Naught.js: zero downtime deployment for node.js - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/indabamusic/naught

<comment><USER2> I've never been interested in hot code-swapping; I find it's sufficient to just take that resource out of the pool, give it the new goodies and then boot it up again. I know the Erlang runtime can do this, but I've yet to find a good use case.

As far as std{err,out} redirection, does Node.js have no Unicorn equivalent?

Daemonization (and respawning) should be handled by a process supervisor, like supervisord/Upstart/Monit or whatever. They can do more than just 'this process died, restart it.'

Also, most of this logging code didn't need to be written:

<https://github.com/indabamusic/naught/blob/master/src/log.co>

Just use logrotate.

<comment><AUTHOR> I apologize - "hot code swapping" may be a misnomer. Naught does the process that you describe about taking the resource out of the pool, giving it the new goodies, and booting it up again.

The native cluster API _is_ the Unicorn equivalent in the node.js world. Naught is essentially unicorn for node. And naught _is_ the equivalent of a process supervisor.

Fair point about logrotate. Here's a counter one: The server that you describe requires 4 moving parts: 1. the app code, 2. the unicorn equivalent, 3. a process supervisor, 4. logrotate in a cron job. An app deployed with naught requires 2: 1. the app code, 2. naught.

<comment><USER2> By 'taking the resource out of the pool', I had HAProxy in mind, not the service itself.

 _And naught is the equivalent of a process supervisor._

No, it's not. Can Naught do this?

[http://mmonit.com/monit/documentation/monit.html#service_tes...](http://mmonit.com/monit/documentation/monit.html#service_tests)

That's legit process supervision. Your process may still be running, but be wedged somehow. Monit can perform remediation based on signals other than process status. Naught can't (and shouldn't) do this.

 _The server that you describe requires 4 moving parts:_

True, but our servers are running all of this anyway; you should use the best tool for the job. Instead of rewriting a fraction of logrotate, you should read `man 8 logrotate` and move on to writing code that will help your business. When you deploy an app written using another runtime, are you going to rewrite 10% of logrotate in that language too?

<comment><AUTHOR> Fair points, all. Thanks for the information.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why your web startup will fail - <AUTHOR> http://www.ideasonideas.com/2009/01/startup_fail

<comment><USER2> Well written article.

The closing thoughts in the article

"With all of that said, I have to emphasize that little of this really matters. If you're inclined to start a startup, nothing anyone says will stand in your way, nor, should it. If you have the bug to make something, it's impossible to shake, and in my mind can be one of the best life experiences you can have.

Every month we get a some new users, a couple of excited emails, a few glimpses at just how neat our project could be. And more than that, we get to build something that we really love.

I wouldn't trade that for anything."

</comment><comment><USER3> that article is just motivation for me to prove him wrong. like the time Michael Arrington said "What is it? I really have no idea." about my startup.

<comment><USER4> Read the article again.

I'm not trying to discourage anyone. Instead, I'm sharing our personal experiences and discussing just how challenging these hurdles can be.

My business partner and I are struggling to make our idea work just like all of the others here. I'm not the person to try and prove wrong. I want your business to work out.

If anything, the post was intended to be a reminder of how we all just have to keep working and remain focused.

<comment><USER5> I think you need an "about" page. It's not obvious to me what the site is for, even with the blurb on the right had side.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> puzzle-out Basically it seems the article is saying that starting a company involves risk. I agree.

</comment><comment><USER6> Anyone keeping a through index of these fail blogs? Could make for a fun anti- pattern.</comment>


Holodeck – A high fidelity simulator for reinforcement learning - <AUTHOR> https://pcc.cs.byu.edu/2018/10/04/introducing-holodeck/ <comment><USER2> This looks awesome! I'm excited to try it out.</comment>


Open HN list of Twitter users - <AUTHOR> https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ApUjBkHSxmB1dHdMdlNwX2QtbnFsa1lkNG13VUxpY0E&hl=en&authkey=CMP8kxQ#gid=0

<comment><AUTHOR> After reading this <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1941631> I decided to to build this Open List of HN users who want to communicate on Twitter. Everybody is welcomed, no carma points are required.</comment>


Ask HN: Life advice for 40yo Web Dev, single, $500k savings - <AUTHOR>

Today i read the thread by the 25 year old web dev with 25k savings (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8019558). And i thought: Damn! Im in exactly the same situation as this guy. Only that Im almost twice as old and that my savings are more then 10 times of his. I would love to hear the opinions of you guys about this situation. So I finally made an account here, so I can post my version.
Just as the other poster, Im in Europe, come from a webdev/entrepreneur background and made some money with my startup. I was pretty introverted and socialy awkward my whole life, but teached myself a lot about social dynamics lately. So finally, I have some success with girls :-) But I cannot find any buddies for my lifestyle (go out, meet girls, talk about business, travel..). Everybody I meet is employed, has a relationship, is too shy to try new stuff. And for some reason, I completely suck when it comes to friendship.
Anybody here who is/was in a similar situation? <comment><USER2> Where are you located? And how many languages do you speak?

Here's a very specific plan:

Move to Barcelona. Once established there, try to find a job with either Computacenter, or Sellbytel Spain. They are usually always looking for people with good computer skills and that speak at least 3 languages (or 2 if you don't speak Spanish).

They have a very nice office atmosphere, and a lot of cool people from other countries work for them. You'll make plenty of acquaintances rather fast, and the lowest level jobs (I take it money is not a concern for you, right?) have a lot of free time (Unless you are unlucky and get a job in one of the help desk with the most volume of calls) when in the office, that would allow you to do some work on the side if needed.

I worked for them 2003 - 2006, and boy was that fun (If you do follow this plan, try _not_ to get promoted: not worth the money ;) )

Have fun!

<comment><AUTHOR> The thing is: I find employment very boring. I could never sit on my ass and do stuff for a company. And I usualy dont click with people who are employed. I dont like all the stuff these people are into. I have absolutely no interest in talking about politics, sports, gossip, gardening, family and whatnot. Im interested in girls, startups, coding, philosophy...

<comment><USER3> You seem like an interesting fella. Wanna get in touch over email and bounce around some ideas and favorite blogs and such?

<comment><AUTHOR> Sure! I will send you a mail to the address in your profile.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm kinda in the same situation, only i'm starting a business, got 80-90 k. in the bank and i'm 27 yrs old, i did parties, but i don't want to commit myselve to a relationship - had a long term relationship... I want to travel (but that's hard when starting a business)... Never travelled a lot in my life.

I already have the property to live, but i need to demolish the old house first and then set a new one on top (then i'll have debts :) ).

Working on a full time job and i'm starting my business after my normal working hours (so it's kinda busy ).. I like working for myselve, because my current employer is old-skool.. Their money-making application is still written in VB6, that probably explains my point with old-skool :)

I speak 3 languages (someone asked you): Dutch, French and English. I also understand German (mostly)

</comment><comment><USER5> I have a similar background, however, I went through a lot of social anxiety my teenage years and somehow converted to being more extroverted my college years.

www.meetup.com is a good site (also check lifehack.org they have good articles on how to get the self esteem to get your foot int eh door). Also I'm always looking for new connects on LinkedIn if you're into that.

www.linkedin.com/in/cameronbradford/

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry, Im not on linkedin.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> You should join the Dynamic Circle, the membership community behind TropicalMBA. It is full of ballers all around the world.

[http://tropicalmba.com](http://tropicalmba.com)

With your savings, I would take Dave Ramsey's advice and invest it in stable growth stock mutual funds, and then not touch it. You can use the interest to fund your retirement - hell you could probably retire right now.

</comment><comment><USER7> Forget about daily job.

