This, to me, is a fundamental problem with the Posterous culture. Here we have a post on a Posterous blog made by a Posterous co-founder which copies, in its entirety and with no significant commentary, a work published elsewhere.
It's attributed with a link to the source â€"Â barely, in lowercased, tiny font, at the bottom. The headline is a link to the Posterous page, not the source (unlike Daring Fireball â€ślinked listâ€ť items, for example). How many people will actually follow the link? Why is this Posterous blog entry #1 on HN when a permalink to the original source on Quora is readily available?
Let's be clear. This is not â€śfair use.â€ť It's not plagiarism, as Garry doesn't claim he wrote the anecdote; but it's a violation of copyright. It's publishing without permission of the copyright holder.â€
My first submission to Hacker News was an original item I posted to my own website. It got quite a few reads â€" but a lot of people were re-tweeting a link to a full copy of it hosted on someone else's Posterous. That user didn't add much (A sentence expressing â€śme, tooâ€ť). I was conflicted: Glad people found my writing interesting enough to duplicate and share, but disappointed that they were reading it on someone else's site for no good reason.
I see now that if the company's own bloggers consider copyright a joke, if they believe posting other people's articles verbatim is kosher, well, can we be surprised their users do, too?
(Postscript: This differs from Tumblr's â€śre-bloggingâ€ť in one important way: You only re-blog other Tumblr posts. â€śRe-bloggingâ€ť is part of the Tumblr system. You expect it there if you post there. You don't â€śloseâ€ť anything by it. I have no problem there.)
â€ Â I don't know if Quora's terms of service mean that consent is implied, but honestly, in this case and this case only (the case of a Posterous employee), it doesn't matter, because it's about setting precedent for the community.
I consider myself generally intelligent and capable, and while ill I was definitely neither. I once failed twice in a row at following the directions to make instant mashed potatoes. It wasn't really a joke that a good day was keeping the toilet seat clean and remembering to flush. It's been about 5 years, and my health is mostly back to normal other than no longer being in decent physical shape. I'm currently doing non-computer work (http://screamsorbet.com) but I'm eager to someday get back to the programming problems I abandoned.
Unlike the author of the article, I didn't find it made me happier. Perhaps it's a general personality issue, but it made me even more depressed. Books and movies were mostly beyond me, and there wasn't much I found to take any joy in. I presumed I would eventually recover (and think I have almost completely) but the overall feeling was one of intense mortality --- a dread of the eventual senility that will probably come with aging, and a realization that when it happens again it will likely be once and forever.
The sad thing about being "stupid" is being unable to put your predicament into compelling writing.
I can tell your from personal experience that being stupid does not feel good especially when you know it. You never "get it" when others talk, you never have anything to say, you are always saying and doing the wrong things, or not doing what should have been done.
I do agree there's a lot more to enjoy. One is not critical and cynical. I like a lot more people, food, music than my smarter siblings. I am very happy walking in parks, looking at trees, or petting animals. Life is simpler.
Reads like the way to cure narcissism.
I might really enjoy slam-dunking basketballs if I just did it more, but there is a really good chance that its never gonna happen, no matter how much I try.
This is a fact of life that I'm often unwilling to admit. I'm sure that contributes to the impatience a lot of people feel, we have very little empathy for people who don't comprehend and analyze the same way that we do. Where would that empathy come from? Analogous experience with slam dunks, maybe.
"Wait, I enjoy walking in the park. Is it possible that I'm not as smart as I think I am? omg, maybe the blood supply to my brain is blocked!"
I was basically incapable of complex reasoning because I couldn't expend the required mental energy. I did not become laid back or socially competent; instead, I was irritable and frustrated at my shortcomings. People could take advantage of me more easily. I generally stopped being interested in esoteric things of any sort. I don't think I derived anything of value from the loss of my mental acuity.
One tangential benefit I did receive, however, from having DKA, was an increase in motivation and willpower. I had taken my health and cleverness for granted, and now it was slipping away, and I didn't know why. All I knew was that I wanted it back. I forced myself to slog through, to finish the CRM I was working on, and I started working out more. It didn't help me health-wise at the time, but now that my condition is being managed, I find I am much more aggressive and resourceful in the way I conduct my life.
I haven't been able to find an answer.
The world isn't full of 'stupid' people and 'clever' people. The human race doesn't function on a linear spectrum; the full variety of personality types and abilities is far more diverse.
Perhaps some people value their intelligence above all else, when other areas of their lives are lacking?
However, one learns to accept this as how the world is, and there's no ill-feeling or depression associated with it.
I'm not trying to trivialize his journey; he just as easily could have spiraled into a feedback loop of self-hate and self-pity. It's admirable that he accepted the change within himself, and I enjoyed reading about how awestruck he was as he observed the emotional change within.
I think with a little patience and humility we can notice the deepness of our stupid friends, and relax enough to enjoy what we are doing without worrying.
also, can you train yourself to be smarter by forcing yourself into such a state, much like weight training or high altitude training?
