The QWERTY myth - <AUTHOR> http://reason.com/archives/1996/06/01/typing-errors <comment><USER2> For the record, here's the response to that article: <http://www.dvorak- keyboard.com/dvorak2.html>

<comment><USER3> So are there any reliable studies that show 1) the superiority of one over the other or 2) the superiority of one over the other for programming?

<comment><USER4> I don't know of any recent studies, haven't really looked, but I've been typing in Dvorak for about two years and this is my take on it.

1\. I don't think the superiority of one or the other is really the issue here. The issue is making the switch. Those studies are addressing whether it's worth it to switch.

The bottom line is that Dvorak is more efficient in terms of movement. It's optimized for typing in English (other romance languages are quite similar) and QWERTY just isn't.

2\. From personal experience, I think that the mappings of punctuation are superior in Dvorak. I especially like having the dash and underscore easily accessible (next to Return) for programming. I also find punctuation more natural overall in Dvorak.

<comment><USER5> I've been typing Dvorak over 10 years now and more than anything I appreciate the comfort. Even though I type all day long I've never had a typing-related hand problem.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> tl;dr: it's a wordy but alright article about how the idea of an inferior product winning because it got a head start is a myth that has no actual evidence. QWERTY vs DVORAK is one example of this myth, but it's not central to the piece, actually.

<comment><USER7> Moreover, it seems to assume that being lucky is the same as being first. Providing examples of second-comers who were successful (VHS, DOS) is not a sufficient argument that luck doesn't matter in markets.

Interesting read, though.

<comment><USER8> Most claims of "luck" don't hold up when examined closely.

There are rather few cases of some technology being superior in every conceivable way to its active competitor; usually, each has relative pros and cons. Beta _wasn't_ superior in every way to VHS - at every point while they were still earnestly competing, VHS tapes had longer run times. Early Beta tapes only lasted _one hour_ , not even letting you record an entire movie. (ETA: It was _very_ popular to record on LP and SLP modes in VHS, further reducing quality to get extra recording time. Recording fidelity wasn't a winning factor.)

Almost as bad, Sony waited a long time to license the format, _turning away_ interested manufacturers who then produced VHS machines.

End result? A (more) open format that was both more available and distinctly superior in an key aspect won out. Not exactly a roll of the dice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm surprised the article doesn't mention (or refute if need be) one of the "tales" i have heard for why QWERTYUIOP is the top row: you can spell TYPEWRITER using these letters, which was a neat demonstration for potential buyers, back when the name for this new technology was up for grabs...

</comment><comment><USER10> The article seems to assume that social factors like product prevalence should have no bearing on the actual ultimate economic benefits of the dominant player, and that's silly, in my opinion.

We've only seen it more and more often; something may be technically better, but there's more than technical consideration in choosing a product, and if the newer product can't overcome the social inertia associated with the old product, then it doesn't offer a net benefit.

People choose PHP because there is an abundance of PHP programmers and businessmen want to stiff people on pay more than they want a good interpreter running their software.

People choose Windows because the system is familiar and all of the software they know, often niche, rare, or unmaintained, works correctly on it.

And so on.

And then there are instances where the consumers don't really have much say, like Blu-ray v. HD-DVD. They were well about even until the one supergiant corporation (Sony) swooped in with extra incentives for the other supergiant corporations (movie sudios) to get them to choose Blu-ray over HD-DVD, even though HD-DVD is ultimately superior.

So I sympathize with their intention to preserve faith in free markets, but their postulation that markets _always_ make the right choice technically is silly. There are many other factors, including retraining costs, meddling by big players, etc., that can effect the ultimate dominance of a product.

<comment><USER2> I don't necessarily agree with the idea, but there _is_ an economic theory that essentially states that the market is always right given that it has perfect information. You can agree or disagree with that theory, but I don't think what they're saying is necessarily absurd.

<comment><USER11> Even if you hold that theory, there's an implicit _limit as t- >infinity_. Certainly if a new keyboard that's objectively better was introduced today, by tomorrow it wouldn't have >50% marketshare.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> QWERTY was not designed to slow typists down. It was designed to maximize the typing speed without the types(?) getting stuck. This is not the fastest layout now, but was the fastest for mechanical typewriters.

</comment><comment><USER13> I'm a bit irked by the conclusion here: "Apparently the typewriter example is of such importance to many writers because it can so easily persuade people that an interventionist technology policy is necessary. How else to explain its continued use in this literature? Since an interventionist technology policy is no more likely to benefit consumers than are the myriad other government interventions in the market, we should not be surprised that good examples are largely fictional."

I don't see how you can infer that because the basis for an argument of government intervention by some writers is flawed, that government intervention is flawed. Regardless of whether or not government intervention is the right idea, it seems strange for a magazine based on reason to make the claim : "A → ~B" is true, But A is false, therefore B is true.

<comment><USER14> I don't think _Reason_ is saying that this example proves that gov't intervention is flawed. I think they take it as a premise that gov't intervention is generally flawed, and the conclusion here is that we have an example of champions of gov't intervention disingenuously promoting this phenomenon as an example of why gov't intervention is needed.

<comment><USER15> The problem is that I don't personally know of any "big-government" proponents who use QWERTY as an example of how regulation is necessary (only that they say it proves that markets can have path-dependency, and inefficiencies, &c., which is true whether this example holds or not).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Is this the case of the metric system vs English system? IMHO, the metric system is superior, but it is too expensive to change in the US. Or driving on the left or driving on the right. In this case both are similar but it is desirable to have a worldwide standard.

<comment><USER17> It wasn't too expensive to change in the rest of the world, though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> [June 1996]

Edit: this comment score has ranged up to three or four points and back down to zero. Is it not relevant to point out that an article was published _14 years ago_?

<comment> william-newman It depends on what point you think you're making. (And perhaps you should make that point explicitly, so that I don't need to guess it before criticizing it, but if I'm guessing wrong, I apologize in advance.) If you are arguing out that an article from 1996 not timely, your argument is "relevant" but not necessarily correct. Note that the thread <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1062031> was on the front page when I first noticed this article. It contained a comment linking to the 1996 article. I don't know why the the 1996 article became a standalone thread instead of just a comment on the 1062031 thread, but it might be that someone who read the 1062031 comment found the 1996 article surprisingly worthwhile.

IMO, the 1996 article (and even more the 1991ish "Fable of the Keys" academic journal article which preceded it) remain timely because both QWERTY-is- superior and QWERTY-demonstrates-market-failure stories are remarkably hardy perennials, presented as established fact without acknowledging the Liebowitz/Margolis counterargument. (E.g., _Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations_ by David Walsh (2006), carries approving blurbs from _The Financial Times_ and _The Economist_ on its cover, and should be easy to find in a library, maybe even a chain bookstore. "Paul David" and QWERTY appear in the index many times, but Liebowitz and Margolis do not.)

