Ask HN: CS students/graduates, Did you struggle with Math? - <AUTHOR> If so, how were you able to get by ? Did you feel like you were falling behind much ? Were you still able to grasp concepts like complexity and other such things ?
Thanks
Edit: I'm currently taking MIT OCW 6.006 (Introduction to algorithms) and some of the math goes a bit over my head but I'm still able to follow along (for the most part). However I've observed, especially during recitations, that most of the students tend to have a very strong grasp of the fundamental math concepts required to understand the material. I'm curious to know if there are any students who struggled/have struggled with this because it seems to me that CS students are math wiz-kids (from the outside looking in). <comment><USER2> Hah. I didn't get more than a D in any high school math course, failed 2 of them and had to retake them in summer school, and didn't go to college.

I work in cryptography engineering today.

The routine algorithmic work we do in the industry may be rooted in somewhat sophisticated math, but in reality even if you're doing somewhat advanced work you're not engaging directly with that math. If I read through the OCW 6.006 curricula I see lots of topics that are important in practice, but none of them really involve deeply understanding complexity math.

If you have an intuition for why sort tends to be nlogn and search logn, I think you're probably doing fine.

</comment><comment><USER3> Computer Science often attracts people who have been told they are good at math from a very early age and often people who aren't that are intimidated away from pursuing it.

I was decidedly _not_ one of those people who was told I was good at math and it caused me a lot stress before I started studying CS and early on in my studies.

But it turns out, a lot of what makes people get the reputation for being 'good at math' is about a very specific subset of math that is taught to young students. That very specific subset _is_ important for CS study, but its a very small part of the maths breadth that you need. For instance, I'm terrible at Calculus but found an aptitude for logic only after I began studying CS.

TLDR: Yes, you can study CS while also struggling with math. You have to do things to make up for those struggles such as engage with the professors/TAs more aggressively, get outside tutoring/help & work harder than your peers in those classes.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for sharing your experience. I can totally relate to that. Cheers

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> It depends, I was really bad at math but today I work as Full stack developer. I would say my level of SD is at 7 out of 10. In my day to day I do not use any math, In 15 years of software development no one has asked me math related question in interviews. However once I was put on a project to created very advance level 3d UI dashboard which require lots of geometry and math related logic. I defiantly struggled a lot and ended up giving the project to someone else. Even though there are many great tools for 3d development, I can imagine math being very useful when you are dealing with such projects.

</comment><comment><USER5> A very good friend from high school went to one of the top Universities in the world. He was flat out brilliant, so none of us were surprised when he was accepted. But, we were very surprised when he got back after his first year and he seemed defeated. He had always been so much smarter than everyone else and suddenly, he was exposed to a world where he struggled with things other students seemed to find intuitive. By the end of his fourth year though, he had realized a couple of things:

1.) Many of the people who he thought had an intuitive grasp of concepts that were way over his head had been just as confused and lost as he felt. They were either better actors, or he felt too much shame to recognize they were struggling.

2.) Over the course of his program, every one of his colleagues struggled with something others found intuitive and found something intuitive that others struggled with.

The point of all this is that you are almost certainly not alone in how you feel. I think you'll be okay!

If math in particular causes you trouble, it might be a sign that your study skills aren't quite up to where they should be. But, with some work, you can get over this hurdle!

</comment><comment><USER6> I don't find CS-level mathematics difficult, but still failed it twice during first semester because at that time it's the most boring, and pointless thing you can learn when trying to become a proffessional programmer.

I picked everything up by myself later after learning computer graphics and AI, since that's when, for me, algebra and calculus became something more than a grade. Derivatives "clicked" for me because i needed to know how to calculate a root value using Newton's method.

I do lack fundamentals, and i do suffer because of that, but over the years i came to the conclusion that i won't understand something if i don't care, and that's just how things are. The education system tends to front-load theory, and i can't learn for the sake of learning. Maybe it's the same for you.

</comment><comment><USER7> You don't need any prior math knowledge to attend college. The math they teach at high school only serves to develop a bit of mathematical maturity, but it's quite different. The abstraction level is much lower, there is little emphasis on proofs, and too much emphasis on elementary algorithms to solve some oversimplified problems.

Furthermore, unless you have followed some relatively uncommon high school program that teaches logic and discrete mathematics, the actual overlap between high school and first year CS math is almost empty.

I think a major part of excelling at mathematics is to understand that you must go through material very slowly. Mathematics is not literature. Taking 1 hour of good effort to go through 1 page is far from unusual if you want to truly conquer concepts by understanding definitions, developing good intuitions and proving all major results.

<comment><USER3> Agree with every part of this except, "Mathematics is not literature. Taking 1 hour of good effort to go through 1 page is far from unusual"

Serious literature study frequently requires this level of pondering as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Take Calculus first - if you start from the beginning, everything flows by itself, it is really enjoyable and logical, suddenly - everything makes sense.

</comment><comment><USER9> Yes, but it tends to get easier with time.

</comment><comment><USER10> A lot man. A lot.</comment>


Destroy all hiring processes - <AUTHOR> http://www.b-list.org/weblog/2015/oct/19/destroy-all-hiring-processes/ <comment><USER2> A couple of years back, I was hiring some vendor developers for my team, and since I had some flexibility in the interviews that wouldn't be allowed for full-time employees, I tried an experiment: For one of the vendor candidates, I told him a day ahead of time that I'd be asking him to implement System.Collections.Hashtable in C#, with behavior equivalent to the one in .Net. The day of the interview came, and he whiteboarded it flawlessly, to a degree that I'd never seen any other candidate accomplish, and he was able to have a deep conversation about the implementation and all of its nuances. He then proceeded to bomb the rest of his interviews and didn't get the position. What this illustrates to me is that the typical programmer interview, where we come up with some weird problem and toss it to the candidate while they have no references to look at, no IDE to type into, and a 45 minute deadline looming over their head, is totally divorced from the actual work we actually really want them to do. If I need someone to implement a widget, I'd rather they took some time to research it and do it right, versus trying to crap out a solution in five minutes on a whiteboard.

<comment><USER3> I recently interviewed with a company that had advertised (in my paraphrase) "we've noticed that a lot of perfectly good developers do poorly in interviews for reasons that appear to be unrelated to job performance. So you can now interview with us by completing a project on your own time, and during the interview we'll talk about that".

My project was a regex matcher. I ended up getting the following feedback:

> We thought you wrote a great, very full featured regular expression matcher. > It was especially impressive how much you dug into the academics behind > regular languages.

> However we made the decision because we felt that while going through the > project together during the interview, we didn't see the fluency of > programming when adding to it that we had hoped for. While we specifically > designed the take home project track to help overcome the difficulties of > coding under time pressure with someone watching, we do still need to see a > certain level of programming during the interview. This didn't seem to be > the case here.

It's hard to know what to do with that. :/

<comment><USER4> Wow, that really sucks. So they basically took the old process and just added more to it.

<comment><USER5> Disagree (on the second part). Rather than giving you the equivalent of a walk-up pop quiz on a random topic, they are giving you followup questions and discussions on code that _the candidate_ wrote recently.

That seems quite a bit more representative of regular work than a pop quiz. Yes, you still need to be able to talk live about code with other developers. That's unchanged and shouldn't change, IMO.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > even if we don't have a sense of ethics we do have a problem of numbers, and > more desks and seats and spots than people to fill them

I get this a lot, but it is amazingly self-inflicted. Almost all of the random job offers i seem to be getting from people i don't know are from clients who:

\- underpay

\- demand on-site only

\- don't even look at the copious provided code samples, only at the CV

The reason for that is simple: A lot of companies view developers as identical to factory workers. There is nothing more to it.

\--

Sadly i think this is not something that writing blog posts about can possibly help. The people making these mistakes when looking for developers make them because they are ignorant and do not care enough to gather the required knowledge. Until they realize their "illiteracy" and wish to fix it themselves, the scale of this education problem makes it unassailable.

<comment><USER7> >> demand onsite only!!

The companies making the most demands usually offer the least. My favorite new flavor is recruiters saying "well for remote the pay rate is lower" to which I answer, "will I be doing less work in that case?".

<comment><USER8> Interesting... as I have taken to giving the random LinkedIn recruiters two rates-- one an on site rate and one a remote rate. The remote rate is my normal rate, which is lower than the on-site rate which has a healthy have-to- go-into-an-office premium.

When you couple that with the higher productivity of remote work, the smart employer will let me work remotely (at least most of the time.)

<comment><USER6> Same here, i quote them my current rate for remote work, and for on-site work they get a markup.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm working on open source stuff for two years now. Everything I do is public for everyone to see. Including my responses to bug reports and design documents.

Yet I get the same algo/ds puzzle questions that you should've solved before in order to solve it in an interview setup. Google reached to me and said based on my profile I can skip the phone interview but I'm so afraid of the interview that I postponed it multiple times.