Zoom out a bit. Everyone middle aged and above in our society is expected to have some degree of arterial plaque. Nowadays it is considered normal. Obesity and diabetes are on the rise.
Doesn't this mean that many supposedly healthy people are already more slow and forgetful than need be?
That said, this one may have simply fallen through the cracks owing to the early failures to follow up more aggressively. Only the Google people can know for sure.
If BOS publishes the video of that, I'll post it -- it was one of the most eyeopening talks at the conference for me (and that is saying something, since they were virtually without exception outstanding).
P.S. Google is a soulless megacorp with above average PR.
I'm British, so my concepts of bothering people, being a nuisance, and being impolite are already vastly out of skew with the American work culture -- I've had to relearn a lot of that behaviour since coming to the USA and Google.
IMO it's not really specifically a Google thing. I think the lesson to be learned from this post (and as a founder, I'm wincing along with you jayro) is simple: when dealing with a big company, keep yourself in the radar or you'll vanish altogether.
But please don't be too crazy or in your face. I administered Summer of Code for our open source project this year, and one very keen applicant kept IMing me for status updates. Unfortunately, he was based in India, and so this meant my phone buzzing at 3am. Suffice it to say (and for mostly unrelated reasons), he didn't get accepted.
Be sensitive, be fresh, be relevant, be interesting.
I think it was a mistake to let it ride for so long. A few weeks, maybe two months, and I would have called them up and followed up. Even a short email positioning myself as asking more out of curiosity than need for an acquisition, etc.
Anyone else agree? Would you have followed up?
1) Deals fall through. PG et all write about this all the time. It's probably easy to figure why they fail in hindsight, but that doesn't make them any easier to manage in the future.
2) It seems like the main premise of the idea was to get bought by google/yahoo/microsoft. That is a dangerous strategy to employ out of the gates (although back in 2005 there was no hacker news and a whole let less general knowledge about the black art of startups).
*disclaimer - ex-Google PM
Quick example: I interviewed with a company back in August and was told I'd hear from them in a week. I didn't so I began emailing the CEO (who I'd interviewed with) at least once a week for almost three months (never got a yes/no, so I kept "checking in"). Because I kept myself on the radar and kept pursuing it, when something finally opened up, I got the job and was told that they admired my persistence. Don't be afraid of annoying people -- if the answer isn't final yet, keep trying.
WTF? Is Google the mob or something? Almost seems like the next line should have been, "And I was never seen or heard from again."
Everything to gain. Nothing lost but a couple transatlantic phone calls.
I got the attention of Google and was flown into NYC for an interview / talk with the spreadsheet team. Similarly, I was also a one man shop since my founder had bailed on me and left for Google 3 months prior! Things went pear shaped when I failed to get through the algorithm gristmill. I had one poor interview with a beaver/rat ringed kid who was eager to demonstrate his intellectual superiority (or so it felt at the time).
The frustrating part is that as an entrepreneur your thoughts are ranging from how to make money/business model to UI design to backend engineering. I was expecting that the googlers would at least show some interest in Numbler - but that wasn't how the meetings were structured. The google PM (Fuzzy was his name) was interested, but seemed hamstrung by the google process. Google never asked me about any of the tricks I used work to build the UI, COMET style networking for responsiveness, etc.
In retrospect, Numbler was an acquisition play and needed a much better strategy and larger vision to succeed. I did end up with a google NYC t-shirt...
"Still what could've been. Is better than what could never be at all" -- Tiffanyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LzGss9QGAk
As difficult as it is, nicely done on recognizing the situation, holding yourself accountable and chalking it up as a lesson learned. No doubt about it, this experience will help you somewhere down the line...
I'm really impressed with your articulate re-cap of the story.
I know one of the Zenter guys. He is definitely a closer.
While keeping the line of communication is important, it's also important to ensure it's worth your time.
"Ouch. That really sucks. Lesson learned. Sometimes you have to take off your engineer hat and stop pretending human communication works like TCP."
Remember, don't use the same password across the Internet. Here's why.
Edit: It's there, apparently as a DES hash. â€¦
Update 2: The first two characters are the hash. So if you use a tool like https://hash.online-convert.com/des-generator you are going to put your password in the â€śText you want to convertâ€¦â€ťÂ box and the first two characters of your hashed password in as the â€śSalt (optional)â€ť. Then you will see the â€śCalculated DES Hashâ€ť which will be the same as the hashed password from the torrent if you knew or guessed the password correctly.
Your Lifehacker password is â€śhackernâ€ť, but in the torrent, it's just â€ś8h48GPxmwy.EAâ€ť. Just to show the torrent is legit, you go to the website I entered above, enter â€śhackernâ€ť and â€ś8hâ€ť as the salt; it will spit back â€ś8h48GPxmwy.EAâ€ť.