<comment><USER18> My point is simply that the publication date provides some important context for the contents of the essay.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> qwerty and dvorak are open standards. beta and vhs are licensable. windows and mac os are retail products. although all three pairs are "competitors" in a sense, i don't think it's reasonable at all to compare their adoption by the market.</comment>


Artists vs. YouTube: A Billboard Overview - <AUTHOR> http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/digital-and-mobile/7357360/its-a-system-that-is-rigged-against-the-artists-the-war <comment><AUTHOR> > _Azoff chose his moment well. YouTube 's contracts with the major labels are > ending -- Universal Music Group's already has expired, although the two > companies continue to do business on an ongoing basis -- and the U.S. > Copyright Office is conducting a study on the DMCA safe harbors._

Potentially obvious prediction: This is going to be messy, with a lot of mud slinging and accusations.

Personally I'm okay with the system as is - the constant head butting between RIAA and Tech keeps both navigating similar waters. Times will change and new products and services will hopefully bring in more revenue. Now, that doesn't mean artists on RIAA contracts will see any more in their bank accounts, but the industry as a whole seems to be adapting...slowly...painfully...

> _Most Internet companies need to get permission from labels in order to use > their music -- a negotiating dynamic that results in high fees._

...and I have no desire to see that change. What the market will bear, it will bear. Even McDonald's tries to pull "Play for exposure!" if they can get away with it[1].

But, and it's a big but, YouTube as the 'new radio' is a pretty obvious correlative. Just look at how stuff can go viral (e.g. 'Panda') and bring people to a song, increasing its market value. Crazy! Granted, the labels can't totally control this dynamic, which I figure makes them pretty grumpy. We'll see how this plays out in time.

[1] [http://www.businessinsider.com/ex-cops-band-response-to- mcdo...](http://www.businessinsider.com/ex-cops-band-response-to-mcdonalds- request-to-play-sxsw-for-free-2015-3)</comment>


California Megaflood: Lessons from a Forgotten Catastrophe - <AUTHOR> http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=atmospheric-rivers-california-megaflood-lessons-from-forgotten-catastrophe <comment><USER2> If you're curious where these rivers are, take a look at a Map of California Rivers that I made a few years ago[1]. Note that nearly the entire Sierra Nevada range drains through the San Francisco Bay. Also note the small blue globs along the rivers (e.g. Yuba) - these are reservoirs, which provide some degree of flood protection, though probably not enough for the size of event described.

      1. https://sites.google.com/site/calirivermap/

</comment><comment><USER3> I had never heard of these "atmospheric rivers" prior to this article and started doing a little reading.

"Atmospheric rivers are typically several thousand kilometers long and only a few hundred kilometers wide, and a single one can carry a greater flux of water than the Earth's largest river, the Amazon River." [1]

That's really impressive. I'm curious about their density and whether airplanes have to avoid them, or if they're able to fly through.

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

</comment><comment><USER4> Just to fill out the first four pages a little more:

[Edit] In the US [/Edit] your home and office are most likely already set outside the floodwaters of the 100-year storm. New roads are typically designed to convey floodwaters at no more than 1 foot deep for the same event.

Protecting a building that has a lifespan of less than 100 years against an event with a probability of occurring between .005 to .002 (the 200-year to 500-year event) is a hard sell.

<comment><USER5> > Protecting a building that has a lifespan of less than 100 years against an > event with a probability of occurring between .005 to .002 (the 200-year to > 500-year event) is a hard sell.

Only in America. The Delta Works in the Netherlands are designed for the 2000-year flood. This is the minimum - there are areas that are protected against the 10000-year flood.

This makes sense. It is not normal that densely settled areas are flooded at least once during the human lifespan.

<comment><AUTHOR> >Only in America.

You don't seriously claim all of Europe is prepared for a 2000 year flood. I doubt a lot of nations can afford it.

<comment><USER5> South Holland is, and it has 4 million people living in it.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was thinking more of Italy and its notorious construction fiascos.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wild, I've lived here nearly 30 years and had not heard about this flood. I also found the concept of a concentrated stream of moist air (the the "atmospheric river") to be an interesting, if somewhat sensationalized, phenomena. Given the relative density of water vapor in these things they should be pretty easy to spot by satellite.

<comment><USER7> Spotting it isn't really the problem - there's still nothing you can do about it. Anything we could try to do would be like trying to stop a blizzard in Chicago with hair dryers.

Even if you can't spot it you do have time to get out (it's not like all of the rain happens in 24 hours), but the consequences of something like this happening now in California would be enormous for the whole country just on the basis of food. In the 1860's most food was (relatively) local, but these days California actually produces something more than a quarter of the US food supply (quick googling gives widely varying numbers without any attribution, research is up to you), particularly fresh fruits and vegetables. Imagine the Central Valley losing an entire year or more of growing season, probably with the loss of a significant percentage of fruit & nut trees that take years to replace. The ripple effect through the rest of the economy would be ugly.

<comment><USER6> Well if someone could tell me that the big storm today was likely to last for a month and by the end of it much of California would be a federal disaster area, I'd consider driving over to Reno to spend some quality time on much higher ground :-)</comment></comment></comment>


V8 Release 5.1 - <AUTHOR> http://v8project.blogspot.com/2016/04/v8-release-51.html <comment><USER2> In case anyone is wondering, NodeJS v6 is right around the corner with V8 5.x. Node is going to get a serious boost of ES2015 features.

Including but not limited to: Proper tail recursion (^_^) and destructuring.

Tracked at [http://node.green](http://node.green)

We don't have an ES2015 features page up to date yet, but it's going to be ready any day now (and we're going to link to node.green anyway most likely).

<comment><USER3> To be precise, Node.js 6.x will include V8 5.0. There has been a little discussion on being able to include V8 5.1 down the road, maybe, but there is nothing concrete on it at this point.

Also, the fate for tail-call-elimination is pretty uncertain at the moment; see: [https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc- syntax](https://github.com/tc39/proposal-ptc-syntax)

<comment><USER2> Oh hi, fancy seeing you here :]

Note that ptc syntax _ensures_ tail calls, tail calls themselves have _already_ been approved in ES2015 and are live in V8 (under a flag), you can follow their status here: [https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=4698](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=4698)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> _" WASM

5.1 has a preliminary support for WASM. You can enable it via the flag --expose_wasm in d8. Alternatively you can try out the WASM demos with Chrome 51 (Beta Channel)."_

The future is coming fast.

<comment><USER5> Y but how long will it take to get to the point where enough users have browsers that support WASM ? 10 years?

<comment><USER6> It took WebGL about 4 years to spread, the reason it took so long was in hardware (GPU, drivers ...). Wasm is just CPU-related, I believe it can reach most of the people within a year.

Pouplar browsers get updated quite often. And those, which got updated rarely, became unpopular. Everything will be fine, I think :)

<comment><USER7> One of the major drags on WebGL was a lack of iOS support. Once that was in place there was an explosion in usage. I suspect we'll see the same here.

<comment><USER8> WebGL still sucks on mobiles.

90% of the time someone puts a link to some WebGL demo on HN or Reddit I either don't get it running at all, or get single digit FPS after the mobile turned into oven mode.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> What's the latest word on native ES2015 module support (i.e. the import keyword) in V8 or Node.js? Every ES2015 comparison table I know omits it, but it's the big one that could significantly reduce the modern JS toolchain complexity.