I'm fine with algorithm questions only if I'm solving it in the same setup as my actual work where I have access to internet and can write some quick programs to test my ideas. I was good at solving pretty much any problem I had in my actual work. Even if I had to read a paper on the topic or learn about a new concept from ground up.

Google asks questions like pots of gold[1] where it's really impossible to solve it on a whiteboard if it's your first time seeing the problem.

I'm on hiring side of equation also. I get it, it's really hard to judge people. Even when the candidate have a GitHub page. I got a candidate from Hack Reactor where he had tons of contributions. But when I looked closely at those contributions they were mostly fake. Some other candidate had exactly same codebase in their GitHub.

[1]: [http://careercup.com/question?id=15422849](http://careercup.com/question?id=15422849)

<comment><USER10> * Google asks questions like pots of gold[1] where it's really impossible to solve it on a whiteboard if it's your first time seeing the problem. *

Ok, so here is an anecdotal sample. I have not seen this problem before.

After reading the problem description I tried one round of the game on the paper (actually in the text editor) to get the feeling of the game play and then it took me about few minutes to come up with one possible solution and then after a little bit of thinking with a more optimal one.

So not impossible (but I was in comfort of my home).

I actually think that this is a rather classical CS problem that does not require some thinking about more abstract mathematical corner cases.

I give an example of the later one.

You have an array or numbers [1 - n], that is not sorted. One of the numbers got changed to 0. Given an array after the change return the changed number in linear time.

Assume the some array but two of the numbers got changed to 0. Given an array after the change return the changed numbers in linear time.

<comment><USER11> Do you allow linear space?

<comment><USER10> Nope. Constant space.

But there is a catch that is very likely not obvious here. All the numbers in the array are (were) unique (and the zero was not present).

<comment><USER9> You didn't say all the array includes all numbers with no repeats ect ect...

<comment><USER10> This is also case with the job interviews.

Some information is actually missing/not obvious and interviewers may actually evaluate your reaction to this situation because this would also model (to some degree) a real life situation.

So I added the missing bits (and fixed typos).

You have an array size of n of integers from 1 to n, that is not sorted. There are no duplicate numbers in this array.

One of the numbers got changed to 0. Given the array after the change return the changed number in linear time and constant space.

Assume the same array but two of the numbers got changed to 0. Given an array after the change return the changed numbers in linear time and constant space.

The first part of this problem should be simple. The second part is more tricky.

<comment><USER12> FWIW I've had this same question in an interview years ago in Australia. Don't recall seeing the second part (which is more interesting, mathematically), but it just goes to show how many questions end up re-used by different companies as their employees travel.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "People who have a master's degree in CS but seemingly can't code their way out of a paper bag probably actually aren't bad; more likely they had an education which de-emphasized practical hands-on programming in favor of heavy theory. People who post "please give me the code" questions on mailing lists and forums probably actually aren't bad; more likely they had an education which was based around memorizing and regurgitating stock answers to stock questions."

What does this even mean? When someone lacks a certain skill, they aren't "bad" in some objective sense, they are misqualified for the job. If someone can't code their way out of a paper bag, should we be hiring them anyway for a programming position because they're not "bad"? What's the point of the interview in the first place? I don't understand the argument.

To the other points, I completely agree there are many ways to screw up interviews and few ways to get them right. I'm still a believer that an interviewer who administers a coding question, one that is reasonably realistic, in both form and the environment the candidate has (ie they have their own laptop) can be a good way to assess someone's skills if you are doing it right. You let them work, let it be a humane environment, and don't get too hung up on the details. Usually if someone can hack it bleeds through pretty clearly, even if they don't get to the exact solution you wanted. (And of course, this is just one data point, that should be distilled into a larger picture of the person's history, accomplishments, etc.)

<comment><AUTHOR> For much the same reason that someone who has no CS background can productively do a short coding bootcamp and be employable, someone who has a theory-heavy and practice-light CS background can almost certainly pick up practical skills quickly. It's more of an educated vs. educable thing, and anyone who's demonstrated that they're educable is probably worth at least looking into a bit more even if they don't come with the full practical skillset already.

(and I say this, ironically, as a lifelong opponent of theory-heavy CS programs which churn out people who can derive an answer to your question straight from the Church-Turing thesis but couldn't code it up to save their lives)

<comment><USER14> > For much the same reason that someone who has no CS background can > productively do a short coding bootcamp and be employable, someone who has a > theory-heavy and practice-light CS background can almost certainly pick up > practical skills quickly.

I don't think they're equivalent at all.

The truck driver simply never had the opportunity or exposure to programming. He didn't know what it was like and hence couldn't do it.

The theory student did have exposure but was either incapable or uninterested in pursuing it. Even in the most theory-heavy of programs, you program a little. The kids who actually understand and like the programming aspect latch onto it and continue to learn and grow, ending up employable. The kids who, having been exposed to programming and realized that it's not for them, never learn any more and continue to flail around in masters programs teaching mathematics in the guise of CS.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> When an actor goes to an interview (aka: casting) twice, he gets paid. I think we need this in this industry. A lengthy interview should be remunerated.

<comment><USER16> That's because actors have a union.

<comment><USER15> We need a union then.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm of the opinion that pretty much every interview technique has at least _some_ tradeoffs. Too many false positives, too many false negatives, selecting for or against certain groups, etc.

At my current company, we don't do any phone-coding or whiteboard-coding, for which I am very thankful (for the reasons the article laid out).

We _do_ do a take-home dev test (4-6 hours). This has the benefits of being low-pressure, repeatable, and similar to the real work we do. It has the tradeoff that we might miss out of great devs who don't have the time to do it. We're working on shortening it to offset that.

We also do a bit of paired programming on-site (using the candidates computer and dev environment of choice). This has a distinct tradeoff, since it can be a bit high-pressure. We try to do everything we can to ease candidates, but I haven't found anything else that works well for getting a feel for what it's like to work with someone in a technical capacity.

Every interviewing technique has issues, and I think phone and whiteboard coding are among the worst still actively used (now that brainteasers are mostly dead). I think what we have is the least-bad, but we're still iterating on it (and hopefully always will be).

</comment><comment><USER18> > a belief that memorizing a bunch of that stuff and being an automaton who > spits back the correct algorithm name and a pseudocode implementation is all > there is to programming. Because what companies really want is to hire a > Fisher-Price See-'n-Say toy, right?

I get the overall rant. I understand the frustrations - but this is wrong- headed. If you can't see the value of understanding algorithms - learning both how to write them and how to evaluate them (including proving their correctness), then you've misunderstood computer science education altogether. Nevermind all the rest of CS, which encompasses far more than just "names of algorithms".

<comment><AUTHOR> It's more that there's a lot of cargo-culting and "Google did this, so it must be good" flying around, and a _lot_ of really bad CS programs which revolve more around the Feynman-rant memorize-and-regurgitate style than actually understanding performance characteristics. Which in turn produces interview processes that really are of the See-'n-Say variety.

Though to be honest, for a lot of what I do my working set in memory (metaphorically) involves very very little algorithms/data-structures stuff and a lot more quirks of libraries/frameworks/protocols stuff. When I need the algorithms and data structures, I pick up the reference I keep on my desk and look up the thing I'm thinking about to double-check that I'm using the right approach.

<comment><USER18> Fair enough, but then you should explain that what you're against is mindless regurgitation, not good CS education (which again, has algorithms at its core, but goes far beyond that).

<comment><AUTHOR> I think that what you seem to be treating as "good CS education" is something I'd be more likely to call "good math education, but probably not great training for programming".

A big part of the problem is over-generalization. Here's a reddit comment I posted in a similar discussion not too long ago, touching on that:

[https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/3nfbkr/patreon_is_a...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Python/comments/3nfbkr/patreon_is_a_flask_app_and_was_hacked_because/cvobo03)

The person I was replying to there had made the mistake of assuming that because in _these_ fields of programming, knowledge of data structures, algorithms and big-O characteristics is one of the most important things for performance, that must be true of _all_ fields. When, in fact, it's not true of all fields, and I provided an example of one where it isn't true and where quizzing someone on their big-O cheat sheet wouldn't actually reveal whether the candidate has the most relevant knowledge for what's going on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've been interviewing recently and it does suck just as described here, so I'm glad somebody called out these issues.

One company I talked to was like a caricature of the bad startup interview: we have a billionaire founder, we have wine on tap, a totally disorganized 4-hour series of discussions where the first person just sat down and started quizzing me with hardly an introduction, and I had to ask the second interviewer how many people I'd be talking to, technical questions ranging from the simple to somewhat difficult (using paper and pencil), with less and less time for each because they couldn't follow their own schedule, followed by an interview with an arrogant, hypercaffeinated CTO, consisting of two brain teaser questions and a series of elevator pitches, all in a tiny glass room near the back storage area, devoid of oxygen. And the following week I found out, sorry, they'd cut funding for the position the day before I came in.

