AMD Ryzen Hype - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/01/amd-ryzen-motherboards-hype/ <comment><USER2> The article title gives out a negative vibe. AMD has a marketing team and the team so far is doing good work. #savedyouaclick.

<comment><USER3> That's not what the article says. At all.

The article says that although Ryzen does outperform Intel's offerings, the deal breaker will be its price. If it's too expensive, it won't sell well. If it's just the right price, it will be an overnight success.

In short, platitudes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I get the vibe that the author thinks that AMD will just launch a 8c/16t processor.

But AMD will launch an entire lineup, from the 8c/16t high end processor to at least a 4c/4t model.

That said, 500$ for a 8c/16t CPU seems reasonable. The 6c/12th model must be around 350$ to be competitive and a 4c/8t CPU will own the market at a 200-250$ price point. The 4c/4t model must be below 200$ to compete with Intels i5 lineup.

I'm not sure if AMD has a response to the recent release of the Pentium G4560. For 64$ it offers the same performance we expected from a i3.

</comment><comment><USER3> The article is spot on in what is essentially the main performance indicators: price, and the price/performance ratio.

Ryzen's performance means close to nothing if its priced out of the market. Nowadays, most computational needs are already well met and even surpassed by what's on the market for the past, say, half a dozen years. AMD's newest product may blow Intel's offerings out of the water, but that means close to nothing as they already outperformed the market's needs. In a world where the main incentive to increase performance is laid squarely on e-penis bragging rights, either the price makes sense or it's yet another nice-to-have-but- don't-bother offering.

<comment><USER5> I would not say that performance has been met. Performance has been met for those who pay a lot of money and then only use their computer for Chrome or photoshop. It still performs quite poorly for many other things, like compiling, physics calculations, network tweening in multiplayer games, and all the things you can do with your computer outside of the basics. Thats not e-penis, thats real work/applications that still suffer quite badly, even with an I7 extreme edition.

Personally I've been dissapointed in how CPU's haven't improved in the same way GPU's have. I'd much rather that CPU's start getting bigger rather than smaller, and put more effort into single-core performance.

<comment><USER3> > It still performs quite poorly for many other things, like compiling, > physics calculations, network tweening in multiplayer games, and all the > things you can do with your computer outside of the basics. Thats not > e-penis, thats real work/applications that still suffer quite badly, even > with an I7 extreme edition.

The market share associated with those use cases is between very slim and practically nonexistent.

Then, you've isolated the market segment which is willing to pay a premium for performance, and then argue that cost is a factor.

> Thats not e-penis, thats real work/applications that still suffer quite > badly, even with an I7 extreme edition.

Quite frankly, those who care for performance and are bound to a budget are also not waiting for new product releases. They are in fact paying attention to the used parts market, where nowadays it's possible to buy dozens of server processors for chump change.

As an example, nowadays it's possible to buy on ebay dozens of bulldozer-based Opteron processors for the same amount of cash that a brand new i7 processor is sold for, and whoever is interested in computational power can easily setup a 4-socket Opteron server for less than €1000.

<comment><USER5> >The market share associated with those use cases is between very slim and practically nonexistent.

If so, then why do extreme editions and the 6700K exist? Those are significantly slimmer in usage than dual core I7's, I5's or I3's. In reality, there are a lot of power users who work with video, code, and plenty of other tasks that demand the highest computing power. These are usually also backed by a business, so they can charge a good amount for it.

>Quite frankly, those who care for performance and are bound to a budget are also not waiting for new product releases. They are in fact paying attention to the used parts market, where nowadays it's possible to buy dozens of server processors for chump change.

That depends upon your budget. If you're working proffessionally with the things I've listed there, chances are an $800 cost is tiny compared to the returns of a productivity increase.

>As an example, nowadays it's possible to buy on ebay dozens of bulldozer- based Opteron processors for the same amount of cash that a brand new i7 processor is sold for, and whoever is interested in computational power can easily setup a 4-socket Opteron server for less than €1000.

That statement largely ignores all the aspects of proffessional machines, and single-core performance. Getting a bunch of old opterons and slapping them in a machine is not a reliable setup. Even if it was, there are plenty of things that cannot be threaded well, its just how some algorithms work. If everything was threaded, Intel could have shoved 12 cores into all their chips long ago.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Reproducing stressed skin effect in aircraft models (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://www.ratomodeling.com/articles/stressed_skin/ <comment><AUTHOR> Found this very interesting. I hadn't given much thought to it before, although I've seen this effect on pressurised sections of aircraft and assumed that was the only cause of this effect.</comment>


StartupBus 24 hour challenge - <AUTHOR> http://blog.startupbus.com/the-24-hour-challenge

<comment><USER2> Elias has another brilliant idea for startups to work together on a short time frame. The competitive environment is fun and tests your abilities - I'm ready to sign-up, are you?!

</comment><comment><USER3> They should stick them in a tiny room next to a smelly bathroom. That'll separate the men and women from the boys and girls!

</comment><comment><USER4> StartupBus is soon going to be considered a martial art.

</comment><comment><USER5> This looks like a really unique Hackathon! Super excited</comment>


Founderscard, awesome benefits for Founders - <AUTHOR> https://founderscard.com/membership?code=FCRAVENSLEY125

<comment><USER2> Wow, complete with a picture of a Maserati (and later maybe a Rolex) when I opened the page.

If I saw a founder flash one of these, I'd wonder why the fuck they weren't spending that money helping out their employees or developing their business through sales. Garbage.</comment>


Ask HN: Looking for a specific story about defeating hackers - <AUTHOR>

I remember reading an amazing story about the arms race between hackers and (I think) TV companies. The companies would constantly release updates to break the hacks and the hackers would, within hours, have found ways around them. Eventually the companies hired a specialist who released a whole series of seemingly unrelated updates that didn't appear to do anything until the final update was sent - at which point the entire system rewrote itself, locking out the hacker entirely.<p>I can't remember enough details to track down the specific story, but I do remember it was a thoroughly interesting read and I'm guessing someone here might be able to recall seeing it themselves. <comment><USER2> You're thinking of the DirecTV H/HU card hacking.

Here is one random link I found in reference to this: [http://www.geek.com/articles/news/directtv-hands-out- smack-d...](http://www.geek.com/articles/news/directtv-hands-out-smack- down-20010126/)

<comment><USER3> also: <http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001125.html>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> <http://slashdot.org/articles/01/01/25/1343218.shtml>

[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/01/25/directv_attacks_hack...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/01/25/directv_attacks_hacked_smart_cards/)

(somewhat tangential but still interesting) [http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/05/tarnovsk...](http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2008/05/tarnovsky?currentPage=all)</comment>


LinkedIn CEO On Why We Need More Than Facebook - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2010/11/17/linkedin-vs-facebook/ <comment><USER2> Has anyone out there found an actual use case for LinkedIn yet? I joined a year ago and have yet to use it for anything other than accumulating more and more professional connections. It's a well designed site, lots of connections to be made, but I can't find myself doing much else with it. I'd love to hear from somebody who thinks I'm missing an opportunity, but I don't find myself ever logging into the site unless I receive an email asking to confirm a connection request, is anybody else in the same boat?

It's not like Facebook where there is fresh content everyday (wall posts, comments, etc.) and new things to see. They are albeit superficial, but at least there's something drawing me back to the site everyday. I seem to get none of that from LinkedIn.

<comment><USER3> If you find out the name of someone who will be interviewing you, and they have a LinkedIn profile, you'll find out their job title, and possibly their whole resume. That should help you prepare for the interview.

Unless you're actively looking for a job (or are trying to hire someone) it's probably not a site you go to every day.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> LinkedIn has done a good job of creating a social network for the professional aspect of your life. You can have co-workers who you enjoy working with, respect, like, but they still might not really be your friends.

But I think LinkedIn's success is partly because Facebook hasn't solved the social context issue. Work vs. friends is very important, but there are also differences in how we act with close friends vs acquaintances, friends vs. family, or even close friends that we met at different points in our lives. That would be a very difficult problem to solve cleanly, are there any social networks that are trying?

<comment><USER4> I think this is a problem that will be solved by the users and not the technology. User's will adapt to curbing what they put out there (especially with everything being sold) and on the other side our opinions on what's unprofessional etc. will relax.

There's way fewer companies that would consider a _keg stand_ as a sign of unemployability than there were 20 years ago. In fact it would probably be seen as social proof by many managers and someone they'd enjoy having around.

It'll sort itself out on the user side. Super complicated tools to manage your profile information will never reach mass adoption.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Because I don't get a cut of Facebook's income."

<comment><USER6> Yeah, this reads to me like "Pepsi CEO on why we need more than Coke".

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> We need some way that social media can move beyond walled gardens.

<comment><USER8> Yes, we do.

<http://opensource.appleseedproject.org></comment></comment>


Heroku Isn't for Idiots - <AUTHOR> http://www.rdegges.com/heroku-isnt-for-idiots/ <comment><USER2> You lost me when you had a laundry list of assumptions they make which preclude other options.</comment>


College Prestige "Lies" - <AUTHOR> http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/03/college-prestige-matters.html What do you guys think? <comment><USER2> I find it interesting that the reports tend to consistently state that college prestige is indeed important for students from lower income families. I found that to be enormously true, myself. I am from a working-class background -- did my undergraduate degree at a state school, and found it boring and, really, a waste of time -- much like high school. But I also think now that a lot of this was my own fault -- I had no idea how to approach college, and how to really make it work for me.