<comment><USER10> [https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=1569#c53](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=1569#c53)

There's been some activity lately, but so far just looks like they're laying groundwork. Dunno where it is in the priority list. The last blocker was supposedly the finalization of the HTML5 module-loader spec, and that came out a couple weeks ago.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Did they run speed benchmarks against older versions of V8?

I'm wondering about the performance cost of these new features (hopefully zero).

<comment><USER12> Unfortunately it is much larger than zero see [https://groups.google.com/d/msg/strengthen- js/ojj3TDxbHpQ/T6...](https://groups.google.com/d/msg/strengthen- js/ojj3TDxbHpQ/T6bTRDlnEwAJ).

It is very sad that people working on es spec do not care enough about performance

<comment><USER13> Yup. To some, performance is just an implementation detail, and they keep adding hooks like @@hasInstance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm really excited about array comprehensions, anyone know if that's actually going to be part of ES2015? Google kinda gives me mixed messages on this one.

<comment><USER15> ES2015 was finalized in June 2015. Comprehensions aren't part of it.

If you ask MDN: Was initially in the ECMAScript 6 draft, but got removed in revision 27 (August 2014). Please see older revisions of ES 6 for specification semantics.

Non-standard. Do not use! The array comprehensions is non-standard, and it's unlikely to be added to ECMAScript. For future-facing usages, consider using Array.prototype.map, Array.prototype.filter, and arrow functions.

Array comprehensions were removed in Babel 6.0

<comment><USER16> What really pisses me off are the posts about Coffeescript being supplanted by ES6 like it's a complete substitute. Array comprehensions are just one example of what JS folks are still missing out on.

<comment><USER15> List comprehensions are incredible. But they're just syntactic sugar for map() and filter() and lambdas.

Python's

      prev = [1,2,3,4]
      next = [x * 2 for x in old]

Is the same as javascript's

      prev = [1,2,3,4];
      next = prev.map(x => x * 2);

Python's

      next = [x for x in prev if x % 2 == 0]

is the same as javascript's

      next = prev.filter(x => x % 2 === 0);

And finally, python's

      next = [x * 2 for x in prev if x % 2 == 0]

is the same as

      next = prev.filter(x => x % 2 == 0).map(x => x * 2);

It could be nice to have a "mapIf" function that accepts a mapping and a predicate, but I think the extra verbosity makes the above code easier to understand.

      next = prev.mapIf(x => x * 2, x => x % 2 == 0);

<comment><USER16> I think it's important to remember that Array::map() and Array::filter() construct new Arrays (even if the old one is quickly "lost" and collected). It's probable v8 sees this and does some trickery to make use of the existing allocated Array, but I doubt it.

let next = [ 1, 2, 3, 4 ].map(x => x * 2);

versus:

next = (x * 2 for x in [ 1 .. 4 ])

...which becomes:

// Generated by CoffeeScript 1.10.0

(function() { var next, x;

      next = (function() {
        var i, results;
        results = [];
        for (x = i = 1; i <= 4; x = ++i) {
          results.push(x * 2);
        }
        return results;
      })();

}).call(this);

Array::map()/filter() get points for encouraging immutable transformations.

<comment><USER15> This could probably be solved if Javascript had map/filter/reduce functions for iterators (and hopefully dictionaries) as well as arrays.

And of course a range(start,stop,step) iterator similar to python's range.

it would then be a matter of:

      next = range(1,40000).map(x => x * 2);

and because range would be an iterator, the only array created would be next.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Thanks for the link. I didn't know about Orinoco, and I'm excited about WASM.

...and performance improvements are always good!

</comment><comment><USER18> Does this have any implications for npm addon authors?

<comment><USER19> I'll assume that by "npm addon" you're simply referring to plain old npm packages (native or js). (If not, ignore my comment.)

As far as I know there are currently no big API changes happening in v8, plus the abstraction layer for native node packages (nan, Native Abstracts for Node.js) has been, afaik, quite excellent at shielding native package developers from a lot of potential API breakage -- so generally it can be expected that there will be either no or very minor implications for native packages -- and no implications at all for non-native packages since those work purely with the node API which is not tied to the v8 API.

We'll know more once the v8 project's API changes doc will be updated with 5.1 info, and node core has created its vee-eight-5.1 branch.

EDIT: added clarification about non-native packages; clarity</comment></comment>


Readlang – My Bootstrapped Language Learning Web-App - <AUTHOR> http://steveridout.com/2014/03/22/readlang-my-bootstrapped-language-learning-web-app.html

<comment><AUTHOR> To be clear: The "my" in the title refers to Steve Ridout.

</comment><comment><USER2> How does it differ from Duolingo ?

<comment><AUTHOR> There is an introduction video here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I10qWoQEi5U&list=PLIGa- eWCss...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I10qWoQEi5U&list=PLIGa- eWCssj9K_PpNGLnIs8vcENanVx3_)</comment></comment>


Rolls-Royce brings propeller engines back in vogue - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/oct/20/travelandtransport-rollsroyce

<comment><AUTHOR> This type of engine is quite dramatic looking:

[http://pic60.picturetrail.com/VOL1689/10590113/19957526/3259...](http://pic60.picturetrail.com/VOL1689/10590113/19957526/325959229.jpg)

<comment><USER2> I thought the article said the engine doesn't have a casing, but in the picture, it does. Kind of makes sense though: if I understand jet engines, they must compress air, so the air must be compressed in some kind of container. This design just uses smaller containers.

<comment><USER3> they were saying there's no casing around the propeller part of the engine, in a turbofan, the casing encloses the blades.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> During the time I worked for US Airways, a Boeing 757 with a Rolls Royce engine lost a ball bearing and all the oil dumped out of the plane. This is known as a "significant event." The pilot kept the engine on so it was destroyed by the time the plane landed.

The investigation concluded that a mechanic had probably made some type of mistake in maintenance. This was the most likely cause because there was no evidence that strongly pointed to any other cause. It very well could have been a mechanic's fault, but there was something fishy about the whole thing.

I'm not nearly as comfortable flying as I was before I had that job.

<comment><USER5> It's good that you don't know how food is made. :)

<comment><USER6> Bismarck said, law is like sausages. It's not to known how they are made.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > Another reason for the higher efficiency of open-rotor

> engines is that, unlike traditional engines, they do

> not have a casing around the propeller.

"Traditional" engines? Isn't this nomenclature a little backwards, given that propellers pre-date jet engines?

EDIT: I still haven't figured out how to quote correctly here... this site seems to only use a tiny subset of Markdown.

<comment><USER8> There is no correct way to quote. You can either use italics or quotes, but there is no markup that will trigger the blockquote HTML tag.

There is a "help" link next to the edit text box (but not the reply text box, for some reason): <http://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> So propeller engines are more efficient than jet engines? Is this true regardless of speed, plane size? I always thought jet engines were revolutionary, were they really just quieter?