</comment><comment><USER20> As both an interviewer and interviewee at Weebly, I'm pretty confident in saying I prefer our approach of the trial week. It really gives a great opportunity for the candidate to show off their skills without the on-the-spot pressure of a coding interview. A great side-effect is the candidate gets to determine if they like the team, and vice versa. I honestly wouldn't work somewhere else where I couldn't come in for at least a few days to meet and work with the team.

<comment><USER21> I'm pretty confident in saying I prefer our approach of the trial week.

A full week is pretty close to insane. It means that application is effectively limited to the currently unemployed (or those who are willing to burn what might be all the vacation they can take for months).

That said, it does make pretty clear that Weebly doesn't give a single shit about employee's lives; so it's kind of Weebly to make clear, right out of the gate that they expect to be the only thing that matters in your life.

<comment><USER20> As a pretty happily employed Weebly for a few years now, I'm frustrated that you think that, but I'm glad that you went out of your way to register an account to reveal your thoughts. In this case, I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's funny, I've tried tons of different approaches to solving this problem and the only thing I now do is spend about 30 minutes with someone then decide to hire or not (usually I'm able to express this on the spot to whomever I'm interviewing). For better or worse, my instincts about who is smart, honest and kind seem at least as good (and often better) than any other approach we've tried.

<comment><USER17> I'm curious how you validate that approach. I'm not saying you're wrong– just that I don't know if you'd be able to tell if you're wrong.

Do you measure the performance of people hired through that method, and have you done so for a long period with a significant sample size? Do you manage to measure your false-negative rate (by somehow following up on candidates you passed on)?

<comment><USER22> Well, the false-negative rate is something we never did even when we tried all kinds of other "standard" interview approaches. If you had a solution for that it'd be useful generally I expect. I'm only make anecdotal comparisons to the quality of persons hired by all other approaches vs. me just using the massive pattern matcher in my head. And to be sure, my company is small and it's my company so the ultimate determinant of hiring quality is really just me. I'm not sure this approach would work for medium+ organizations.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> > Even among the most common demographics for developers (American, male, > white, skewing young and middle-class background), we are absolutely abysmal > at this..

How does nationality, gender, race, age, and income level have _anything_ to do with this _at all_?

<comment><AUTHOR> People tend, consciously or not, to recruit most heavily from among people like themselves (for lots of reasons which aren't necessarily bad: a lot of referrals are based on knowing someone, for example, and a lot of peoples' social circles/contacts tend to be pretty homogeneous to begin with).

In other words, even on the easiest default approach (recruiting from people similar to ourselves), we suck. God help us as we try to recruit from people dissimilar to ourselves.

<comment><USER23> IMHO you are subconsciously profiling if that is what you're doing in your hiring i.e., making assumptions about people's skills/talent based on any of those attributes.

<comment><USER24> That's exactly what you are doing, and there is copious data out there to say that we all do it. The generally accepted term is "unconscious bias."

I saw a summary of a study recently in which people were asked to rate top character indicators of success for male and female candidates for a job, things like "aggressive," "nurturing," "outspoken," "mediator." Not surprisingly, the adjective sets for male and female candidates were substantially different.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I didn't read the entire article, I stopped after a couple of paragraphs. The problem as I see it is companies are trying to hire coders when they really want Software Engineers. Or maybe I should say they are trying to buy a Software engineer but only willing to pay the coder rate.

A good Software engineer can design a program or system and not even have to know the programming language, they understand software and how it should work. I have on many occasions told our SQL coders/programmers where problems are and how to fix them without ever having programmed in SQL.

The key is the Software Engineer understands the fundamentals of the system as an engineer and understand how everything goes together and should work. For example, if you are designing a business system, you engineers understand how the business works and how the program can help it. The coders know how to implement the design but not the why's.

If you are hiring outside vendors then it is even worse. They are coders that know nothing about your business or your project or what you are trying to do but they do know how to code something, let you try it, have you change it and try it again and change it again and try it again an...you get the picture. If you hire a software engineer that understands software and learns your business, they can develop design documents that can then direct your vendor. This creates a better product the first time and at a lower cost.

The schools today are creating more and more programmers and fewer Software Engineers.

</comment><comment><USER26> I would offer that the subtle point missed in coding interviews is the ability of the interviewer to judge the flexibility, poise, and social skills of the interviewee. That seemed very important during my interviews. This may be why the best advice is to "talk it out"

Any yay-or-nay judgements based on hastily-written program output should be taken with a grain of salt by both parties.

</comment><comment><USER27> I disagree with this. Coding interviews are great. The interviewer needs to realise though that they're not there to be an adversary or a judge, but to help the candidate demonstrate their skills, to help the candidate get the job.

<comment><USER28> I feel like all you're saying is 'Coding interviews could be great' not 'coding interviews are great'.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> As someone in the computer science/cyber security field who _didn 't_ go to college, I tend to agree with this article in a few ways. Having no college degree has really hindered me in terms of landing interviews, but once I'm given a chance on the job I'm always flourished and proved my worth.

I've also found it strange that it didn't matter what my degree was in, just having one wold have secured me interviews. A theoretical degree in Turfgrass Science would have benefited equally as a proper degree in CompSci.

</comment><comment><USER30> Try triplebyte. Their process is actually pretty good.

</comment><comment><USER31> Perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see anything mentioning certification. With that be an alternative? If you're hiring someone to code in Java, is there not a certification they can get?

</comment><comment><USER32> There might be a solid startup opportunity here. I completely agree with the author, from both employee and employer point of view.

</comment><comment><USER33> this article is awful. it cites a single bad coding interview as a problem with all coding interviews. as someone who gives tons of code interviews, they are absolutely invaluable, and are a strong indicator in weeding out people who can't write code. you can't blame bad interviewers for the entire process not working.

<comment><USER34> Slippery slope fallacy...You are incredibly oversimplifying what he is saying. Sure, he is generalizing but he isn't citing a _single_ coding interview to judge the _entire process_.

Having said that, I actually agree with him because I've learned that it's not always simple as _who can 't write code_. I would much rather assess a candidates' ability to learn (sharpness) than the current skill-set.

<comment><USER35> Second this, but Joel Spolsky said it much better [http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/ThePerilsofJavaSchool...](http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/ThePerilsofJavaSchools.html)</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Radicle. A decentralized alternative to GitHub built on IPFS - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/radicle-dev/radicle <comment><USER2> Wow this is quite cool, thank you!</comment>


UK ICT classes killing kids' interest in tech - <AUTHOR> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/05/school_fail_tech/

<comment><USER2> I once got penalised in college because I solved a problem using SQL instead of 'the wizard' :\</comment>


Octogit - Giving git more tentacles - <AUTHOR> http://myusuf3.github.com/octogit/

<comment><USER2> Seems pretty neat, but I personally find 'hub' (<https://github.com/defunkt/hub>) a better fit: it acts as a filter to git itself. This might be interesting for issues handling. (But it could probably be added to 'hub').

There are some things in 'hub' that aren't working in the release because of github's move away from user tokens—but there's an active branch with a proposed fix.

<comment><AUTHOR> They were working on providing CLI OAuth waiting for that; It was mainly to scratch an itch I had. If others can benefit from it great. I will keep it maintained and in working order.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I built this. If there are bugs makes issues; I will fix them. I welcome suggestions and feature requests.

<comment><USER3> Very cool, does it support organizations? Eg, can octogit create a repo in one of my organizations, instead of my main account?

Perhaps:

octogit create firstname.lastname@example.com:org-name/new-repo-name.git 'new repo desc'

<comment><AUTHOR> I have completed the feature it will be in the next release.

<comment><USER3> Excellent! I went to submit it as an issue, but several people had beat me to it. Guess it's popular. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> You could at least tidy up the presentation.

> A free, open source solution for creating github repositories from the > __commandline avoid __the usual copy and paste. Keep up to date on issues, > and much more.

Needs a comma.

> octogit login &ltusername> &ltpassword> # allows you to store your github > authetication data octogit create &ltreponame> 'description' # lets you > create the repository both locally and on github octogit issues # lets you > see all the related issues in the current repository octogit issues > &ltnumber> # lets you see a specific issue with summary octogit issues > &ltnumber> close # lets you close an issue

&lt's everywhere.

The "follow" link's right hand corners are cut off.

The title is showing Octogit plus a unicode D with a horizontal line through it (can't seem to paste it here).

EDIT: Downvotes for constructive criticism? Really?

<comment><USER5> It's on Github. That means you could fix that and send a pull request to the developer (which is consructive) instead of making a "constructive criticsm".