Later, I then did a graduate program at an Ivy League school -- and the scales fell away from my eyes. The most important thing I learned there, I think, was how successful people work in the world -- how to resourcefully make the most out of every opportunity, how to seize the initiative, how to make connections. I have the feeling that if I hadn't been brought up in the class I was, I would have inhaled these things at my parents' knee -- as it was, it took me much, much longer than it should have; but it was an enormous lesson, and _almost_ worth the ridiculous student loans I now owe. ;-)

(I am also by no means saying that an Ivy League school is the only place for lower-class kids to learn how to work the world -- far from it! I was just not talented enough to figure it out myself, and the experience made all the difference in the world for me.)

<comment><USER3> Cool. I'd be curious to know some of what you picked up in grad school. Care to elaborate?

<comment><USER2> Good question! I have tried to answer this before, and always fallen flat -- I think that the reason is that if it could be transmitted by writing, I would have picked it up without the need to have spent all that money and time. But that sounds like such a cop-out! So I'll try:

At the Ivy League school I went to (and I did not study a technical subject here -- it was an architecture school), I was surrounded by people who had an agenda for their lives -- in fact, they often already had their career plotted out, and many were already working on the side. School was for them a set of tools (people, information, opportunities) to be hacked resourcefully to get what they wanted. At Big State U, the kids seemed to think of themselves more as subject to the whims of an institution, and to think of the institution as something they needed to please to get "a degree." The degree was hardly worth mentioning at Ivy League School; the professors were seen as either equals or, in a sense, servants/tools. The Ivy League kids also seemed far more ready to create their own programs and experiences; they would see a niche, form a group, and suddenly the school was filled with minority kids learning architecture on the weekends; or suddenly a local youth group had a student- made meeting place.

Of course this kind of volunteerism and spirit of service happened at Big State U as well! What I thought was really different at I.L.S. was the self- assurance and lack of self-consciousness involved; these kids saw ownership and power in the world as their natural right -- they seemed to act and take command as naturally as another young person might turn on the television.

I hope this doesn't sound arrogant or somehow fanboyish; I am trying to explain how being thrown together with these people for years changed me deeply -- made me both able to see beyond where I came from and to be more proud of it, and of myself. It was really almost more a matter of physical knowledge -- of mimicry and group identification, perhaps -- than of something you could pick up in a book.

<comment><USER4> That is really interesting. Just out of curiosity, how much could be attributed to maturity? Was this change in behavior just within the graduate program or throughout the entire school?

FWIW, I went to Big State U (had a nationally ranked CS program, though), and I agree with much of what you said. However, I don't have anything to compare it to.

Edit: learn grammar.

<comment><USER2> Another good question -- some of it definitely might be, but I also did find the behavior at Ivy League School was characteristic of the entire school.

Then again, I did some grad-level coursework at the B.S.U. before I switched to the I.L.S., and found the same sort of differences that I described in my note above. In fact, after I.L.S., I wanted to go back to my former classmates at the State University and bring the message "you have power! You can change things! You are in charge!" But, of course, this is what every commencement speaker in the world tells every graduate, and you can't really understand what it means until you've felt it in your own bones, one way or another...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Several of the comments lead me to believe that people aren't reading to the end of the article.

Robin's final conclusion is that the more prestigious name _does_ matter, and that the study has been misinterpreted. That's why he says "Ack! I was almost conned by elite journal editors and media reporters into believing a comforting lie!"

<comment><USER6> Moreover, a response to the Krueger and Dale study's methodology by Avery and Hoxby in the article "Do and Should Financial Aid Packages Affect Students' College Choices?" National Bureau of Economic Research (Cambridge, MA), 2003 showed that Krueger and Dale aggregated their data in a way that tended to underrepresent the advantage of going to the better college for ALL students, not just low-income students. So if you carefully read the Krueger and Dale study, you can tease out an advantage to the better colleges that they admit is especially strong for low-income students. But they might have found an even stronger effect size if they had analyzed their data differently.

Anyway, yes, for low-income students who manage to get admitted the lesson from all studies is clear: go to the best college that admitted you, and take advantage of your opportunity for an elite education.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Also interesting, one of the links on the site leads to another discussion which claims that there is a correlation between higher intelligence and lower wages for those whose highest degree is a bachelors. The study partially attributes this to the bad advice that more intelligent students tend to get from their parents ("study what you love", as opposed to "study something practical").

(Referenced link is <http://www.halfsigma.com/2006/07/higher_intellig.html> )

<comment><USER8> I get the suspicion the causal progression here is deeper than just f(intelligence) - g(wages) = 0.

As an alternate hypothesis, the reason why students who study what they love earn less than students who study something practical is because of the intrinsic value the student finds being employed to do what they love. As a result of this, they don't need or demand to be paid as much to perform the same work, and so salaries tend to be depressed.

But maybe it doesn't bother them; maybe there is something to the advice more intelligent people are given. Perhaps the needs most people fulfill by earning and spending money have already been fulfilled by these people through other means. If you do what you love by trade, perhaps there is less need to spend money in exchange for spare time to work on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> How much people earn is not the only test of the quality of their education.

<comment><USER10> The value that people deliver to the world should be a good determinant. :-)

<comment><AUTHOR> How do you suppose one would measure "value"?

<comment><USER11> I believe the answer implied was "the market"...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The real question is the value of an exclusive education vs the cost of such an education. An extra 100k by graduation requires a huge increase in lifetime earnings to balance it out.

"those who attended the most selective colleges would earn an average of $2.9 million during their careers; those who attended the next most selective colleges would earn $2.8 million; and those who attended all other colleges would average $2.5 million." (Clearly, with those numbers paying for such an education is an net economic loss on average.)

PS: Granted if your getting a free ride then it's not that big a deal. However, the only reason the question shows up is an increase in tuition to the student and or their family.</comment>


A software engineering manager guide to measuring an engineer's performance - <AUTHOR> https://www.jmoses.co/2019/07/08/software-engineering-manager-guide-measuring-performance.html <comment><USER2> > It is not realistic to give an early software engineer defects within the > first few months of a project assignment. So this skill area might not apply > until a little later in their career.

what?

Please don't listen to this. Give junior engineers bugs right away. It forces them to set up their environment for debugging and begin to understand the flow of the project.

Even if he/she needs to be guided to the solution, this is a GREAT litmus test for the standards of your documentation, and ease of environment setup.

<comment><USER3> This!!! Nobody gained any skill from writing vanilla code or "hello world" type programs. Experience comes from spending days and sometimes weeks on ugly bugs. Bugs are perfect to level-up juniors quickly and find ones with weak motivation. Because having no progress for hours is really really frustrating. Went recently through this cycle teaching colleague. Found out, there is no motivation at all.

<comment><USER4> Some people thrive when bugs are assigned to them early, some people thrive when whole new functionalities are assigned to them. Usually intersection of sets of these two kinds of people is close to empty and the worst mistake is to assume bugs first are good or new stuff first is good automatically.

<comment><USER5> When you give someone new functionality to implement and they don't have experience fixing defects, they'll likely add more defects along with the new functionality.

<comment><USER4> I am in the group that prefers new functionality; I can build state-of-art $10M business from the scratch in 3 months but if you ask me to debug old stuff for longer periods of time, I'll most likely leave or underperform. It's good to know what people you have on your team instead of assuming certain traits.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > The Lake Wobegon Strategy famously coined by Google and Peter Norvig claims > that you should always hire above your team average. Doing so increases the > quality of your team.

Ugh, not this again. Obviously don't hire people who aren't good at their job. But most improvements come from investing in your team.

> are they putting their code up for review [...]

Missed one: Are their code reviews/pull requests high quality? I.e. do they go out of their way to document how they tested it? Reproduction steps? Do they invest time in making code reviews as easy to review for other people as possible? Or does their code reviews always take multiple rounds of review due to sloppiness?

<comment><USER7> Investing in workers is hard. I'm in a mentoring/leadership position. I approach this in two ways. One is the general mentoring everyone gets during regular stuff like code reviews. The other way is sometimes I see someone who I think has real promise and kind of take them under my wing, give them lots of 1on1 attention, etc. They improve exponentially and then leave. One guy I mentored had been with the company for over 10 years. No one had ever "invested" in him. He had a great attitude and work ethic, but terrible skills. I taught him how to program. He left the company and doubled his salary. That was a year and a half ago. This week he called me to thank me because he was changing jobs again and doubling his salary again.

So my current employer went from a low skill high dedication worker to no worker because I invested in him. I'm going to continue help/mentoring people because I find it fulfilling, but if I'm honest it's bad for my employer. They currently pay good salaries in line with the market. There's no way they can justify giving a person who's been with the company for 10 years 4x salary growth in 2 years. How could they even reasonably measure the market value of his skills changing so much so quickly?

<comment><USER8> > They currently pay good salaries in line with the market.

> There's no way they can justify giving a person who's been with the company > for 10 years 4x salary growth in 2 years.

One of these must be false. According to "the market", this employee is now worth 4x previous salary, so then how can your company be paying "in line with the market?"