Life is short. Just live your life to the fullest. Travel around the world and do what you like. You'll meet awesome people down the road that's for sure.

</comment><comment><USER8> Become an architect! Sorta serious, go google digital fabrication. Your'e good at programming but young in the realm of architecture. Be the next zah hadid!

</comment><comment><USER9> invest in a high quality dividend index fund(DVY for example) and retire. You ought to be able to get over 1k EUR a month no problem. Might not sound like a lot in the EU, but you can travel or live very comfortably most places in Asia, Africa, and Central/South America on that and be completely free to pursue your interests.

<comment><AUTHOR> Do you live in one of these countries?

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I work with Silicon Valley founders & CEO types on Intimacy as a Spirtual Path. It's a post-pickup view. I spent a decade studying with the top guru's and realized what an empty existence it was. I know work with guys to create visionary partnership with amazing women. I'd be happy to give you a free deep dive session with me, as I've done for a number of Hacker News readers.. email@example.com

</comment><comment><USER11> Move to South America or Asia and live off your savings for the rest of your life. Unlimited time for hobbies!

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point. I at least have to check out these places to see if i like it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I... don't have much of a saving. I save just enough to take a year off to learn Android and move toward that field hopefully soon.

During that year, I've worked my ass off with girls mostly doing pick up artist kind of deal. I have a few friends are really prominent in this circle.

Since my funding is drying up, I've given up on improving my pick up skill, I've attain a decent level right now, but for now I'm working my ass on studying android and getting a job in it.

I've never had a problem with friends even with my horrible introvertness. I had problems keeping them because of my lack of keeping in touch skills. It's getting better though.

I'm 28.

> But I cannot find any buddies for my lifestyle (go out, meet girls, talk > about business, travel..).

You can't find buddies to fit all aspect of your life style. I find that you need friends that fit certain aspect so you have multiple group.

I have university and highschool friends to just hang out and just interpersonal talk and maybe programming. I have another set to just talk about programming.

I also have another social group of friends that I go out and do pick up with. In general these group of friends aren't wealthy, who am I to complain? Ha, but they're mostly broke with deadend job but they sacrifice wealth for chasing girls. Well at least that's just my observation, I tried to balance both but well it's a tough.

edit:

If you really need to find buddies to chase girls, you can try to find a pick up community.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I met a couple of guys from the pick up community. But I had to travel to meet them and they where not very dedicated or experienced. They where impressed with my skills as I was way better in attracting girls then them. And it was nice for me to have company. But all in all it was not enough to build a friendship. They where much younger then me, we had no mutual interests apart from girls and they where not really dedicated in that field either.

<comment><USER13> I hope that you can start to see women as people with whom you can form meaningful relationships, rather than seeing them as "girls" that you need to "pick up".

<comment><AUTHOR> Of the things I wrote, what makes you think I do not form meaningful relationships?

<comment><USER13> The "pick up" mindset implies a number of things about the kinds of relationships "pick up artists" have with women:

\- Calling them "girls" implies they are young and not really in the adult world, and not on an equal level with "men".

\- The phrase "pick up" implies that women are objects, to be "picked up", not to be viewed as equals.

\- The whole pick up mindset turns dating into a game that men are out to win, rather than it being about finding someone you can build a relationship with.

\- The word "dedicated" in this context implies a disturbing commitment to this approach to dealing with women.

I'm responding because my comment was sincere. I hope that people who get into the pick up mindset can recognize the shallowness of that approach, and move on to forming more respectful and lasting relationships with women.

<comment><AUTHOR> Neither did I use the term "pick up" in relation to what I do, nor did I imply seeing women as objects. Thats why I asked you to refer to what I wrote.

As for the dedication to become good (which mainly means more self secure and understanding) in the interactions with young beautiful women: Yeah! I would love to meet other guys who are into this. It seems to go against some old fashioned worldview you hold. My reply to this is: Get rid of values that have been drummed into you and start listening to your own feelings!</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Please stop asking how to find a technical co-founder. - <AUTHOR> http://www.humbledmba.com/please-please-please-stop-asking-how-to-find <comment><USER2> Good post.

Speaking as a technical guy, my default position is to be turned off by co- founding with a business guy unless they have an amazing track record. I like the advice of _earning_ a technical co-founder.

I just wish more business guys realized their ideas aren't that special, aren't a magic way of printing money and just coming up with the idea doesn't entitle you to 75% of a two-man venture. It doesn't even really entitle you to an extra 10%.

In the beginning, your job is probably going to be to find a place to work, deal with the guy who's installing the Internet line, buying computers, buying food, buying and _assembling_ furniture and generally just making things work. That's all very unglamorous work but, depending on the venture, it's quite likely your (alleged) business skills will be of very little value (while you're building a PoC/PoS/MVP).

I don't think I'm alone (as a technical guy) in generally finding business guys to have an inflated sense of self-importance who often want to treat technical people as an exchangeable/replaceable commodity.

<comment><USER3> > It doesn't even really entitle you to an extra 10%.

Depends on the capabilities of the business guy. The best idea in the world, with the best technical execution in the world, is worth precisely $0 without the capability to bring it to market: to build sales channels and drive growing revenues.

This is a real skill, often over-looked by gung-ho coders with a neat idea. If you don't have the contacts and the experience of engineering a proper bis dev strategy, you ain't going anywhere.

<comment><USER4> So, you need a sales guy.

I don't think I've ever met a self-described "business guy" who wasn't a student.

If someone is a great salesman, they are a "sales guy". If they write ads, they are a "marketing guy". If they allocate capital, hire and fire, and lobby the CEO for more funds they are "managers".

When people say "business", it means they don't know what they are able to do, but want to make money. Or that they want to be the manager, but don't want to say it.

<comment><USER5> What does that make the CEO?

<comment><USER6> The guy that talks to other CEOs, goes to CEO conferences, decides on strategic development and signs deals.

<comment><USER7> You forgot to mention the golfing.

<comment><USER8> Same thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Last week I was approached by 2 business type guys looking for a technical partner to start a business. One of these guys I already knew from years back. Immediately I got the impression that these guys were very passionate and very serious about their idea. It helps that their idea was a good one.

What really impressed me is they had already done a lot of the leg work. They picked out a name and had a logo designed. They had used mocking software to mock up most of what will become v1. They had written content for the entire website. They had already started using their competitors products which only further validated their idea. They had also reached out to their contacts to see if the idea had legs and if people would use it. They had a big vision for what they wanted to do.

When guys come at me like this, it gets me fired up and makes it hard to say no. They aren't looking for a free ride and they don't expect/want you to do all the work. They needed a guy to build it and they wanted an equal equity partner.

That is how you land a technical co-founder.

<comment><USER10> A key point here is that you already knew one of the guys.

<comment><USER11> I think it's a point to consider but I think the main point is that these "business" people showed passion and had delivered on that passion by creating mockups, logos and so forth.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> You don't _earn_ a technical co-founder any more than you earn your first secretary. _Every_ person who is recruited to join a business must be convinced that he or she is going to get something out of the deal.

The problem quite simply is that there are a lot of wannabe entrepreneurs out there who expect someone with technical chops to join them when they a) don't have an existing relationship, b) don't have a proven track record of execution and c) don't have anything to give besides equity that isn't worth anything. In other words, "co-founder" is little more than a title bestowed upon the person you need to build your product but can't actually pay to do the work.

It's no surprise that it's hard to find a "co-founder" of any type under these circumstances. When somebody you briefly spoke to at a meetup asks you to be a "co-founder" in exchange for 10% of a company that doesn't exist yet, you're naturally going to be skeptical. If that person adds a reasonable salary to the equation, you're far more likely to take the proposition seriously.