<comment><USER4> Contributing to open source comes in many flavours. Bug reporting is one of them. I simply don't have the motivation to contribute more than this to a project which doesn't personally interest me. Instead of throwing the little I do give back in my face, why not make use of it?

<comment><USER6> > I simply don't have the motivation to contribute more than this to a project > which doesn't personally interest me

Creating an issue wouldn't have taken much more effort. I think your tone is what most people are having a problem with. Re-read your comment, and imagine that it's someone commenting on one of your projects.

<comment><USER7> pavel_lishin is right.

Had you changed your tone, submitted an issue, or as farslan suggested you could have taken an extra 5 minutes and submitted the changes yourself. If you had done that you would be a contributor to a great project, but unfortunately now you're just an ass.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Didn't play with it yet, but I have a question. I have an organization linked with my personal account. Is it possible to creat a repo for that organization, instead of one for myself using this tool?

<comment><AUTHOR> Its a feature that has been requested. I am going to implement it soon.

<https://github.com/myusuf3/octogit/issues/19>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> People that make projects using pip need to explain how to install pip. It doesn't come with Mac or Ubuntu by default. I know what the package is for Ubuntu but Mac, I have no idea.

EDIT: after 5 minutes of Googling since "PIP" is a common acronym that stands for a bunch of things, you can install it on Mac via `easy_install` which comes on it by default.

`sudo easy_install pip`

<comment><USER10> For what it's worth, the pip website does explain that you can install pip with easy_install.

<comment><USER11> Actually, it took me about 30 minutes to find how to install onto 64-bit Windows. You need to first install Python, then run the following:

<http://peak.telecommunity.com/dist/ez_setup.py>

Then you use easy install to install pip. That's how I got it working, but I'm a complete Python newbie!

<comment><USER12> For future reference, <http://www.lfd.uci.edu/~gohlke/pythonlibs/> contains tons of Python packages (including pip!) with nice installers for various Python versions.

<comment><USER11> Sir, best reply ever! Thank you so much for this!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> One thing I noticed: Could you link more prominently to the github page/repo of the project? One has to click the "watch" button to get there (which I didn't know before, so at least I learned something :D).

My idea would be to make a prominent "on github" link or link the big title to the repo.

</comment><comment><USER14> This is pretty cool. I don't know if I would use it for everything but 'create' and 'issues' looks sweet! I'm assuming you can use it with git interchangeably.

</comment><comment><USER11> This looks pretty awesome! After installing it though I get an error saying it can't find git... but git is in my path. Any ideas how to troubleshoot this?</comment>


Stores Ask Shoppers to Use the Honor System - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-04/stores-ask-shoppers-to-use-the-honor-system-when-it-s-time-to-pay <comment><USER2> The honor system doesn't work at scale. A small percentage of the population are kleptomaniacs or desperate for their next hit and there isn't an easy way to filter them out. Even with small groups you are playing the odds.

The only thing keeping the stores in the article in business is that they stock only a relatively small amount of cheap merchandise with no secondary market. Their total liability is so low that it's cheaper than hiring staff.

<comment><USER3> Also, (I can see it being possible that)* when it is communicated that the only thing stopping you from stealing is your own conscience, a burden is placed on your conscience every time you shop. I think people will be surprised to see how worn down the conscience can get when you keep invoking it for insignificant situations (in other words, when your conscience belies rationality). People may find themselves stealing when they never would've before.

*added as an edit

<comment><USER4> I hope the act of not murdering or not stealing isn't slowly wearing you down.

<comment><USER5> Murder takes physical effort. Stealing something you already have in your posession does not take any extra physical effort. Don't conflate the two. You may also be completely ignoring some of the work people have done studying self check outs. My understanding is that people who would never think to hide items from an actual checker are much more likely to leave items unscanned. And that many of them justify the behavior in various ways.

I think petty theft is far more instinctive than you may realize. I personally have to fight the urge to steal my daughter's holloween candy, even though I can easily afford my own, and she would give me some if I just asked. I don't know where the urge comes from but I know it's there, and I doubt it's an uncommon type of urge.

Social interactions can really help to bolster behaviors we prefer in ourselves. I can see them being useful in keeping honest people honest. In the same way a gym buddy makes it harder to skip a workout.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This only works with low cost items, and/or in nice areas. In low income areas, even many fully manned stores bail due to shrinkage. I'd like to see a middle ground, personally. I like the idea of grabbing and going, using some combination of rf tags and my phone to just charge me automatically. This sounds like the best of both worlds. In an honor system, I'd feel like I'm paying more to cover those who are stealing - which is already a big problem in some areas, like baby products.

<comment><USER7> In Sweden since at least ten years, and Austria in recent years, most big markets support self checkout. Theft costs are apparently less than salaries for manual checkouts...

<comment><USER8> Practically every decent size market in the US has had self-checkout for many years. That's not a new phenomenon. There's still a staff member monitoring, but they are overseeing a dozen terminals and their job is about helping customers that run into some kind of snag, not catching shoplifters.

This newer idea seems to be small markets with no staff at all on site. Though it's not _that_ new, we've had Avanti Markets at my workplace for a number of years now, and it's an honor system.

<comment><USER9> > Though it's not that new, we've had Avanti Markets at my workplace for a > number of years now, and it's an honor system.

We got them at my workplace a couple years ago.

In the case of Avanti, I feel it's different. Getting caught stealing from Avanti could cost you your job. I wouldn't risk my job for a ham sandwich.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I imagine this works well in semi-secured contexts - meaning within a gated apartment complex or in a church. The items are low value (a nice box meal is maybe $20?) and the value of stealing is minimal since you can't resell the goods or hold onto them for any period of time.

The mirrors are an interesting idea. I was recently reading Schneier's book on trust and he makes reference to an experiment where theft rates were reduced when there were portraits of eyes facing shoppers.

I'm sure they still need some token security, and the article mentions some kind of basic camera. I imagine scanning your credit card to enter would also be highly effective (though possibly have other downsides).

</comment><comment><USER10> Stores already ask shoppers to use the honour system, even without self checkout, that's why we don't ask a clerk at a counter to fetch our goods anymore.

</comment><comment><USER11> > without the big expense of cameras, sensors and software

> People scan everything themselves

> Customers are trusted to use their phones

There certainly are cameras, sensors, and software expenses; it's just some of that burden is paid by the customers.

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure that's true. Traditionally, customers are paying for the wages of the cashier.

Cameras, sensors, and software are likely 1-time purchases. There may be cloud storage costs if your cameras are storing videos off-prem, and maybe the software is a monthly license fee, but I'd wager those costs are cheaper than a cashier.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Is this a poorman's version of Amazon Go stores? lol

<comment><USER8> In a sense. But that's good, because do we really want Amazon to become as ubiquitous in brick and mortar as they are online? Glad to see other retailers trying to innovate to stay competitive.

<comment><USER6> I don't necessarily want that, but if every other company is sitting on their hands, it's their loss. Walmart is the absolute worst. They have the size, money, and a decent tech team, but the checkout experience still sucks. At least the last time I visited, it was all self checkouts. Very small kiosks, so you constantly had to stop and tie your bags and find somewhere to put them while you scan more. All while trying to avoid the family next to you ramming you with their cart or their kids running around you, since the kiosks are less than a cart lengths apart. Assuming you are lucky enough to pay without needing to wait on an assistant for the inevitable machine issues, you'll then be stopped at the door and have your receipt checked if you have anything you decided not to bag. It's literally the worst checkout experience I could dream up.

<comment> frosted-flakes _All_ self-checkouts? At my neighbourhood Walmart, the checkout area is split into three sections: regular checkout (cashiers behind long conveyor belts, separate queues), express checkout (cashier with no conveyor belt, combined queue), and self-checkout (no cashier, combined queue). In Ontario, Canada.

I was impressed with The Home Depot's new self-checkout "machine", which is basically a touch-screen monitor sitting on a big table with a handheld wireless barcode scanner and a regular old receipt printer sitting beside it. Importantly, they ditched the weigh scales which are far too sensitive.

<comment><USER6> Yep, all checkouts. But I know what you're talking about, the Meijer in my old town was setup that way.

And I agree about Home Depot, that system, while imperfect, is pretty great. No more having to lift heavy awkward items over a small scanner!</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Thingylabs AG I.G - <AUTHOR> https://BLOG.thingylabs.io <comment><AUTHOR> Some of my friends still read Hackernews. So here you go! _wabalabdabdab_ or something.

We're not trying to make your crew leave. We just want you to feel something... <3</comment>


Sitebox.io - A Dropbox static site generator [new product, feedback wanted] - <AUTHOR> http://www.sitebox.io/ A build this new product together with a friend of mine and I think it is pretty unique in the marked. I'm looking to get some exposure but mainly feedback.<p>Please comment or e-mail me if you have any tips. <comment><USER2> This seems pretty cool, but doesn't it make more sense to use github pages for this? What is the benefit of using dropbox? Is the site only available from site-name.sitebox.io? Don't dropbox public folders have their own urls?