<comment><USER7> Ok, so it's more like the business is in the market for a $80k/yr developer, and not a $300k+ developer. The words changed but the result is the same. The work they're doing, it honestly doesn't make sense to pay anyone that much.

<comment><USER9> This is what many are missing: for some jobs the company can only get so much value, no matter how great the developer.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > Code reviews are probably the first thing a new engineer can start doing in > a new role.

That really depends on what you want the code review to achieve.

Catch typos? Yes, a new engineer can do that.

Check if code fits into the existing architecture, adheres to the invariants of the code base, uses base libraries idiomatically etc? I don't think a new engineer can contribute that from the start.

> Creating metrics through issue trackers and time sheets

Which metrics? It's far too easy to create metrics that are easy to measure, rather than metrics which actually increase the business when optimized for (and developers _will_ optimize for / game a metric when it's used to assess their performance).

<comment><USER11> Code reviews have 2 purpose. Help the person whom's code is being reviewed improve quality/catch issues, BUT ALSO the reviewer gets familiar with the code being pushed and learn stuff. It's super important for new engineers to review code as soon as possible for the later.

<comment><USER12> > BUT ALSO the reviewer gets familiar with the code being pushed and learn > stuff.

The reviewer is supposed to determine what goes in or not, so how can this be an opportunity to learn from what goes in? They're the one who's supposed to determine that! Is your idea of a reviewer someone who just spectates all code going through? It's like saying people who don't know a subject should grade work from students taking a class in that subject, as it's a great opportunity to learn from what gets turned in.

<comment><USER13> >The reviewer is supposed to determine what goes in or not

This is not a given, and in fact, I would not recommend it.

For small code reviews with only one reviewer, the reviewer gives feedback and they have a conversation about it, but with only one reviewer the developer should have the final say. The problem with giving the final say to a single reviewer is you'll get plenty of pointless code changes to suit the reviewer's individual preferences. Don't waste time on what is a perfectly reasonable difference in opinion.

If you have more than one reviewer, but still a small code review, the final say should be with the reviewer(s) - if their is consensus (you could also go with voting, with its pros and cons). Having multiple reviewers prevents the likelihood of individual preferences dominating.

If it's a significant code review, the final say should be with an experienced moderator.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> "Process improvements" is a bit weird. You measure software engineering performance by their dev ops skills?

It's a completely different skillset, and you're probably only measuring how eager people are to have breadth of knowledge or how familiar they are with your specific system.

Similarly, the explanation for "Debugging and troubleshooting complicated issues" is a bit odd. Why is knowing where the log files are, and knowing how to do complicated test setups for your specific environment a performance measure. Again, that's not really measuring skill but familiarity.

The other two measures are just "Do they complete tasks" and "Do they follow code review guidelines", neither of which are very good measures beyond pass/fail.

The conclusion is: > Once a set of skill areas for a role is landed and agreed upon you will want to make sure your team knows in advance what they are being measured on

So, to do well in your business, I need to pick easy tasks, snipe code reviews, make pointless CI tasks and spend all my time learning the build/test processes not actually developing the product? :)

<comment><USER15> Your comment seems to fall into a common fallacy, that "developing the product" is entirely done by writing the code. That isn't true, there is no product if it is not built, tested, deployed, and debugged. Lots of programmers consider this "pointless" grunge work, but there is a reason it tends to be picked up by the more senior engineers on the team. This sort of work has more foundational impact than just writing feature code; it benefits all features written in the future.

<comment><USER14> No, of course other things are important.

But if you measure only ancillary things, that's a pretty bad measure.

I don't expect every one of my team members to understand the entire build system, testing setup, logging system. That's a waste of their time. They should know some, and perhaps one of the areas in depth.

<comment><USER15> My point is: Those things aren't ancillary. They aren't a waste of time. Good developers can figure out how to use logs to debug issues. They can figure out how to fix the build and deployment system when it's broken. They can figure out how to set up testing environments. If not them, then who? Managers look for people who are self sufficient. All of this stuff is a necessary and important part of the job.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It seems to me there are two sides to engineer's performance: the ability and the productivity. Ability measures how complex tasks can an engineer solve and how well can he/she execute, and the productivity measures the actual amount of work done. Able programmer is not necessarily productive, and productive programmer might not be able to do tasks of high complexity.

As a technical lead, I feel that I'm able to judge the ability of individual team members, but I'm having a hard time objectively judging productivity. Simple count of PRs doesn't really tell the whole story, and some tasks look simple in hindsight, when in reality it took a lot of effort to find a good solution. There are also a lot of other complications I'm not going to dive into, but the end result is that it's hard to have an objective productivity evaluation based on the engineer's output only.

I'd be interested to know how other people evaluate individual productivity?

<comment><USER17> People say that no metric works but I think almost any metric works, for example PR count.

You, a human being, would never actually confuse the engineers with 0 PRs because they spent the last month playing online poker with the engineers with 0 PRs because you entrusted them with developing an automated deployment system for a legacy application and starting a mentorship program.

Many metrics will spot the outliers. But what is the business value of knowing when an engineer rated 82.13 vs 84.51?

<comment><USER18> Yeah but what about the highly skilled employee who spends 90% of their time playing online poker and spends 10% of their time producing output on-par with other people in the org that work 100% of the time. There is almost always one of these in any given org.

<comment><USER16> I would actually be OK with it, as long as I can objectively say that even though someone is slacking most of the time, he/she is very productive in short bursts, so the overall productivity is on par with the team average.

The problem is that if you don't have an objective approach to evaluating productivity, all sorts of biases come in, e.g. if I see someone coming to the office at 11am and leaving at 4pm, I would subjectively rate their productivity lower, even though objectively the results might be the same as for someone who comes in early, and leaves late.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> > Be a better management with transparent performance reviews and quick > feedback with on focus areas.

This article contains dozens of grammatical errors (starting right off with the title). Whenever I read something like this, I'm so distracted by the errors that I can't even focus on what the author is trying to say. The English language is dying.

<comment><USER12> It's not just English. :(

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> > Ability to write source code that adheres to specifications

This article reads like a series of bad advice from 1990s.

\- No, engineers shouldn't be writing code that "adheres" to specifications. They should study, understand, question and contribute to problem statement and approach at all times (also called "requirements" in pre-2000s).

\- Manager shouldn't be at center of evalauting performance but rather establishing process, standards and collecting feedback and metrics.

\- Bonuses are inherently evil and would always motivate individuals to exploit short term gains at the expense of long term sustainibility. Any performance evaluation strategy must keep this issue front and center at all times.

\- Large part of performance feedback shouldn't come from managers but peers

\- Performance reviews should never be entirely metrics-driven. No finite set of metrics tell the full story and all metrics are susceptible at gaming.

\- Don't treat new comers as incapable of fixing bugs or do X but not Y. Don't create class system of seniors vs juniors. Titles cause more troubles then they are worth.

</comment><comment><USER8> I think there's only one metric that is really effective for measuring and evaluating software teams.

Tie their compensation to the product's financial success.

This means, to the greatest extent possible, everything relevant to the product's success must be owned by the team and become their responsibility. Maybe there are some cross cutting concerns that should be the responsibility of a group separate from any product team, but those should be rare and require a strong justification.

This will have an amazing effect of clarifying prioritization of what to work on and figuring out how to deliver it as quickly and reliably as possible. Suddenly the whole team will be in the loop about what features are most important to the customers. Suddenly the things blocking new features demanded by the customers from shipping will be cleared away.

I think for any other metric you can devise, either intentionally or unintentionally, employee behavior will be optimized for satisfying the metric, and not customer satisfaction with the product.

<comment><USER21> > Tie their compensation to the product's financial success.

This is an atrocious idea in anything much larger than a start-up. It leaves the engineering team beholden to bad decisions made in other facets of the company (sales, marketing, upper management). It's exceedingly frustrating to write a solid, stable, performant program only to have marketing or sales push it as something that it is not and nosedive the company due to customers calling bullshit.

Start-ups are somewhat immune to this because of the lower barrier of communication between departments, as many people will be wearing multiple hats due to there being more things to do than people to do them.

This is very visible when executives begin choking off benefits across the board. Nothing kills morale quite like losing your bonus because another department isn't doing its job properly. I've seen more than one mass exodus from a company as a result of this.

<comment><USER8> > It leaves the engineering team beholden to bad decisions made in other > facets of the company (sales, marketing, upper management).

I mean, you're screwed anyways if those people can't do their jobs. No sales means no revenue means engineers taking a pay cut or getting laid off.

So the sales and marketing and product management responsible for your project, need to be on the same product team as the engineers, and have their compensation tied to the product's success.

If the engineers see themselves as the natural enemies of sales and marketing, the product is probably already doomed.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> dfeojm-zlib I think of software developers having multiple qualities:

\- coolness (cooperation, proactiveness, professionalism)

\- carefulness

\- integrity (ethics)

\- morale

\- cadence (speed) of work

\- skills competencies (matrix)

\- grit (badassery)

\- estimated time to completion multiplier

</comment><comment><USER22> All I see here is a bit of advice on what to measure, and nothing on how to measure it. The problem with measuring software engineer performance has always been in the how, not the what, so this article is just noise, IMO.