Update 3: â€śOFFER HNâ€ť: The most paltry â€śOffer HNâ€ť ever â€"Â send me your username or email address and I'll grep both files for you to see if your password and/or hash is in one of them. My email is contact-at-<HN username>ogan.com
So, uh, how come I and everyone else affected don't have an email in our inboxes from Gawker right now, marked as urgent, explaining the situation?
Doesn't that seem like the right thing to do?
(Put a bookmarklet for this if anyone who wants to try it out: http://bit.ly/exvive)
I'm currently writing a little script that parses all the address and emails the owner a heads up. I gotta step out so I won't have it done for 2-3 hours and I thought I'd post here in case anyone else has that idea (don't want to flood the victims).
From Felix Salmon:
Most of the value of Gawker Media lies in Hungaryâ€"but how much value is there, really? To a large degree that depends on what Denton decides to do with his proprietary technology. Other blogging platforms are worth nine-figure sumsâ€"Tumblr just got a valuation of $135 million, while Automattic, the parent of WordPress, turned down a $200 million acquisition offer three years ago, when it was much smaller than it is today, and subsequently raised money at a valuation north of $150 million. I know a lot of people at big media companies who struggle with the limitations of WordPress, and who would pay good money to license an alternative web publishing technology, if it was robust and proven. Big companies are already licensing the NYT's Press Engine mobile-publishing technology, and it's rumored that at one point Denton was talking to Bonnie Fuller about licensing his technology to her nascent website, although that never happened.
It gives a little bit of background information on password hashing and salting, and on simple password cracking techniques.
I must admit I'm a bit intrigued as to why mine's not there. Anyone else in this boat?
Odd, I'm sure I had a lifehacker comments account, but my username isn't listed. No complaints though.
Kind of ironic really, considering the whole secrecy vs non-secrecy debate.
EDIT: Nevermind - it seems that resetting your password at gawker.com resets for all of their sites.
BigCo promises you the original source code + game assets.
Instead of promising Alpha/Beta/Release from the signing of the contract, promise X/Y/Z business days from delivery of those critical assets.
(Make sure you have a timeout clause in there too, "Assets will be delivered by BigCo within 60 days of the signing of this contract or we will not develop that title and BigCo will pay a penalty of $X")
[edit to add] Be careful to define what "assets" mean to you. Assume what you write will be read by a lowest-bidder consultant, with active disincentives against showing initiative, and who can barely read. (Not stupid though)
I was working on a coin-op game for a mid-level manufacturer in Chicago. Let's just say they were the last dinosaur in the tar pit and they didn't have a stellar hardware engineering team. They tended to copy other people's designs and not really understand the architectures, so things like in-circuit emulators and IDEs were scarce or non-existant. You debugged via trial-and-error and, if you were lucky, printf().
So I was working on this title and started working from home a couple of days a week to take care of a family member. That made things hard, and even harder since you tend to have the physical machine next to you while coding. It was frustrating to code for a day, get to work, then find half of it wasn't working.
Then I discovered that the MAME kids had already supported the platform. With a small amount of work I could develop on the emulated platform. I could work remotely and I had access to things the in-house guys didn't even have: hardware breakpoints, live RAM viewing, scripted testing for example.
Without MAME I would have seriously been suffering on this project.
"I wanted to give the guy a game credit [...]. The publisher refused....their legal team were already writing up a cease-and-desist letter ordering him to remove the assets from his fan page."
Guy saves the day and instead of a cookie he gets a CnD letter. Do things really have to work this way?
"But you have to defend your trademarks or they become worthless!" Right, because the publisher would have been so much better off if those WAVs wouldn't have been out on the Internet in the first place.
Years ago at a previous employer, we had an old xenix system that ran a library book lending system. The company that maintained it had gone bust long ago and noone knew how to migrate the data, in fact noone really knew xenix either. I ended up (as the Linux and y2k guy) working with one of the smartest guys I've ever met to hunt the data down. In the process I learnt xenix and Geoff learnt xenix x86 assembly. Geoff patched the library system to start dumping out csvs. Then he patched an import function, then an extra field to indicate the year starting with 19 or 20 (to solve the y2k problem all we had to do was shutdown for Christmas, bring the box up in January, set the date to 1900 and we'd be fine. It didn't quite turn out that way but that was another story) and after a significant post y2k problem Geoff took over maintaining a defunct piece of software on a defunct platform, for 3 years. The library didn't migrate because they didn't need to, as long as they had Geoff. After I left, Geoff took over xenix admin (to be fair, not a lot to do) and a few years later fell very ill. While the library thought they'd saved money, ultimately they trapped themselves in an expert system that could only prolong the inevitable disaster on the horizon.
> MAME is free. The source code is free. If you paid for it, you've beenripped off. If you sell it, you are a thief.
> You are not allowed to distribute X-Mame ( source or binary) and ROM's image in the same package or physical medium.
> If you distribute the executable, you should also distribute the source code.
> The source code cannot be used in a commercial product without awritten authorization of the authors.
Crazy, yet all too common. We didn't hold up our end of an agreement, but YOU have to. Does this happen in all industries, or just software?
