create a way to go back and see your first tweet?

<comment><USER43> Yes, but those types of services only work if you have less than 3,200 statuses, or, depending on the service, if your first tweet was published while their service was active and collecting your tweets (which isn't likely if your account is old).

<comment><USER44> What services are these?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> we should be talking about how to build the federated social web as the solution, not just bitching about the problem

</comment><comment><USER46> backupify - it's the new ronco showtime rotisserie - just set it and forget it.

</comment><comment><USER47> It's funny to me to see people prizeing their tweets so highly.

I reviewed mine a while back and realised they were inconsequential drivel, so I deleted them along with the account. Now I have a read-only account for reading the tweets of some folk who tend to be funny to read. No techies trying to demonstrate value, no not-that-interesting acquaintances, no naive political rants from relatives - much better.</comment>