Additionally, I think it's worth pointing out that wannabe entrepreneurs have a lot of misconceptions about what type of technical skills they need. Instead of looking for someone who can build a basic web app (which is what 99% of them want to build), they look for a hipster developer whose resume is filled with all the buzzwords of the day. You do not need a Ruby on Rails developer with MongoDB experience to build a web application where individuals can organize and share pictures of their pet goats.

<comment><USER5> This comment should be higher up. I think that the commenters are mostly overexcited technical people (I am also technical) because this post panders to us.

In reality, you have to "earn" technical cofounders like we have to "earn" business cofounders. I hate sales/meetings/trying to raise money, so it would be great to have a cofounder to do those things, but I have to "earn" a good one.

It's nothing more than people having to prove themselves to each other, which is natural. The only content in the post is the old chestnut of people overvaluing ideas.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I think you de-stress the 'having an idea' too much. Having a truly great idea -will- attract a co-founder. Well, if they hear it. It's not a magic spell.

Also, being the 'idea guy' might be over-rated, but being the 'vision guy' is definitely the bee's knees.

At a previous company, 1 man was the vision behind the entire product. I can't tell you how many hour-long meetings were ended in 5 minutes when he showed up and made it all clear. (This was after things got really busy and cloning him started to seem like a good solution.) You could bring any question about the direction of the product to him and he would have a good, clear answer.

Without him, I really doubt the company would have been a success.

<comment><USER14> It's true that those people are valuable. But would you really believe that this guy was the "vision guy" if he'd just said so? The guy in your story _did_ earn it, so it kind of affirms the OP.

<comment><USER13> Would you believe I was a programmer if I just said so?

Only if the answer didn't matter. Which is the way it should be. And just like anything else, the only way to prove is to do. It didn't take long to see that he had a clear vision of the product and its destination.

He never identified himself as the idea guy, or anything like that. He actually self-identified as a sales guy. (And he was, too.) But if all he did was bring vision to the table, he still would have been invaluable.

<comment><USER14> I don't disagree with you. I'm just pointing out that there's a difference between being "a guy with an idea" and being a guy with a proven record of providing ideas. The latter definitely exist and are valuable, but I did not get the impression that post was trying to say anything to the contrary.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> One thing that irritates the hell out of me every time is meeting a 'business' guy with the world's best idea, who is prepared to let a lucky developer have 10% of the venture in return for building the damn thing.

I am yet to meet a developer who has not had this very same experience.

<comment><USER16> What would you consider fair and reasonable? I'm one of the people who needed to read this article, because I am not as technical as I need to be to see my idea through, but I'm also not a "business" guy--and I am coming into this endevour with little to no baggage or pre-conceived notion on how things work --I honestly thought if I ever did find someone technical (I'm paying freelancers right now) it would be a 50/50 split--but in your opinion is that undervaluing a technical persons worth on a project?

<comment><USER17> Read this: [http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a- new-s...](http://answers.onstartups.com/questions/6949/forming-a-new-software- startup-how-do-i-allocate-ownership-fairly)

<comment><USER18> This is excellent, thank you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've already had my fill of "idea guys". Somehow, almost every one seems to think that merely coming up with a cool idea while drunk one night automatically entitles them to 50% of the profits (after YOU build and ship it).

A successful startup requires all aspects of a business:

\- leadership

\- sales

\- marketing

\- market research

\- competitor research

\- product research

\- product development

\- product shipping & deployment

\- contacts in key areas related to your business

\- strategic planning

\- financial management

\- employee management

\- investor management

\- lots and lots and lots and lots of paperwork

\- and of course a million other little things you discover along the way

Some of this can be learned as you go, but the most likely startups to succeed have a large portion of these areas covered by the founders, at least in the book learning sense.

So whenever I'm approached by an idea guy, my questions usually go like this:

\- "Great idea. So who else is doing it?" (red flag for "nobody")

\- "Who is going to buy this?" (red flag for "everybody")

\- "How do you know that [group x] is going to buy it?" (I'm looking for something better than a hunch)

\- "How much starting capital do you have?" (got to at least have ramen money)

\- "Who have you spoken to about funding?" (red flag for "nobody", unless they are bootstrapping with their own money and have enough for 6 months of runway and a plan for after that)

\- "Are you going to do this full time?" (If not, this conversation is over)

\- "What skills are you bringing to the table?" (Must have at least half of the list above, or have other interested co-founders who fill many of the gaps)

So if you're looking for a technical co-founder, make sure you're bringing a business to the table, not just an idea.

</comment><comment><USER20> I completely agree with this article, I would also add the following. I'm so tired of seeing these posts on HN--I do appreciate the genuine feelings, but my gosh, I am so frustrated when I see posts on Ask HN: 1) What should I build? 2) What programming language should I learn? Both question tells me the poster hasn't done enough thinking and research on their own and is asking a VERY BUSY community to do the legwork for them. The questions should be from this stage:

1) You are trying to build this idea, you've researched and tried a few strategies in thinking about this [then explain what you're thinking], any other suggestions before you go build this thing? Fine, this is a meaningful conversation we can have and will afford opportunities for everyone to learn from it. Most of us are building something because we mostly CAN'T sit by/live without it NOT being built.

2) If you're a young and a starting out hacker, all you have to do is Google your questions. Most questions, believe it or not, have been answered. All the programming language X vs Y, framework A vs B questions are usually answered extensively by many other wise hackers that went before you. If you don't spend the time to read, understand and appreciate those reading/researches which many hackers in the community had spent the time writing them out specifically for YOU, all ou're doing is asking a VERY BUSY community to do your basic legwork for you. No, that's now how it works. Most of us learned stuff/languages because we are hungry for it. We ask questions on freenode etct, read articles, books AND discuss in depth about what we're trying to learn.

/rant

</comment><comment><USER21> Good post. "Entrepreneurs" nowadays seem like a bunch of whiners. Maybe it's the internet that encourages such passivity and hand-holding over the internet.

You want to succeed? Do whatever it takes. Learn how to code even if you won't be the one coding the program. Learn to speak the language, whether it's VC/investing, tech, or business. Sell your idea to a tech cofounder.

I agree idea guys who can't do sh __are pretty much worthless. But I worry that there's been an overemphasis on the technical side. Sorry hackers, you aren't as special as you think you are. You have some personal projects you want to work on? Most personal hacking projects are worthless and even worse ideas than the ones business guys come up with.

Also worrisome is the attitude hackers have of only working with people with successful track records. I think that's the exact opposite of what you should do. People with successful track records have more to lose, and may have just gotten lucky the first time around. We should pay attention to the idea, not necessarily past success. You don't see business guys recruiting hackers based on whether they founded twitter/facebook/google do you?

A great hacker needs to be paired with a great vision guy. If hackers were as important as they thought they were then all hackers would have made it big already, and that is very far from the truth.

</comment><comment><USER22> I'd like to give an alternate perspective to the Business Guy vs. Technical Guy dichotomy.

What about your UX Guy?

(apologies for the gender-specific wording; both women and men are "Guys" in my post, here)

The UX Guy the one that takes Business Guy's wacky ideas and hones them down to a limited feature set that people can actually understand. He helps the Technical Guy map out the user flows, often deals with the tedious writing of use cases, business rules, and content matrices. A good UX Guy even gets involved with the data modeling.

Your UX Guy brings the insight about how people will use a product, and knows how to create scenarios that anticipate that use. Those scenarios focus the work, and usually shrink the feature set.

The UX Guy is the one with the interaction design skills, the usability skills, and the one who makes sure the brilliant idea from Business Guy and the brilliant execution from Technical Guy actually result in something people will want to use, and most importantly, can understand how to use.

