Tell HN: Apply HN applications now closed, let's discuss the next step - <AUTHOR> Applications for Apply HN closed a few hours ago. Now we need a way to sift through the threads and give the community a final say.
A few users have suggested that we create a list of applications that had the most interest, then run a poll to let the community produce a final ranking. That seems reasonable, so we can tentatively consider that the default plan, depending on what other ideas appear in this thread.
Unfortunately I have to be offline most of today, but I'll read and respond to the comments here tonight.
Edit (11 PM Pacific): I'm back now but just too tired and need time to think about this. Sorry. More in the next couple days. <comment><USER3> As someone who submitted yesterday [1], I'd think we need to give new applications more days to catch up with early applications before making a decision.

Also, I think in order to give more reliability to the HN votes and ranking we need to find a way to give a similar exposure to all the applications, this would make up for other bias like time of submission.

One idea is to feature a subset of the applications in the front-page for a given amount of time. (not sure if that's what you're trying to do with /applyrand)

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11586948](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11586948)

</comment><comment><USER4> I'm definitely biased, but I say YC should have someone comb through the top ~100 upvoted submissions and pick the best 20 or so. Let those that get picked write up a really solid short pitch, and then let everyone with a certain level of karma vote. That would allow real HN members a chance to seriously review submissions so that the best ones can be chosen.

I think it's possible to game the system as it is now. You can get your buddies to upvote you, submit at the right time, etc.

<comment><USER5> What I don't think can be gamed is the quality of the discussion. I mean even if someone sock puppets good "technical" questions in order to provide good "technical" answers, that just demonstrates there is depth behind the application. On the other hand, sock puppeteering "Awsome! +1" won't generate quality discussion.

<comment><USER4> How do you quantify quality discussion?

<comment><USER6> I think the whole point is to qualify the quantity not the other way around.

<comment><USER7> I don't know if you're serious, but I'll bite. "Quantify" == express or measure a quantity (thus having an objective measurement that can be compared with other quantitative measurements). GP's point was how to you create a measurement for "quality of discussion" that isn't subjective.

<comment><USER6> And my point was that the whole thing is subjective and the value is in the subjective quality of the discussion.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> 328 Apply HN's currently [[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22Apply%20HN%22&sort=byPopula...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=%22Apply%20HN%22&sort=byPopularity&prefix=false&page=1&dateRange=all&type=story)].

Personally, cadwolf ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11441930](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11441930)) was the most interesting to me. I think they're biting off too much... but it's an opportunity rich environment.

<comment><USER9> Not sure if this is the best place for this comment but is the CADWOLF focus ME only, could it be expanded to EE as well?

Would like to see a way to help contribute to product / market fit on this and other Apply HN's, btw.

<comment><USER10> EE problems will be addressed in later versions of the system. The hope is that it will be able to monitor voltage and current requirements and tie those into the math. Circuit board type problems are a back burner thing for now.

If you want to contact me, you can get my email from the team page on cadwolf.

<comment><USER11> I really like your concept. I'm curious how you think it compares to a LaTeX workflow though.

For example, I have MATLAB generate figures and *.tex files containing LaTeX formatted tables. I have C# Solidworks macros to generate PDFs of CAD. If the analysis changes, the MATLAB outputs automatically update, and the same with CAD files. These 'outputs' get picked up by LaTeX on compile. Other than a WYSIWYG editor vs a 'compiler', are there any fundamental benefits to the cadwolf workflow you're envisioning?

<comment><USER10> There would be both logistical and technical benefits.

1\. A direct link between the CAD, the math, and the documentation. I don't believe that Solidworks will update its models without pulling the matlab output onto the server and the documentation won't update without creating the PDFs and pulling them into the PDFs.

2\. CADWOLF will allow you the ability to create template items like fittings or trusses that consist of a CAD model and the math. Your junior engineers drop this into their designs and give defined inputs like loads and the truss redesigns itself.

3\. The part tree system organizes all of these facets and gives you the ability to see real time system weight/cost/whatever instead of having your people update spreadsheets.

4\. A link between your work and neighboring parts/systems. Although the stack you described "works" whenever the jackhole sitting in the cube next to you updates his model, you have to wait for him to tell you and then go through the entire redesign/upload/redo process. CADWOLF will see those changes and update accordingly.

5\. One system vs Matlab, Solidworks, C#, PDFs, LaTex, etc. Since it is browser based, it can be seen by anyone/anywhere. This is more logistics, but it prevents you from having like six pieces of software running and it prevents you from making a mistake somewhere.

6\. Scale. We will have an AWS server side that can be scaled up instead of being limited to your desktop. This will also help small companies that don't want to buy large computing systems.

7\. Process. Since you have access to every person's documentation for a system through a part tree, you can open that doc and check their work from anywhere. A checkoff system will eventually be implemented.

I did something similar to what you are doing with all of the different pieces of software. It really doesn't seem that bad until you realize that it could all be done automatically. There are also far fewer engineers capable of doing what you are doing than most people realize. You're like in the top 10% of production in my experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I would love to see Pinboard in YC somehow (although might make more sense for Core vs. Fellowship); more people with some level of cost-consciousness in how they build infrastructure would be a win for the alumni network, plus it is a great product. What would be interesting to me is if Maciej would actually enjoy the process; I think he would.

</comment><comment><USER13> The poll sounds good, but tbh I'd consider granting an automatic entrance wildcard to "Pinboard McPinboardface", without having it on the poll. It's well-deserved and there is no point in reiterating that the internet has a sense of humour.

</comment><comment><USER14> I would have found it easier to review these Apply HN threads if each applicant had completed the full YC Fellowship application and posted that in their thread as well. For many of the existing threads, there's just not very much to go on, but you have to read each thread before you can work that out. You can feel the inefficiency begin to drag at you as you go through the review process.

Question: Why don't you require all Apply HN applicants to complete the full YCF application, and open those applications to the HN community? Each YCF application includes an option to generate a corresponding Apply HN thread. Comments from the HN community are made available to YC reviewers. The applicant consents to disclosure by ticking the Apply HN box.

Anyone who posted an Apply HN thread could have just lodged their own YCF application anyway, which the YC team would have had to review and determine in the usual way—but completing the application mandates a baseline level of information about the applicant's team and startup. So why not leverage the existing process and help the HN community help you to review them.

Unfortunately none of that will help you choose applicants from among the existing Apply HN threads (sorry), but it might be worth considering for the next stage of the experiment.

<comment><USER15> James I don't think we need a full application (who wants to watch hundred of videos), but we do need more details from the short list. The 2000 character limit of the original application process was just too limiting for many applications.

<comment><USER16> I think James in is on the right track though. A short intro to gather interest and get discussion going with a link to the application might work for the future.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> What's wrong with using the already expressed intentions of the community, as expressed by the upvotes on each submission, as the 'final say'?

You should give the money to Pinboard.

<comment><USER18> I don't understand how YC could _not_ invest in Pinboard, given the opportunity.

<comment><USER19> The thing is, what does Pinboard actually need? It's a lean one man operation, and has a viable subscription model. Why would that person want VC money?

<comment><USER20> I like money!

<comment><USER19> It's not your money!

<comment><USER21> I do not understand the point of this comment at all. Everybody doing 'Apply HN' is looking for outside capital. Pinboard has a loyal following that would probably be interested in additional value being added to it.

<comment><USER22> I think it is clear. When someone invests in your business, it is not your money. It belongs to the business and is there to help the business grow.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Someone commented recently on older submissions being closed for comments: If it is technically possible without too much effort, you should open all the threads for comments for X days before/during the "vote" (however it looks). Many people are going to pay attention (again) to the threads, and they should be able to ask questions and receive answers before they vote.

</comment><comment><USER24> My suggestion:

1) Filter out troll applications and applications with fake votes and other ineligible applications.

2) From the sanitized list find out the top 10

3) Start a poll where users can choose from the top 10 (but don't rank them in the poll, randomize the placements and don't show live voting stats to prevent bias)

4) Give every applicant on the poll the opportunity to post why one should vote for within a short word limit. As we have seen from low engagement after the first few days, extremely few users will read 10 complete threads and make their choice.

<comment><USER25> > 1) Filter out troll applications and applications with fake votes and other > ineligible applications.

How exactly do you identify "troll" applications? The most important ideas are often the most likely to be perceived as an act of trolling.

<comment><USER26> Note that OP is being very coy and is not disclosing the fact that the proposed rules benefit his own Apply HN submission.

The OP is referring to Pinboard which was a joke submission.