<comment><USER10> Yes, propeller based engines are much more efficient. They don't waste quite as much energy "throwing" air out the back. It is generally true regardless of size. However, using a propeller does limit the speed of the plane. In fact, an airliner with an open-rotor engine (like the one described in the article) will most likely fly just a bit slower (around Mach 0.75-0.8 instead of 0.85 like most airliners today). The propeller becomes very inefficient when shocks start to form on it. Therefore, you have limitations in how fast you can spin the blades and how fast you can fly. You eventually reach a speed where the blades cannot generate any more thrust to keep accelerating the aircraft.

Jet engines were revolutionary, but not because they are quieter. Pure jet engines are actually incredibly loud. The only way the noise was reduced in modern airline engines was the advent of high bypass engines where most of the air going through the engine is only slightly accelerated.

<comment><USER9> Another thought. I heard that putting a duct around a prop gives you more thrust ceteris paribus. Is this just not true, or maybe only true for slow speeds?

<comment><USER10> Yes, it is generally true. There is not a big dependence on flight speed because the inlet on jet engines slows down the flow before it enters the engine. So even though an airliner might be flying at Mach 0.85, the face of the engine only sees about Mach 0.3. The reason the duct improves the thrust of the engine is because it reduces the pressure losses (improves efficiency). A fan (or any stage in the engine compressor) increases the pressure of the air. Since air moves from high pressure to lower pressure, the air that you just pressurized wants to sneak back around to the front of the fan around the tips. By putting a duct around the fan, you help keep air from sneaking back and robbing you of the work that you just did on it. In fact, the efficiency that you gain is highly dependent on the clearances between the duct and the tip of the fan. A lot of work goes into reducing these clearances as much as possible. You can imagine that that is a non-trivial task since the parts of the engine expand and contract based on temperature, and also vibrate and have dynamic structural behavior.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: OverLook.io – Get your non-technical friends involved in QA and Testing - <AUTHOR> http://www.overlook.io

<comment><USER2> This looks great, however I currently have hundreds of manual tests in a spreadsheet. I need to be able to import the tests from a column of the spreadsheet rather than hand type / copy & paste each test in

<comment><USER3> Tried using something like Selenium to automate your UI testing? (Unless I'm misunderstanding you)

<comment><USER2> We are in the process of automating the regression tests. Until that is complete there is a significant amount of manual testing still to do.

My point was that although this tool looks like it would help a lot, I have not found any way to import my current manual test descriptions, so I would have to copy & paste them in one by one (although I suppose I could automate that )

To the devs, it would be great to be able to import something like a simple CSV with my test descriptions.

<comment><USER4> Hi phelm,

We offer QA/integration testing as a service here at www.rainforestqa.com and currently support many paying customers. We also can import tests from various sources (testlink, spreadsheets, etc.) to make it as easy as possible to get immediate coverage with Rainforest.

Send me a note at firstname.lastname@example.com if you're interested and want to learn more.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It seems very dev focused. I tried the demo out and it took me awhile to figure out what I needed to do. The Question should be larger and have more information about what I should do

<comment><USER6> My thoughts exactly. I'm a dev and I still stared at the demo for a while before I could tell what was Overlook and what was the site I was testing. Maybe this could be fixed by more specific/explanatory questions, but I think it definitely needs better visual cues as well.

<comment><USER7> It really helped me to see a screenshot of the "tester" interface, I didn't quite get it until I saw that. It's behind one of the "try a live demo" links.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I tried the demo and found it wasn't very intuitive.

My eyes were repeatedly drawn to the massive wall of text and input boxes in the lower frame while the top frame referred to me in the 3rd person ("User should be able to enter the number", "User will put the lotion in the basket", etc).

If I didn't already know what the site was attempting to do, I wouldn't have done anything with the top frame since it seemed to make impersonal statements than actually telling me what to do.

If the goal is for non-technical people to use that testing interface it needs to be much more clear as to what they should do and give better feedback when they do what they're supposed to.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great feedback, thanks. Will work on a more intuitive demo.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Some feedback:

1\. (I think) that all .price-box elements should have the same height, the pricing page makes me do a double take when I scroll to the bottom.

2\. In your "Create Test Plan" screenshot, you should change "Timmy Jones"'s icon to be different from your own ("Team" section) later in the page

I had a similar idea around allowing any and all people to participate in integration testing. If you think about it, having "experienced" testers is probably _not_ a good thing for your tests :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! Will work on these ASAP.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Nice naming: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto- antonym](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auto-antonym)

<comment><AUTHOR> =)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> In mobile safari, the fixed header gets messed up when you scroll, the lower third part of the text gets cut off. Good luck! :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yea... I went with web-first since that's what I needed. Mobile-happy is on the way.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This looks good. For the integrated plan, which tools can it integrate with?

<comment><AUTHOR> Looking for user feedback to drive the integration priority. Drop me a line - email@example.com

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is nice - any competitors?

<comment><USER13> I have not looked at both products very much but it seems similar in some ways to [https://www.rainforestqa.com/](https://www.rainforestqa.com/)

<comment><USER14> It might feel similar, but they don't take care of the testing itself which is a major pain point. My 2 cents :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This site could use some QA.

The Name field has input type="email", which causes this: [http://puu.sh/8V8VE.png](http://puu.sh/8V8VE.png)

Looks like they're not ready for prime-time just yet ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> Indeed. Thanks for catching this. It's been a race since launching to button things up.

<comment><USER15> Congrats on launching by the way. You've probably heard the old Reid Hoffman quote about launch dates. Site looks really good, best of luck!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Please get rid of the giant pop-up banner begging for my email address. I immediately thought "this website is a waste of my time" when I saw it. I know you are looking for feedback so I continued looking at the website, but if I hadn't then I would have just left.

The idea does seem to have potential, but the marketing text is way too verbose and it is more about the feature list than the value it provides.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd always wanted to try ExitMonitor (or equivalent services) from a pure optimization standpoint. So far it hasn't proved out to be worth it, and the annoying factor certainly overpowers the lift it provides.</comment></comment>


444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444.com - <AUTHOR> I can't seem to register a 44444444(n) website.<p>Any history behind this? Anyone? <comment><USER3> I haven't been keeping up, but it certainly used to be the case that domain names can contain digits but have to start with a letter - <USER2> [https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1035) where it mentions "rules for arpanet host names".</comment>


Open WhisperSystems  Blog  TextSecure, Now With 10 Million More Users - <AUTHOR> http://whispersystems.me/blog/cyanogen-integration <comment><USER2> Great!</comment>


Apple could announce the next iPhone on September 12 - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2017/08/23/apple-could-announce-the-next-iphone-on-september-12/ <comment><USER2> With a headphone jack?

I know several people who have switched because of that insanity.

<comment><USER3> My iPhone 6 Plus just went off contract. As soon as it dies, or slows down, I'm going to buy the best Android phone with a headphone jack. I'm sure wireless headphones are great, but the high cost - not to mention the silly dongle - just doesn't work for me. It's highly unlikely we will ever see a headphone jack on an Apple phone again. Their disdain for going backwards, let alone admitting they were ever wrong about anything ever, spells doom for the headphone jack. I would not be surprised if they don't remove it from all of their products.

<comment><USER4> While the cost issue is still there, AirPods and the ever increasing competing products really solve this entire issue for me, and then some.