Sometimes your Technical Guy is also your UX Guy. Sometimes Business Guy is (not that often, sadly). No matter what, though, I'd argue that having a UX co-founder is one of the most valuable things you can do.

<comment><USER21> I think product visionary falls under "UX guy". The name "product visionary" by definition means he has an excellent grasp of user-oriented design and focus.

<comment><USER23> In the industry we call the "Product Managers".

<comment><USER22> Are you saying a UX professional is just a product manager?

<comment><USER23> I'm saying that almost all the tasks you describe above also fall under the responsibilities of a good Product Manager (at least on small teams, which is what we're talking about here).

If your "Idea Guy" comes from a Product Management background (and can do all the things you mention above, plus "Strategy"), then you should be in good shape.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> As a non-technical guy with a lot of ideas, I skipped looking for a co-founder and just hired people to make stuff. Eventually I learned enough code to be dangerous, and with a bit of a design background, I've spent a lot of time building mockups and doing front end work to fill in the gaps.

I have found that developers are much more likely to engage in conversation with me because I can speak their language. This also works great at conferences, meetups, and local events.

In the end, I decided to try and build things so awesome that I'd have developers asking to join my projects, instead of the other way around. So far, it's working well.

<comment><USER25> This is exactly how to do it.

It's incredibly difficult to manage your own expectations until you know how technically challenging it is to build your "idea".

<comment><USER24> It sure is, and looking back at the way I handled my first few developer interactions, I'm slightly embarrassed. I was ignorant, but try to convince myself that I wasn't. Big learning curve there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Can't catch a fish unless you go fishing.

Hustlers should stop asking the community how to get a technical cofounder, but it doesn't mean they should stop asking technical cofounders to be a... cofounder.

Only way you're going to find one is to put your idea on the line and prove you've got the chops to support each other.

</comment><comment><USER27> I think the frame of "Business/Idea Guy" vs "Technical Guy" is a mistake. Where does design fit into all of this?

I can imagine an "Idea Guy" who just says "let's make AirBnB for pets" or something, and then the "Technical Guy" designs and codes everything according to loose goals stated by the "Idea Guy." In that setup, clearly unless the "Idea Guy" has a truly magical idea that he somehow has the means to protect, he's not worth much.

But I can also imagine an "Idea Guy" who is also a product designer, who has a concrete vision for not just what to make, but how it should be implemented, how it should look and feel, what the process should be like, and so forth. He's synthesized a lot of complicated things and just needs a "Technical Guy" to translate his blueprints into a building. In this case, the "Idea Guy" is really valuable indeed, especially if his decision about implementation differentiate the business or otherwise drive it's success.

In other words, execution is more than coding, it's making a ton of decisions. Value can be added by making lots of really good decisions, and you don't have to be a programmer to do that. Of course, if you have no familiarity with technology and can't see all of the possibilities, you won't make good decisions.

<comment><USER28> You are not talking about just an "Idea Guy" you are talking about a "Visionary". Vision is what separates an "Idea" from a "Business". All non- techies should bring the vision/strategy and all techies should look for people with a vision.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Someone email this to the Winkelvoss twins. Every time I hear about how Zuckerberg stole their 'idea' it makes me mad. He didn't steal it, he implemented it. The idea wasn't worth much, the implementation was everything.

<comment><USER30> To be fair, The Winklevoss guys were trying to get their idea built and Zuckerberg stalled them (stopped them from doing that) while he built it for himself.

I don't like the Winklevii, but I think its a bit unfair to kick them too hard.

<comment><USER31> Not only that, but they actually had found the right technical guy to do the implementation. They really were pretty close in that sense. In a different world where they partnered with him, or he was more ethical and helpful, they'd probably be considered the geniuses of the operation, in a Kevin Rose sense.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Is it possible there's a market for technical people who could help business guys like this with a prototype of their idea for a fixed price?

I wouldn't be willing to quit my full-time job and work with some unproven guy on a startup project. However, I might be willing to work during my personal time to help a business guy build a prototype which could be used to find a technical co-founder, vet an idea, or pitch the product to a customer or investor.

Of course there are the usual hazards of fixed price projects. However, if the deliverable is clearly defined and agreed to up front, it seems like a nice option for both parties. Business guy gets technical input and prototype, technical guy gets cash and an opportunity to become a co-founder if the product has value and a market.

<comment><USER33> Developer Town <http://www.developertown.com/> in Indiana does something pretty similar. I'm sure there are other but this one popped in my head

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Quite coincidently I saw this on Reddit today: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEGUa3uekIE>

The video is a stereotypical 'Idea Guy' - asking for a rock star developer to develop his project (for almost free), on the promise of 'riches' when they strike gold.

It is amazing how many people share this view these days (even more so after the 'social network' / success of facebook).

Despite the video author's lack of technical knowledge, there is still no excuse for his lack of research into creating a start up like that and the low value he puts on the technical co-founder.

I guess the real question to the author of that video would be. Apart from the idea, what do you as the non technical co-founder bring to the table?

<comment><USER35> The best part is how he doesn't say that the programmer will get equity, but that if they hit it big, he will be the first employee.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Having an idea to fit a vision is your starting altitude. Great execution takes it to the stars. The starting altitude does matter.

It's really honestly all about teamwork - not some tit-for-tat, we are better than you. So don't perpetuate it.

</comment><comment><USER37> I am a technical cofounder myself. Still i believe a successfull business is the sum of many parts, not only the technical side. There are also enough stubborn devs that praise everything they build but still fail to bring it to a relevant audience. I agree with parts of this post, but overall i dont like this kind of elitist talk on here all the time on how everything else than technical guys is worthless. There a bad business guys and bad technical guys as well.

</comment><comment><USER38> Excellent advice, I will be quoting him on having to "earn" a technical cofounder. He couldn't have said it better. The truth is, ideas and idea people are generally a dime a dozen. For the most part, it is all about execution.

For non-tech cofounders, you need to prove you bring something substantial to the table. The best piece of advice in that article is to learn to code yourself. If you really think you have an idea that could turn into a company, you should be driven to do anything it takes to build your MVP.

Just starting to code the front or backend will show people how dedicated you are and that alone is impressive to coders. Also, having a piece of your site already started will help you explain your idea to a potential tech cofounder better than words alone can.

My biggest suggestion is to go to "hack nights" in your area. You will kill two birds with one stone by doing this. First, you will be around people willing to teach and help you with your project. Second, hack nights are a great place to meet people looking to join a project.

</comment><comment><USER39> I have a strange view of this. I wouldn't generally consider myself a technical co-founder, but keep getting approached as one. I think I am better at the business side of things but get forced into the technical side because who else will do it? The constant business pitches are somewhat boring, I haven't seen one where I thought, 'damn I need to join that guy/company.' It feels like most approaches are somewhat desperate, and that's a turnoff. Instantly what comes to my mind is 'why didn't someone else take up this offer if it's so good?'

I can only speak for myself, but it wouldn't surprise me if others used similar reasoning when being pitched (perhaps on both biz/tech side). Almost always, these things seem forced rather testing interest and seeing if there is any match. If a founding team is like a marriage, these guys pitching you to join them as a cofounder are asking you to jump straight into bed with them, there is no real courting period or build up. I feel like that's what's missing.

</comment><comment><USER40> Finding a cofounder is like finding a marriage partner. You spent time and get to know each other before committing long term. Doing a trial projects may be one thing but its not just a matter of few days or meetings.

I second with "Spent some money" advise. Business people should also prove that they have a skin in the game by some way. Obviously it varies depending upon what else you are brining on table, and what has been done before. Money factor may not be as critical if the business person has already have mockups, market research, and many things that could have been done before or in parallel. You just have to show that you are not just looking for coder and then see if it works without spending any of your own energy.