<comment><AUTHOR> I think the benefits are:

\- Dropbox enjoys widespread adoption

\- You can observe changes to your (preview) site right after you save a file

\- It also allows us to upload an example site to your Dropbox after you sign in

\- There are text editors for mobile devices that have Dropbox integration

We are looking to support additional file systems like Google Drive and GitHub repositories. Advantages would be push support for file updates and the ability to share source files.</comment></comment>


Could the Open Source Movement Have Prevented ObamaCare Debacle? - <AUTHOR> http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/could-the-open-source-movement-have-prevented-obamacares-federal-exchange-debacle.html

<comment><USER2> No.</comment>


List of Javascript Libraries or Tools? - <AUTHOR>

A little over a week ago, someone posted a link to a list of javascript tools/modules/libraries that were most popular. Me being new to javascript wanted to save this list, but now cannot find it. Additionally, are there any other types of lists or sites that rank popularity of javascript libraries? <comment><USER2> There is hnsearch now

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=javascript+...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=javascript+libraries)

</comment><comment><USER3> Wikipedia to the rescue: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_JavaScript_framew...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_JavaScript_frameworks)

</comment><comment><USER4> <http://www.everyjs.com/></comment>


How to Design a Magical Life - <AUTHOR> http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/how-to-design-a-magical-life

<comment><USER2> Although this article is not about product development, I am reminded of how I described a product I was working on to a friend. My goal was to have the user experience be very simple and intuitive and yet what we did with the data on the back-end be so complex and unexpectedly good that the experience would feel kind of "magical."

I was hoping to invoke a certain sense of wonder "how do they do that" even while they enjoyed and used the practical outcome.</comment>


Android Again - <AUTHOR> http://mattmaroon.com/?p=476

<comment><USER2> The reason that Microsoft/Windows has such a dominant market share has nothing to do with how 'open' the PC market is—it is due to the historical predominance of Microsoft DOS which is related to the fact that IBM was the first company that sold 'Personal' Computers into businesses. In the 1970's virtually no individuals had computers of their own, and the vast majority of people who had used a computer were exposed to it at work.

As businesses purchased IBM PCs instead of terminals for large IBM mainframes or minis, more and more people were exposed to computers. Apple was selling computers into a very different market—they were serving computer 'enthusiasts', in the 1970's that was a very limited group akin to those people who build thier own sailboats or airplanes. IBM was exposing a much larger and more homogenous group of people to computers—people with jobs ;-)

As computers became more mainstream over the years there were just more people who had used and were familiar with 'PCs' running MS-DOS, which eventually transitioned into Windows. The Microsoft piece of the personal-computer market has ALWAYS been bigger in the modern era, because it was the easy choice—people used it at work, bought it for home, and were comfortable recommending the same approach for their friends and co-workers.

Mobile devices such as smartphones are VERY 'personal'. With the possible exception of the BlackBerry, which will have been imposed on a lot of people through their jobs (as the PC/MS combo was in the 70's and 80's) people are free to choose whatever they want for their device. The majority of the market will not choose a smartphone based on whether or not the OS is 'open' or 'closed'—they will very likely not understand the distinction.

Apple understands that users will not be interested in apportioning blame between the hardware manufacturer, the OS provider and the applications developers. AT&T probably understands this too, and so will other carriers. If/when Android develops any of the little _issues_ that are very common with applications written for other 'open' platforms, those issues will reflect poorly on all parties involved.

The public at large will not understand and accept the compromises in applications that those of us in the "blogosphere" take for granted They will not keep coming back to try an application through 25 "point" releases until it is finally/potentially better and more robust than any 'closed-OS' alternative - they will give up on it.

Customers will choose smartphones based on how USABLE they are, how many useful and easy-to-use features they have, how reliable they are, and how 'cool' they are. Unfortunately, Android and any other completely 'open' OS is likely to have more buggy applications and security issues than a semi- monitored 'closed' system like the iPhone OS. I do not think Android will ever be a major player in the smartphone space unless/until they modify their definition of 'open' to allow some method for 'vetting' of applications.

<comment><USER3> All they need for that is a solid ratings system in the store. Or possibly some independent third party certification system. Both are easily possible.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The iPhone has the best browser available for a smartphone... and if you have a browser you can do pretty much anything.

What is the lure going to be for people to stop moving to webapps, and suddenly embrace an open platform and installable apps?

The web, through a browser, is the best open platform IMHO

<comment><USER5> _What is the lure going to be for people to stop moving to webapps, and suddenly embrace an open platform and installable apps?_

The fact that internet connectivity on a desktop vs. on your mobile device is different by an order of magnitude. When you get ubiquitous and fast internet on the mobile device (not some bizarre spotty coverage), then things will change. Maybe Europe is ahead in regards to that, but in the US, I don't see that happening very soon.

Edit: oh, and also the processor speeds. So, basically I will bet on webapps for mobile after 3-4 years. Until then, at least, installable apps will work better.

Another Edit: perhaps, when something like Google Gears is everywhere, it might change. But offline support - both for code and data - is kind of essential.

<comment><USER6> "Another Edit: perhaps, when something like Google Gears is everywhere, it might change. But offline support - both for code and data - is kind of essential."

HTML 5 includes a storage API, including a SQL database. Apparently the iPhone already has it, and any browser based on WebKit (Nokia, Android?) will likely have it in the not too distant future.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I don't think you can generalize the PC's lead over Mac to say that Android will eventually overtake.

First, if you narrow you scope a bit you see that the Mac is still the market leader in certain market segments.

Those markets have always been dominated by Mac.

The PC dominates overall because it is a generic business machine. But can you say the same about cellphones?

It seems to me that cellphones are much more narrowly defined and used. Some are fashion accessories, some like the Blackberry are like a communication utility.

But none are a generic computing device, and I don't think they'll ever be. So it is easy to imagine the cell market being dominated by the most shiny thingy.

You could even say that with Vista's DRM, even the PC is heading that way, where the open platform will eventually be relegated to a niche enthusiast market.

People like us will pay a premium to get a PC as open as one anyone can by today.

<comment><USER8> _First, if you narrow you scope a bit you see that the Mac is still the market leader in certain market segments._

If you're willing to play the "in this market segment" game, you can make anybody a winner. OpenBSD totally has a lock on the "paranoid dudes in their mom's basement who think Debian is too damned corporate" market segment.

 _The PC dominates overall because it is a generic business machine. But can you say the same about cellphones?_

I think you can. "A generic mobile device". There, I said it.

The PC, in hindsight, I think was obviously a case of fully proprietary (Apple) vs. mostly open (the PC, with DOS and later Windows). One can easily say, "It's the applications!" And you'd be right...but why were there more apps for PC than Mac? Bigger market, sure. But, if Apple could stop people from making applications for the Mac, and Microsoft couldn't, I know which OS I'd be developing for. And that's the situation here. Apple are basically being bastards to their customers and their developers, and because Apple products are really attractive, extremely well-executed, and generally good and useful, people haven't _immediately_ noticed what a bastard Apple is being about the whole thing. But, I think Matt's right. People _will_ notice that Apple is treating them like crap, with abusive contracts, abusive terms for distribution of applications, and anti-competitive practices with regard to who gets to make and sell apps for the iPhone. It's already happening, and Apple will either wise up, or lose out.

 _You could even say that with Vista's DRM, even the PC is heading that way, where the open platform will eventually be relegated to a niche enthusiast market._

Nobody is saying that Microsoft is open, or good for consumers. At least, I didn't take Matt's post to indicate that at all. He merely used the early PC vs. Mac war as an interesting historical precedent for what's going to play out in the mobile market and for the very same reasons: Cost, availability of apps, and control (i.e. who controls your device: you, or the manufacturer?).

I think the comparisons are pretty obvious and pretty difficult to argue against. The current behavior and direction of Microsoft (and its own historical abusive behavior) is irrelevant. Nobody is going to argue that the PC was a less open platform than the Mac in the 80s and 90s, and changes in the landscape since then don't alter history.

 _So it is easy to imagine the cell market being dominated by the most shiny thingy._

I think it'll be dominated by the cheapest thing that does what people want, just like PCs. It is becoming a commodity...as most mass-manufactured goods do.

<comment><USER5> It continually amazes me why people have such intense hatred of Apple. At least, you give credit, but still: "bastards"? Abusive contracts: who knows who forced an abusive contract for the phone? I agree with you that cheaper, working things will beat the crap out of the iPhone, but still: "bastards"? What did they do to you, man?