I felt they were overpriced but bought them anyways as a birthday gift to myself. Now that I have them though, I would probably even pay twice as much if that was the only way to have them.

They're the single best 'gadget' I've bought in a very long time and even now, six months in, I regularly have little 'moments' where I realize having bluetooth headphones saved me some (minor) inconvenience.

Furthermore, there are pretty decent bluetooth headphones even at forty bucks these days. I'm pretty sure most of us will end up with cordless headphones in the near future.

I don't think it was smart of Apple to go jack-less before cordless was the norm, but then they often do these types of things (non-removable battery/storage, walled-garden iDevices, etc.).</comment></comment></comment>


Chernobyl: The True Cost of Technical Debt - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/better-programming/chernobyl-the-true-cost-of-technical-debt-8307e6f4d53c <comment><USER2> I'd compare retry logic that doesn't exponentially back off as somewhat similar to the Chernobyl incident. It increases load at the exact moment you don't want that.

</comment><comment><USER3> Technical debt!? True cost of intellect.

We are living organism, our sole purpose is to live and take what nature gives us. instead we go and poke our nose in every possible experiment as we can. All for what? intellectual supremacy?

After the first experimentalist dies, then what happens?

Other evil minds take over and milks the opportunity.

Ain't this common throughout everywhere?

We all see, instead we choose to ignore it!</comment>


Ford is taking on Tesla with a new group called Edison - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/1092396/ford-f-is-taking-on-tesla-tsla-with-a-new-electric-car-group-called-edison/ <comment><USER2> I think just the choice of name shows the typical big organisation doesn't 'get it' syndrome.

</comment><comment> King-Aaron _So they can steal all the ideas and patent them_?

<comment><USER3> Don't worry! Westinghouse will come along, buy out Tesla, and destroy Edison!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I like it, kind of, but it's a shame because the story of Tesla vs the big auto makers seems to have a parallel with Tesla and Edison and many tech enthusiasts may already be on team Tesla. I do like Ford's work on technology though.</comment>


"Good Artists Copy; Great Artists Steal" (2013) - <AUTHOR> http://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/03/06/artists-steal/

<comment><USER2> I've always interpreted the quote as meaning that good artists are able to recognize worthy work and imitate it, while great artists take that work and make it their own, improve upon and personalize it.

The Macintosh team "stole" the GUI from PARC, insomuch as they turned an academic experiment into a user-friendly, commercially viable product with its own refined sensibility and personality.

Samsung was a good enough artist to recognize that the iPhone was worth copying slavishly (albeit poorly), but they never turned their imitation into a distinct work unto itself.

<comment><USER3> Can you tell the difference between a Samsung Galaxy S5 and and iPhone 5? If yes, then why isn't the Galaxy series a distinct work with its own sensibility and personality?

<comment><USER4> Looking at images on Google ... it just looks like a bigger iPhone with a slightly smooshed home button. Reminds me a lot of all those cheap knock-off things you can buy on random markets in places like Bosnia and Serbia (in my personal experience, I know there's many more out there) where they make it look off just enough to avoid being sued.

For example, Adibos sneakers: [http://www.funfacts.com.au/images/fake- counterfeit-adidas-sh...](http://www.funfacts.com.au/images/fake-counterfeit- adidas-shoes12.jpg)

Not to say Samsung phones are knock-off iPhones, just that you could easily sell me one as such. Especially if I wasn't a techie. Hell, I'd be surprised if my mum could tell me I'm wrong if I said Apple released a bigger iPhone and showed her a Samsung Galaxy.

<comment><USER5> "Hell, I'd be surprised if my mum could tell me I'm wrong if I said Apple released a bigger iPhone and showed her a Samsung Galaxy."

So? I could show a new Mercedes model to a non-car enthusiast and say it is a BMW and they couldn't tell the difference.

<comment><USER4> So practical things look a lot alike? I don't know. But I'm almost certain you couldn't show a Pollock to a non-painting enthusiast and convince them it was a Picasso.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I love their travels through the literature to find out who may of originated a quote. That the first published instance was 1892 (which Picasso was just 11) suggests that the conceptual quote was already out there.

I've always wondered though how Steve internalized that thought. One less charitable interpretation was that he felt that 'greater artists' had more right to a concept than lesser artists because they could do more with it. The literature has certainly portrayed him as very protective of ideas that he has championed, without regard to the idea's origin.

<comment><USER7> This is certainly a well researched one. And seeing so many versions throughout the history, does make me think, if some is going to change it again :).

Well Steve Jobs introduced fonts to computer. Something that he stole from the hands of specialized calligraphers and enabled everyone to produce great content.

<comment><USER3> > Well Steve Jobs introduced fonts to computer.

What? First of all, I think that you're confusing typefaces and fonts. A computer font is computer code that describes how the size and shape, orientation, etc. of a collection of glyphs should be output onto the screen. Computers had successfully output text to a screen for decades before the Macintosh.

The Xerox Star, which came out in 1981, three years before the Apple Macintosh, had sans-serif and serif typefaces:

[http://www.digibarn.com/collections/screenshots/xerox- star-8...](http://www.digibarn.com/collections/screenshots/xerox- star-8010/xerox-star-8010-07.jpg)

The Macintosh might have been the first popular commercially available machine that offered several computer fonts, but Jobs certainly did not come up with the idea.

<comment><USER8> The MIT Lisp Machine source tree contains Times Roman and Helvetica fonts dating from 1977.

<comment><USER3> I didn't mean to suggest that the Star was the first commercial computer that offered multiple fonts. I picked the Star because it came before the Macintosh there were good pictures of it available. I believe that the Alto also had a font that set a typeface in cursive, and even came with its own font editor, but I'd have to look harder to find videos or pictures of that.

<comment><USER8> I think you were correct to identify the Star (or at least the prototype of it), The article on the history of Smalltalk that was posted yesterday gives a date of 1972 for the first Xerox PARC font editor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It's interesting how these quote with no clear attribution can take a life of their own. It's like the quote attributed to Burke that "all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." You see that quote referenced everywhere, and it is a great quote, but it doesn't appear in any of Burke's writings.

</comment><comment><USER10> [http://i.imgur.com/7LipLvS.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/7LipLvS.jpg)

<comment><USER11> Where is this from?

<comment><USER12> I am guessing:

Steal Like an Artist by Austin Kleon

[http://austinkleon.com/2011/03/30/how-to-steal-like-an- artis...](http://austinkleon.com/2011/03/30/how-to-steal-like-an-artist- and-9-other-things-nobody-told-me/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm fond of attributing this quote to myself, but I may have the causality reversed.

<comment><USER14> This quote created you?!?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I always knew the "talent borrows, genius steals" version and it being attributed to Oscar Wilde. While I couldn't find any concrete evidence online to him having said that, I still like this version the best.

</comment><comment><USER16>
      It's not cheating to copy.

      - Paul Graham

[http://www.paulgraham.com/taste.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/taste.html)

</comment><comment><USER17> IMHO, it doesn't matter how the quote was created.

What matters is Mr. Jobs said the quote. He said artists both copy and steal. He did not say 'create'. Can we agree on this?