"We didn't provide the plants or mulch or dirt for the garden (which we were supposed to do last week), but you still have to provide a flower bed tomorrow."
I'm assuming there was something in the contract that the original party was required to provide assets for the port. Perhaps it wasn't.
"No... no need to contractually obligate us to deliver - just believe us, we'll get you the files!"
Perhaps because I've always been an, er, "dedicated" gamer, there's something about a solution involving playing the game which is really satisfying.
We did not have the source to the midi/mod library playing the music (they were composed of short samples).
Instead we found .wav files of all music tracks on one of the fan-page sites. We even found the samples to a lot of our sounds. We simply grabbed and used them instead
OB cached link: http://www.ppl-pilot.com.nyud.net/mame.aspx
Looks like the suits won this one.
Things which induce me to drop what I am doing and immediately get to work on someone's behalf:
1) Demonstrating that you know me well, either through familiarity with what I've done, what I've written, myself personally, or someone close to me.
2) Demonstrating that you have put a lot of work into something and can benefit from specific application of my expertise.
3) A precise request which I can satisfy. ("Can you teach me about running a business?" is not a precise request -- well, OK, it is, but only if you accept "I could." as a complete answer. "I have built an application which does X. I want to increase its organic search rankings for X, and having done my homework about SEO, I understand this means I need to get links to my website. Can you give me an idea for an X-related piece of linkbait?" is a precise question.)
Things which people frequently try that are not as successful as they probably hope:
1) "Help me, Obi Wan, you're my only hope." I enjoy backing underdogs, not losers. There is a difference. Pluck and vim and tales of what you've managed to do make you sound like an underdog. Apologies and lack of confidence and telling me who you've already asked who ignored you totally make you sound like a loser. (By the way, it very rarely improves any negotiation to tell the other party that they were the first person you thought of after the first four people you thought of said no.)
2) "This will only take..." Asking me to drop what I'm doing is much more disruptive than many people would assume it is. Also, folks have a tendency to underestimate how much work is required or how thoroughly I tend to answer requests which I answer.
3) Napkin stage ideas. Most of them will be culled before shipping. Why should I dedicate my limited time on a project which will probably be shelved, when I could instead work on something which will, with certainty, help people?
- Siddhartha by Hermann Hesse
On HN I try to have a measured tone. On my personal blog,I just write(rant!) without regard to "voice" and so on. It doesn't help that, while I enjoy meeting people and parties and such, I am equally content to stay in the shadows and don't care about "personal brand" or building a group to bring change and so on.
I just got frustrated at receiving the nth "please mentor me and send me some code so I can do a cool AI project for my bachelor's degree requirements. I need this next week." email.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=670453 is the original thread , with many nice comments.
I knew a student once who was messing around with Java, and I pointed him at Lisp and some code for a metacircular evaluator. He figured it out in no time flat. It's fun to blow people's minds, and to watch them learn.
But as the article says, you can't help people who aren't willing to roll up their sleeves and go to work.
Then I just went and wrote the code, put up a repo on Launchpad. I was soon getting many helpful comments.
I see this a lot with students in introductory physics. If they come to me and say "I don't get it" or "I can't get started" I actually invest less time than if I get a good student who has hit a wall and can't get through. The student who won't/can't start will get sent to the tutoring center and I will spend the time with the kid who works hard. There's only so much of me to go around and I want to make it count.
Funny -- this is almost exactly the advice I wrote in "How to get your professors' attention -- and coaching and mentoring": http://jseliger.com/2010/10/02/how-to-get-your-professors%E2... . The big thing you need to do if you're trying to get someone's attention is show that you're worth the investment.
Most people either don't do this or don't know how to.
I think people are often quite hung up on being courteous, and are keen to gain permission to have that initial conversation.
While I think that's understandable, this is a nice example of why it's useful to a) be persistent, and b) get to the point of the conversation efficiently and effectively.
I disagree that ML is something that can be picked up through just an OCW site and such. "Real" ML involves way too much mathematics and does not overlap much with programming. ..unless your idea of Software Engineering is writing stuff in MATLAB.
There are so many books and the path to knowledge can be daunting.
In the spirit of the blog-post's advice I was trying to gauge whether to take the author's advice seriously, but after some short searching I could not come up with publications in ML. I definitely found several moderately complex projects with an ML "flavor." And that's already way better than most people who try to get into this by themselves and shows Ravi picked up on a bunch of stuff.
Ravi mentioned 5 years ago that reading the literature felt like banging your head against the wall and I think most of people who attempt the self-taught route are going to feel the same.
You're looking at a year or two of full-time college-like preparation during which you will learn lots of math but little to no ML. Only then can you begin to really learn ML. The books by themselves are simply not enough to learn this stuff. One needs to literally go through as many lectures as possible in the relevant coursework online, and do the labs. Various CS departments that actually have some traction in ML spend a large chunk of time designing the course and labs are incredibly illuminating.
If you just want to learn how to apply an ML algorithm taught in an undergraduate-level course, disregard my post.