</comment><comment><USER23> Lake Woebegon is a horrifically bad strategy under even the most basic of assumptions. There are not enough engineers in the world available for hiring to create a single large tech company under such a strategy even with zero turnaround. A fixed level of achievement can give you similar quality (assuming you do have some level of attrition) but at a much faster rate.

The best strategy after looking at various strategies under simulation is to focus on developing the people you already have since fixing your quality through hiring is very difficult and expensive.

<comment><USER24> It's a substitute for a strategy: in reality, it is a wishful thought masquerading as a strategy. It doesn't give you any strategic framework for achieving that by hiring, mentoring and retaining in a competitive landscape. I find it of limited use and anachronistic.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I know how to fix most problems with measuring an engineer's performance. The best solution is to remove "manager" from measurement. Lead developer would speak with all team members to assess performance of colleagues. Those are those who know exactly who makes their work harder and who helps them everyday whether by wise advice or by leaving clear code and thought through architecture.

Managers will argue that they have so much responsibilities that they cannot code together with teh team, but I again would say that the problem may be reduced with reduction or higher management. Bussiness part shall talk with engineers on feasibility of their vision and ideas without proxies who are so in the middle that they neighter understand bussiness nor technology.

</comment><comment><USER26> Yikes.

</comment><comment><USER27> Are we really going to pretend that managers in sillycoin valley even bother to be objective like this?

<comment><USER28> I'm sure not, but could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments here?</comment></comment>


Stack Exchange is not a forum: the role of "niceness" on a Q&A site - <AUTHOR> http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2012/08/stack-exchange-is-not-a-forum-the-role-of-niceness-on-a-qa-site/

<comment><USER2> StackOverflow has been overrun by anal people. Internet power attracts this kind of douchebags like moths to light. If you write 'Hello,' in questions the system will automatically delete it, if you - god forbid - write 'Thanks!' other users will edit your question to remove it. I can't explain how fucking weird it is that people take time to remove the word 'Thanks' from a website they don't even own.

StackOverflow is a crazy good system for Q&A. Just like in Wikipedia, the problem is no longer trolls - but bureaucracy and pedanticism of the moderators. People are assholes who like power, and I don't think any q&a software can solve this.

<comment><USER3> I absolutely LOVE stackoverflow. I've been working on my own for about 9 months, and without SO, there would have been zero chance I would be able to make any progress.

But I do agree about the criticism of the moderators. I also think that there is almost a "Stanford Prison Experiment" level of power-wielding amongst some of the mods. There are examples of someone/me asking a question, and then someone closing it as a dupe, when in fact the question isn't a dupe. It might be superficially similar, but the mods don't take enough time to actually read the question and see if it's a dupe or not. And the rest of us are powerless to do anything about it.

But this is the minority of cases for me. For the most part, SO is a completely invaluable tool, and I love it immensely.

I think removing "Thanks" is a bit too abrasive. Maybe 10+ years ago, the NYC subway system tried getting ticketing agents to stop saying "Thanks" because they thought it would make things more efficient, and all it did was piss off the passengers. It's trivial, but there has to be a base level of civility between participants. I get that upvoting is "Thanks", but we're still humans (at this point), and trying to make communication more "efficient" by removing natural human responses makes it too terse, and almost insulting sometimes. It's a small thing, and I think it's better to just leave it in, because it's nice to say "thanks".

<comment><USER4> > There are examples...

Where are these examples? This is the internet. Please provide links.

> And the rest of us are powerless to do anything about it.

That's simply not true. Stack Exchange provides a Meta site where you can take up issues with the entire community. <http://meta.stackoverflow.com/> You can also email the company. They do read your emails.

As for removing "thanks," we really don't recommend doing that if it's the _only_ thing you're going to change. However, it's not supposed to be included, so removing it while making other edits is encouraged.

<comment><USER3> I didn't know the meta.stackoverflow.com site existed. They should probably make note of it when someone's question gets closed, so that the person asking the question knows they can dispute it. There isn't any indication from the FAQ that you can dispute things like questions being closed by posting to the meta site.

Here's an example of my question that was closed on serverfault:

[http://serverfault.com/questions/342191/performance-of- sql-s...](http://serverfault.com/questions/342191/performance-of-sql-server- decreases-as-i-add-more-vcpus-on-esxi-5)

I specifically asked why my throughout for my database was more than doubling when I decreased the number of vCPUs from 4 to 1. And it was closed as an "exact dupe" of a question asking about how to optimize a VM's performance. There's nothing to optimize in my situation, I had more physical cores than vCPUs, so there was no over-allocation. I get that obviously there must be some contention between the vCPUs, but to double the performance by dropping to a single vCPU? I wouldn't see that type of performance hit on a physical system otherwise multi-process databases wouldn't exist.

I had another question that was arbitrarily closed as a dupe, but I made a comment disputing it, and by some small miracle, the mod removed the dupe status. I can't remember which other question it was at this point since it was modified to remove my comment and the closing. The point is that there is no way to flag the question as being under dispute, and if the moderator decided not to do anything about it, then I couldn't do anything (except post to meta which I just learned today).

EDIT: I posted the wrong link, and just corrected it now.

<comment><USER5> Ha! A user that's not logged in can't even get to your ServerFault link. They're silently redirected to the duplicate. Even more frustrating (to you, I imagine) is that your question was closed unilaterally by a moderator -- the same moderator that asked the question that it's redirecting to.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Shameless plug here...

Many times I have found myself needing to know about a technology with which I've had little experience. If I have time to spend learning something new, and if I think I'll use the technology in the future, then I will enjoy learning about it in depth, but often times, working against a deadline, I have no time to learn, or perhaps I do not expect to ever use that technology again.

An example of the latter would be my limited experience with the Perl programming language. I recall when I was working for Danforth Diamond in 2005. I had to modify some of the old Perl scripts they had on their server. I spent a week working with Perl, and it was the only week that I have ever worked with Perl. I would have loved to have been able to quickly hire my own private consultant for all of maybe 20 minutes, to ask some basic questions about the language. As it was, I wasted days tracking down information via Google, and reading tutorials that did not quite answer the exact question that I had in my head.

My brain fought against me – it knew that I was not planning to work with Perl again, so it was resistant to learning it in the first place. I was stuck in a situation where I had to read through multiple articles about strings and escaping and how to handle variables inside of strings – many wasted hours. My life would have been much easier if I could have turned to someone who had a lot of experience with Perl, and handed them $20 for maybe 15 or 20 minutes of their time, to be allowed to fire away with questions like, "How do I put a variable in a heredoc string?" and gotten instant answers, answers that were tailored to me, answers that gave me exactly the information that I wanted, and nothing superfluous.

Hoping to get fast answers to my questions, I started posting on various forums. I have sometimes gotten fantastic assistance from various programmers on these forums. One of the greatest things about the Internet is how much people are generally willing to help one another for free. If you are trying to learn a programming language such as Java, it is surprising how helpful people will be on sites such as Java Ranch. And if you are trying to get answers to your questions about WordPress, it is wonderful how much good information you can get over at the WordPress forums.

And yet, over the years, I've had a lot of bad experiences with free forums. I find it frustrating when I post a question that is altogether unique, but someone mistakes it for a common question, and so the only reply I get is "RTFM!!!!!" When people offer you free help, sometimes they are wonderful, but sometimes they attack you for aspects of your project that are beyond your control. For instance, I was once asked to fix a Javascript slideshow that depended on jQuery for funtionality, and when I posted some of the code to a forum, the only response I got was "Do not use jQuery!" But it was the lead programmer on that project who had decided to use jQuery, and I didn't have the power to change that. I only had the power to fix the problem that I had been assigned.

We all seem a little stupid when we are learning a new skill. It doesn't matter how smart we are. We ask what the experts think of as painfully dumb questions. Asking those dumb questions is essential to our learning process, but it is understandable that answering such questions may seem tiring to those who know a great deal about a given subject.

Hoping to get some high quality answers about Perl, I signed up for Experts Exchange. At the time it cost $9.99 a month (as I said, this was back in 2005). Nowadays it costs $12 a month. The fact that it costs money seems to introduce a level of seriousness to the conversations that is often absent on the free forums. And yet, Experts Exchange suffers a fatal flaw – none of the money goes to the people who answer the questions! The corporation, Experts Exchange, keeps all the money to itself! This limits the usefulness of the site. What I needed was an easy way to hire an expert for all of maybe 20 minutes, and give them some money, so they would take my dumb questions seriously.

For that reason, we decided to make a site where programmers could pay money to get fast, high quality help with their questions.

I have found that even small amounts of money radically changes the social dynamic. Even $1 changes the social dynamic. As long as the advice is free, those giving the advice feel free to show scorn for what they feel are stupid questions. And yet, as soon as even a tiny amount of money is offered, the dynamic changes around: the answers are respectful.

But then, after we launched our first site, we were confronted with another problem: as soon as the askers are allowed to offer money, they are the ones who become scornful. The askers can be rude or ignore community norms.

We asked ourselves, how could we balance the power of the askers and the answerers, to achieve a perfect balance?