And following may be common knowledge on HN but let me just bring them up for the benefit of those who may not know.

1\. Remember the $350 bonus Mr. Jobs did not give to Steve Wozniak, which was rightfully Wozniak's. This bonus was profit from their very first join venture, designing board for Atari.

2\. And before there was the Apple Inc. the Computer company, there was Apple Corps Ltd, of the Beatles fame. The name of 'Apple' in Apple Inc (the computer maker) was 'copied' without authorization from the Apple Corps Ltd (of the Beatles). There were multiple litigations between them over the name.

I really hate to bring these up with Mr. Jobs gone but let's not forget these things happened. He was a great figure no doubt.</comment>


Taurinus X200 laptop now FSF-certified to respect your freedom - <AUTHOR> https://shop.libiquity.com/product/taurinus-x200 <comment><USER2> Yea, this is just a Lenovo X200 w/ libreboot. The same old laptop that's been around for years and years, now with a crappy sticker over the windows key!

[http://libreboot.org/docs/hcl/x200.html](http://libreboot.org/docs/hcl/x200.html)

<comment><USER3> You forgot the ridiculous price tag for a refurb X200. My stacked X201 8Gb of RAM, 256Gb Samsung 840 pro, new 9-cell, ultrabase with DVDRW, keyboard, mouse, 22" TFT cost about the price of their bottom end model in total (via ebay)

I assume it hasn't got a hard disk in it as well as they are technically standalone computers with closed source firmware as well these days.

 _Freedom_ is expensive.

<comment><USER4> > Freedom is expensive.

I'm willing to pay that price for owning something that I know cannot spy on me, does not have remote kill switches I can't control, and is completely serviceable from bottom to top by any third party.

It really is sad that these requirements are now expensive. They used to be taken for granted.

<comment> Lx1oG-AWb6h_ZG0 But if there's one thing we learnt the last few years, it's that we were never able to take those things for granted in the first place. You were never free of threat of spyware or kill switches. If anything, we have gotten much better at security than ever before.

<comment><USER5> Security from whom? Malware has always been fairly easy to avoid as a consumer. Built-in backdoors? What do you do about that?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> _Notebook designed and manufactured by Wistron Corporation, assembled by Lenovo Group Ltd., and modified by Libiquity LLC. Product contains a combination of new and refurbished parts._

So it's a rebadged Thinkpad?

<comment><USER7> A Lenovo Thinkpad X200 is itself a rebadged _Wistron Mocha-1_ , if you want to think of it that way.

Despite what companies like HP/Compaq, Gateway, Dell, Lenovo, etc. want you to think, their products are actually mostly just branded by them, and mainly the work of ODMs such as Compal, Inventec, Pegatron, Quanta, and Wistron. Looking on the motherboard often reveals the true name and manufacturer of the product:

[http://www.laptopschematic.com/wp- content/uploads/2010/04/Mo...](http://www.laptopschematic.com/wp- content/uploads/2010/04/Mocha-1.jpg)

(HannStar is the manufacturer of the actual PCB.)

<comment><USER3> Most stuff is like this. If you pick up an HP, Casio or TI calculator these days you'll find they are all Kinpo calculators with slightly different firmware.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I want freedom from ugly stickers on new laptops! I currently have to take a blow-dryer to remove them.

</comment><comment><USER9> "The Free Software Foundation loves this laptop, but you won't" [http://www.pcworld.com/article/2879086/the-free-software- fou...](http://www.pcworld.com/article/2879086/the-free-software-foundation- loves-this-laptop-but-you-wont.html)

\--

Why the FSF loves these old ThinkPads

\- Trisquel GNU/Linux operating system.

\- The low-level firmware on the laptop was replaced.

<comment><USER10> They also have great keyboards, great pointing devices, no irritating touch pad, and are highly portable and highly robust. It would be nice if there was something newer that actually compared on these fronts, but there just doesn't seem to be. (I am using a 2015 MBP presently and it's pretty ghastly compared to any of my X-series Thinkpads, except the X1 which is even worse.)

One bummer about these is that the aspect ratio isn't 4:3, though.

<comment><USER11> I haven't used old Thinkpads but my current x250 is great:

1)great pointing device - check (the buttons are back)

2)no annoying touch pad - it's there but it's small and easy to set to very low sensivity (I use it only for occasional quick click with my thumb)

3)highly portable - check + great battery life (I sometimes get more than 15 hours)

I've got 8gb of RAM but 16GB chip is already available (RAM is not soldered but there is only one slot). The display (IPS 1920x1080) is fantastic and the keyboard is fantastic as well (well, apparently it depends if you are lucky to get it from one manufacturer over the other).

I am not a fan of 16:9 but other than that I love almost everything about this laptop.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I just wish they would make something like this on newer hardware

<comment><USER12> Librem 13 and Librem 15v2 [1] are one blob away from being FSF-certifiable. And they are brand new hardware.

[1] [https://puri.sm/](https://puri.sm/)

<comment><USER13> It isn't going to happen, at least not through the use of Libreboot [0], which is what the X200 in the parent article relies on for their firmware replacement. The X200 is one of the latest support ThinkPad models, as the newer ones also use Intel Management Extensions. Without replacing these binary blobs with free software you won't be able to get the FSF certification. [1] Or would it fall under the "secondary embedded processor" exception?

>Will the Purism Librem laptops be supported?

>Probably not. There are several privacy, security and freedom issues with these laptops, due to the Intel chipsets that they use. See #intel. There are signed proprietary blobs which cannot be replaced (e.g. Intel Management Engine and CPU microcode updates). It uses the proprietary Intel FSP blob for the entire hardware initialization, which Intel won't provide the source code for. The Video BIOS (initialization firmware for the graphics hardware) is also proprietary.

>It will likely take many years to replace even one of these blobs, let alone all of them. Some of them (ME firmware and microcode) can't even be replaced, which immediately disqualifies these laptops from being added to libreboot.

[0] [http://libreboot.org/faq/#librem](http://libreboot.org/faq/#librem)

[1] [https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/criteria](https://www.fsf.org/resources/hw/endorsement/criteria)

<comment><USER14> Purism claims to have gotten access to intel CPUs specially fused to run unsigned Management Engine firmware, and it claims to have made progress on a minimal replacement for the ME firmware.

The plan for the microcode is to just not ship any updates, either in the bios or the default distro.

The other parts will indeed take a lot more time, but it isn't hopeless.

[https://puri.sm/posts/pioneering-cpu-efforts-to-liberate- lap...](https://puri.sm/posts/pioneering-cpu-efforts-to-liberate-laptop- hardware/)

[https://puri.sm/posts/weekly-update-on-librem- production-201...](https://puri.sm/posts/weekly-update-on-librem- production-2015-10-02/)

<comment><USER13> Wow, I wonder how they pulled that off. It's certainly a good start, but since it will be shipping with non-Free (though replaceable) BIOS binaries it would still fall short of the Respects Your Freedom hardware certification requirements. I did some digging since I have little knowledge of the Purism project. The Purism project offers an estimate of one year for replacing the non-Free blobs in the firmware. The Libreboot FAQ says that it could take years to replace the Intel FSP or Video BIOS, much less both. Given that a Coreboot developer has expressed doubts [0, 1] about the bold claims the Purism project has made in the past I'm inclined to take the word of the folks working on Libreboot. If by the time, if ever, a truly Libre product ships from Purism will it be any less dated than the X200 we have now?