<comment><USER8> _It continually amazes me why people have such intense hatred of Apple._

I have no hatred for Apple. I have very little interest in Apple, in general. But, we're witnessing a really interesting time in computing, and I think it's worth paying attention to how it plays out, because it will shape how we use computers and online services for years to come. So, my feelings for Apple, in particular, aren't strong in any particular direction...but I'm paying close attention because my livelihood will be shaped by what plays out over the next year or three. If the industry follows Apple+AT&Ts lead, I believe it would be really bad for consumers.

 _Abusive contracts: who knows who forced an abusive contract for the phone?_

We can know, with confidence, that the telco _and_ Apple worked together to come up with the abomination that is the 2nd gen iPhone contract. The mobile industry, coming from the telco industry of old, is about as abusive as an industry can be and still be legal (and with a wee bit of competition allowed), and yet Apple managed to one-up every other phone contract to come up with the crazytown that is the iPhone contract. It's the worst contract in the industry, as far as I know, and that's saying something. Since AT&T does offer more reasonable contracts for other devices, I'd say it's pretty clear that Apple had a hand in devising the iPhone contract. If you'd like to believe that Jobs is a gentle soul who only wants the best for the world, and would give away free ponies to everyone if those evil telcos would only let him, you're certainly free to continue to do so. I'm not of that opinion. I'm of the opinion that Jobs is a less (monetarily) successful Bill Gates (though far more successful on other fronts...like product development). I don't hate Bill Gates, or Microsoft, either. I just avoid dealing with them as much as possible.

 _What did they do to you, man?_

Nothing. They have no power over me, at all, since I've never entered into any contract or agreement with Apple, and probably won't as long as they are as controlling as they have historically been.

I perhaps use strong language...I figure I'm among friends here at HN, and that you'll all understand that I'm coming from a somewhat more extreme position than is the norm (I contribute to EFF regularly, I have been an Open Source software developer for ten years, and I generically hate anti- competitive practices wherever they appear). I'm not saying Apple kills babies, just that they are on the wrong end of history if they think they can maintain the level of control they have over the iPhone without dramatically damaging their future market share. I'm not RMS, but I think and hope that openness will win out over fully proprietary.

If you don't think the iPhone has an abusive contract, by all means, buy and use an iPhone with joy. If you don't think iTunes terms of service and DRM are bad for consumers (and that poor Steve is being strong-armed into using DRM by those nasty record labels), then by all means buy your songs from iTunes. I'll continue to use a mobile device other than an iPhone. I'm planning to buy the HTC G1 when it arrives, assuming the contract is sane. And I'll continue to get my music from other, non-DRM encumbered, sources, like emusic, Amazon Unbox, Amie St., direct from artists, etc.

<comment><USER9> _note on the iphone contracts_

Not sure how things are (& were) in the states, but down here I think Apple did something interesting. The iphone plans must come with 'data plans.' These have been available but something that consumers just didn't want (to pay for) previously. They always took the 'pay as you go' options, & just avoided using it. So the majority of people that bought phones in the past couple of years had internet enable devices that they never used. Apple broke that.

I think it comes back to Apple's measures of success. They don't just measure sales, they measure _use_. Do you check mail? Do you listen to music? Do you use the browser?

The contracts (while highly priced) are there to optimise for those latter metrics. It's a much more forward minded strategy then most of what we've seen up to now. Given the whole segment a kick up the arse.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Google could end this now with a nationwide wimax buildout. Build a skype-like voice protocol on the android stack, open source a reference hardware design, and let programmers planetwide innovate on the platform. Would fell the iphone and every other carrier within a year or two.

<comment><USER3> Google failed to win the broadcast spectrum to build out anything. It's not as simple as just deciding to put up some towers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's comments like this:

"And there's the Shuffle, which I'm not really sure if anyone ever purchases, but maybe it's just for people who are too poor to buy the Nano and only own 3 CDs because most of their collection is still on 8-track."

That make me dislike Matt - there's just something about the tone of that statement.

</comment><comment><USER12> i don't get it

Symbian has a 70% of the market. Why is Android suddenly so important?

sorry but as much I like Google I don't want them running the O/S on my phone.

<comment><USER13> Symbian is hell on developers. It is a platform, but it's not really used/marketed as a platform.

<comment><USER14> S60 is a platform, Symbian is an OS

And you're right about the development, its hell!!!!

I just want to add, the J60 isn't as good as the Android's Java environment (not even close), and it carries the penalty of the J2ME slogan write once test everywhere (to the point where different open S60 devices will behave differently)

Symbian week point is its development environment, I imagine they will have to respond in that front in the next versions.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How did you go from employee to startup entrepreneur? - <AUTHOR>

You use to work 9-to-5 for "the man" but now run your own business.
How did you make the transition?
Would you do it again? <comment><USER2> You basically have 2 option: start with fulltime, supported by savings or income that doesn't require you to clock in OR do it as part time contribution (evening and weekends) and set yourself a target date to do fulltime transition by saving $$ along the way. I have been doing the 2nd option for 2 startup company now.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the response.

What type of targets do you set? Are they financial targets? Have you written a formal plan? When will you quit your full time role and focus on 1/2 startups?

<comment><USER3> I built mine on nights and weekends and quit when I was able to pay myself more than my day job. I had about 9 months worth of living expenses saved up.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Nights and weekends at first. Then I landed a gig as a network technician, where I had no office. I just got dispatched out whenever a client had a problem. Otherwise I could do pretty much what I wanted and work on my business. If you can do something like that and buy you more time while still getting a salary, it can help. I joked that my boss was my investor.

</comment><comment><USER5> I started my business after I got a full-time client (a bit of a reversal to how it's usually done). It was the right time, right opportunity.

I also, without a doubt, received God's help, so I can't claim it was all my doing.

Would I do it again? I work many more hours than I did working for the man, but yes, absolutely.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. Did you go employee to consultant? Why was it right time?

<comment><USER5> I had been doing web dev and marketing for years while working full time. I had a family and mortgage to support. But the time was right to go full-time consultant when I landed a client who was ambitious and had a lot of work for me.

This client also happened to be a "super-connector" who told everyone about me and how good I was, so that helped.

My advice: learn how to market and start planning now, be patient, ask God for help, and you will surely have your own business.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I quit my job because I didn't like what I was doing. I didn't like having a boss so the easiest thing to do was "be my own boss", right? :)

So far so good, the journey is fun and I'm learning a shitload of stuff on the way. If it failed, no worries I'll go back and slave myself in a big corporation.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. How are you paying the bills? What is your journey? Learning or actually building stuff and speaking with customers? How would you measure success or failure?</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Twitter and Spam - <AUTHOR>

Hi guys,
I finally succumbed to the crowd and joined Twitter this past weekend. (Yay! danielbmarkham)
I still don't understand it, but I figure I need to play around with it some to at least give it a shot.
And almost immediately I'm starting to get followers. Double yay!
But as it turns out, these are like 'fake' followers. They're auto-generated machinations that seem to exist to get me to visit their page so they can sell me stuff.
I feel like that little kid Ralphie in A Christmas Story. The one who saves up coupons and sends off for the special decoding ring only to find out the secret messages from Little Orphan Annie are actually Ovaltine commercials.
Is this Twitter's version of junk mail? If so, what do you twitter people (twits? tweeters?) do about it? Is there some kind of anti-spam strategies you can use? Because if I've only been online a few days and already have 4 B/S followers, this is a mess that is only going to get worse. <comment><USER2> Don't pay attention to your followers. Don't reciprocate followers. Follow people who interest you, or who you've exchanged messages with. I've had zero problem with Twitter spam, but then, I just use Twitter. I don't fret about what my follower list looks like.

</comment><comment><USER3> Even worse are the ones that seem legit for a long time (like a month or more - I suspect regenerating other ppl's tweets, but I've never tested that) and then start to "spam" subtely. Bloody clever and I've clicked links w/o even slightly imagining they were spam.

Im guessing it is down to Twitter being fairly quick to kill spammy spammers.

At the end of the day now my steam moves so fast (with just a few hundred follows) that it's tough to keep up anyway :)

<comment><AUTHOR> Maybe the answer is just to follow people you know?

But that kind of defeats the point of Twitter, right?

And if you've got so many people in your feed you can't track them anyway, what's the point again?

I'm still missing something here.

<comment><USER4> If you have too many people in your feed to track, you need an app that sorts them for you so that you see tweets from the most important/interesting people in your stream first (not necessarily people you know).

I don't know...I manage Twitter accounts for the blogs I update, but I don't use my personal account very much. Even with the business accounts, I'm horrible about checking for @ replies and usually respond several hours later- which kind of defeats the "real-time" purpose of Twitter, does't it?

It seems like you have to be always on to really make it work for you, but there are many hours during the day where I need to be focused on what I'm doing and not on checking Twitter.

But, you have one more new, non-spam follower anyway!

<comment><USER4> Well, you would if I could find you...Twitter can't find anyone named danielbmarkham.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's weird, copied directly from the page it's:

danielbmarkham

must be typo somewhere or something?