Our first thought was, "What if we allow the askers and the answerers to vote on the money, and we average out everyone's vote?" We could impose the rule that answerers were not allowed to vote money to themselves. But wait, we realized, that doesn't work either: the answerers could just simply create a dozen dummy accounts, and use 11 fake accounts to vote money to their 1 real account.

So how could this be achieved?

After some careful thought, we decided the way to do this was to restrict voting to those experts who had earned some money answering lots of questions. If it took effort to gain the right to vote, then people could not easily establish fake accounts and vote money to themselves.

We launched our first site, which is narrowly focused on just WordPress:

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

The site gets moderate action, maybe $500 or $600 in questions a week. Over the last 2 years it has seen over $50,000 go through it.

Next month we will start offering this software as a hosted service, so anyone can open up their own site.

<comment><USER7> _I have found that even small amounts of money radically changes the social dynamic. Even $1 changes the social dynamic. As long as the advice is free, those giving the advice feel free to show scorn for what they feel are stupid questions._

Isn't this desirable, at times? Do you believe every question submitted to a site like SO is value added? Even stuff like obvious calls for homework help ("I need to write a singly linked list in C++. I haven't tried yet, can someone show me how to do it?")

<comment><USER6> >>stuff like obvious calls for homework help

Several people have written to us and asked permission to re-use our software for sites focused on homework help. There are already many, many sites where students can hire tutors, but most of those sites involve hiring a tutor for some hours, and paying some hourly rate. The gamble that some people have talked to us about is the possibility that some students would be willing to pay $1 or $2 or $5 or $10 for quick help with specific questions about math, science, or other subjects. Especially at the college level, it becomes possible to imagine some students wanting quick help with a specific question, or possibly needing help with a concept they having trouble understanding, for instance, perhaps some complicated math problem.

So, certainly, I think homework questions are potentially a great area where this software might be able to do a great deal of help.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I can't count the number of times I've found the perfect StackEschange answer to my question and it was marked as "closed as not constructive" or closed for off topic.

The worst is a question that's closed because it's a duplicate of another question that's two or three years old. These answers are not eternal, they should change over time based on the changing environment.

<comment><USER4> Then answer the old question. Or suggest an edit to one of the old answers if it's out of date. Anyone can do those things, even with only 1 reputation point. The system was designed specifically so answers _can_ change over time.

<comment><USER9> This has happened to me, I was looking for an answer, and found a blatantly wrong old answer (as some breaking changes in the toolkit had been made).

What I didn't have was an answer to provide, and so I moved on.

I'm not sure the tools given are effective enough for this problem.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Here's what happened to me when I threw out what I thought an interesting question then had a little debate about it on Meta. My question got extremely downvoted.

[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11706028/creating-a- elisp...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11706028/creating-a-elisp- function-to-convert-url-to-html-link)

The "rule" is that you must show some sort of effort before you ask a question. I was honest and said that I didn't do anything, but I did make my question well-defined, and I thought that it was useful, in general.

Anyway, if that's their rule, that's their rule. Personally, I'm interested in seeing a "Wikipedia of Programming", where all good questions exist with good answers.

For example, "How do I do X in Java|Perl|Scala|Haskell|Elisp|...?"

I think a site with enough questions would be the perfect site to take someone from novice to guru. The big thing missing from StackOverFlow, IMHO, is that there are lots of questions for popular topics like Java (280k)

<http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/java>

Where as topics like elisp (1200) are almost neglected.

<http://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/elisp>

StackOverFlow doesn't want to be the site that connects the dots, which isn't their business model. I think another site could fill the void.

<comment><USER11> Your question was downvoted because it basically reads as, "I want to do X. Please do it for me." The site is supposed to be a replacement for a smart coworker. You wouldn't ask your coworker to do something like that, you'd ask him for help with a specific part of it. Asking otherwise just comes across as freeloading.

<comment><USER10> Yes, that's the rule and I disagreed so I left the site. I'm interested in a site to augment the wizardly elisp or Haskell guy you run into occasionally, who you know could show you "the way". I don't use elisp in my day job, for example, but when I get the rare chance to play with it, it would nice to have a deeper repository of questions from which to learn.

<comment><USER12> The point is, it's not a "do my work/homework for me" site.

It's a "I tried to solve the problem this way, but it doesn't quite work; can you show me what I'm doing wrong?" or a "I solved the problem this way, but it seems really bad; is there a better way?"

I agree, asking a question without demonstrating an earnest attempt at solving or understanding it shows to me that you didn't care enough about it to even attempt it. Given that, why should _I_ care enough about it to attempt it?

Btw, I added a downvote to your question. It really is in poor form.

<comment><USER10> Fair enough. If anyone wants to build the other site, let me know.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The problem I see with Stack Exchange is that they are too highly ranked as a site in Google which means that the rubbish pages show up highly ranked.

A very common experience for me is to be searching for a solution to a problem. Follow a link to Stack Overflow to find a page where somebody has asked the question and been told they are asking the question in the wrong place.

<comment><USER14> Contrary anecdote: I've several times had the experience of Googling for a question and finding my own Stack Overflow question as a result, and using the answer to solve my problem (again).

<comment><USER15> I am reminded of a story about my retired scientist grandfather. When he first used the Internet, he did some searches about his field of study. A few pages in, he thought, "this feels familiar" and checked the author of the paper he was reading.

He had written it, about 30 years earlier.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I like that SE has taken a stance on this, and I like their stance. The programming community, especially as it pertains to blogging, news, etc, has been infiltrated by navel-gazing unproductive carebears that insist that you have to be nice to get things done.

This isn't an MBA program, and HN/SE/reddit/etc are not networking arenas. They're discussion boards.

<comment><USER17> And yet a major part of his point was that "discussion" is not enough. If someone presents facts in a way that causes the person they are responding to, to almost inevitably ignore everything they've said, then they've wasted their time (aside from generating fleeting feelings of smug superiority).

It's funny how easy it is to lose sight of that (I've certainly done it before). A discussion is only a discussion when information flows between two parties, not when it is is broadcast into the void.

<comment><USER16> If you say something, and you're wrong, and I correct you, and you disregard what I've said because I was abrasive, you're still ignorant. I've lost nothing but hot air (or a few keystrokes).

<comment><USER18> But you also gained very little.

<comment><USER16> I gain nothing in either instance.

<comment><USER18> I can't speak for everyone but it seems to me one does gain something. If you didn't, why bother at all? Whatever you gain may be small and it probably doesn't have any monetary value but there should be some extrinsic motivation to answer. There are plenty of alternative uses of your time.

Thus, my greater point is: when you have decided to answer, you should give the best answer you can reasonably give in the time you want to use. It wont hurt you and will improve the world a little bit.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I actually like the coldness of StackOverflow. It facilitates a culture that conditions the participants to look things up before we go typing. From a first-person perspective I kind of appreciate it.

<comment><USER7> I agree. I want SO to approach reference documentation for common questions. When I want to know about the syntax for a Python list comprehension, for example, I want to see a number of examples arguing why they are a best practice in a concise, no bullshit manner.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> SO is great, let's get that out of the way. Fine. Whatever. They are getting a bit ridiculous and taking themselves too seriously. I mean that foolish "graph of niceness," wow. There is a really good side to SO and a really weird side and I don't think the good part is made that way because of the weird side. The weird side is somewhat cultish, to just be honest. Honestly, this probably because of a culture derived from one of the founders, in fact a particular one of the founders would aggressively defend this cult of personality behavior

Also, I found this strange:

>But in the end, this sort of navel-gazing misses the point: we're not here to pat each other on the back and hand out gold stars ...

Isn't this basically what SO is?

</comment><comment><USER21> Dumbledore. Gandalf. Yoda. Keep them straight.

/ob pedantic

<comment><USER10> It was an intentional geek troll. Geeks love to run into the weeds over stupid little things. I think that was part of his point.

<comment><USER22> I think the GP made his point for him.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to find a tech-savy business co-founder? - <AUTHOR> I'm trying to launch a SaaS startup - still working on the MVP. I'm technical and am building out everything with an eye towards boot strapping in the beginning.
I'm not too concerned about immediate help with the technical aspects (though some code review would be lovely), but I'm aware that there will be non-technical work which I am willing to do, but am inexperienced in. Also, it would be good - in general - to have a co-founder to share the experience with.
I'm currently located in south eastern USA and would prefer not to relocate - but I'm happy to travel for networking purposes. <comment> driftsumi-e The criteria I would look for:

• A track record in guiding early stage products or services. The early days are as risky and ambiguous as it can get. Someone solidly aware of that going in is valuable.

• Multi-disciplinary. Highly probable that the first few employees will need to wear multiple hats and be able to shift between roles comfortably and as needed. It may not be coding, but ideally it is something tangible and measurable - e.g. the ability to PM a project or being comfortable enough to lead design/UX. Conversely, someone only willing to handle a single discipline - sales, fundraising, marketing, PR, etc. - will have limitations that become obvious right away.

• Domain expertise. May not necessarily have to be down to the exact problem domain but some level of familiarity helps in hitting the ground running.

• Comfortable as a distributed team. Since you brought up the location issue, it would probably help to have someone experienced in working virtually. Communication becomes even more crucial if you won't be interacting outside of a screen on a regular basis.

Where I would look:

• My network and extended network.