[0] [http://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2015/08/09/the-truth-about- pu...](http://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2015/08/09/the-truth-about-purism- behind-the-coreboot-scenes/)

[1] [http://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2015/02/23/the-truth-about- pu...](http://blogs.coreboot.org/blog/2015/02/23/the-truth-about-purism-why- librem-is-not-the-same-as-libre/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Because a Core Duo and GMA combo is the very definition of respecting freedom. ;)

</comment><comment><USER16> I love how they called it a "small ultraportable".

<comment><USER17> The X200 is also a viable self-defense tool, unlike those pesky macbooks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Too bad 2GB has been unusable for a decade or so.</comment>


Man-Computer Symbiosis (1960) - <AUTHOR> https://groups.csail.mit.edu/medg/people/psz/Licklider.html <comment><USER2> For context, here's a great post on Licklider from The Digital Antiquarian:

[https://www.filfre.net/2012/01/the-roots-of- infocom/](https://www.filfre.net/2012/01/the-roots-of-infocom/)

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a brilliant paper, it seems more applicable and relevant today as we are developing modern AI and defining the design how AI will interact with users and programmers. The author did miss the mark on his prediction (he said it Advance AI will be doing the job by 1980's which obviously didn't happen).</comment>


Ask HN: What's the role of the most successful coding bootcamp graduate you know - <AUTHOR> Bootcamp graduates have gone on to do a lot of great things which I think can be encouraging to people entering the software field. However, their background is often times not discussed as they move into higher roles. What are some cool accomplishments of people that you know who attended a boot camp? <comment><AUTHOR> In our organization, we have some bootcamp grads in lead engineering though. How often do grad found startups?</comment>


2012's Best Linux desktop: Linux Mint 13 - <AUTHOR> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/2012s-best-linux-desktop-linux-mint-13/11110

<comment><USER2> An article by zdnet.com

Amusing.

<comment><USER3> I don't get it. What's the joke? I never really cared enough about zdnet to know anything about it.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Google Places X Instagram- Michelin Starred Restaurants in the Bay Area - <AUTHOR> https://www.sglinks.com/san-francisco-bay-area/michelin-starred-restaurants/ <comment><AUTHOR> I built this thinking combining Google Places and Instagram would be an interesting way of discovering cool places. I am not sure if it is compelling as a standalone site... but perhaps it could be white labelled to publishers who curate their own directory of places, or to a chain of hotels or cafes to showcase their locations.

I have tried to make it as fast, mobile friendly, and low maintenance as possible. It does not use the big JS frameworks and is basically generated as a static site hosted on Netlify for free.</comment>


What life was like before the Web - <AUTHOR> http://matt-welsh.blogspot.com/2011/02/what-life-was-like-before-web.html

<comment><USER2> Just to add to that, coming to a full-blown TCP/IP connection from dialup was mind-altering. When I was a young teenager, I started using BBSes in the early 1990's. With those, there was not really a notion of doing several things at once. If you were downloading some file, you couldn't browse around and post to message boards or anything in the meantime. If a download was happening (ahh ZMODEM, oh how we loved thee), that was all you could do. Full stop. I distinctly remember the first time I discovered I could launch Netscape _and_ be using FTP at the same time. It took a while to get accustomed to the fact that multiple things could go over my connection without me having to worry they would stomp all over each other. Now I can't imagine things working any other way. I'd bet that most people just slightly older than I am have no idea this was ever the case.

</comment><comment><USER3> Heh. He forgot to mention the wonders of gopher, archie and IRC. Now I feel old... :P

</comment><comment><USER4> Calling Yahoo a startup that begat the search engine is glossing over a HUGE chunk of early web history.

Scott Yanoff's list was the real origin of the web directory, which led to Filo and Yang's YAHOO list (yes, it's a backronym)

</comment><comment><USER5> Eternal September: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September>

</comment><comment><USER6> i remember going to the library to write reports for school</comment>


Micromanager Horror Stories - happy-go-lucky http://www.npr.org/2017/07/22/538592692/keep-detailed-records-of-every-minute-and-other-micromanager-horror-stories <comment><AUTHOR> Are there any _NON_ horror stories of micronanagers?</comment>


What's the most asinine technical requirement you've had to work into a design? - <AUTHOR> https://prokopetz.tumblr.com/post/187107725877/heres-one-for-the-techies-whats-the-most <comment><USER2> 90s company who wrote code that'd run as executables in laptops. When we wrote the first version of the cloud back end, we were asked to "compile" all the scripts because "as a company policy we won't allow source code to leave company network"</comment>


Anyone know what happened to EAccelerator? - <AUTHOR> http://eaccelerator.net/

<comment><USER2> I was wondering the same thing as I've been configuring eAccelerator on a new server.

I hope they have backups...

</comment><comment><USER3> Lemme guess... They fucked up their server?

<comment><AUTHOR> Still down after 10 days, must some really messed up servers.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is it worth $60k and four years? - <AUTHOR> I'm a freshman at a university in Boston, and I'm stuck.
All I've ever wanted to be was an entrepreneur, to start a company, to have great ideas and execute on them. First I wanted to be the CEO of a big company. Then I discovered the world of startups, went to a couple TechCrunch conferences and fell in love with the startup culture. I started a couple pseudo-startups. More like projects, none too successful.
BUT -- I feel amazing when I'm working on a new web app or a startup idea. I'm longing for that experience again, but school is making it nearly impossible. I have 23 hours of class per week, a (non-paid) job in a research lab, and a ridiculous number of papers to write and studying to do.
It's a "3, choose 2" scenario: (1) Pursue my tech/startup passion, (2) do well in school, or (3) have a social life. Adderall would probably let me do 2.5 of these, but I'd rather avoid it.
Perhaps the problem is that I chose neuroscience as my major rather than comp sci or business related. I am legitimately interested in neuroscience and the related fields, but it's not the kind of tech I'm into. It probably could be, but not before years of schooling and long-term, low-impact research.
On top of all this, I don't see any entrepreneurial spirit at my school. I haven't met many people remotely interested in tech or startups (trying to fix that by starting a 'hackers & entrepreneurs' organization). I just don't know if this is worth $15k of debt per year.
In an ideal world I would find an internship that brought me to SF this summer, and then never leave. I'd love to take a leave of absence to work at a startup. Being a product guy probably makes that a lot harder.
I'm trying to avoid being in school for four years and hating it. I'm trying to avoid graduating with crazy debt while being forced to take a job that sucks but pays well.
Any advice would be amazing. It's not often that I feel beat down like this. I'm in this period of time where I can make decisions to completely change my life. It's an opportunity that I don't want to screw up.
Thank you. <comment><USER2> Hopefully one day there will be a better alternative to college, but right now it's the easy way to just fall into a nice job without having to try very hard.