<comment><USER20> What basis do you have for claiming it's a joke?

<comment><USER26> Pinboard is not eligible for the YCF because it is not an early-stage startup.

Otherwise the submission is perfectly fine. :p

<comment><USER20> From [https://fellowship.ycombinator.com/faq/](https://fellowship.ycombinator.com/faq/):

"The only restrictions on acceptable teams are founders must be willing to work on their ideas full-time, and teams can't have previously taken money from investors."

<comment><USER26> Huh. It appears I have been lawyered.

<comment><USER24> From the same page:

 _What if we haven't yet received investment, but we have a ton of traction, users, revenue, etc.?

We want YC Fellowship to really help teams that are just starting off, or have been struggling to get traction. If you're doing really well, we'll likely ask you to apply for the next batch of Y Combinator._

<comment><USER20> This says nothing about eligibility. It only suggests that such teams—which are allowed to apply—are unlikely to be selected.

In this case, the normal selection process has been changed by throwing the decision to Hacker News. And the people have spoken!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> > then run a poll to let the community produce a final ranking

Given the voting patterns on some of the Apply HNs so far, I hope that the voting ring detector on the poll is extra-strict. :P

(Fortunately, such patterns have been in in the minority of Apply HN submissions from what I've noticed, though.)

</comment><comment><USER5> Maybe the next step in the process could be a period for those interested to go back and read through the applications. This could be followed by a brief period where the threads were reopened for relevant questions and answers. This could be followed by the polling.

My take is that this would sort of parallel the regular YC process of application->interview->selection except that it would eliminate "rolling selection". My gut is that the implication of "rolling selection" may have encouraged problematic "Apply HN" strategies. Not to mention it's too late for it to be part of this cycle anyway.

Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER27> A polled ranking sounds good but that may not be a reliable gauge of a project's ultimate "interestingness" or viability, just a gauge of HN community's preferences. E.g. a project with great potential (market, usage, etc) may not seem so simply because very few HNers find it interesting. Activity and discussion also dropped after the first couple of days - <USER2> reviewed and asked questions on some then forgot about it. I'll take final run through the list now. For future iterations, some sort of opt-in notification system might help.

</comment><comment><USER12> I'd like to see some YC people (dang? kevin?) go through the entire list and find 25 or so great ones. Then, ask those people to flesh out their apps a bit more, then have discussion and community voting.

I'd be fine trusting YC to make the first pass, and community make the final selection.

<comment><USER24> I think the whole point of the experiment was to select applicants YC would not normally pick. This would bring back all YC biases.

Quoting dang _" If it seems unstructured, that's on purpose: we don't want to bias it along the lines of how YC already operates. We want to see what the community comes up with."_

<comment><USER28> Having read through many of the applications, I think that we could safely get down to 25 without risking throwing out any that deserve the win. There just weren't all that many applications that clearly described a remotely plausible business idea and that had founders who posted thoughtful responses. I would say that at least half of the applications seemed like a hobby or an idea that had been simmering in the back of someone's mind, with little to no thought given to how it could turn into a viable business.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Note about discussion on submissions - the comments closed at the standard time so when people looked at old submissions they couldn't participate in the discussion.

</comment><comment><USER29> How will "most interest" be defined?

<comment><USER30> Seconded. Additionally, I'd love to see a distribution of comments/upvotes by date of submission (such data I think could be gleaned from HN search). My eyeballs tell me posts submitted within the first 2 or 3 days of Apply HN got much more traffic/discussion. Certainly it is possible that those first posts warranted such discussion and subsequent posts did not. Or maybe I'm completely wrong in my observation, which is why I'd like to see such data.

Also, after ApplyHN became randomized (around midway thru the experiment) it seemed like discussion dramatically fell again, but it was definitely tough to tell since refreshing showed new applications every time.

Fun experiment though and I'm excited to see what types of projects the community picks.

<comment><USER31> Yeah, what was the criteria for making it to the main Apply listing? Was it number of votes? Comments? Our application never showed up there: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11467813](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11467813)

<comment><USER30> Yep, mine never made it to the front of ApplyHN either. It seemed like unless it got at least one or two immediate upvotes, it disappeared into the abyss, thus making it even less likely to get traffic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> The quantifiable attributes of Apply HN should not be the main factors in determining which one makes it. I think we should vote on the most thoughtful, helpful commenters and let those people chose 1 apply hn that they think should survive.

</comment><comment><USER33> Most of these ideas will not have mass-market appeal, precisely because this is a tech-centric market.

I could have submitted an idea like this:

        Instagram for Pets
        OR
        Tinder for food

I would probably get about 3-4 upvotes on HN, but a "stupid" idea(s) like this could easily get 1+ million app users the same way "Yo" did.

What you guys should have used the Apply HN for is to fund ideas like "open- source as a business". Rather give that money to GitLab-type ideas so that even if the founders fizzle out, the IP remains in the open and can be used by everyone.

<comment><USER34> This effect is especially true for those of us who are non-profits.

"Give food to the poor and needy" often understandably has more appeal and is a quicker reference point to the normal citizen than the stuff we do: "Hey it's becoming more dangerous than ever for a small amount of the people who deliver the food to the poor and needy, so let's think of a open source technical approach way to make it easier." Both are very worthy/important, but some messages are just easier/clearer for people in a voting process.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I went through most of the applications and comments earlier in the month (I need to do the rest) and it took me around 6 hours [1].

I think the best option might be for someone at YC (Dan this is going to be you) to make a top 20 list and ask those applicants to put in a longer application that we can then rank and comment on - the 2000 character limit of the initial application process was too limiting in my opinion to use for the final ranking.

1\. [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11477879](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11477879)

</comment><comment><USER35> How about this:

-1st round: Submit application (with this we get all submitions and all users that spent time submiting so we already have filtered users that have knowledge on startups)

-2nd round: Every user that submited for 1st round gets to pick for example 3 of 10 other random submitions we present to them that are then evaluated on that votes (This way we avoid ring voting and dumb mass voting. Note that for next cycle we can allow users from previous cycle to evaluate too!)

</comment><comment><USER36> My pics:

Statistics/Data Analysis As a Service.

SponsorGigs: Event / Sponsors Matching Service.

925: Job Search Assistant Via SMS.

NextAppointment: Automatically Suggests Your Next Dental/Doctor Appointment based on Your Availability and Theirs.

Knowledge Maps: Curated Links for Specific Topics.

Signl.FM: Medium, Twitter for Voice/Audio.

Automate: Bookkeeping & Accounting automated.

Remember: Google For All Your Files.

Agora: Debate Local Issues.

Therapy: P2P Therapy Phone Calls.

Wanderlust: Recommended Trips Based on Budget.

AuthorInvestments: Fund Works You Like in Exchange of Future Royalties.

Social Network for Farmers.

Krewe: Make New Friends Where You Live.

</comment><comment><USER37> its hard to identify a good candidate. I think a combination of votes, the discussion that happened and then obviously standard evaluation of idea, market, etc is a good strategy.

So many ideas are amazing. May the best ideas win. I think for the ones that do make to top list but not to yc fellowship, it would be really helpful for them if one of the YC partners can provide brief feedback/advice/direction to them.

<comment><USER38> It'd be nice but they probably won't for the same reasons they don't provide feedback to real YCF or YC applications.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Although I was initially against it, having another "round" where partners narrow the list could allow for a number of questions to be answered. Most of these questions could not be addressed in the 2000 character limit of the initial post. These questions include things like whether or not the applicant(s) have the ability to complete the project, what is their domain expertise, have they worked on the project on their own, what is the market size, how are they better than the competition, can they explain how the idea is really a worthwhile company and not just a neat idea that is really more of a feature on an existing product.

It would also allow for more conversation since the readers would not have to comb through as many applicants.

</comment><comment><USER39> I am against the idea of anonymous voting. There is too much gaming involved here. I think only HN accounts that are identifiable to a real person should be allowed to vote. Not sure how you can enforce this though.

<comment><USER40> I think there has already been a ridiculous amount of gaming, regardless of real person or not. I mentioned in a previous comment about this that even the time of day you post can dramatically impact how many votes you get because of the way the system works.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Could someone enlighten me about Pinboard, the founder idlewords and the back story/relation with YC.

The comments regarding Pinboard and idlewords are very interesting.

Note: I am only asking out of curiosity.

<comment><USER42> I'll take a crack at it. A long time ago, idlewords and pg were both active here and they were the opposite ends of some kind of spectrum. pg would write things and idlewords would throw rocks at them and sometimes write his own things in response. At some point idlewords got temporarily hellbanned. It was supposedly some kind of innocent error but at that point idlewords took his ball and went home.