<comment><USER4> Too weird...here's what I'm getting:

Name results for: danielbmarkham

Search for a username, first or last name

Did you mean daniel garnham ?

We couldn't find anyone named danielbmarkham.

<comment><AUTHOR> Using this? <http://twitter.com/#search?q=danielbmarkham>

Maybe it's a database replication issue -- although I've been on for several days now.

<comment><USER4> That worked...one more non-spam follower for you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Recently the spam followers have been increasing at a faster pace. I would say of the last 15 followers that added me at least 10 were spam. I'm also stating to notice more spam when doing a search for a trending topic. Hopefully twitter can get this under control. I'm not sure why they dont have a "spam" or "flag" button on @replies, messages and on the follow pages.

<comment><USER6> Send: @spam @<Account name of spammer>

Or you can directly message @spam

<http://twitter.com/spam>

<comment><USER7> Normally you have to be followed by someone in order to DM them. Note this is _not_ true with the spam account. There's a special hack in the code to allow for this, so "d spam" away!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Well those followers don't generate any traffic, their sole act of spamming is just following you. I'd just ignore it. And I think you just got +1 actual follower.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well their sole act of spamming might be simply following me, but really it's a neat little trick.

1) Open a new Twitter account 2) Post some innocuous stuff, like poetry, or quotes 3) Post an advertising message 4) Add 10000 followers 5) Each of those goes back to your main page to see who you are and reads the spam message 6) $$$

I can see where this is going to get out of control very, very quickly.

<comment><USER9> Twitter imposed a 2000 follower limit because of that exact fact. You can never be following more than 2000+(#_of_followers). So maybe you can make $$ and not $$$...

<comment><USER10> Lots of politicians are active on twitter, just too bad that only 2000 people can follow them.

Any arbitrary limit is wrong. They should crowdsource the spam problem, not block legitimate users from interacting with each other.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> You can report them to twitter by way of direct message to <http://twitter.com/spam> (although none of the spammers I've reported have been removed)

You can also block them, but I don't think this achieves much.

Alternatively, just ignore them (my preferred method).

</comment><comment><USER12> Keyword spam is another issue. Yesterday i was watching a Microsoft conference on digitalwpc.com and it shows tweets with the #wpc09 keyword. Initially it seemed nice to show tweets on the site, but spam (and sometimes stupid comments) made it annoying after a while.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'd like to learn more about the relationship between keywords and tweets.

Are there programs that capture tweets in realtime that have certain keywords? Are there correlation tools that map between users and keywords? Can you have something like PageRank, only for tweets (or tweeters?)

<comment><USER13> You may want to take a look at our app, <http://twist.flaptor.com/>

It's like Google Trends for Twitter. Instead of queries, we track what people say. You can see how a keyword explodes and becomes a trend in an hour or two.

For example, yesterday someone saw an amber alert. It turns out this person was the mother of @ddlovato, who has 600k followers. You can see the mother's tweet, ddlovato's mention 18 minutes later and a subsequent explosion of retweets until they reached 0.4% of all tweets during the hour (that's probably in the thousands).

[http://twist.flaptor.com/trends?gram=child+abducted&span...](http://twist.flaptor.com/trends?gram=child+abducted&span=168&start=2009071311&end=2009071405&hot=true)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I block them, which I believe helps identify them as spammers faster.

At the same time, deadbeat followers don't really cost YOU anything. Follow and follow-back people that seem interesting or valuable to you.

</comment><comment> onreact-com I largely ignore it but you can make your tweets private. That means people have to apply to follow your updates.

</comment><comment><USER15> Every tweet is junk.</comment>


Kim Dotcom's Mega goes online at Mega.co.nz - <AUTHOR> http://mega.co.nz/

<comment><USER2> Check out the _Limitations_ beneath the "How to become a Hosting Partner" page.

> _Unfortunately, we can't work with hosting companies based in the United > States. Safe harbour for service providers via the Digital Millennium > Copyright Act has been undermined by the Department of Justice with its > novel criminal prosecution of Megaupload. It is not safe for cloud storage > sites or any business allowing user-generated content to be hosted on > servers in the United States or on domains like .com / .net. The US > government is frequently seizing domains without offering service providers > a hearing or due process._

<comment><USER3> The DMCA Safe Harbor works fine for companies that aren't PURPOSEFULLY attempting to violate copyright. Just don't make the mistake of getting caught berating employees for taking down infringing material, don't get caught figuring out what users upload the best pirated material so you can reward them, don't get caught ordering employees to work on improving the quality of pirated files on your site, and you won't have the problems Mr. Dotcom (who did all the aforementioned things) had with staying under the Safe Harbor.

<comment><USER4> > _and you won't have the problems Mr. Dotcom (who did all the aforementioned > things) had_

This is simply false. Legitimate non-infringing websites have been seized by the U.S. justice department without due process.[1] There is a reason to have due process and innocent until proven guilty; the reason is that otherwise power is abused by those with the power.

[1] <http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2012/120505dajaz1>

<comment><USER5> Bureaucrat 'bo1024, you are technically correct --- the best kind of correct! Following the strict letter of the DMCA does not in fact guarantee that nobody will make a mistake or fail to stop someone abusing process.

What this has to do with the meat of the comment you're responding to, I'm less sure of; that comment was useful in that it corrects an extremely common misconception about the DMCA (that if you simply have a process to honor takedown requests, you're a service provider immune to prosecution).

Regardless of your opinion about copyright or the DMCA, it remains an under- appreciated fact that if you do the things Kim Schmitz was discovered to have done (it's spelled out explicitly in the Mega emails), you're violating the DMCA whether or not you honor takedowns; further, you're not simply committing individual infractions by doing so, but instead (potentially) forfeiting all your protections as a service provider under the DMCA.

<comment><USER4> If you look at the comment _that_ was responding to, it was a quote from dotcom on how the DOJ is going _around_ the DMCA to illegally take down legitimate sites. My comment was on-topic, but the parent comment, while technically correct, was misleadingly off-topic. It implied that, if you stick to the letter of the law, you'll be fine. That's not true, and that's what the original quote was pointing out.

<comment><USER5> It would be very bad advice to site operators with expose to US law to ignore that law because it is capriciously applied.

For one thing, its application is much less capricious than the echo-chamber would like you to believe; there's a cascading availability bias at play, because it's hard for Techdirt and Torrentfreak to drive page views with stories about sites that play by the rules and don't have a problem with takedowns. You only hear about the dramatic cases, but the fact is that the boring cases are much more common.

For another, regardless of whether you can be taken down by accident or malice when you follow the rules, you will, if you're popular, be taken down, sued, and potentially prosecuted if you run a site the way Kim Schmitz ran his.

I'm less interesting in refuting you or any other commenter on this thread than I am in being clear about what the situation is. There is a widespread belief on HN that the takedown of Megaupload was unlawful because Kim Schmitz and his team responded to takedowns. Whatever technical or even Constitutional issues may or may not have tainted the case against Megaupload, we now know that Megaupload _was_ in fact a conspiracy to evade copyright law.

We can dispute the legitimacy of the prosecution, but it's no longer possible to credibly dispute the underlying facts. And, back to this thread: those facts are instructive. There is more to US copyright law for service providers than accepting takedown requests.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "The new Mega encrypts and decrypts your data transparently in your browser, on the fly. You hold the keys to what you store in the cloud, not us."

For me this is the most important bit of the website. That bit demonstrates the dedication of building something that will be very hard to shut down.

If you combine this with the VPN tunneling at the backend to obfuscate parties for the final host and content (similar to what piratebay did a month ago according to the news)- it has the potential to become very powerful and take a good share of torrents traffic.

<comment><USER7> "Encryption in the browser" just screams "boondoggle" to me.

<comment><USER8> Finally someone with some brains!

That pesky browser thing never could do anything of value. Umm...Dah... What a joke! It's all "boondoggle"!

It unquestionably couldn't ever be used to build "apps" [1].

Certainly could never ever be fast enough [2].

Obviously cannot ever possibly utilise multiple cores [3].

Most definitely never ever could do 3D [4].

So, you're right, I doubt it will ever do crypto [5].

Those fools might even consider "Online Banking" or something crazy like that!

When will those stupid browser idiots learn?

<http://alwaysbetonjs.com>

[1] <http://facebook.com>, <http://gmail.com>, <http://twitter.com>, etc.

[2] <http://arewefastyet.com> \- <http://madebyevan.com/webgl-path-tracing/>

[3] <http://w3.org/TR/workers> \- <http://chromium.org/developers/design- documents>

[4] <http://khronos.org/webgl> \- <http://chromeexperiments.com/webgl> \- <http://ro.me>

[5] <http://w3.org/TR/WebCryptoAPI/>

<comment><USER9> Let's get the web crypto done, and maybe then we can find an "Encrypt before you upload" button on every single web service that stores your data, from e-mail to Dropbox-like services.