Unless you want to try very, very hard, college is the path of least resistance.

Also, because of that, you won't meet many ambitious people. Most peoples' ambitions don't lie very far beyond "be comfortable".

You will also literally never be surrounded by as many 18-22 year old girls in the entire rest of your life. That's opportunity you should think carefully about passing up.

</comment><comment><USER3> Why not change majors to something relevant to your goals that could help you? For example, go for a business major and an accounting minor, or something that seems completely unrelated but could be helpful, like History/Philosophy.

I don't know about your university, but mine was a great place to meet people and network; you never know who will be doing what or who will know what in the future. It's not all about the classrooms, for better or for worse.

Additionally, your professors, if you establish good relationship with them, can be great sources for both recommendations (for job applications) and also for advice/contacts in the future.

(I may have a biased perspective because $60,000 isn't even the cost of two years at my university, so it seems like a fairly low-cost investment.)

So basically, take your time, make connections, and prepare for what you know you want to do. It will probably pay off in the long run, despite the stories of people like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates.

</comment><comment><USER4> Hey man, I am in a similar boat and am balancing an 18hr/wk job, school full- time at Umass (business major), and just launched a health related startup. My overbearing passion is health - more specifically neuroscience so I thought I'd chime in.

I think, intuitively, we conclude that the ideal situation is to be a full time entrepreneur. However many people in the tech-field don't agree with that notion (DHH) and have been very successful in spite of adhering to it. Being strapped for time when working on my startup demands that I be efficient. I don't have the time to waste on superficial/cosmetic features. If I can't get to the meat of the matter quickly then I won't get anywhere. I have been able to use that pressure so I can speed through my school assignments and get to what I really love - which is working on my website.

It's not that I'm afraid to leave college and go full time into my startup but instead that it's my belief that doing so would be too easy. It would be too easy to quit school and spend all my time on my startup, I'd rather earn that right of going full-time when the time comes. Not to mention being faced with the alternative of spending the rest of my days in corporate America is a huge motivation for me to get out of there.

All I can say is my life is hectic as hell. Full time uni, 18/hrs a wk working, a startup, and maintaining a social life. I'll admit I don't have time to shoot the shit, I can't play video games, and the only reading I do is that which has a practical application to my business. But I can honestly say that not only is it possible but I think that I am slowly discovering that it is (counterintuitively) optimal.

Good luck,

</comment><comment><USER5> It depends on your school and what you are learning. My advice is to take classes that you want to learn and don't worry so much about finding a job with your degree. College should broaden your mind and introduce you to new ways of thinking. I made the mistake of majoring in an IT degree. Besides the obvious problem of it not being Computer Science, it is incredibly outdated. I wish that I would have done a liberal arts degree and worked on tech on the side. I have learned so much about myself, life, and what I value from taking classes like philosophy, literature, etc. I really wish I would have realized college was about more than getting a job earlier so I could have switched majors.

</comment><comment><USER6> As a junior at a university outside Boston who has dealt with the same questions, here's my advice:

Personally (this may not be you), I would say drop the lab job unless you're really enjoying it or it's very clearly worth the time. You've got a lot going on for a freshman and you can always explore a lab job again later in your undergraduate career.

I don't worry too much about GPA. You're at a well known school with a good reputation. I don't know what your definition of "do well in school" is, but notwithstanding the unfortunate fact that your school seems to have significantly less grade inflation than similar schools (which is bad when employers are looking at your school and GPA and don't know what the average GPA is, and assume it's higher than it is), I don't believe that having a GPA in, say, the 95th+ percentile is worth the potentially 4-5x more time spent studying than for a GPA in the 50-75th percentile, depending on what classes you take. If you can do something noteworthy as a result of the freed up time, it will be more valuable to employers than a higher GPA. (Looking at your resumé, you are more than on your way already).

There's nothing wrong with neuroscience as a major, but I do advise taking a broad spectrum of classes to expand your horizons. I've learned a huge amount just by exploring the available information about interesting subjects that have only been introduced in my classes. I also extol the merit of taking lots of compsci classes, particularly because they will give you lots of practice programming, which will help you spend less time building your own projects in the long run. They will also expose you to important theoretical computer science ideas that, while not talked about every day in industry, can be indispensable. Taking an algorithms class will make you stop writing grossly inefficient code, for instance.

I'm doing nothing for the next month before I go abroad (besides finding and building my next project) -- let me know if you want to grab lunch or something.

You might want to attend <http://developersdevelopersdevelopersdevelopers.org/>.

</comment><comment><USER7> You could always do your entrepreneurial things you wish and go back to school later. Mind you, it gets tougher each year to go back. But really, what's from stopping you from doing what you want? There is no need to "fall in" to the norms. Do what you want. It's your life.

I will say, though, that you miss many opportunities if you choose to pass up on school. I would take the advice of others and pick a major you truly enjoy. College is for you. It is not high school. Please, do what makes you happy, not what makes your parents happy. You are now grown up. Welcome to the world of responsibility and decision making. It's fun. Enjoy :)

</comment><comment><USER8> I, a Junior now at a University in NY, have often have felt the same way as you. I've never liked school too much and probably won't really pursue anything related to my major, but I don't regret my decision to stick with it at all, due to one aspect: People.

Let's face it, college is fun. You'll probably have some amazing times and make some incredible and long-lasting friends along the way. Don't skip out on that because you know eventually you want to start/work for a startup. You will probably always be able to start a company, but can never really go back to school and enjoy it in the same way you can now.

</comment><comment><USER9> I think you'll find this article very relevant. <http://blog.guykawasaki.com/2006/01/hindsights.html> All the best.

</comment><comment><USER10> Don't be in such a rush or you'll miss the best parts of growing up. You've got to stop and look around to find out what those things are.

</comment><comment><USER11> Your in a city with a great startup culture. Staying in school in that city and thereby staying exposed to that great startup culture for 3+ years could very well be worth what debt you will accrue in the meantime, and if your smart enough to do well at neuro-science, you will probably get out of that debt in short order.

</comment><comment><USER12> "Legitimate interest" just isn't the same as passion...you can already see the years of unpaid lab work and anticipate the academic tedium (leading to a series of $30k a year postdocs well into your thirties.) My advice: pick a major you actually have passion for not one that you believe people expect you to have.

</comment><comment><USER13> It depends on how you view education, as simply a means to a financial end, or as a personal enrichment, a chance to learn and grow. Money isn't everything, there are many wonderful things to study, and who knows, maybe you combine your major and being an entrepreneur in a fulfilling way.

</comment><comment><USER14> As someone who felt the exact same thing as you going through school, I say just enjoy school if you can. I loathed school -- but looking back, I wish I had embraced it more. Not necessarily the academia -- but the atmosphere. Plus, your GPA doesn't matter at all -- especially if you're going into the startup world (at least it didn't for me). I got a job at a startup right out of school and have since started a company with a few others. What is meant to happen, happens, in my opinion.

I now look back and wished I had spent a bit more time forming relationships with people and doing stupid things while I still could. It gets much harder to meet people after college as well in my experience. Just hack in your spare time and keep building projects. If one really takes off -- go for it.</comment>