At some point he started up a bookmarking service to compete with Delicious, and it _really_ took off after Yahoo bought Delicious and then made an unholy mess of it. A lot of early Delicious users (myself included) went looking for an alternative, and there was pinboard, waiting for us, and it was better in a lot of respects.

So he's done pretty well at running pinboard, it is a lifestyle business, and he's an excellent writer and it's hard to tell whether he's a writer that happens to own a bookmarking service or a programmer that happens to be a decent writer. Anyway, a lot of the stuff he's written has gotten some exposure and he's given some talks. I've started to see people talking about his website obesity presentation ([http://idlewords.com/talks/website_obesity.htm](http://idlewords.com/talks/website_obesity.htm)) in circles WAY removed from HN.

He uses his twitter feed to poke fun at the SV startup scene, too. Overall he's a foil to some of the sillier aspects of Silicon Valley.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> What is Apply HN? Somehow I missed this.

<comment><USER25> Same here. It's such a shame that we allow for such important things to be miss-able.

<comment><USER44> Yep, hundreds of comments on the original post, 300+ submissions on the new Apply tab on the top nav of the site -- and I'd missed it completely as well. Even though I read this site far more than I should do.

Of course somebody has to miss these things, you can't reach everyone. It just feels strange when it's you.

I would love to see the pattern of how those 300+ submitters came to hear of it.

<comment><USER24> Media outlets like Tech Crunch covered it as well :P

[http://techcrunch.com/2016/04/06/y-combinator-flirts-with- ha...](http://techcrunch.com/2016/04/06/y-combinator-flirts-with-having- hacker-news-community-pick-fellowship-companies/)

<comment><USER44> Ah, not even a full-blown case of FOMO will induce me to read TechCrunch.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> dang, I really like apply HN. I think it helps not just ycombinator fund the right ones, but also really helps inspire the ecosystem to come up with good ideas.

<comment><USER26> > but also really helps inspire the ecosystem to come up with good ideas

Let's talk about that, since we're on the subject. Most of the ideas presented in Apply HN submissions reminded me of the old "Idea Sunday" threads. To quote<AUTHOR> ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7693640](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7693640))

> Having all these ideas in one place makes the whole less than the sum of its > parts. [...] Ideas are better in the wild. Let's discuss them as they come > up organically, rather than try to organize an idea-fest.

The most popular Apply HN submissions I've seen are "LinkedIn that does not suck!" which is not a high bar of innovation. However...that is the bar for the YC Fellowship, which allows for unformed ideas, so I'm unsure whether I _should_ be criticizing such submissions.

<comment><USER45> agreed, idea sunday was awesome. removing it was really really dumb.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Does anyone have contact information for chroem-, who submitted the application for Mechanical Mind? It's too late to comment on the listing, and there's no contact info on his profile.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11442038](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11442038)

<comment><USER10> I was trying to get in touch with him too. The images on the application can be traced back to an ME page for Carnegie Mellon but there is no contact info on that site or on the imgur site that hosts the images.

</comment></comment><comment><USER47> Is there a singular landing page to track official posts related to "Apply HN" updates?

</comment><comment><USER47> Why were some users ban for posting "Apply HN" apps?

</comment><comment><USER48> Hi everyone! I'm Gabriel, one of the founders of Casepad which is currently the second most upvoted Apply HN Post [0].

Before I launch into an argument for how to conduct the selection process I wanted to say thanks to everyone who contributed to Apply HN. The feedback and support that we received went beyond our wildest expectations and regardless of what happens we're glad we participated.

<argument> _With that being said,_ I would suggest that upvotes and comments should have serious weight in the decision of who receives the fellowship. My understanding of this process was that it was an opportunity for members of HN to express their voice in the YCF selection process and it seems to me that the way they do so is via comments and upvotes. While the idea of a "runoff" selection with the top five or top ten most upvoted posts is appealing in practice it also disregards much of the work that the community put into vetting and discussing existing submissions. A runoff also doesn't solve the problem that it purports to solve, that some submissions got more structural attention than others, because it is also being conducted on an anonymous message board over an arbitrarily selected period of time (not unlike the first 20 odd days of Apply HN). As an example, someone who had the chance to vote or comment on ApplyHN might miss the runoff because of a bad week at work, and that means that their voices could be washed out.

I have a vested interest in saying this, but I am skeptical (until I see data) of all of the oblique suggestions that the front runners' posts only made it there because of bandwagoning. I like to think that we, along with many of the other front runners, presented a strong idea that deserved the attention it got. A separate but related point is that this is HN, not a randomized controlled experiment in selecting companies, so the habits and voting patterns of the community should be seen as a feature rather than a bug.

If I were running this selection process I would say that some combination of comments + upvotes + the judgment of the partners who will work with these companies would be the best way to choose the fellowship recipients.

But, that's just me :). </argument>

Thanks again to everyone who upvoted, asked questions, and gave feedback. More thoughts + feedback are always welcome. (I'm at firstname.lastname@example.com if anyone wants to reach out privately.)

[0] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11452884](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11452884)

EDIT: Small edits for clarity.

EDIT2: Removed "(a more focused version of /u/baron816's suggestion)" because it just wasn't that accurate of a statement

<comment><USER49> Co-Founder of Brightwork here. This is great and would echo this sentiment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> May the best thread win...

</comment><comment><USER51> People gonna copy idea, its that easy i think.</comment>


Google ignore another spam content site, BigResource.com - <AUTHOR> http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Web+Search/thread?tid=2fcbb7ec02a527b2&hl=en

<comment><USER2> I don't think Hacker News is the appropriate place for Google content petitions.</comment>


Barack Obama: America Will Take the Giant Leap to Mars - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/11/opinions/america-will-take-giant-leap-to-mars-barack-obama/index.html <comment><USER2> Just a quick flashback to President George Bush circa January 2004 [1]:

 _Our second goal is to develop and test a new spacecraft, the crew exploration vehicle, by 2008, and to conduct the first manned mission no later than 2014._

[1][http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/54868main_bush_trans.pdf](http://www.nasa.gov/pdf/54868main_bush_trans.pdf)

<comment><USER3> What happened to that? Lack of funding?

<comment><USER4> It was a typical flags and footprints mission without much thought given to cost, so it ended up having a sticker price of about a trillion dollars, give or take. Congress hated it so much that they curtailed even the hint of talk about a Mars mission by NASA for well over a decade.

<comment><USER5> Come on brah, you can 'lose' a couple of trillion down the backseat of the sofa at the Pentagon but you lose your shit when NASA asks for a mere 1 trillion dollars spread over a number of years?

I feel pretty tall from this horse. Even the horse is feeling pretty aristocratic about the whole affair.

<comment><USER6> In fact, I didn't even blink when you implied that the military brass have sofas _with back seats_.

Who else would have a couch _with an entire other couch bolted to the back of it_? At only 15x the cost of one normal couch, too.

<comment><USER5> For a hidden camera prank I want to go into the Pentagon's reception area, find a couch, and then struggle to pull out one of those enormous cheques with a lubricious number of zeros on it. Maybe I could even get some people in uniforms to help me yank it out.

I would then finish by galloping (bearing the cheque) into the sunset on an empty road, and at the top of a mighty hill I would yank the reins and the horse would paw the air with its front hooves as I wave the cheque in triumph.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Trying to go to Mars is equivalent to the explorers in the 1500-1700s discovering other continents. History has shown it was a good idea.

We won't know the benefit of going to Mars until 100s of years after we do it.

<comment><USER8> I don't think it took 100's of years for people to figure out that a continent teaming cod, timber, and beavers might be a good place to set up trade. Grated, early on, they thought it was a continent full of gold and spices.

I don't know what the analogous economic engine could possible be on Mars. If Mars is going to grow, we need to be able to imagine someone saying "I'm moving my family to Mars in search of a better life. I just don't see that happening. Series or L2 station? Sure, someone has to refine the iridium before we send it down the gravity well. But why would an entrepreneur want to set up shop on Mars?

<comment><USER9> > why would an entrepreneur want to set up shop on Mars?

? New environment, new markets, new needs = lots of new and potentially huge opportunities. I'm asking myself the complete opposite question.

<comment><USER10> There's nothing there. Did you setup shop on Antarctica? No? That's because there's nothing there. Same with Mars.

Go for the knowledge, but as far as ordinary human things are concerned there is no reason to go.

Until you can make an economic case for settling the poles you won't be able to make one for Mars - and the poles are LOT easier to live on BTW.