• The thankless, yet tried and true method of "pounding the pavement" and networking in person. Having "Terminator Vision" here using the above criteria is invaluable (there will be a LOT of noise to filter out).

• I'd consider looking around for past startups in a similar space that may not have worked out. Perhaps individuals from those teams still have that "itch."

</comment><comment><USER2> I would encourage you to look at product managers currently employed in your area by big co's. From those cohorts there might be some who are disenchanted with the cube life and looking for a change. Especially if the big co might have people who possess domain expertise in the area you're building in.

I'd also encourage you to seek out startup meetups or any programming that's done by people in the entrepreneurial ecosystem as it often attracts people who are thinking about getting in to the startup game but aren't quite there yet.

Networking is a huge part of being a successful startup. You could treat this as your first foray in to an activity that's absolutely critical for success.

Good luck out there, but take your time and be extremely selective. A truly amazing cofounder is 1) hard to find 2) a pre-requisite for success.

<comment><USER3> I would add onto this to say you should try to find someone who has been with at least one product since it launched. Launching vs. inheriting a product is a huge difference.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is not directly addressing your question, but I went the bootstrapped SaaS solo founder route and have no regrets. Code reviews would've been nice, admittedly, and some of my initial attempts at the non-tech stuff were weak. But ultimately the non-tech stuff proved fairly easy to pick up and I really appreciate the extra skills I ended up with. As for sharing the experience, consider joining one of the many online bootstrapper communities, or attending MicroConf.

So my advice would be to look for a co-founder, sure, but don't discount the option of going it alone. Remember that good co-founder > solo >> bad co- founder!

</comment><comment><USER5> I'm an interested product manager and UI/UX designer. I left my last full-time gig in SF to work on my own SaaS too. My details are in my profile if you're interested.</comment>


14 Awesome Features in the New Google Analytics v5 - <AUTHOR> http://www.eugenoprea.com/14-awesome-features-in-the-new-google-analytics-v5/

<comment><USER2> It's very usefull you post,Eugen! Congratulation!</comment>


Less than 2% of purchases happens online. 98%, offline - <AUTHOR> http://milo.com/blog/the-bulk-of-shopping-still-takes-place-in-store/

<comment><USER2> I don't understand where the data for this graph came from. The 2000 Census?

It claims online electronics sales of $1.3 billion. But Newegg alone sold $1.3 billion... in 2005. [http://www.allbusiness.com/business-planning- structures/star...](http://www.allbusiness.com/business-planning- structures/starting-a-business/3874326-1.html)

The numbers just aren't believable.

<comment><USER3> These numbers feel more realistic:

[http://www.permuto.com/blog/2010/02/27/what-are-people- reall...](http://www.permuto.com/blog/2010/02/27/what-are-people-really- buying-online/)

Maybe I'm interpreting the Milo graph wrong.

<comment><USER4> The graphs represent completely different data and it is easy to misinterpret. Neither graph represents total percentage of online sales to Brick & Mortar stores accurately.

From the comments on Permuto site: "The graph above is more descriptive of how e-commerce is replacing mail order catalogs for non-store purchases."

Source of data is probably: Table 1022: Electronics Shopping and Mail-Order Houses–Total and E-Commerce Sales. "Represents NAICS code 454110, which comprises establishments primarily engaged in retailing all types of merchandise using non store means, such as catalogs, toll free telephone numbers, or electronic media, such as interactive television or computer. "

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Too bad this graph was made with no regard to the actual numbers. Compare Food & Beverage to Clothing & Accessories. Food has 0.2% ($1,022) online, while clothing has 0.9 ($2,115). So twice as much in dollars, and four times as much as a percentage. Yet it's shorter and narrower.

<comment><USER6> It's a disinfographic.

And where are books? Copy says "less than 5% of retail sales" is online, and graphic shows sectors all at 2% or under. What sectors bring the split back up to 5%?

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Cars, food, clothing, electronics, misc(???), hobbies(???), and furniture. Let's see, that amounts to duh, duh, duh, duh, huh?, huh?, and duh.

Hmmmmm. Let's see. Something is missing here. I can't quite pin it down. What is it? Oh right! Music, books and movies!

Convenient to just have blinders on to Amazon, iTunes, NetFlix and the like.

Oh, this chart must be before 1990. Aha.

</comment><comment><USER8> Is this Ted Dziuba's startup? I just tried a search in my area and it only came up with 1 item. It doesn't seem very useful so far.

<comment><USER9> Yes it is

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> "Online sales poised to grow by a factor of 50x!!!"

</MarketingSpeak>

</comment><comment><USER11> 0.2% for food & beverages! Looks like plenty of room there for startups, e.g. OpenTable-like service but for meal takeaways and orders (as opposed to OpenTable's eating out)</comment>


Caddy 0.10 Released - <AUTHOR> https://caddyserver.com/blog/caddy-0_10-released#HNSaysPreviouslySubmittedButCouldNotFind <comment><USER2> So far I'm loving Caddy. Super simple to configure, and the auto management of SSL certificates is magical. However, for all of the simplicity, they are still pretty resistant to properly packaging it up in the repositories. By far the longest part of getting it running, is the stupid manual configuration of launch daemons, working directories, and permissions. For software that prides itself on dead simple management, the basics of getting it into a package manager should not even be a discussion.

With that said, I 100% moved all of my sites from Nginx to Caddy after the config file setup is around three lines per site.

<comment><USER3> >the basics of getting it into a package manager should not even be a discussion.

Last time I looked into it, their problem was that Caddy plugins must be configured at compile-time, because runtime plugins seem to be hard to do with Golang (besides RPC). Because there's a handful of Caddy plugins, they'd either have to provide a slim package with no plugins, or ship with all or only some blessed plugins. Obviously all approaches have drawbacks … they discussed the option of shipping their own package manager for Caddy plugins, too (shudder).

See: [https://forum.caddyserver.com/t/packaging- caddy/61](https://forum.caddyserver.com/t/packaging-caddy/61)

<comment><USER4> Nginx had the same issue. Ubuntu ships 3 or 4 versions - nginx-light, nginx, nginx-full, nginx-extras - for different numbers of modules included.

<comment><USER5> With dynamic modules support now in Nginx, that practice should end.

<comment><USER6> As Michael Lustfield said in Debian bug #790623 in October 2015.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Caddy is a web server written entirely in Go.

Features:

\- Easy configuration with Caddyfile

\- Automatic HTTPS via Let's Encrypt; Caddy obtains and manages all cryptographic assets for you

\- HTTP/2 enabled by default (powered by Go standard library)

\- Virtual hosting for hundreds of sites per server instance, including TLS SNI

\- Experimental QUIC support for those that like speed TLS session ticket key rotation for more secure connections

\- Brilliant extensibility so Caddy can be customized for your needs

\- Runs anywhere with no external dependencies (not even libc)

<comment><USER8> So is it ready for "prime time"? Should I be considering it over Nginx for side projects or real projects?

<comment><USER9> Yes, it's pretty nice and sometimes is even nicer than nginx in some regards. E.g. it notices DNS changes without SIGHUP, so if your app is containerized, Caddy just works when you start and stop containers, when nginx requires special tricks.

However, it lacks in some areas, for example if you need some complex regex- based routing it could be somewhat unpleasant (while probably doable, the configs would look really messy).

<comment><USER10> Wait... why would a web server need to know about changing DNS?

<comment><USER9> It doesn't need to know about the changes, but it surely needs to notice them as they happen.

For example, FLOSS nginx does DNS lookups just once on startup. On config (re)loads, to be exact.

E.g. when you have "proxy_pass [http://spam;"](http://spam;") or "uwsgi_pass spam:9000;", you'll end up with permanent 502 (until a SIGHUP) after you've started a new "spam" Docker container and then removed the old one.

There are well-known workarounds like "set $backend "[http://spam";](http://spam";) proxy_pass $backend;", but it's nicer when you don't even have to think about this and know that TTLs are properly honored. Caddy does that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The MitM detection is interesting. How long until these appliances start altering the HTTP request's User-Agent header to avoid detection (or adding logic such that the handshaking process mimics that of the browser), though?

To me, HPKP with preloading seems like a more reliable approach (and browsers shouldn't allow this to be overridden [1]).

[1] If this breaks corporate MitM attacks, great. This practice always struck me as incredibly invasive and I'd personally be concerned if an employer was doing this. I think some traffic data should be able to be logged and timestamped in case of abuse (e.g. SNI info, TCP connections, DNS lookups) but I don't see a need to intercept application data - and honestly, it seems like the vast majority of these appliances hinder security.

<comment><USER12> I'd also be concerned if an employer was doing it, unless there was a good reason - and I can think of a few of those. For example, companies that deal with sensitive health, financial or legal information. They may need assurances (or at least a paper trail) that's a lot stronger than "we don't MITM and we trust our employees to do the right thing".

<comment><USER13> Even with those reasons, I believe the risk outweighs the potential benefits. It's not just about trusting the intentions and assurances of the company, but also their competency and knowing they're not being compromised etc. Hackers don't care about paper trails. These are things you typically can't measure.

If you have untrustworthy employees, you have bigger problems than you can solve with by MITM attacking everyone.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> How does it compare with [https://traefik.io/](https://traefik.io/) (reverse proxy, written in Go, automatic HTTPS / letsencrypt) ?