Truly understanding anything written by Bishop or even going through ESL completely is something that is going to take an enormous amount of time (on your own easily a year, if you have the background) and mathematical skills that are typically way outside of what a Software Engineer deals with in any of the projects. I mean Bishop introduces hyperpriors in Chapter 1 or 2 for chrissake.
I can see how getting into patricle-filtering based probabilistic robotics can be easier, but try some EKF-based methods and feel the pain, that is, feel the amount of math that you don't know yet.
Extra hint for HN readers: take a look at the CVs of hot-shots in ML. Lots of Math and Physics undergrads, and a PhD in Theoretical Physics or Mathematics is not a rare occurrence by any means.
I'd also take a risk and say that traditional mentor/student relationships in India are quite different from the less formal ones in the West. My experience with colleagues from India is that they are much more likely to observe the authority ladder. Just look up Anil K Bera's interview with C.R.Rao (of Rao-Blackwell theorem) especially w/regards to how things were going at ISI.
> most people I know including myself couldn't live without Chromium/V8 anymore.
Is this a common sentiment ?
I find it such a shame that these types of conditions are so popular for most contests / easter eggs, etc.
Are the legal issue regarding this that complex?
I'm assuming Google is not really that cheap regarding postage costs, since we're also only talking about 1 notebook here.
Also interested how it all worked out for Jamendo, since (from what I see) they're based in Luxembourg.
The blog indeed crashed, it's on a very small VM with a remote filesystem and even with a WP cache plugin.. not so much luck, even with apache stopped.
However our company blog has a proper sysadmin ;-) So after I setup a redirect there no more issues... until we get on slashdot maybe ? :)
I do not see how he did that?
One-click rollbacks. It's really, really important that when you deploy a release to the production servers, you can un-deploy it with a single click or command. That means all changes should be logged, and all the old files should be kept around until the next release. You hopefully won't have to use this often, but when you do, it's a lifesaver to be able to say "Okay, we'll rollback and fix the problem at our leisure" rather than frantically trying to get the servers back online.
Staging/production configs. If you do need to have differences between staging & production configs, try to limit them to a single overrides file. This should not contain app config that changes frequently, and should be limited to things like debug options and Patrick's "don't e-mail all these people" flag. Check in both the staging and production config overrides, but don't check in the actual filename under which the system looks for them. On the actual machines, cp the appropriate config to the appropriate location, and then leave it there. This way it doesn't get blown away when you redeploy, and you don't need to manual work to update it on deployment. (I suppose you could have your deployment scripts take a staging or production arg and copy it over appropriately, but this is the poor-man's version.)
Deployment schedule. I'd really recommend having a set, periodic deployment schedule, maybe even run off a cronjob. The problem with manual deployments is they usually happen only when people get around to it, and by then, dozens of changes have gone in. If something goes wrong, it's hard to isolate the actual problem. Also, deploying infrequently is bad for your users: it means they have to wait longer for updates, and they don't get the feeling that they're visiting a living, dynamic, frequently-updated website.
The holy grail for deployment is push-on-green. This is a continuous-integration model where you have a daemon process that continually checks out the latest source code, runs all the unit tests, deploys it to the staging server, runs all the functional & integration tests, and if everything passes, pushes the software straight to the production servers. Obviously, you need very good automatic test coverage for this to work, because the decision on whether to push is completely automatic and is based on whether the tests pass. But it has big benefits for both reliability and morale as team size grows, and big benefits for users as they get the latest features quickly and you can measure the impact of what you're doing immediately. I believe FaceBook uses this system, and I know of one team inside Google that has the technical capability to do this, although in practice they still have some manual oversight.
Third-party software. I know Patrick recommended using apt-get, but I'm going to counter-recommend pulling any third-party code you use into your own source tree and building it with your own build tools. (Oftentimes you'll see all third-party software in its own directory, which makes it easier to audit for license compliance.) You should integrate in a new version when you have a big block of spare time, because it'll most likely be a long, painful process.
There are two main reasons for this. 1) is versioning. When you apt-get a package, you get the most recent version packaged version. This is not always the most recent version, nor is it always compatible with previous versions. You do not want to be tracking down a subtle version incompatibility when you're setting up a new server or deploying a new version to the production servers - or worse, when you rollback a change. (If you do insist on using apt-get, make sure that you specify the version for the package to avoid this.)
2.) is platforms. If you always use Debian-based systems, apt-get works great. But what if one of your devs wants to use a MacBook? What if you switch hosts and your new host uses a RedHat-based system? The build-from-source installers usually have mechanisms to account for different platforms; open-source software usually wants the widest possible audience of developers. The pre-packaged versions, not so much. And there're often subtle differences between the packaged versions and the source - I recall that PIL had a different import path when it was built & installed from source vs. when it was installed through apt-get.