Hopefully the Government hasn't tried to put a backdoor in it, but I assume that would be discovered pretty quickly.

<comment><USER8> You're setting yourself up for disappointment ^w^

We can dream though, can't we?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> So why not a .onion? You can set it up so that name resolution goes through Tor, but you still connect directly to the IP, if you're after speed. He could even manage to get mega.onion.

<comment><USER8> The first rule...

<comment><USER11> ... is that it's 2012, digg is dead and nobody cares for the tired old memes that somehow outlasted it.

<comment><USER12> Wow, I can't believe I just read someone referencing a Usenet meme thinking it was originated in Digg.

September did never end uh?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> As someone who lives in New Zealand, I think that its only a matter of time before the domain name is seized. This whole MegaUpload affair has shown that the US government has quite a lot of sway over the NZ government and in my opinion I don't think they will stop until he's extradited to the US and put behind bars.

<comment><USER8> Yeah, because that old trick still works.

Assange is still chill-banging. Sipping Aguardiente. Schmoozing Ecuadorian diplomats. Yelling shit about the commander-in-chief out from the balcony to the glassy-eyed press [1].

As for Mr. DotCom, don't hold your breath. NZ is still busy kissing his arse [2].

[1] [http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/julian-assange- labels...](http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/julian-assange-labels-obama- a-wolf-in-sheeps-clothing/story-fnd134gw-1226512743231)

[2] <http://rt.com/news/zealand-apologize-dotcom-spy-108/>

<comment><USER14> Last I heard Assange was still stuck in Ecuador's London embassy, which is what your linked article seems to imply too. Not exactly as rosy a situation as you're implying.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Under How to become a hosting partner:

"Make us an offer. We prefer unmetered fixed monthly payments."

Right. And I want a flying Llama that poops gold bars.

<comment><USER14> Are you implying that finding unmetered fixed monthly payments is hard? Because it's not.

Unmetered != unlimited.

There's still going to be a maximum capacity for the connection, and for unmetered connections that's the basis used to price it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Mega Conz? Really?

<comment><USER17> First thing I noticed too!

For anyone missing it, "mega.co.nz" -> Mega Conz -> Mega Cons:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_trick>

<comment><USER18> The perils of country-specific TLDs. Spare a thought for the poor Cook Islanders.

<comment><USER19> co.ck

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Due to the potential for shutdown even outside of the U.S., will people feel safe hosting important files on the site?

<comment><USER21> Did anybody _actually_ ever host "important files" on MegaUpload? I know people say they did, but did they actually? If they did that's just plain stupid.

<comment><USER22> MU was the only site that allowed unregistered users to upload large files with unregistered downloads, making it a great way to distribute customized Linux live CD images.

<comment><USER21> Sure, i've used a couple of upload sites recently to transfer large files... but never anything that was actually important, i didn't have local backups of or couldn't be easily replicated.

I've read about people trying to get their files back off the servers and all the other hoo-ha going on, and have nothing against people trying to do that or using the excuse that it was their _main_ backup... just seems extremely silly to rely on it form my point of view. It's not possible to rely on Google, for fear of them shutting down your account for some violation or T&Cs (and no recourse for appeals), so to rely on these kinds of companies...

Not sure why I got down votes for a genuine question.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I am interested in which technology he would use to encrypt/decrypt the data in the browser. Most web-tools I've seen have a strict limit on number of bytes that can be encrypted in a userfriendly process.

<comment><USER6> I suspect they could use data URL scheme as in RFC2397.

See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_URI_scheme> and <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2397.txt>

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Beautiful design. But I'm getting an error when I try to sign up to be an API partner. Anyone else?

<comment><USER25> Works here

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Am I the only here who's seeing "Domain Parked with Instra"?

<comment><USER8> More or less.

<http://dnscheck.pingdom.com/?domain=mega.co.nz>

<comment><USER26> That's crazy. I had to open it up in TOR to see the actual site. Could it be my ISP?

<comment><USER8> Depends on your DNS; which, yes, most likely depends on your ISP.

You could try OpenDNS or "220.127.116.11" or something.

If you choose to change, please be aware of the implications.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I'm still seeing, on January 11th this button will change the world on main page? is there any way I can navigate into the main site folks?

Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER28> Metro UI? Microsoft is an one of the MEGA investors? :)

<comment><USER29> I guess you can say that. There will be lots of MS bits in, once the site goes up :D

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> ...jeez, thought that by now the guy thought of a different business model

<comment><USER7> Once you do something, you keep on doing it. Check out what happened to Peter Popoff after James Randi and Johnny Carson busted him in the 80's. <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYdlX_Wn1K4>

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Until

Some

Enquire

None

Ever

Tell

<comment><USER31> Not only that, torrents are totally sufficient when done properly.

<comment><USER8> Imagine "torrents ... done properly".

Imagine some kind of worldwide system, without a central server and dedicated administrator, distributed among a large, constantly changing conglomeration of servers that store and forward messages to one another.

In your dreams!

<comment><USER31> So why is golden the rule of usenet, to not talk about it?

Because if people did, anti-piracy companies would start paying attention to it. Therfore making it way more expensive to run Usenet servers and expose users to legal risk.

It's success depends on its relative obscurity.

You have to provide a credit card to use Usenet (unless you use bitcoins). Making it easy to be targeted.

Torrents "done properly" can be completely anonymous for everyone involved and still free.

So I don't agree that the problem was completely solved by Usenet. Despite being a happy Usenet + NZBmatrix user (oops broke the rule :p).

<comment><USER32> >You have to provide a credit card to use Usenet (unless you use bitcoins). Making it easy to be targeted.

Which does nothing but say you accessed the server- not what for. Furthermore, the better providers don't keep logs.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


80% of us hate our boss:  what to do - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.jobdig.com/wwds/2008/07/01/i-forgot-one-thing-over-at-todays-us-news/

<comment><USER2> As someone who's about to start a job as a "boss", I'm going to take "Even if we went to business school, that was two years spent, long-long ago." to heart. Wishing for an article like "80% of your employees hate you: what to do"

<comment><USER3> Management is a social activity, so you will have to embrace social interaction. Rule #1 is to actively encourage feedback. The difficult part is not getting upset but acting on opportunity when you are told where you screwed up. You'll get over it. It will take some time (6-12 months) before people will be comfortable with telling you what they think, and they will start with small things. Make sure to follow up on these by either addressing or making it obvious that feedback was given serious consideration. Everybody likes beign listened to. Be prepared for the first 6-12 months beign very awkward. It's ok.

One trick I learned from my boss is to ask people two questions: "how could we make this better?" and "how could we make this worse?". It's important to ask both questions as this creates proper frame around conversation. It also avoids the whole conversation beign 100% "negative".

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'm in 20%. At the day job my boss is great as are two guys higher up (not sure about #4 and above - too hard to reach those). They are not without their issues but they are listening to feedback and keep improving. I usually fill detailed feedback for them each year and follow up in person (for the first two guys in the chain of command) to make sure the message was read right. This year I found very little to criticize them for, which is quite unusual for a crank like me.

In the past I had couple of so-so managers at the same place and our collective feedback saw them managed out of their roles back to what they were good at. But this is the product of workplace where feedback is being listened to, if you don't work in a place like this your options maybe limited.

If you want to change the place where you work and your boss (not leave but make it different), I recommend "The Possibilities of Organization" book

[http://www.amazon.com/Possibilities-Organization-Barry- Oshry...](http://www.amazon.com/Possibilities-Organization-Barry- Oshry/dp/0910411107)

it will help you inderstand what's going on in the heads of your managers and why they act like they do. I was thoroughly moved by this book.

</comment><comment><USER4> Fire him!!</comment>


These Companies Build The Technology Used To Spy On You  - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/runasandvik/2013/11/20/these-companies-build-the-technology-used-to-spy-on-you/

<comment><USER2> Interestingly, I've actually been put forward as an interviewee for two of the companies on the front of the linked page (Gamma + Cobham) by your usual nefarious job agents trying to get anyone in anywhere for a chunk of commission. My speciality is code, data and operational security so I assume they were interested on that basis.

The agencies and the companies themselves describe them in a completely different fashion, almost as if they have to hide what they really do to get people interested.

I turned both down on the telephone interview stating my objection and why.

The agent gave me a face full over it because I embarrassed him to his clients. I told him to pick some better clients.

I get the feeling that a lot of these places hide what they do until you get there. The agents will sell you to whoever as well. Watch where you step.

<comment><USER3> Good for you! Very nice to hear and be bold!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Direct link to the list:

[https://www.privacyinternational.org/sii/](https://www.privacyinternational.org/sii/)</comment>


Slither.io - <AUTHOR> http://slither.io/ <comment><AUTHOR> Do not play this if you have work to do!</comment>