<comment><USER15> Yep, I use the similar eBay/fabio which pulls my LE certs from hashicorp/vault, much better than leaving them in a filesystem. Can't imagine using a proxy/ingress/LB without automatic reactive routing these days. All I have to tell Fabio is what interface to listen to.

<comment><USER16> Why do you say it's better to pull them from Vault? Unless MTLS is set up talking to Vault, you are pulling secrets unencrypted (and maybe unauthenticated) over the network... a local file system is not bad for small scale deployments if setup with the proper permissions.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Awesome product, I'm using it at work and it's incredibly fast. Configuration is easy, documentation is clear. The systemd unit provided in the repo is insane, all the latest security and isolation stuff are in it, a great inpiration for writing good systemd units.

<comment><USER18> Took me a while to find:

[https://github.com/mholt/caddy/tree/master/dist/init/linux-s...](https://github.com/mholt/caddy/tree/master/dist/init/linux- systemd)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I would just like to bring up how much I admire the way they want to profit off Caddy[1][2]. Sponsorships and focused development; followed by "remember, caddy is open source". My only feedback would be that they introduce a "$50/mo; my bank is not big enough" for people that wants to endorse their model/software.

Look at nginx, where new functionality is hidden behind a paywall. I don't want to deny them [nginx devs and sales people] their well-deserved money, but it pushes me away.

[1]: [https://caddyserver.com/blog/options-for- businesses](https://caddyserver.com/blog/options-for-businesses)

[2]: [https://caddyserver.com/pricing](https://caddyserver.com/pricing)

<comment><USER20> Thanks for the feedback! We are mindful of people who want to contribute funds but aren't able to because of the price. We get a lot of requests for stickers and T-shirts and even jackets/sweaters; so we might go that route for individuals being able to contribute.

<comment><USER21> Why not introduce a $50/month (hell, even a "pay what you want") option, with no sponsorship benefits (mentions, link, etc.)? Depending on volume, you could still offer Slack access as a benefit, perhaps if paid up front for a year.

<comment><USER20> That's possible! We wanted to gauge initial interest first but let me talk to Cory about this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> PSA for those who use caddy's proxy "without" configuration item - it is broken in 0.10: [https://github.com/mholt/caddy/issues/1604](https://github.com/mholt/caddy/issues/1604)

This bit our app during testing.

</comment><comment> mike-cardwell Surprised there isn't more talk about the MITM detection here. Anyone got a TLDR of how this is supposed to work? I'm going to read the full doc when I get home, but I'd be interested in hearing peoples opinions on how accurate it is likely to be.

<comment><USER23> The authors of the original paper [1] identified that the set of client cipher suites advertised by each browser can be used to fingerprint and identify a browser.

Caddy records the cipher suite advertised by the client during the TLS handshake and then later examines the client's user agent. Using the fingerprinting techniques mentioned in the paper, Caddy then determines whether or not the advertised user-agent is compatible with the user-agent that it inferred through the client cipher suites.

TLS interception proxies establish their own TLS connection to the server. Depending on what underlying TLS library the proxy uses, it also has its own unique fingerprint. When the TLS proxy forwards the user's request, Caddy detects the mismatch and flags it as a MITM.

[1] [https://jhalderm.com/pub/papers/interception- ndss17.pdf](https://jhalderm.com/pub/papers/interception-ndss17.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Anyone with experience using this as a dynamic reverse proxy - I need to proxy certain requests to private container (ports) where the port isn't known until the container is booted, and containers come up and down as users require them.

<comment><USER25> Depending on what that private container is serving up, an API gateway might work better. Tyk is one that's written in golang. It has a rest API and hot reload, so it should be able to handle your use case of dynamically allocated ports.

[http://tyk.io](http://tyk.io)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Pricing page is pretty bad. Draws your eyes with primary colors and bold fonts to $5000/yr and $9900/yr. I had to swallow the sticker shock and look around the page to see the weird, faded side-bubble telling me it's free.

</comment><comment><USER27> I always really liked this video by Matt:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyVA9tuif4s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyVA9tuif4s)

The way he explains things makes me wish he did tutorials for programming languages.

</comment><comment><USER28> They mention that 'Default Timeouts' have been disabled. Urging users to 'Act according to your threat model!'.

I'm not sure I understand. How is not having these timeouts a security thread? Someone could potentially open up enough HTTP connections to starve others from having the opportunity to do so?

<comment><USER20> This is true; but slowloris attacks don't require opening as many connections. We've seen one or two instances where buggy (or malicious?) clients were slowlorising Caddy instances; but we were too eager to enable timeouts by default I think.

<comment><USER29> No, not having timeouts is rather bad practice. There are a lot of clients out there that never close connections for various reasons. And since TCP doesn't use healthchecks and most systems by default have limits on the number of descriptors per process, your web server in default configuration will simply leak descriptors and memory over time until the whole thing stops working. The only sane choice here is to have timeouts enabled everywhere and explicitly allow them to be disabled, not the other way around.

<comment><USER20> Believe me, we wanted to do this, but it broke a lot of WebSocket connections and other legitimate, long-lived connections. It confused many users. It's hard to know what is legitimate and what is not. I wish we could configure timeouts on a per-request basis but not without some serious hacking around the net/http lib for now.

I do encourage setting timeouts when you are able to. It's easy, for example:

        timeouts 30s

I have heard of occasions where people have done this and it made their servers breathe again. At this point it's just up to your discretion/judgment.

<comment><USER29> If I remember correctly, websockets have ping/pong support on both ends for that. So to handle them properly you have to detect connection upgrades and then start issuing ping requests to clients periodically, closing their connections if they fail to respond in time, but still using timeouts everywhere.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Does Caddy have a pluggable extension set where you can write your own middleware, in Go?

<comment><USER31> It does and it's documented on the wiki. I've written a few plugins privately, like implementing SCEP into caddy and adding a few other features.

Due to the nature of the plug system, you'll have to build caddy yourself if you add customizations like that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Random question: is there a way to start Caddy as root so it can bind to port 80 (for example) then change the user so a non-root user can send a `USR1` signal to Caddy to get it to reload the configuration?

<comment><USER33> At least with systemd caddy starts as a non-root user, if you use the provided unit-file: [https://github.com/mholt/caddy/tree/master/dist/init/linux-s...](https://github.com/mholt/caddy/tree/master/dist/init/linux- systemd)

<comment><USER32> Is there something like `setcap` for macOS?

        Give the caddy binary the ability to bind to privileged ports (e.g. 80, 443) as a non-root user:

            sudo setcap 'cap_net_bind_service=+ep' /usr/local/bin/caddy

<comment><USER25> There isn't. There's a port of authbind, but I don't think anyone was able to get it working with caddy. The only solution I've heard of working is using the pf firewall to port forward, for example, 8080 to 80. Like this: [https://salferrarello.com/mac-pfctl-port- forwarding/](https://salferrarello.com/mac-pfctl-port-forwarding/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Any benefit in using this inside a docker container instead of nginx? No need for SSL or many of the other features I'm seeing listed here since it's all behind an Amazon ELB.

<comment><USER35> We are using Caddy as a simple reverse proxy in Docker environments. The configuration is a bit simpler than nginx and we love the tiny Docker images we can create (not sure how large an nginx-full installation is).

That being said, we did run into a few issues that forced us to go back to older Caddy versions, like broken websocket support or the timeout issue in 0.9.5. Also, sometimes the documentation is a bit lacking and unclear. DNS resolution seems to be flaky sometimes (we're using alpine-based containers and sometimes Caddy just won't resolve names of other containers, even though a curl inside the container can resolve the names just fine).

So if you've got a working nginx setup, I'd say stick with it. For new projects it is worth to check out Caddy. The issues we ran into occured early in our development process, they didn't just suddenly happen in production, so once you've tested everything, Caddy just works.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> When would I use Caddy, rather than using nginx and configuring Let's Encrypt for myself? Honest question.

<comment><USER37> I feel like the niche Caddy's trying to fill is for people who don't want to bother with that, or don't want to learn. If you already know how to set up nginx and LE (like you and I do), its only appeal is relatively minor: potentially saving a quarter or half hour.

<comment><USER38> I think over time there will be a similar server written in Rust, where at least we can be sure that there are no buffer overflows..until then nginx is probably better in every situation.

<comment><USER39> Do we really need someone to mention Rust in every thread ?

<comment><USER38> No, it just makes sense to have a fast and safe HTTP server at the same time.

Go is ona average 3x slower than C according to bechmarks, and it's hard to get rid of this issue because of how the language is architected. I just don't see Caddy as a possible long term replacement for nginx.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> This is the first I've heard of Caddy and I'm really impressed by the feature set. Looks like a breath of fresh air, can't wait to try it.

</comment><comment><USER41> Is there an official Docker image yet?