Overall, I like the post, but title is bit confusing or contradictory to what Jason talked in the post. How to earn a co-founder would probably be a betters title.

</comment><comment><USER41> I couldn't even get through this. Probably an informative post, but yet another one that acts like technologists are God's gift to business people.

It is so rare that a technologist or two technologists, without a business person, build a killer company (read: not product), unless one of them is a strong business person, and then what makes them more one than the other?

Honestly, the first part of the post is true - if you're a good founder, you'll figure it out. But honestly, I just could not be more sick of posts acting like business founders are nothing but a thorn in the side of the technology world.

And the comments on these types of post are laughable. "Oh, at the beginning your job is to make sandwiches." I was selling partners on our product before it ever existed. If your business person is making sandwiches, it's no wonder they had to beg people to build their product.

</comment><comment><USER42> I think a good hacker/hustler combination is a great idea! Thats way the hackers doesn't have to deal with all the BS that comes with running and growing a business and stay true to their passion, and the hustler can focus on growth, raising money, doing bills, getting the marketing and PR set up and rolling, think how to acquire new customers, enter new markets, do financials, find new partners, read through contracts etc. RIM is an example of that, they have co-CEOs, Google's Eric S was a business guy and so is Ballmer (I think). Neither is S. Jobs a hacker. My point here is they are useful ... I mean if your passion is technology and you list all the activities involved you will see a LOT detracts from the passion. And you kind of need them as a co-founder so they have vested interest, and are diligent, resourceful and careful.

</comment><comment><USER43> Jeese, I haven't seen anybody ask this question on HN for the last month, but maybe I've been working too hard.

</comment><comment><USER44> You seem to be tired to answer this question. $10 say you did not answer it more than 100 times, yet you have asked your professor _hundreds_ of questions.

You could have skipped the rant (which is not going to have any sort of effect) and went straight to how to earn a technical cofounder.

</comment><comment><USER45> Every startup has a technical and business component, but their relative importance varies greatly. On one end of the spectrum, you have companies like Google which is a purely technical achievement; on the other you have Groupon which is a mostly a business achievement. The important component is what requires real vision and innovation and that may have to come from either technical side, business side or both. The profile of founders should reflect what kind of startup you are and what is its "critical issue." E.g. it doesn't make sense to have a "business co-founder" whose only job is doing some routine paperwork just as it doesn't make sense to have a "technical co- founder" whose only job is to develop some trivial webapp.

</comment><comment><USER46> Speaking as a technical cofounder, it depends on the potential technical cofounders that you meet. Personally, when I met my non-tech cofounder, he already had his idea well thought out to the point where he'd made a trailer video demonstrating some of the UX using After Effects. I fell in love with the product idea itself because I'm primarily motivated by product ideas, and secondarily by team members.

I've now got as much skin in the game as him - neither of us is making a salary yet.

There's no one way to find your technical cofounder - we're all motivated by different things, and maybe what you've already got will click with someone. Just keep meeting people and putting your idea and self out there.

</comment><comment><USER47> I'm a business guy... who learnt to code. Here's why "finding" or even "earning" a technical co-founder is a stupid strategy: there's no guarantee that, even after you have found or earned him, he'll be sticking around. You'll then be left with half-done code that no other person wants to work on, and you'll find yourself learning how to code to get going anyway. So, just learn to code. If you find coding too difficult, you're probably just not smart enough anyway to be an effective business guy.

</comment><comment><USER48> As a technical guy the only thing he proposed that got my attention was _Build a following_. A strong following can be extremely useful in getting a lot of feedback early on.

</comment><comment><USER49> Loved your post. Definitely great advice. I made the decision yesterday to start learning to code, but your post made me feel I really made the right decision. Thanks. :)

</comment><comment><USER50> As much as I'd like to agree with this post, I can't. I had an idea and learnt programming to implement atleast a prototype. Done. I can't go to local meetups because we don't have any (small country in europe). I posted on HN (during the "best time") with the title that I'm a business guy with a prototype. I received two upvotes, one comment and got one email. Now I did expect a little more earnings here, what did I do wrong?

</comment><comment><USER51> There are really three roles in a startup: funding, selling, and building. They're all important. If a business co-founder doesn't have funding, he/she has to prove they're good at selling. Unfortunately, a lot of business co- founders with ideas haven't actually spent much time selling, and they don't have much money either, because if they did, they'd be looking for a technical _employee_, not a "technical co-founder."

</comment><comment><USER52> As someone who you're describing I absolutely love the post. I've gotten into WordPress, basic PHP, a lot of frontend stuff and a few projects later I feel confident to actually look a technical cofounder in the eye and say let's do something together.

</comment><comment><USER53> So true, I'm completely non-technical but I've built a business that is bootstrapped, ramen profitable and growing - now we are actively looking for a Technical co but I'm realizing that I need to learn the basics myself as well. Awesome article!

</comment><comment><USER54> Agreed except for the recommendation of 99designs. That's zero respect for design.

<comment><USER55> I don't understand the hatred toward 99 designs. Should people expect the most awesome work from it? No. Is it a good solution for startups with a small budget who can't afford anything else? Maybe, but that's for them to decide.

No designers are forced to participate in 99 designs, and no companies are forced to use them. What they do is legal and ethical, so what's the problem?

I release all of my photos under a Creative Commons license on Flickr, and I've received comments from professional photographers complaining that my hobby hurts their profession. So what if it does? If amateurs are willing to do something for free, then that should encourage professionals to differentiate themselves by being better. If lowering their prices is also a consequence of that then so be it.

It reminds me of people who are against open source software because it competes with people who make and sell software for a living. Again, should open source groups stop what they're doing out of respect for people who do this for a living? I don't think they should. Especially when you realize that most open source contributors _are_ professional developers who make a living building software.

I don't mean to disrespect designers at all. In fact, I have a tremendous amount of respect for great designers, and I've found that you usually get what you pay for when it comes to design. I wouldn't personally use 99 designs, but I just don't understand the hatred that a lot of people have toward them.

P.S. If you're looking for a great designer in the bay area, and you can afford a little more than 99 designs, I recommend Dual Aesthetic. <http://www.dualaesthetic.com/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> Founders: in your experience, what qualifications should a "business guy" have? Is the willingness to do what your cofounder can't or what sufficient or do you need a certain business/leadership/social skill?

</comment><comment><USER57> Wonderful advice, in particular to just go ahead and at least build the user interface. It is defiantly possible to reach the MVP stage through outsourcing - just get something out there!

</comment><comment><USER58> This has to be the best post on HN for the full year 2011. Just do it. Start something. Scramble and find a way. Hire offshore and just get it done.

</comment><comment><USER59> I am a technical co-founder and I am looking for business cofounder. Drop me a line if you are interested in local market and based in South Bay area.

</comment><comment><USER60> How about the reverse?

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2714684>

</comment><comment><USER61> As a formerly non-technical entrepreneur, I approve this message.

</comment><comment><USER62> You're either building or you're selling or gtfo.

</comment><comment><USER63> I'm torn either way on this post, on one hand I agree that you should go tell them to find their own resources but on the other hand and from experience as a 'non tech' founder myself even getting some of these items done isn't enough to get a co founder, you need a good network too.

For clarification, I worked previously at startups where development was outsourced and I was working as a project manager. This time round with my own idea I knew I didn't have that luxury and would need to contribute a he'll of a lot more if I could be lucky enough to tempt a co founder to take on the bulk of the technical development.