We have a base on the poles for the same reason we'll have one on Mars.

<comment><USER11> You can't set up shop in Antarctica because its forbidden by the antarctic treaty, which is backed by 32 Nations. If you think people wouldn't be conducting business there if given the option, you've somehow managed to overlook every other corner of the world where its not prohibited. Mining businesses. Tourism/adventure companies. Setting up stores, bars, and other entertainment venues to supply tourists and miners with things to do and stuff to buy. These are just a few things I can think of off the top of my head that would be happening in Antarctica if it weren't patently illegal.

<comment><USER12> Two countries close to Antarctica, Chile and Argentina, are not signatories to the Antarctic Treaty and have territorial claims. Both of these countries already have a decent amount of natural resource extraction (especially Chile), so one would reason that if it is worth mining, they would be.

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

One could also look at the interior of Greenland, which is Danish territory. No serious development of any kind occurs there - it's all along the coasts.

<comment><USER13> Er, Chile and Argentina are original Treaty (1959) signatories, and dispute at least some of Britain and France's claims, and vice versa.

The treaty sets aside territorial claims whilst it's in force. All the claims for all countries are still there, just neutered.

<comment><USER12> You are right. Not sure how I missed that

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Probably not a coincidence that this announcement arrives barely a week after SpaceX's absurdly ambitious Mars architecture announcement.

It's a good bet that any politician meaning business about this will award numerous private contracts as part of the initiative. SpaceX intends to make manned exploration of Mars a lot cheaper than NASA has ever suggested possible, and cost is the main factor.

<comment><USER15> Yeah I was surprised to see that he didn't mention SpaceX anywhere in the article. It seems that Elon usually pays tribute to NASA -- he did in his Mars announcement.

It seems like if there are only two entities trying to go to Mars, and they work together through a contracting relationship, then it makes sense to mention the relation to the other one.

Otherwise I'm just left confused about the two efforts.

<comment><USER16> He didn't call out ULA or any private company. It gets tricky to call out specific companies in a broad statement like this one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Politicians and the desire of legacy.

<comment><USER18> If only we would feed the space industrial complex as we do the military one. _sigh_

<comment><USER19> We need to be a peaceful species if we ever hope to commune with ETIs and unlock the inner mysteries of the universe. According to Edgar Mitchell, the ETIs will not tolerate violence. Zero point energy is too powerful to entrust to warmongering space pirates (like us).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The relatively tiny budget spent on NASA is well spent -- the research opens minds, understanding of physics, and even commercial opportunity.

</comment><comment><USER21> Would have been nice to hear this earlier than the final minutes of his presidency. I have no faith that either of his possible successors give a damn about Mars.

<comment><USER22> I'd have given his words more credence if he hadn't canceled the Constellation project in 2010 [1].

It was in fact part of his original campaign platform in 2008 to cut funding to Nasa to pay for a national day care program. The day care never really got off the ground, but he did succeed in cutting Nasa's budget, forcing a lot of projects to shut down.

I'm glad to hear he's had a change of heart about space, though it sounds as though he's counting on the private sector to do a lot of the work. And, of course, it means diddlysquat given that he's retiring in three months.

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constellation_program](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constellation_program)

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> >> sitting on my grandfather's shoulders, waving a flag as our astronauts returned to Hawaii.

>> More than 1,000 companies across nearly all 50 states are working on private space initiatives.

These are my takeaways - the reason we do the hard things is because of a child like sense of wonder.

And the reason we will succeed is because 1,000 companies is a _lot_. And I bet I am not the only HN'er wanting to be one of the next ones, to buy into the dream.

Just take lots of tomato ketchup in case.

</comment><comment><USER24> Wasn't clear if The President is referring to the NASA Orion Space Lunch System?

The GAOs latest report suggested it would miss its 2018 first test launch due to technical challenges (software-related):

[http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-620](http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16-620)

<comment><USER25> I know it's a typo but I'm amused by NASA considering the difficulties of space lunch.

<comment><USER26> Hey now, have you tried any of that Astronaut Ice Cream? It's horrible! Clearly they need to improve space lunch!

<comment><USER25> In fact, I have, and I quite enjoyed the texture.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> > Editors Note: Barack Obama is President of the United States.

Thanks

<comment><USER28> That line was more so for people who stumble upon that article in 5 years, not necessarily for those reading today.

<comment><USER29> I thought it was a joke, suggesting that everyone is so caught up with the presidential election, they may have forgotten who the current one is. I thought it was pretty funny. :P

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> We aren't close to ready for Mars. We need a base on the moon.

<comment><USER31> The gravity and atmosphere of Mars make it a more ideal candidate.

<comment><USER32> True but isn't the big problem self sustaining food, water and breathable air?

<comment><USER31> Sure, but this conversation was Mars vs. the moon. The only argument the moon has going for it is that it's a short trip.

Mars does have a reasonable atmosphere (albeit not breathable, it's mostly CO2), and therefore does have some hope to be terraformed to earth-like levels. We will probably have to use closed systems (greenhouses with water recycling) until we heat the planet up a bit and get it back to the state it was when it had running water and precipitation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I believe this bill cancels our no-commerce-in-space obligations under the Outer Space Treaty - American companies may now lay claim to and develop celestial objects.

<comment><USER34> Where does it say that? That would actually be a huge deal...

<comment><USER33> Never mind, it may have been effectively nullified by the Space Act of 2015 [1]. It's a bit schizophrenic, however.

One section states "a United States citizen engaged in commercial recovery of an asteroid resource or a space resource under this chapter shall be entitled to any asteroid resource or space resource obtained, including to possess, own, transport, use, and sell the asteroid resource or space resource obtained in accordance with applicable law, including the international obligations of the United States."

Section 403, meanwhile, confirms that "it is the sense of Congress that by the enactment of this Act, the United States does not thereby assert sovereignty or sov- ereign or exclusive rights or jurisdiction over, or the ownership of, any celestial body."

[1] [https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ90/PLAW-114publ90.pdf](https://www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ90/PLAW-114publ90.pdf) _See Title IV Space Resource Exploration and Utilization_

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> No mention of SpaceX. If they can collaborate, humans can go to Mars by 2025

<comment><USER36> I don't entirely disagree, but overall I think multiple independent endeavors may be the most resilient approach.

In other words, collaboration may indeed the fastest path if all goes well, but multiple independent efforts may be safer, with a higher probability of success.

Independent approaches also allow for slightly different techniques and technological approaches to the problem, which may have additional unknown benefits later on.

<comment><USER37> One does not preclude another. As long as all parties involved share knowledge, they can pursue different paths while at the same time speeding up each others' efforts.

<comment><USER36> True, that would probably be the ideal scenario - independent yet collaborative.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> The Destiny of Earthseed / Is to take root among the stars.

"[God is] change we can believe in."

</comment><comment><USER39> Even if Mars worked, it would be terrible for the Earth because it would give the first real nuclear asylum. Should leaders be able to live somewhere completely free of the threat of destruction, who knows what they'd do. Should it work, it can greatly hurt the human race; should it fail, it was a waste of money. I don't understand why people would be happy about this?

<comment><USER40> Serious? I honestly can't tell.

Do you think the only thing stopping leaders from killing billions is the fact they might also die or be otherwise affected?

<comment><USER41> They must be so looking forward to life in the Mars desert!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Let's fix education, healthcare, banking, infrastructure, inefficient military, "warrior" policing, and prisons first. Then, if money is left over, we can go to Mars or just subsidize American's vacation trips to interesting places on this planet. :)

<comment><USER43> I encourage you to spend some time perusing NASA Spinoffs: [https://spinoff.nasa.gov/](https://spinoff.nasa.gov/)

Granted, NASA is slowly turning into a regulatory agency compared to being purely technical, so we can't use the rate of technical advancements in the past to predict the future. However, I think NASA is one of the handful of federal agencies where I stand to see tangible benefits from my tax dollars.

<comment><USER42> I know about them. I just prefer the next initiative dealing with major problems with long-term ROI for the country. They can never seem to put money and effort into those things but they can go to Mars. (Rolls eyes)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Props to Andy Weir and his book _The Martian_.

Like how _Star Trek_ inspired a generation of engineers and rocket scientists, his book is inspiring another generation to go even further.

</comment><comment><USER45> Kennedy: We choose to go to the Moon

</comment><comment><USER46> And yet any sort of program that gets fleshed out right now will get trashed in about three months time when he leaves office and congress turns over. Yay, political infighting and sabotage!