A developer that worked for me did exactly this a few years ago, only instead of ringing numbers he sent them overcharged SMS messages. I had to call up every single affected customer and explain to them why they had just received 50 SMS messages that cost them $5 a pop. After that I of course refunded the money - only problem was that the SMS gateway charges 40% on each transaction, which I couldn't get back.
Very expensive mistake.
For anyone not already aware of it, I recommend checking out Git Flow. It's a set of git extensions that standardize the git workflow:
It is so useful to have very similar setups in staging and production.
In particular, I really try to avoid having a different architecture (eg: 32bits vs 64bits, or different versions of ubuntu, or passenger just in production etc). It makes it easier to catch issues earlier.
Also, not to pimp my own stuff, but I wrote a thing about generating test data with Ruby some time ago. I've used this strategy a number of times and it works really well: http://larrywright.me/blog/articles/215-generating-realistic...
It is virtually impossible to understate how much using source control improves software development.
Shouldn't that be "overstate"?
So now we finally know patio11's grand scheme!
But seriously, thanks for the writeup. I am using the lazy man's version control (Dropbox... ;-) ), but I definitely need to more to Git ASAP. I guess before now the time spent learning and setting Git up was better spent doing something else (at least in my mind).
That's something worth of having as well.
Seems pretty nifty.
It's fine for a small startup to cater to small startups, but the big companies have big budgets, and eventually, you'll be making 80% of your money off of them, so learning how to deal with them can be helpful.
1. Big companies often have purchasing departments actually do the purchase. They are trained to expect discounts and the people in the purchasing department know a lot more about asking for discounts than they know about software, because that is their specialized role in the organization. If you politely tell them that you have one price for everyone, they'll still purchase, because the purchasing department ususally doesn't have the power to stop the purchase.
2. Those 80-question checklists usually come out of the following, typical corporate process:
* A team of people identifies a need for software
* The team meets to agree on everything they need
* The junior person on the team is tasked with evaluating 12 possible products to see which one is best
* That person makes up a spreadsheet and sends it to each of the vendors hoping that they will do his homework for him
* The vendors who have decent presales support or sales teams fill out the spreadsheets by marking everything as "Yes" or "Yes with a footnote" and get the deal.
This also explains the "multiple questions that can be answered from a website" -- it's a sign of a person who has been put in charge of evaluating multiple products, not a sign of a toxic customer.
3. Multiple contacts through multiple channels are usually the sign of multiple interested parties at the client site. You can't sell to big companies without touching multiple people. One of a salesperson's most important jobs is helping the customer themselves get organized and make a purchase. A good salesperson helps the person who wants your software navigate their own corporate purchasing politics.
Summary: while it's fine to turn away truly toxic customers, and you are welcome to decide that you'd rather sell to the starving startup founders on Y-combinator who would rather spend 2 hours scouring your website than deal with a salesperson, the corporate customers turn out to be remarkably price-insensitive, once they make a purchase they will keep paying you maintenance for years long after the product is not even in use, and they're just as likely to leave you alone as the small guys, but they do have "multiple stakeholders" and if you want to sell to them you need a process that matches their reality.
(Those certainly exist, though. Charge more, and they'll mostly inflict themselves on your competitors instead.)
I ended up referring him and his company to my worst sworn enemy competitor, haven't heard from him since.
One of the problems with that is that even jerks have friends. If you reject them, they'll tell those friends and you could lose even more customers.
In this case, when they were going to have to write a custom solution for this customer, it was definitely the way to go.
As a side note, my father asks for 'discounts' all the time. He almost never gets them, and doesn't act entitled when he doesn't, but it sometimes works. So he keeps doing it. I really have to start doing it myself to see what I get.
I have had experience of clearly being at fault also: twice I have let myself be talked into projects in tech areas where my experience was really thin, and within a short period of time, had to notify the two customers that I was not a good fit to their needs. I was very apologetic both times and obviously did not bill them, but they were out the time documenting the tasks for me.
I've found that people who email with no explanation or "sell" of their own but just immediate, terse requests like "What are your rates?" or "I need a copywriter. You available?" are typically NOT interested in finding the right person for themselves or their product; instead, they're looking to just outsource what they think they COULD do themselves, if only they had time/energy/desire.
People who know they're considering (hopefully carefully) how to add value to their product/life are the ones who will take the time to build trust from the beginning, will be honest about expectations, and are more likely to give the freedom and flexibility necessary to maintain a healthy working relationship over time.
And another example of toxic customers: people paying with Groupons.
The funny part about this one, is I always ask for a discount for no real reason. Even if I am only buying a single piece of software. Why, because it lets me know up front if a vendor is going to be flexible with large volume purchases and OEM arrangements.