So what did I do, after a few months of procrastinating over the idea I finally decided what better way to get going than to learn a new language and code (I already know HTML / CSS / asp.net back in the day). I looked at languages that seemed to have a good following and active support forums that if I got stuck I could ask for help in, I chose Ruby on Rails and ordered two books on Amazon.

It was really difficult at the start but after a while I found things were clicking into place, albeit using a lot of trial and error. I installed irc and became active on the rails channel and found the guys really helpful on there.

So after a month or so I got through the books and figure I was ready to start planning and applying my ideas to what I had learnt, this was the hardest part of all and still is. Simple things like image uploading using AWS or Paperclip I found took me days to get my head around as a lot of this was alien to me and outside the comfort zone of the tutorials. I progressed and thought it was about time I start developing the front end UI so started getting to work on photoshop creating templates and designs, I found some great resources like designmoo and iconfinder which helped me in this process. After the designs were done I reached out to a previous contractor who had experience in rails and HTML/CSS and paid him to cut and code it to fit the view, I setup a Heroku hosting account, configured the DNS and hosted the code on Github for collaboration.

I suppose the site was now at 75% ready, I had feedback from a few angel investors that it was a good idea and that to get in touch when I had a working prototype, this is where the delays set in, I just couldn't find a co founder to help with that all important final backend work.

See in your post you state a co founder should bring some of the qualities you point out such as do the front end or learn to code or business networking, I've done all of them and more yet I am no nearer to finding someone local who I can get onboard. I know the first part of being a successful co founder is being able to sell yourself and your product but I think it's sometimes forgotten how difficult and time consuming development and design is to get to grips with. Whilst I know this may come across as a rather random reply I thought it at least fruitful to show that some non tech founders are willing to get their hands dirty with some code and in fact the other half, the finding a co founder is equally a struggle as learning to code

That being said if anyone is interested please feel free to get in contact ;)

<comment><USER64> I might be interested:) If you leave your email I'll send you some references -- although I'll be busy for the next few months. After that I've +-3 months free time & I'll be going to the UK around January. (or you can contact me on twitter with the same nick)

<comment><USER63> jameskmcdowall at googles email service, look forward to hearing from you :)</comment></comment></comment>


How Scare Tactics on GMO Foods Hurt Everybody - <AUTHOR> http://www.technologyreview.com/view/528331/how-scare-tactics-on-gmo-foods-hurt-everybody/

<comment><USER2> She's completely missed the point. When I buy something I want to know what is in it. I want to know if ifs genetically manipulated too, but that is beside the point.

Putting ingredients into a food product and then not labeling the package in sufficient detail for the consumer to evaluate the contents is fraud.

Her argument is that very few people are allergic to nuts, so you shouldn't have to label the product as having an item with some genes from a nut product. Wrong wrong wrong.</comment>


Microsoft quietly buys Netscape browser technology (and patents) - <AUTHOR> http://www.slashgear.com/microsoft-quietly-buys-netscape-browser-technology-09222093/

<comment><USER2> I don't see a scenario where Microsoft will actually use these patents against Firefox or Chrome. They're doing everything they can to curry favor with web developers, and they'll destroy it in one fell swoop if they even think about it.

That being said, I'm curious why they felt these patents were worth $1B. There must be something really special in there.

(Disclaimer: Mozilla employee with no knowledge outside of what's been posted on the Internet about it.)

<comment><USER3> Back in the sands of time when Netscape begat Mozilla Foundation and released their source, they did so under the MPL, a license specifically written to grant patent rights where required to operate the software. I'm not sure how to interpret that, but I suspect Firefox would fare better in any war than Chrome or Safari.

<comment><USER4> Safari will do fine. Microsoft and Apple have a broad patent cross-licensing agreement. Chrome, on the other hand...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> With all the patent lawsuits flying around among the big tech companies, stockpiling patents seems like a prudent strategy from a corporate risk POV. I have no idea which patents are included in the list, nor do I know what MSFT would do with them. Just generally speaking.

<comment><USER6> SSL, cookies + Javascript are/were Netscape patents.

Better article about it: [http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/microsoft-buys- netscape...](http://www.zdnet.com/blog/networking/microsoft-buys-netscape-web- patents-from-aol-to-attack-google/2203)

SSL [http://news.cnet.com/Netscape-patents-crypto- protocol/2100-1...](http://news.cnet.com/Netscape-patents-crypto- protocol/2100-1001_3-203307.html?tag=content;siu-container)

cookies [http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=...](http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=US&NR=5774670&KC=&FT=E&locale=en_EP)

Javascript [http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/255293/-z_programmin...](http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/255293/-z_programming_languages_javascript?fp=4194304&fpid=1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Sweet. They only expire in 3 years or so. Brilliant move on AOL's part.

</comment><comment><USER8> I suppose it's only a matter of time until they do something obnoxious with these patents. Who will be their first target: Firefox or Chrome?

<comment><USER9> As long as Firefox's code heritage can be traced back to code released by Netscape under GPL (or Apache), Firefox will be fine. Chrome, OTOH, may have some problems.

Also, it's unlikely Chrome will be Microsoft's target - it's more likely Android will. Chrome is much less of a threat to Microsoft's future and Android includes a WebKit-based browser.

<comment><USER10> >As long as Firefox's code heritage can be traced back to code released by Netscape under GPL (or Apache), Firefox will be fine.

Does the GPL contain a patent grant and/or indemnification clause? I think only the GPL v3 does which wasn't around then.

<comment><USER9> As was discussed a hundred times, GPLv2 includes an implicit patent license (because it's impossible to grant the required rights without granting the usage of the patented technology and not granting those rights is a license violation).

<comment><USER11> An explicit grant is much better than an implicit one (and is one reason why the university where I did my grad work refused to let us use the GPL).

Besides, wasn't the Netscape code released under the NPL/MPL, partially for this reason?

<comment><USER9> > wasn't the Netscape code released under the NPL/MPL, partially for this > reason?

Exactly. When I wrote the original comment, I didn't remember Netscape invented its own license.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Dying is Funny, Comedy is Easy - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm0rrGBin5Q

<comment><USER2> This is over 2 hours long, and there's _no_ indication about what it is, or why it might be useful. It's not searchable, indexed, and no meaningful summary available.

Has anybody watched the whole thing?</comment>


Dakota Fire Hole (2012) [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffldYo4EVCg <comment><USER2> I used a 'Dakota hole' camping with Troop 246 back in the 80s. (Thanks to Scoutmaster Cliff Pederson, who taught us this and many other tricks.)

They really work!</comment>


Startup Advice from the Greatest Advertising Genius of the 20th Century - <AUTHOR> http://derrekpearson.com/2010/05/hire-people-that-are-smarter-than-you-are/

<comment><AUTHOR> If you don't want to click though that advice is:

"Hire people that are smarter than you are"

The article points out that due to ego this is much harder than it sounds — and I think the point applies to geeks who tend to be brighter than most on average. However if you look at any top tech leader they always pack their companies with the smartest folks they can find — from Steve Jobs picking Paul Rand to do his logo to Google and their Phd hunts of the previous decade.</comment>


Google now asks you to enter your credit card as part of the Gmail signup flow - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/#!/rmatei/status/172145591374184448/photo/1

<comment><AUTHOR> This looks like an A/B test, I just talked on FB with Robert Cezar Matei. He got this when trying to open a Gmail account (not GWallet), but when I tried I didn't so, like I said, maybe an A/B test.

</comment><comment><USER2> You can also click the "not now" to opt out, in the test. When I first read this, I read it as Google requiring you to enter CC info to get an account.. not the case.

<comment><USER3> The Not Now button is definitely presented as a secondary action, though, which I think could definitely confuse people into thinking credit card information is required, or that something will be missing if they don't enter their information.