<comment><USER47> That NASA cannot plan reliably past the next budget actually affects a lot of things very negatively.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> To all those questioning the need to go to Mars: because it's there.

</comment><comment><USER49> II Cold War has just begun and Obama is already trying to finish it with the same old move?

<comment><USER50> The Cold War didn't end in 1969

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Translation: we discovered vast amounts of oil on Mars.

<comment><USER52> That would be an absolutely _fantastic_ reason to go to mars, because it almost certainly indicate the existence of large quantities of life on mars at some point in the past.

<comment><USER53> Or evidence for [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin)

<comment><USER52> Interesting, thanks!

I get the impression from the wiki article that, so far, these are well- studied but rejected theories re: sources of petro and gas on earth. It's unclear to me, though, whether that's because of _essential_ reasons that would apply to other systems, or just a historical happenstance specific to earth.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Finding funding for seed stage? - <AUTHOR> I'm not picky with equity, nor overly arrogant in wanting to regain massive control, since I take a long term view. Seeking around 150K USD for seed stage startup, in data collection / BI, with a time to market of 6 months, and a no-free-tier PaYG business model. I have a Delaware C Corp, started recently on Stripe which has not taken any funding. As well as funding I'm interested in taking advice and guidance on go to market strategy, business model and initial target markets and applications. I have deep technical knowledge of this space, and have technology prototypes, but no prototype for the application. The biggest risk I see is that this is not a real market, because it's similar to, but significantly different to other offerings in this space. The second biggest risk I see is that this is a solution looking for a problem. This could also be advantage. The third biggest risk is that I am unable to complete this, either in a team, or as at present, working alone as a solo founder.  I shall not require you to sign NDAs to discuss further, but please ensure I can verify you are a real investor prospect. To keep responses here focused on my goal, I am not seeking further questions or advice about my approach as replies here, only invitations to connect to discuss further, or suggestions who I should reach out to. Finally, this is not a case of, come back to me when you are ready to launch, this is a case of seeking funding to get to launch and 1 year post launch. I'm an Australian, currently based in China, but am prepared to relocate at your convenience, pending consideration of such relocation's effect on runway. Thank you for your time, if this question is not a fit for HN, please ignore. If you'd prefer, please email  email@example.com <comment><USER2> Not what you're looking for, but strong recommendations:

1) Find your co-founder first. Much better for your negotiating position going forward. You may have a harder time bringing in a co-founder if your stock price is impacted by the funding.

2) Always have potential investors sign NDAs before you disclose anything remotely confidential. They expect it. And they will take you more seriously.

3) Be picky with equity. Be somewhat arrogant about retaining control. That IS the long-term view a founder should take at your stage.

I'm happy to discuss in more detail by email. But you need to get certain ducks in a row to make it sensible to take on funding.</comment>


Show HN: Breakthrough in quantum physics - <AUTHOR> http://inwhy.net/quantum.jpg <comment><USER2> I only see a jpg. Is there something interactive? The idea of the ShowHN is that it's a project that the other users can try and provide feedback.

Anyway, the idea looks interesting. I have some formation in Chemistry and Quantum Mechanics (and Math), so an historic almost first hand report looks interesting.

For example, the periodic table looks weird, it looks like an old table. I'll (99%) upvote a next post with more information.</comment>


Ask HN: How to minimize risk when having to disclose passwords on US border? - <AUTHOR> The word on the street seems to be that no matter what, you can be asked your passwords if you want to enter USA nowadays and if you don't comply the best you can hope for is to be sent back. Until now I've read here on HN mostly some strategies on how to not comply with plausible deniability. But how about another assumption?
Assuming Joe
* is not a security expert * doesn't know its passwords and uses a password manager * has 2nd factor authentication enabled (but only) on some of the logins (some tokens, some TOTP, some sms) * doesn't want to deceive or lie to the requester (border agent?) and doesn't want to give the agent reasons to detain Joe, confiscate Joe's devices... and so he's willing to comply
how does Joe even reduce risk in his compliance?
Is changing all passwords as soon as possible after crossing borders the best risk reduction he can do? (Considering he just gave up a lot of passwords just because he unlocked the password manager it's already a pretty exhausting burden IMHO). Maybe having a list of required logins, one could have a separate temporary "vault" of logins just for the required accounts, hence avoiding compromising all other logins (and change the temp vault's passwords asap)?
What about the 2nd factors? will the software ones require a refresh? How about the hardware ones or the U2F ones (I don't think you can refresh them)? Maybe disabling 2nd factors until border is crossed? Possibly even not bring the hardware ones and re-enabling them after crossing with a new one that wasn't "imported" while traveling?
Thanks for your opinions <comment><USER2> The strongest advice and one I've heard from several experts is don't travel out of the country with your phone. Joe could get a pay per use, or have a 2nd phone to use just for travel.

Changing just the vault password would be useless. I'm unaware of what level of tools border control has at it's immediate disposal, but they do make a copy of your phone contents from what I've heard, and passwords can be decoded from that after the fact. Once you get it back they've already got what they want.

2nd best to that IMO is set phone to wipe after a number of incorrect password attempts, which is good security in case a phone is stolen anyway. It might not be considered "compliance" however, but you'd be handing over your phone (given ability if stopped to enter wrong password in x number of times before asked for phone).

But after the fact, being caught in the situation and complying, I would suggest completely wiping the device, deleting/recreating any account that isn't essential, changing passwords for all that are and enabling 2FA as possible.

And non-tech related, carrying the # for ACLU or a attorney written down is essential for anyone who might be flagged.</comment>


Some Notes on the "Andrew Ng" Coursera Machine Learning Course - <AUTHOR> https://ftrsn.net/2018/02/11/some-notes-on-the-andrew-ng-coursera-machine-learning-course/ <comment><USER2> I took the 11-week Coursera course last year (and even paid for the 'verified' certificate). It was worth it, I think. I may not have a deep understanding of the different ML algorithms that were presented, but at least I know of their existence, and to what problems they are suited (and then I can look up the details when needed).

Granted, that's not enough to actually find work doing anything ML-related, as there are now plenty of experts with years of experience out there on the job market, but hey, I like learning stuff for the sake of it. I'm thinking of taking one of the follow-up courses on NN.

<comment><USER3> What made you decide to take the paid certificate route? I've browsed job boards for the past few months; but have seen that employers are increasingly looking for degrees as a minimum requirement versus having a Coursera certificate. Especially with regards to anything involving the ML space, it seems like employers are more interested in it as a supplement to a degree rather than being useful on its own.

<comment><USER2> Well, I have a BS in Comp Sci as well as an MBA. Moment of weakness, I guess. Besides, since I paid for it up front, I had that much more motivation to finish the course :)

In any case, it's on the resume. No idea if it looks good or not.

Of course, if I were really serious about it, maybe I ought to go for a PhD in CS. But at 37 years old, I'm approaching the end of my useful life as a software engineer. I understand I have to report to something called "Caoursel" on my 40th birthday, whatever that is.

EDIT: Allright, I took it because at the time I was working as a software development "SME" on a program in which AI, ML and data science terms were being bandied about by the PhDs and I wanted to be able to sit in on meetings and at least follow the conversation (And not look completely stupid. Adopting a stern look and nodding along will only get you so far, occasionally you have to speak). The course largely fulfilled its purpose on that score.

<comment><USER3> I'm a bit younger on the age range at 23, and taking some time out of school since my grades and finances weren't quite where I wanted them to be. Would you say a person who has a handful of relevant Coursera certificates and does well on an interview would be able to compete against a degree holder who also did above average?

For your case of staying current in newer tech I can see the market reason for taking it. People like Knuth who're well into their 70's still seem to find ways to remain relevant as well. What is the "Caoursel" you're referring to?

<comment><USER4> After 40 you'd be actively managed out by a company, even if you built their business from the scratch. You see it happening all the time, once you start thinking you should now reap rewards of your hard work, you'll be shown the door. Better start your own company and fight for life than to end up 40-year old unemployed burned out developer.

<comment><USER5> ^ This is one person's opinion that reflects their own experience.

I am a 35 year old who has done development, and may do it again in the future. I have kept my skillset updated by taking several AI courses during a sabbatical.

If you are competing against a group that competes for roles that select for what you think is silly, you'll never win. This does not describe most startups; it may be an indicator of _bad startups_.

There is age discrimination, for sure. In the startup cohort study of the future, I am quite confident those exhibiting this discrimination will not be on the successful side.

Younger devs focus on their skills. Older devs focus on the value they bring to the company. Companies that focus on the latter will do better.

YMMV, we live in a probabilistic world.