Funny story, I was evaluating some screen capture software for OSX not too long ago for a client of mine. I was building a web app for them and part of the work flow for their content was screen capture. Anyway, I emailed a company that had a reputable product and basically told them that I had no need for the pro version, would not be using the pro version for any commercial work but that I would like to use the pro version to teach my daughter about video editing. I then asked if they would consider selling me the pro version at the basic software packages rate. I framed the story in this fashion for several reasons. I had just told the developer/owner that I would be using it for non-commercial and educational purposes both of which usually get some form of pricing plan that is below the commercial mark-up lack of having a plan to deal with either tells me that they do not have a competent pricing structure, and quite possibly that they lack a formal sales organization and negotiating deals later on would be difficult due to lack of attention to pricing structure for the various fringe purchasing needs. Dealing with companies that do not have flexible pricing policies can be difficult when you are dropping large purchases in which no one realistically pays full price per seat.
Anyways, point is be careful of putting earmarks on customers, this small developer lost a $75,000 purchase (what we set aside for a site license) for seats on his product due to the fact that he showed that he was not flexible in his pricing structure. Allowing me to purchase the pro version at the basic version price would have cost him nothing and given the purpose it was purchased under "non-commercial and educational" there was a need to reduce price to be competitive. Instead, I got a dismissive response that the basic version was good enough for my needs and that if I wanted the pro version I would have to pay full price. Needless to say, his competitor was very happy with the $75,000 purchase order.
I guess, long story short, bargain shoppers are not always bad, some people negotiate over what seem to be inconsequential amounts because rather than haggling over dollars they are finding out up front whether a relationship with your company will be tenable.
And in particular, if you're seeing people asking multiple questions that could answered from the website then there's probably something wrong with the site.
The moral is that he almost lost a sale, were it not for the other guy stepping in. The moral is that he should have asked to speak with someone else at the company to continue the selling process.
This guy almost blew it.
ASF : Apache Software Foundation
EC : Executive Committee
EE : Enterprise Edition
JCP : Java Community Process
JSR : Java Specification Request
JSPA : Java Specification Participation Agreement
SE : Standard Edition
TCK : Test Compatibility Kit
Having Apache on the EC (Executive Committee) strengthened Java by giving an official voice to the (large) open source Java community. This was useful for Java because Apache often agitated to make sure specifications were licensed under terms that are compatible with open source implementations. Open Source implementations have kept Java competitive with .NET in terms of price, and many specifications have grown out of open source Java projects.
The Eclipse organisation remains on the EC, so Oracle can point to them as a voice for open source. However, Eclipse is different to Apache in that it is primarily a pay-to-play organisation, whilst Apache is a meritocracy.
In terms of specifications themselves (JSRs), Apache will no longer automatically have a representative. Individual experts can still be invited, but Apache's withdrawal (as well as that of people like Doug Lea & Bob Lee) makes it less likely experts will want to serve on a JSR committee.
To that end, our representative has informed the JCP's Program Management Office of our resignation,effective immediately. As such, the ASF is removing all official representatives from anyand all JSRs. In addition, we will refuse any renewal of our JCP membership and, of course,our EC position.
Holy crap!That just sounds like Java is really bleeding now. Anyone knows how significant the real impact of leaving representatives on the JSRs is?
The Apache Software Foundation concludes that that JCP is not an open specification process - that Java specifications are proprietary technology that must be licensed directly from the spec lead under whatever terms the spec lead chooses
Huge loss for the JCP either way.
â€śThe question isn't who is going to let me; it's who is going to stop me.â€ť (Ayn Rand)
Zooming out. What are the biggest technologies being affected by this, and what are the alternatives available to the creators and developers of those technologies?
Would we end up in a situation where someone like Google would have to revamp their entire Android runtime?
Seriously, what did we actually think Oracle was going to do with Java? Get all open and community-minded and crap?
[There's also object oriented programming, class inheritance, polymorphism, algorithms, time complexity, discrete math, data structures, imperative programming, and a few other things I forgot the first time around. Lest we forget, we might take these for granted because we've been programming since we were $ARBITRARILY_YOUNG, but to most people these are just black magic. My girlfriend, a smart cookie, asked to see "how I made the phone ring" and, after I showed her the code that did that, told me it had never even occurred to her that every program she's ever seen was once a collection of special words placed in a particular order.]
After that, it was pretty much done, except for the marketing.
On the plus side: you can learn one or a few of these things at a time, and get more comfortable with how deep the rabbit hole goes as you go along. I coded my website in static HTML written in Notepad with no JS or CSS, crikey, only four years ago. (And my brain still recoils at how much better I'd have to get to do e.g. web scale work.)
About half the time, I feel humbled whenever I encounter some new technology.
The other half, I wonder why anyone bothered.
The trick is knowing which half is which.
For instance, terrible UIs on the web are just as common as terrible UIs in GUI applications. And making a cross-platform GUI application that looks good on all platforms requires familiarity with tools specific to each platform, which is much more involved than learning browser quirks.
The hardest thing about the web is probably how fast it moves, but that's also what makes it exciting.
The main challenge of embedded is that you are in charge of controlling and managing everything. The developer is closer to the hardware and the cost of things breaking is far higher because you cannot for one second forget about some part of the technology stack that's below you. Everything is suspect, and nothing can be ignored.