In any case, it seems like a great way to end up with a bunch of users who aren't really aware of or interested in your product, and who signed up merely because you told them to.

<comment><USER4> _In any case, it seems like a great way to end up with a bunch of users who aren't really aware of or interested in your product, and who signed up merely because you told them to._

Eh, I really don't believe anyone would enter their info because the Not Now button isn't clear enough. I do think they'll get a lot of people backing out and deciding not to go through with making an account for that reason though, and if the A/B testing reveals anything it will be that.</comment></comment></comment>


US Bachelor and PhD enrollment rises for Computer Science - <AUTHOR> http://www.cra.org/resources/crn-archive-view-detail/undergraduate_cs_degree_production_rises_doctoral_production_steady/

<comment><USER2> It's wonderful to see the market economy at work. There's a shortage coding talent, leading to skyrocketing compensation, leading to a greater supply of coders.

But will this greater supply reduce future compensation from levels it would have been at without the increase in supply of coders?

I don't think so. Good products and good business models generate more demand for talent. This may not be apparent on a company basis, but when one considers all of the partners required in today's business model, then it does seem possible that a greater supply won't necessarily offset today's high compenstion.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I was curious to see where enrollment was at considering the 94% job placement that NYU CS grads are now experiencing ([http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/business/2012/01/07/harlow-...](http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/business/2012/01/07/harlow- computer-science-jobs.cnn))

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> @tryitnow, I agree, I remember the days when many were afraid that outsourcing IT jobs to India and China would have offset the rising salaries for software engineers. That hasn't factored in much for US software engineers since.</comment>


Researchers Show How Lost Sleep Leads to Lost Neurons in Mice - <AUTHOR> http://www.uphs.upenn.edu/news/News_Releases/2014/03/veasey/

<comment><USER2> Would anyone please link directly to the pdf of the paper so I can see for myself how they're keeping the mice awake?

The typical way is for them to put the mice in a position such that it's impossible for them to fall asleep without falling into water. All that this proves is that extended stress leads to lost neurons, not necessarily the sleep loss.

People often cite the "Fatal Familial Insomnia" disease as evidence of lack of sleep's ill effects, but they neglect to point out that the "insomnia" part is sometimes not observed in patients who then die anyway. So the sleep loss is apparently unrelated to the death.

There doesn't seem to be any conclusive evidence linking sleep loss to neurodegeneration. It's seemingly just something that people want to believe in absence of evidence.

<comment><USER3> Abstract: [http://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/12/4418.short](http://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/12/4418.short) Full Text PDF: [http://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/12/4418.full.pdf](http://www.jneurosci.org/content/34/12/4418.full.pdf)

I'm on an academic network, so I'm not sure if the PDF's paywalled...

From a cursory glance at the paper, this is what they had to say about how they kept the mice awake:

 _Mice were housed in a light /dark environment with lights on from 6:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. ... A previously validated, enriched, novel environment (Gompf et al., 2010) was used to promote spontaneous exploratory wakefulness. The short- term wakefulness (Sh Wake) period selected was 3 h during the lights-on period. With zeitgeber time 0 h (ZT0) referenced to the onset of the lights-on period, Sh Wake occurred at ZT8–ZT11, while extended sleep loss (Ext Wake) consisted of 8 h of continuous wake time at ZT3–ZT11 with 16 h intervals in the home cages after the first and second days of 8 h wake time._

<comment><USER2> Yes, the PDF is paywalled. Would you mind posting a Dropbox link to it or emailing it to me? Thanks!

This is a very interesting paper, but I need to analyze the specific method they used to keep mice awake. All that paragraph says is "we used a previously validated technique," with no details as to how specifically they woke the mice up.

<comment><USER4> I believe this is the cited paper: [http://www.jneurosci.org/content/30/43/14543.full.pdf](http://www.jneurosci.org/content/30/43/14543.full.pdf)

They describe the "novel environment" starting on page 3.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> In mice:

"SirT3 is essential across short-term sleep loss to maintain metabolic homeostasis, but in extended wakefulness, the SirT3 response is missing. After several days of shift worker sleep patterns, LC neurons in the mice began to display reduced SirT3, increased cell death, and the mice lost 25 percent of these neurons."</comment>


Could Virtual Reality Be the Next Big Thing in Education? - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/ptc/2014/08/27/could-virtual-reality-be-the-next-big-thing-in-education/

<comment><AUTHOR> An other article about the subject : [https://unimersiv.com/blog_post.php?id=15](https://unimersiv.com/blog_post.php?id=15)

I strongly believe that VR could help us learn much faster.</comment>


Ask HN: Would there be an energy crisis if... - <AUTHOR>

Would there be an energy crisis if we replaced all powersources with nuclear power plants? And then started using electric cars?
And then put all energy-research into solarpower to replace nuclear power when there is a major breakthrough?
I'm hardly an expert but it seems most other alternatives are either not viable or they are just a trade-off. <comment><USER3> It has to do with market forces and politics.

 _Disclaimer: These are not necessarily my views, but views I believe others hold._

A: Nuclear energy is dangerous and a terrorism threat (political)

B: Electric vehicles are not practical (market) and there is a ton of money in oil (market) and our relationship to the oil providers is frail (political)

C: Wind energy is not very profitable (market) or practical (market) because the technology isn't there to harness it efficiently

I agree with most of my market reasons, but the political ones I think are unfounded.

I also think that there is a great reward awaiting those who find a way to make electric vehicles and wind power practical and profitable (and a great deal of headache awaiting those who attempt to change the political aspect of energy).

</comment><comment><USER4> The cheapest energy source right now is coal, even if carbon-offset costs are factored in. So it would be cheaper to do the electric car thing right now with the existing power sources than with the nuclear option -- but we haven't done that, because electric car designs aren't quite ready yet, and because the demand for raw materials for all those new lithium-ion batteries would push the cost through the roof. (That actually happened this year with laptop batteries, somewhat.)

But yes, nuclear power stands a better chance of being able to fully replace fossil fuels than most of the other options in the next few decades.

<comment><USER5> This is true, the total cost of nuclear is actually quite high - <USER2> construction, storage and decommissioning is hideously expensive. You also have all the other ancillary risks mentioned (material availability, risk of a meltdown).

So I think this will severely limit nuclear. There are also dozens of other tracks to explore in the meantime - plugin hybrids, LPG hybrids, carbon scrubbing. Not zero emission, but very accessible technologies that cumulatively can make a big difference.

Improvements in reprocessing would probably make a difference, but arguably you might as well plow this directly into alternative research.

Edit: Here's a link to a article on an LPG Hybrid. LPG infrastructure is great in Australia. Available at most fuel stations. [http://www.theage.com.au/national/hybrid-lpg-car-in- pipeline...](http://www.theage.com.au/national/hybrid-lpg-car-in- pipeline-20080605-2m46.html)

<comment><USER6> _[nuclear] decommissioning is hideously expensive._

How expensive is it?

<http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf02.html>

 _Nuclear energy ... internalise[s] all waste disposal and decommissioning costs. ...

For nuclear power plants any cost figures normally include spent fuel management, plant decommissioning and final waste disposal. These costs, while usually external for other technologies, are internal for nuclear power (ie they have to be paid or set aside securely by the utility generating the power, and the cost passed on to the customer in the actual tariff).

Decommissioning costs are about 9-15% of the initial capital cost of a nuclear power plant. But when discounted, they contribute only a few percent to the investment cost and even less to the generation cost. In the USA they account for 0.1-0.2 cent/kWh, which is no more than 5% of the cost of the electricity produced.