<comment><USER4> It's not my experience, it's my observations on people that graduated MIT and similar top schools, created awesome things and got the boot from companies they built without any remorse from management that sensed more money to them. At 35 you are likely at the peak of your abilities and just starting decline in your employability. Try to apply to some companies online for the fun of it (e.g. practice current crop of interviews) and report back on how many want to talk to you and how many want to give you more $ than you are earning right now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I have tried to get into Machine Learning/Deep Learning a few times, but I found it difficult to get motivated because I feel like I don't have any immediate use cases in my own personal or professional life to which I can apply them.

Even areas in which my company can potentially benefit from Machine Learning, we don't have access to vast troves of data to use as training sets. So our brainstorming sessions have gone nowhere.

<comment><USER7> So many use cases! Take the course! You can use regularization to learn from small datasets by penalizing learning extreme biased feature weightings.

For finding a use case or at work just think of any normal problem like UI or ux design, or showing someone an enjoyable loading screen or funny picture, anyone can make something okay but to solve a problem close to optimally you start to need to gather data and do ml/ai

<comment><USER6> Well, for example, can I look at the company's sales performance over the past 24 months (along with various factors such as number of sales staff on the field) and accurately predict its numbers next month?

Where would I start with this? Is this even an ML problem?

<comment><USER8> Time series data is hard, especially without lots of training examples.

Consider looking into traditional forecasting methods as a baseline. AR(I)MA based approaches with seasonality might actually be fine for you.

However, it all changes if there are structural breaks in your dataset. Look into Rob Hyndman's free online book ([https://otexts.org/fpp2/](https://otexts.org/fpp2/)) for an excellent introduction into timeseries forecasting.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Ended up founding a ml startup predicting crypto currency prices [https://bitbank.nz](https://bitbank.nz) after finishing this course! such a good skillset to have I didn't know what I would do when I started the course just that I should learn this ml stuff

<comment><USER9> serious question: how well was bitbank able to predict the recent bitcoin selloff?

<comment><USER10> given that he gives only 1 day free trial, clearly he is not confident of his system.</comment></comment></comment>


Researchers build malicious Facebook application - <AUTHOR> http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/09/05/researchers-build-malicious-facebook-application

<comment><USER2> In a nutshell: the Facebook app performs a DDoS attack on a victim website using the users' bandwidth.</comment>


Ask HN: How much do you make? - <AUTHOR> How much do you make in SF/Seattle/NYC/Vancouver? What is your household income?<p>Edit: Deleted a lot of personal information and also changed theme of the question. <comment><USER2> There will be a huge selection bias + reporting bias here. HN has a lot of people with relatively high wages and people are more inclined to state their earnings when they are high, just keep this in mind.

Also: cost of living is a huge factor in salary, if you earn over 100k in the Netherlands you're considered loaded, but I keep hearing stories about software devs in the US starting out with 100k.

</comment><comment><USER3> _How much do you make in SF /Seattle/NYC/Vancouver? What is your household income?_

I will suggest you delete everything but the above. You will get better answers. Otherwise, you can probably expect a lot of snark and not much real information.

</comment><comment><USER4> Seattle. At my last 3 jobs, I made $135k, then $110k, then $90k, in that order, as both my skills and the profile/prestige of the products _increased_.

<comment><USER5> Why did you accept the lower pay, or leave the job with the higher pay?

Were the hours better, was the work more interesting, did you not have a choice or was there another factor at play?

<comment><USER4> The work was far more interesting each time. The high paying job was a bullshit Sharepoint app that everyone knew full well would never see the light of day. The middle one was a very, very successful mobile game. The last one was HoloLens.

<comment><USER6> I think we've long reached the point where there's more very talented people in tech than interesting jobs for them - hence the downward pressure in wages for those interesting jobs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> In San Francisco, fresh grads can expect to make between 95-115k at a startup or non-tech company. For the tech giants, check Glassdoor - it's spot on for people with <5 years of experience because of the volume of people submitting information. Their numbers have consistently been in line with offers I've received.

</comment><comment><USER8> I'm not in any of those markets but have lived and worked in Vancouver, and if I still did would likely have the same job as I do now.

$84k US but living in a part of Canada much cheaper than Vancouver. 4 days a week. No crazy corporate or startup deadlines. All open source.

</comment><comment><USER9> Quite a bit less than enough :-)

</comment><comment><USER10> I make ~34k USD per year as a senior iOS developer at a kinda-startup. That's before taxes, taxes are ~10%. I live in Bangkok.

<comment><USER11> Are you guys hiring by any chance?

<comment><USER10> Unfortunately not, in fact we're letting one iOS developer go soon due to company shifting a bit.

I'll send you an email if anything changes (checked your history out).

If you're keen on moving to Bangkok it should be fairly easy to check out job listings on LinkedIn etc though, there's certainly demand.

<comment><USER11> Thanks! Can you add me on Linkedin? [https://www.linkedin.com/in/brandonaubrey/](https://www.linkedin.com/in/brandonaubrey/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > I feel like I am paid poor man's salary despite being knowledgeable.

Trying living on 25k in Los Angeles.

<comment><USER11> Los Angeles local and I'm in the same situation. I feel like have the developers in LA are over paid (some iOS developers making 150-200k) and the other half are underpaid (15-30 dollars and hour)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Toronto: $94,000 CAD and 5-10% bonus. Pension is matched 13% defined benefit plan.</comment>


No Time to Be Nice at Work - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/opinion/sunday/is-your-boss-mean.html <comment><USER2> I have to say: working in a civil work environment makes a huge difference in terms of job satisfaction and job performance. Civility works for the business, the worker, and the customer. Nobody really benefits from incivility except for the arrogant power-monger over the very short term.

<comment><USER3> Most of these "safe space" environments are filled with arrogant people who, while not being outright rude, can belittle you passive aggressively and it can sometimes be worse than someone just calling you out on your bullshit.

A friend of mine worked for a startup that's mentioned on HN quite a lot, (I won't say the name). The lead developers used git and IRC chat a lot. After being hired my friend began to test a new product they were working on and submitted some changes to github, they accepted the pull request and my friend submitted a few more finding all sorts of bugs. At this point the lead developers started to argue about how the changes were unnecessary and that my friend needed to learn more about how their product worked, what was rude is that they were publicly arguing while leaving him out of the conversation. No words directed at him, just conversation _about_ him. A few weeks later they realized their project really did have a lot of bugs and pushed through a large change with many of my friends bug-fixes in it without giving him credit or even so much as a thank you.

The lead devs would pal around and make inside jokes and ask my friend to do all sorts of work while leaving him "out of the loop" as if he were some "lackey" for them to boss around and not really part of the team.

Not too long after he started working there the team told him he needed to attend a "conference on sensitivity in OSS" halfway across the country. My friend couldn't make it and then he was basically interrogated by the lead devs as to how he feels is the proper way to treat people. He said he was treated as if he was in trouble and felt like he was being accused of a crime. About a month later he left the company after being continually snubbed by his superiors and not receiving any appreciation for his work.

Personally I get this feeling with a lot of "safe space" organizations I've contributed too. The leaders are arrogant and passive aggressively rude, treat you like crap and belittle your work, then act high-and-mighty because they've never said a curse word.

<comment><USER4> I get the feeling there's a lot more to this story, would be interesting to hear the other side. Were they really that doughy?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is to be expected when the working environment gets as cut-throat as the American workplace has become. Blame it on inequality, blame it on the puritanical drive to overwork, blame it on the zeal to squeeze every last bit of profit. It's just one other symptom of how anyone who is not an oligarch in this society is meant as an expendable resource to be crushed by the ubermensch.

My only hope is that the USA fails to export its brand of moral decrepitude to the rest of the world. Europe should stay civilized, for the sake of its people.

<comment><USER6> The United States is the way it is because this is the only way to survive within the framework of competitive capitalism. European attempts at cultural protectionism will fail as market pressures force them to adopt American customs and habits.

This is just basic economics. American companies ruthlessly optimize for profit. Any attempt to optimize for anything else will take away from the potential for profit. In a global economy this means that profitable companies will beat out nice companies, and eventually "nice" company shareholders will force restructuring according to American ideals.

I would also say that based on existing trends the United States is quite rapidly succeeding at bringing its way of life to the rest of the world. There are no more competing ideologies left, and the next few years will lead to more trade agreements that will mop up the remains of protectionism. Soon, English will be mandated as a first language in most of the world, and we'll have a truly globalized culture.

<comment><USER7> Employee happiness is absolutely relevant to P&L. Happy employees are more productive and have less turnover.