<comment><USER20> No, but this is the one I usually recommend for now: [https://hub.docker.com/r/abiosoft/caddy/](https://hub.docker.com/r/abiosoft/caddy/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Is ECDHE_ECDSA possible on Caddy?</comment>


MongoDB hasn't got a sweet spot - why use it? - <AUTHOR> http://codeofrob.com/archive/2011/01/26/ravendb-vs-mongodb-why-i-dont-usually-bother.aspx

<comment><USER2> journaling has been introduced in mongodb today, so some points in this article are, unfortunately for the author, outdated only one day after it was published.</comment>


Show HN: MapMe.io, AR platform for IoT, primarily for transportation awareness - <AUTHOR> http://mapme.io <comment><AUTHOR> [http://MapMe.io](http://MapMe.io), a AR platform for the IoT, primarily for transportation awareness. Original motivation was to create an all-software solution for the bicyclist to be more aware of something coming up from behind - as I am mostly deaf. After a few startup weekends and intel edison incubators, I'm getting close to testing with small group of alpha users in a larger city like SF (where real-time data is available for public buses). The idea for the MapMe.io is to be the software platform where real-time notifications enhance transportation safety overall. Spotter view/tab will access the phone camera for "background" of app/"foreground" for user and the alerts will give relevant alerts based on user location.

</comment><comment><USER2> I don't think you're going to get much participation unless you explain more about the project on your website.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks! the main company website ([http://beaconsafety.co](http://beaconsafety.co)) and/or the mapme.io site? For the mapme.io site I'm planning to add a "how-to" modal later.</comment></comment>


Live Metrics from BBQ IoT Powered by Go, Gobot.io, Grafana, Influx - <AUTHOR> http://bbq.live/dashboard/db/brians-bbq?orgId=2&from=now-1h&to=now&refresh=30s <comment><USER2> Awesome! Thanks for posting. This project is at [https://github.com/bbqgophers/qpid](https://github.com/bbqgophers/qpid) It's powered by Go, Gobot.io, and runs on a raspberry pi that's connected to an air conditioner fan that blows air into my Myron Mixon MMS 60 bbq grill. Today I'm cooking a pork butt in preparation for the Easter whole hog cook.

<comment><USER3> Awesome little project! This is probably a stupid question, but what is the front end built with? (Go as well?)

<comment><USER2> the live dashboard is Grafana chart, that gets data from Telegraph/InfluxDB, which gets data from MQTT streamed off the Raspberry Pi. On the Pi is the Gobot.io app written in Go.

<comment><USER3> I've never used Grafana chart before - it looks ~really~ nice. I've been trying to think of a good mini-project to start learning Go with as well.

Maybe Grafana is a good starting point...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> Now with youtube stream too: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mghvBegP1TU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mghvBegP1TU)

</comment><comment> kris-nova This is wonderful. I love this so much. Best post of the day IMHO

<comment><USER2> aww. Thanks! I'm looking forward to tasting the results. Metric-driven food for the win.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is really awesome!</comment>


Show HN: Visualize your Dropbox Space Usage - <AUTHOR> https://mkolysh.scripts.mit.edu/whatsinthebox

<comment><USER2> I fail to see the need to authorize a third party to visualise your Dropbox when your files probably all sit at least on one of your machines anyway and there are perectly fine open source tools that do treemap visualisation very well:

* For Windows,use [http://windirstat.info/](http://windirstat.info/)

* For Mac, use [http://www.derlien.com/](http://www.derlien.com/)

* For Linux, use [http://kdirstat.sourceforge.net/](http://kdirstat.sourceforge.net/)

<comment><USER3> I use Dropbox as a glorified email attachment sharing system without installing the desktop client; this is perfect for me because there is no way in the web interface to find large files.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> "Treemap Visualizer would like access to all files and folders in your Dropbox. This app will be able to read and modify everything."

Has anyone tried this yet? Something about "hey this app may or may not alter every file you have on Dropbox" makes me wary, even if the title does imply it's a read-only operation.

<comment><USER5> It's absolutely ridiculous that the permissions required are no more granular than that. Is that the fault of the app or of the Dropbox API?

<comment><USER6> That's the dropbox API. Apparently there's no read/write distinction, and access to metadata is considered a "read", so this app needs full read/write permission.

<comment><USER7> Once you've tried it and got your treemap, you can unauthorize the app from [https://www.dropbox.com/account/security#applications](https://www.dropbox.com/account/security#applications)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Screenshot: [http://i.imgur.com/z9hkHT7.png](http://i.imgur.com/z9hkHT7.png)

The colour and area of the blocks would seem to correspond to the file type and file size respectively.

<comment><USER9> Thanks for that. I thought it broke for me, but then I realized my entire dropbox is one movie file and the blue screen was appropriate.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I made the exact same thing at PennApps Fall 2013! Great minds think alike. ;)

[https://github.com/kevincon/utilityknife](https://github.com/kevincon/utilityknife)

</comment><comment><USER11> "This app will be able to read and modify everything."

Why modify?

<comment><USER10> Unfortunately, there's currently no read-only access for Dropbox API users to access all of the user's files and folders (e.g. to make a treemap visualization). It's read/write or nothing.

<comment><USER11> ouch.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Treemaps have been around for ages. why not just run one on your local dropbox folder?

</comment><comment><USER13> Would be nice if it would tell me where things are located. I can tell they're grouped by folder, but it doesn't tell me what folder that is or where it is within the Dropbox folder. (I know I can find it in my actual Dropbox folder, just wondering why that information is missing from here)

Also, there seems to be a bunch of "undefinedByte"-sized files lying around. Anyone know what those are? Maybe 0-sized files or something?

</comment><comment><USER14> I'm sure this was a cool and fun dev project. I've used a program like this before: [http://www.derlien.com/](http://www.derlien.com/) to visualize and edit/delete files.

But for space management have since switched to [http://spacieapp.com/](http://spacieapp.com/)

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm intrigued, but not enough to click. Ahh. Can someone else take the leap? Provide some details, screenshots, any credentials about who made this? Can't be bothered looking into how hard it is for someone nefarious to get something on *.mit.edu subdomain.

</comment><comment><USER16> Guys, seriously. Somebody built something. He's sharing it with you. Yes, there are other things that can do it.

You don't have to leap on every thread and complain that someone else had the same idea.

</comment><comment><USER17> This is just like [http://windirstat.info/](http://windirstat.info/) which can be run on the desktop. Very handy tool...

<comment><USER18> Yep, and if you're on OS X, you can use Disk Inventory X[0] to get the same tree-like layout.

[0] [http://www.derlien.com/](http://www.derlien.com/)

<comment><USER19> I've been using GrandPerspective for quite a long time. Pretty happy with it, lots of ways to drill down deeper / filter / etc to get at what you're looking for.

[http://grandperspectiv.sourceforge.net/](http://grandperspectiv.sourceforge.net/)

edit: oh, hah, they're almost identical. interesting.

<comment><USER18> Ah, I have used both, but I also haven't been using OS X for the past couple years. One of them, I didn't remember which, was actually a PPC program that required a Rosetta to work. At some point it stopped working, and I switched to the other.

Since I hadn't used them in a while, I forgot which was which. However, some further research says that Disk Inventory X was the PPC program. In that case, I'd also recommend GrandPerspective.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Dropbox has left it difficult to track down large files in their web interface; nice to see someone fill in the (purposely) missing piece.

</comment><comment><USER20> On my 5-year old netbook and my pretty decent spec desktop I just get a white page that goes grey when I move the mouse over it. :(

<comment><AUTHOR> Maybe you have too many files in your Dropbox for the app to handle? It only displays files over 10kb, though..

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> OP: how are you getting around 429 errors thrown by Dropbox when you do a full dirwalk like this?

<comment><AUTHOR> Seems like Dropbox allows that many metadata calls. When I was testing this for myself, I started getting 429s when I would make 5+ refreshes in a minute, but it also rate limits on a user-by-user basis.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Did anyone dare authorize? I find using simple commands like `du` and `tree` sufficient for me...

</comment><comment><USER23> Sample output would be great.

<comment><USER24> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6736049](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6736049)</comment></comment>


Use PNG image compression to send large numbers of rows to the browser - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/sasakiassociates/png-db <comment><AUTHOR> I found this lib while searching for a PNG compression module and loved the "outside the box" thinking behind the idea!

</comment><comment><USER2> How does decompression speed compare to gzip?</comment>


Critical Privilege Escalation Flaw Patched in Kubernetes - <AUTHOR> https://www.securityweek.com/critical-privilege-escalation-flaw-patched-kubernetes <comment><AUTHOR> Heads up, this is a critical Kubernetes security vulnerability that can be exploited without any credentials via a network vector and without leaving a trace.

It fixes Kubernetes issue 71411 [1]: CVE-2018-1002105: proxy request handling in kube-apiserver can leave vulnerable TCP connections.

[https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/71411](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/71411)</comment>


Anyone acquainted with the MIT Enterprise Forum? - <AUTHOR>

The Cambridge chapter labels all of its networking events as "members only" and membership starts at $75/year.  Expecting people to pay for the privilege of meeting each other seems like a yellow flag, but if the forum actually attracts smart people then it's worth the price.  Has anyone here been to any of their meetings?  What's your opinion of them? <comment><USER2> My experience is a few years old, but it probably hasn't changed much. It really depends what you are looking for. The enterprise forum in general is more on the business side than the hacker side, in my experience. I never really made any great connections there, but that may just be me being too introverted. Note that there is also the free e-club (<http://web.mit.edu/e-club/>) and the free 100K competition (<http://www.mit100k.org/>) at MIT.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the link to the e-club. That smells a lot better to me.</comment></comment>