The back-end of the fuel cycle, including used fuel storage or disposal in a waste repository, contributes up to another 10% to the overall costs per kWh, - less if there is direct disposal of used fuel rather than reprocessing. The $26 billion US used fuel program is funded by a 0.1 cent/kWh levy._

      .

Decommissioning costs can be reduced even further by extending the operating lifetimes of reactors (now planned to be 60 years (70 years in Japan), but potentially soon planned to be 80 or 100 years), and by deferring decommissiong activities by mothballing them (placing them in SafStor mode <http://www.google.com/search?q=safstor>) for what is currently planned to be 100 years. Deferring decommissioning activities saves money because the cost of future capital tends to be less than the cost of present capital (i.e. future costs are discounted), and because radionuclides decay over time which makes decommissioning easier.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> with nuclear, you still have a centralized source ... resulting loss in cables and converters

with solar, it's decentralized ... loss should be minimal ... maybe no need for AC converters ... can u directly use DC ?</comment>


Ask HN: Would it be possible to get feedback on our project? - <AUTHOR>

I am a chemist by profession, but after visiting SF I was amazed by the startup culture and since my return from SF, I have been working on the project "RepairShift" with a friend of mine who is an iOS developer.
We followed a simple guideline: build a product to solve a problem or simplify the existing process.
We are in beta mode and were wondering if we could get feedback?
Any input would be greatly helpful.
bit.ly/rsbetaaccess
Features for users under current beta version:
•	Help you stay informed about your car's scheduled maintenance. 	•	Conveniently submit repair requests. 	•	Receive quotes from local mechanics for all your repair needs. 	•	Maintain online invoices and repair history, no more paper trail. 	•	Cashless transaction
Services under current version: 	•	Scheduled Maintenance (based on your car make and model) 	•	Oil Changes 	•	New Tires 	•	Tire Rotations 	•	Pre-Purchase inspection 	•	Road side assistance 	•	Diagnostic services 	•	Alignment 	•	Battery replacement 	•	Transmission fluid
If it is recommended to place the product under "Show" I can do that.
Thanks <comment><USER2> This has potential, but you need to quickly evaluate whether you should be going:

\- Direct to consumer

OR

\- Via dealers/mechanics

I don't like that you used a bitly link though. This is HN, you shouldn't be tracking people here who can provide feedback.

This has a lot more "value-add" under the hood than 1 would realize in the start (think about how valuable it would be for buying a used car when you could get a "qualified logbook" of maintenance on a car via your app, big potential indeed).

You need to put the app out there and through usage, see which parts are important and what users use the app mostly for.

I don't think many mechanics would like "cashless", but maybe in your market it is different (although I doubt a mechanic in 1 part of the world could be that much different to another).

If I were your marketing guy, I'd try these marketing segments to use the app: car enthuasists, buy/sell "on the side" kind of people, small carshop salesmen and any other folks you can identify in the used-car market.

Beware of big automakers, as they may have an app like this or 1 of them steals the idea (eventually, unless you scale fast enough).

Good luck though!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for your feedback.

My intent to post/share bitly link was mainly to get email so we can send you the test version of app via test flight or crashlytics.It certainly wasn't to track. I apologize if it came across that way.

In regards to the "cashless" transaction, handful of mechanics that we reached out to early on were supportive of the idea. Mostly the independent shops. We have seen some reluctance from franchise shops though.

We have not reached out to the small auto shops yet, but will certainly reach out to them in next day or two.

Thanks once again.

<comment><USER2> >In regards to the "cashless" transaction, handful of mechanics that we reached out to early on were supportive of the idea. Mostly the independent shops. We have seen some reluctance from franchise shops though.

It goes both ways.

In 1 way, every business loves cash-in-hand over having it processed (unless they're a massive company that prefers e-money, as it is less expensive to deal with).

On the other hand, people normally screw around with service-men for payment, so having them able to bill electronically is a good way to market cashless transactions.

Think of it this way "Don't you hate when you fix a clients car and it takes them 6 months to pay, with our app, you can get paid quicker and without needing to run around for clients. Just push an update requesting payment and clients are notified immediately." . etc etc

I really like this app.

Just don't "Uberize" or "Snapchatify" it. You aren't "making the world a better place", but you sure are addressing inefficiencies in the used-car market, which is a multi-billion dollar industry.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is what show HN is for - you should file this post under that.</comment>


Show HN: The Task Switch – time tracking gadget - <AUTHOR> https://doug.pacifico-hammond.co.uk/software/hardware/2018/06/24/the-task-switch.html <comment><USER2> I've built a similar thing only in VIM. At work I'm spending most of my time in there, so it made sense to make something without any context switching (Toggl or Jira).

BTW, great work, really like the finished product!

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I have built a little box of buttons which I can use to record the time I spend on each activity at work. Mostly just for my own amusement. I've open sourced the entire concept, software and physical designs.</comment>


Ask HN: What is your favorite purchase you've made in 2018? - <AUTHOR> Be it a software, electronics or even a car! <comment><USER2> My new home in western Montana. Just came in from my deck, listening to the lake across the road lap at it shores as a flock of geese flew buy. Caught a glimpse of a bald eagle soaring through the trees. In Christmas theme: an electronic piano for my daughter, who was unable to take our dilapidated upright grand with us from California; she can play music again!

</comment><comment><USER3> If I could only pick one it would probably be my desktop chair:

hag capisco[1]

Why? -It has helped me feel better about working all day long sitting on a chair which is something I don't think humans should do.

-It is well built and I know I have purchased something I will have with me during many years

-I use it on a dialy basis

Similar logical purchases I also feel proud about this year:

Backpack:Tumi alpha bravo (high resistente nylon)

Headphones: b&w p7 wireless and etymotic er3xr

Coffee machine: aeropress

Edit:typo

[1]:[https://www.amazon.es/dp/B0198M40L0/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_HZx...](https://www.amazon.es/dp/B0198M40L0/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_HZxiCbFGNHXDK)

<comment><USER4> I got the same backpack this year, and that's my choice for best purchase. Worth every penny!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Highly entertaining for my cat. Works just as well as in the videos, even on my deep carpets.

[https://petronics.io](https://petronics.io)

Available on Amazon as well.

</comment><comment><USER6> Oura ring!

It's an amazing piece of technology. I can barely notice it in my finger, I love the details it shows about my sleep although I still have to educate myself about sleep to make the best out of it. This is my first wearable. Well worth the few months wait.

<comment><USER7> This is the first time I've heard of a smart ring. I wonder how they pack a battery in such a thing. How's the battery life?

<comment><USER6> Around 8-9 days when I have it on airplane mode for most days and maybe 6-7 days with airplane mode at all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> 4K 55 inch curved TV for a monitor on my desk at work, super clear display but only 30Hz due to Hdmi, $500 plus delivery from Kogan (Australia).

Initially I was mocked, then they started quietly coming up to me and asking for the link to buy one.

<comment><USER9> I am currently searching for a new display. With the 55inch display, how far away from the screen do you sit?

(I am also Aussie. I have been considering the Kogan displays for a while now, due to price.)

Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> A secondary wide monitor (Acer).Having dual monitor setup definitely multiplies productivity. You can go with any brand but make sure it's atleast 24" plus and Full HD.

</comment><comment><USER11> I bought a motorcycle for cruising and exploring the life outside cubicles, instead of wasting time on Facebook or anyother social media site.

</comment><comment><USER12> LG Zone4. Amazing phone for the price. Seriously considering buying another one as a backup. Completely ditched my laptop as a result.

</comment><comment><USER13> 85" TV half price on black friday and Sonos sound system.

</comment><comment><USER14> GOOG, APPL, BRK.B

</comment><comment><USER15> 2,20m long sheets.

</comment><comment><USER16> Yet another best of 2018 question</comment>