Companies already know this. It becomes a game of "how little must we do" but it's far from the sweatshop imagery I saw while reading your comment.

I grew up middle class in middle America and it's not just the SF tech scene I've made my career in; I grew up in a world of company picnics and "4 10s" work weeks. Also, layoffs and plant closures. I'm not naive to the nature of American business, I just have inclusive opinions about how companies can be run profitably. And doubly so in tech.

<comment><USER8> Employee happiness is relevant to profit/loss, unless it isn't. Look at Walmart: Profits are fine, and employees are noticeably unhappy.

Don't delude yourself with idealism. Capitalism is the way it is and it's not right or wrong any more than a beaver building a dam.

<comment><USER9> Yes, let's look at Walmart. Walmart is increasing wages and staffing across the board because it's getting its clock cleaned by Target, CostCo and other retailers that are willing to pay more and grant better benefits, and therefore get employees who are willing to do more than just the bare minimum.

<comment><USER8> You don't know your ass from your head. Before you go spouting off untruths you know zero about, go read the respective companies 10-Ks, moron.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I once went to a talk on the "8 powers of leadership", one of these "powers" was the power to be yourself. The presenters idea was to get your "go to hell kit" ready (x months of living expenses saved) and then act the way you believe you should. For example, if a boss started shouting at me, I would politely, but firmly, say shall we continue this in another room, once there, I would try to work out what the issue was and come to some resolution. I certainly wouldn't stand for that sort of behaviour, life is too short.

Respect yourself, get your go to hell kit ready, and stick up for yourself, there are always other jobs if push comes to shove, especially for anyone reading this.

<comment><USER11> This is so true, and victims of bullying especially have a problem with this. It helps to realize that the problems is often also the cause, because bullies choose their victims. In a work environment, a kit is probably a good idea, but you'll see people who can't stand up for themselves regardless of circumstance, even when the risk is non-existent. It also has a lot to do with standards and how high or low your standards are for how you should be treated. Too high or too low and there is a price to be paid.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> From my personal experience, I agree on the stress caused by uncivil workspace...especially if the boss is uncivil. I used to get thoughts of suicide when I was working for a boss in a job right out of college and my health declined a lot. It was not until I changed my job that I saw a huge difference in civil and uncivil workspace and its effect on life.

<comment><USER13> There was thing somewhere (Internet!) that the number one reason people switch jobs is because of their relationship with their manager.

I agree with you. Happiness is hugely a function of said relationship.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm guilty of workplace incivility. I was oblivious how much I was negatively impacting my colleagues. I read No One Understands you and What to do About it and the No Asshole Rule. Both helped me to improve.

</comment><comment><USER15> My personal favorite quote from a previous boss: "I left you alone last week when you were out for your wife's surgery. Now it's time for you to catch up."

<comment><USER16> What a douchebag. I'm glad you can describe this work relationship in the past sense.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> On the other hand the fake niceness of some workplaces is just as repugnant. And it makes it harder to find out where you stand and what needs to be done. I fully agree there is no need for hostility in the workplace and it shouldn't be tolerated. At the same time I believe many people have become oversensitive and forgotten the massaging of their personal feelings are not the reason a company exists.

</comment><comment><USER11> Kindness is so so so underrated. If one needs an excuse to be kind, they are already an asshole. And those who stick around horrible people need to realize that those people suffer greatly for how they behave even if they deny it. In startups especially. A leader that lacks integrity and lacks a heart does not deserve any loyalty, and if you're giving it, you need to consider the possibility that you are victim of a bully.

I also love the conclusion of original article:

 _Given the enormous cost of incivility, it should not be ignored. We all need to reconsider our behavior. You are always in front of some jury. In every interaction, you have a choice: Do you want to lift people up or hold them down?_

</comment><comment><USER18> Having seen my fair shares of people like these, I say it has everything to do with their own personal lives not sorted and them taking it out at workplace. If anything, companies should be extra vigilant in rooting out such workers.

</comment><comment><USER19> For those of you that like business books, and want to improve the culture of your workplace in terms of creating space for respect, civility, compassion, and yes—love, I thought this is relevant to these issues:

[http://www.amazon.com/Love-Is-Killer-App- Influence/dp/140004...](http://www.amazon.com/Love-Is-Killer-App- Influence/dp/1400046831)

It's not a new book, and it's written by a Yahoo guy, but don't let those things put you off. There's tons of actionable stuff here.

</comment><comment><USER20> Job role plays a big part in how civil someone thinks they are expected to be to one another. With the transactional nature of sales, I see many leaders approach their sales team with a sort of 'what have you done (closed) lately' mentality, which is a slippery slope that can get very ugly very quickly.

</comment><comment><USER21> I have heard first hand about some CEO or bosses deliberately practising meanness/curtness. The worst thing of all is I could not fathom they kind of justifying and moving on. Most likely if things are working something most be right.

<comment><USER16> Large orgs can do well due to market conditions despite it's leaders. To quote Andy Grove terminology, being an asshole seldom creates leverage. It's kinda cargo cult to figure out some prominent social behaviour of a CEO is the reason for orgs success when in reality there are so many things going on that are hard to observe as outsiders.

<comment><USER21> Completely agree. Drawing positive correlation between CEO behaviour and success is fraught with lots holes. My peeve against this is people(employees) accepting such behaviour and to some extent condoning the same.

Also my last statements I meant the attitude of people that "Most likely if things are working something most be right."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> There's a school of thought among "economic leftists" that the disconnect between US productivity and average US worker wages since the 1970s, is due to a decline in "outrage constraint."[0] Executives didn't pay themselves that much more than their workers because it would essentially be considered "uncouth" to do otherwise. They might be rich, but they would be condemned and considered pariahs among their peers. You could optimize your personal gain, but the reputational damage would be be so suboptimal for your firm that you'd wind up in a net worse position.

Social norms and conventions have significantly shifted since then. It is now entirely acceptable for executives to pay themselves several hundred times the average worker compensation[1]. _There is no longer any real cost, reputational or otherwise, for optimizing for your personal gain_ So you might as well get yours, and fuck everyone else. Sure, some people with "Sanders 2016" bumper stickers will whine on Reddit about you, and maybe they'll even get together and yell at some buildings until they collapse due to a combination of in-fighting and tear-gas. But for the most part, you'll just shrug, order another round of layoffs, and think about how much your RSUs will appreciate in the inevitable stock price bump.

And if you're truly concerned about reputational risk, and can't reconcile that some people in society will still think you're a "bad person" for this, and the thought of being a bad person causes too much discomfort for your liking, then you can literally _compare them to Hitler and find a sympathetic audience._ [2]

I have to imagine -- and yes, I literally have to imagine, because I don't have any quantitative evidence and don't pretend otherwise -- that this is essentially a sociopath mindset (perhaps best explained by the Gervais Principle[3]) that then trickles down at every level of most professional organizations. When you're optimizing for your personal gain, you don't have a lot of time to consider things like "empathy" or "fairness." This is unfortunate to those disposed to such personality traits like the OPs father, because they essentially get eaten alive in the modern American workplace. At many professional organizations, the approach is binary. If it's not "fuck you, got mine" then it's "fuck! you got mine."

HN is known for having a significant population of those who that there is nothing wrong with this, and if the most productive members of society happen to be sociopaths, then they should be rewarded as such as their productivity is what drives the human race forward. But what's unfortunate to me is that this means some of our society's most brilliant and productive people will essentially get marginalized in their professional (and indirectly, their personal) lives, not because they lack some level of competence, self- reliance, productivity, etc, but because they're incapable of embracing a sociopathic mindset to professional advancement.

I have no problem with those who want to make their fortunes in any way possible, so they can retire to Galt's Gultch with their fortunes. I suppose I only question why they're so hell-bent on having only assholes for neighbors.

[0] [http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/23/opinion/the-outrage- constr...](http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/23/opinion/the-outrage- constraint.html)

[1] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/09/25/t...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/09/25/the- pay-gap-between-ceos-and-workers-is-much-worse-than-you-realize/)

[2] [http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/the-rich-strike- back-1...](http://www.politico.com/story/2014/03/the-rich-strike- back-104753.html)

[3] [http://www.ribbonfarm.com/the-gervais- principle/](http://www.ribbonfarm.com/the-gervais-principle/)

<comment><USER23> @nhashem - great comment, well thought out and worded, thanks. I'm not going all Wikipedia on you, but can you provide some links or thoughts on the idea that "what's unfortunate to me is that this means some of our society's most brilliant and productive people will essentially get marginalized"?

In my experience, people who believe in the totally individual focused system, see anyone who doesn't as not being tough or focused enough to survive the realities of highly competitive environments.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> A lot of these things are artifacts of intense competition and change. Ignoring invites often happens (where I work) when people have 20 appointments in a day already! Stress transmits from the top down; if your business is "as usual" you can get your hands round it and run it smoothly, if your platform is on fire and your customers are throwing bombs at you (and disappearing) then staying on an even keel is hard.

</comment><comment><USER25> Civil face to face relations and at the same time "uncivil" communication via email.

I've lately been experiencing this at my work place.

Face to face, people are all really civil to each other, assertive, giving objective feedback and collaborating really well to get work done.

However when things move to the written form (email mostly) things can quickly escalate into finger pointing and the blame game.

Anyone got thoughts on what would pressure us to act this way?

<comment><USER26> One of the more insidious ways that reading books / training up on management or being civil is when people understand the high level message and can relate to some of the individual strategies without personally embracing the ideology. So when you're face to face with other people, you can recall strategies of being civil, you play the part, but deep down the message hasn't been really been fully embraced. All it takes is a situation where strong social cues have been removed (electronic communication) and you're unable to notice that the situation requires care and involves other human beings, and you see a lot of reverting to old, poor habits.

One very skin-deep method to help out there is to create a strong culture around not having endless email discussions and knowing when to take things "off-line". Close, personal communication with care and compromise is how disputes get amicably resolved, and the impersonality of email leads to sides just wanting to be told "You are right, I am wrong". Which is a situation that will never, ever, ever happen.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> How does this compare with the idea of "disagreeable givers"? [http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/06/why- it-p...](http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/06/why-it-pays-to- be-a-jerk/392066/)

</comment><comment><USER28> We are such apes.

<comment><USER29> That is so true. Primates, not just apes. Here's Sapolsky explaining how stress in an hierarchical social arrangement impacts heart health and life expectancy.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4UMyTnlaMY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4UMyTnlaMY)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Aggressive behavior is the norm when working as a consultant. You have to know that it's not personal and that part of it is negotiation on the part of the client, part of it is anger on the part of the client, some of it is just due to poor personality, some of it due to your misunderstanding of the situation and culture.

Most people are not fit to work in a high-stress, aggressive environment, but some of us are. And that's why we get paid a lot for not doing a heck of a lot.

I worked as a 'clean up' consultant in Europe for a couple of years - going to clients that had failing projects and were desperate to bring in a developer to get the project back on track. My job was 75% calming the client down and making them feel loved and 25% programming.

And boy, do I have some stories...

<comment><USER31> Are you able to share a few?

<comment><USER32> I share the opinion of the parent comment, pretty much exactly.

Some of my comrades call this a layer-8 problem. (hint: there is only 7 technology levels, 8 is the human one).

One story in particular my firm was hired to come into a startup that had failed to scale, both technology wise, and personnel wise. They had hired up to 25 engineers, hoping to fix their stability issues, and almost going bankrupt doing it. I am at no liberty to say which company this is publicly unfortunately.

It was stressful, but you can't take things personal. You have to put aside feelings, to get useful data out of these people to make the platform work. You can't possibly care about someone's ethics, approach, and often even coding style on these missions. The goal is to try and not piss off as many people as you and, and go ahead not worry if you do have to piss someone off to get the job done, and not lose sleep at night if someone does not get along with you.

The end result was that they had to shed, through various reasons the great majority of their internal team. We stabilized things and bought them lots of time, while they slowly brought in new senior tech management and rebuilt their internal team from the ground up.

It was a multi year affair, and involved working on over 12 codebases and consolidating applications from 3 different hosting providers into AWS.

They got very close to running the ship into the ground. If you think staying up late and pulling the occasional all-nighter is unhealthy, or having a job that has extremely high expectations and leave you no time for a personal life is bad, this is about one hundred times worse. Since my team is small and highly skilled we can get a lot done in a short amount of time, and occasionally we are terse even with each other. But the amount of sleep deprivation that comes with a task of gargantuan size, where your dealing with hundreds and thousands of requests (sometimes per second), the company is going for broke, and a single code change can improve monetary situations in instantaneous, tractable ways, it gets super intense.

You have the CEO, the COO, the CFO all breathing down your neck. One day they see light at the end of the tunnel from fixing the currently broken problem, and then the next day, you discover another codebase lost in git that powers commerce for android, is starting to experience issue, and you don't even know where to find credentials to log into its production systems since it was setup by some employee in the middle of the night a year ago that is no longer there.

I can go on and on and on. But honestly, please don't read this as a recommendation. Being a digital mercenary is fun in your 20s, but it got old quick. Of course I still do it, but I have a much healthier way of saying NO, more often now. You can make a very lucrative living doing this sort of work, but its hard to earn the reputation to get these clients, and you may end up forgetting what your family looks like by the end of a 2 year job that is 365/24/7.

The story did have a happy ending though. The company does well today. Extremely well. A new era of management has come in over the last year, and I think everyone learned a lot. They are a household brand and I hear about them in the news it seems like monthly.

Cheers

<comment><USER33> >you don't even know where to find credentials to log into its production systems since it was setup by some employee in the middle of the night a year ago that is no longer there.

Recently I was searching for some report generating code that my team had been voluntold to maintain. I spent a day trying to find the code that generated and uploaded the report. Once I finally was able to get in contact with the last person who had worked on it I found that a developer in India was manually running and uploading the report every week. Why? Because job security.

<comment><USER34> > voluntold

That's excellent.

<comment><USER35> We use that term at my company pretty frequently, although I'd just heard it less than a year ago. Seems to be making the rounds.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> First, I think that people aren't becoming less uncivil but that environments are getting worse. If anything (although this is probably an artifact of increasing age and status) people seem to be getting better, on the whole: fewer mean jokes and exclusionary behaviors. Work environments, with the open- plan trend, are getting a lot worse and more stressful. It used to be that an off-color joke was heard by 2 people in a private office; now it's heard by 40 in a bullpen. Open-plan offices tend to magnify the cumulative effects of microaggressions, which is one of the reasons why every population except for the most constitutionally insensitive one (those who've never had negative experiences, either due to general inexperience or a combination of privilege and luck) hates them.

Second, when you're aggressive or even uncivil, it hurts you with that person. That said, it can be beneficial-- in very small doses. Punching down is bad, while punching up is risky (the best target is a person of high status, that is "punching up", and low character, but with no real power) and if you're perceived as being uncivil for personal benefit, you're just considered an asshole. Usually, uncivil behavior is to one's benefit when (and pretty much only when) one is perceived as being that way _for the group_ : you're a protector. People tire of selfish rule-breakers and firebrands, but those who behave in such ways for group benefit tend to inspire loyalty.

Don't get me wrong: it's generally best not to be uncivil or arrogant at all. It's just not intellectually honest to say that it's always socially detrimental to be that way. You have to be extremely selective in your targets to make it work, though.

<comment><USER37> Have you ever considered writing a book? Something like a "Peopleware 2.0"?

<comment><USER37> I mean, your blog is must-read material every time new content shows up in theoldreader, and I keep coming back to certain points, like the Gervais principle series.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> From the article: _But insensitivity or disrespect often sabotages support in crucial situations. Employees may fail to share important information and withhold efforts or resources. Sooner or later, uncivil people sabotage their success — or at least their potential. Payback may come immediately or when they least expect it, and it may be intentional or unconscious._

It's a bit weird how the article paints this as a failure of the uncivil person - this is pretty clearly a failure of the sabotager. Some people are willing to harm random third parties (shareholders) in acts of petty revenge against those they dislike (for possibly valid reasons). Quite a bit of victim blaming going on there.

I agree that the person with power should - as a pragmatic move - attempt to behave in a manner that accounts for the bad acts of others. In much the same way, people should avoid putting themselves into situations where there is a high risk of crime. But the ultimate responsibility for an individual's actions lies on the individual, not the person who was "asking for it."

<comment><USER2> Are you seriously suggesting that the uncivil boss is the real victim?

<comment><USER38> No, I'm suggesting shareholders are the real victim. They are the ones paying agents to maximize their wealth while those agents pursue their own agendas instead.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_proble...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal%E2%80%93agent_problem)

<comment><USER39> >They are the ones paying agents to maximize their wealth while those agents pursue their own agendas instead.

I am a secret agent not just any agent...and I pursue my own agenda instead. lol

Dude, life is not an economics textbook. Have you actually worked in the real world with real people?</comment></comment></comment></comment>