Fixing embedded systems in the field is freaking hard, so the quality of code matters is in a completely different dimension from what's on the web today. Now, I am not talking about Linksys router or your iPhone. That's just a fraction of "embedded" devices. I am talking about things that don't have a TCP/IP stack (or any connection to the outside world), don't have a GUI, and are installed at the contractor rate of $1,000/hr and must exist in the field for 10-20 years. There are millions of these devices shipping every month, and they are all around us.
Are you telling me these systems are easier to design than a webpage that can be twiddled with at your whim a million times a day?
Don't downvote just yet! Just so you know where I am coming from:
I am a product manager for a 100K LOC embedded stack that runs in 128K of flash and 8K of RAM. It's all C code, no OS, no toolkits, no MMUs, no garbage collection and no dynamic memory allocation. These devices get 15 years on a single battery and go inside your house. I've also had good exposure (not an expert) to the online technologies the author mentions. Yes, things may be tough to learn (I don't actually believe they are), but the web is a lot more forgiving of mistakes too.
The complexity of web development is not intrinsic to the problem, but an extrinsic reality imposed by widely differing implementations of a number of overengineered technologies.
- get familiar with HTML and css. That is, learn the basics, their purpose and how they interact.
- learn one of the prominent web languages for the server-side. Python, Ruby, PHP, etc. I used to recommend PHP as a first language because compared to other languages, it was ubiquitous amongst hosting providers. Nowadays, I recommend against, especially if you already have some programming experience. Python and Ruby also have a decent offering and they have the added benefit of a community that generally promotes better programming practices than PHP.
As you get comfortable with one field you can expand on others. After years playing in the server, I'm only now expanding my client side skills. Also, beyond technologies, other areas of interest that can expand your overall understanding and web expertise, are interface architecture, usability and various other optimizations. As you go, you'll stumble upon many.
To build a legit website:
We haven't even gotten past the front end. Learn good db design, code your middle tier. Choose or roll your own framework. TONS of work.
Once it works, go back and secure everything for the OWASP10 and other potential holes. Also make sure it will scale gracefully.
Maybe you should optimize your cacheing scheme? Maybe tweak your php config so it runs faster.
AGhghghsdhdshf%@!$^#$ it never ends!
We're still looking for X to do to front end web programming that Rails did for back end web programming.
Something along the lines of Cappuccino will help a lot. Then you're "only" left with the problems of UI/UX, scaling, security, A/B testing, big data and marketing.
I decided to do a switch from embedded to web development about a year and a half ago after being laid off. My paycheck is smaller but I now work on a whole new set of problems. After working about 10 years in embedded and everything around it, I felt that I needed a change. It was as if I was solving the same problems over and over. And don't get me started in the state of the tools. I remember thanking the heavens when we switched platforms to PowerPC and ELDK.
At first I did not know were to start in web development. But I did decide to concentrate on the back end quite early. At first I approached each technology separately, mostly because of my ignorance. For example, I saw that tomcat was very popular, so I decided to take a look into it. But I quickly realized that I needed a birds eye view of the whole web service stack and not its individual components. At least not yet.
I started to look into frameworks. After realizing that there are lots of those and that I learn about a new one almost every week, I had to narrow my search. I've been working and learning Groovy on Grails which is all based on the JVM since then. What sold it to me was the fact that Groovy is a language very similar to Python, which I know, and that Grails is a web framework that integrates all the necessary technologies to get a decent site up and running thanks in big part to the amount of plugins available for it.
Like grayhairmomma says, it's a humbling experience.
But you really should be grateful for that. If it were easy a large number of us would not be earning what we do because things that are easy tend to devalue quickly.
Remember when being able to write HTML would net you $80 / hour?
Ten or fifteen years from now, when web programming is 'easy' you just might long for the times when web programming was hard but you could basically name your price if you were competent at it.
Second, the lack of integration between the various technologies was surprising. I often knew what I wanted a particular page to do, and the solution was to learn a new technology, and then figure out how to shuffle data between the new technology and those technologies I was already using.
That said, now that I've got a working app, I think the learning curve was in some ways (though not all ways) less steep than the desktop. A couple of reasons for this, I think:
1) The communities share code prolifically. It is not that there is no code sharing going on in desktop development, but code sharing seems much more prevalent in web development. As a new web developer, this makes my job a lot easier not only because I can just plug in code, but also because I can read that code and learn from it.
2) You can get minimal results quite quickly, which is very encouraging. Again, you can get minimal results quickly on the desktop, but the standards are different on the web. In my experience, a desktop app needs a lot more to be minimally functional than a web app, probably because the level of complexity is different. Yes, web apps can be just as complex as desktop apps; but I think a minimally functional web app is in many ways less complex than a minimally functional desktop app. Just think about all the menus, help files, and other accoutrements you need to get a desktop app minimally functional; web apps can get away with less.
So, perhaps web programming is hard, but there are several ways travelling the path is made easier - maybe even easier than on the desktop.
I'm (slowly) trying to re-learn C/C++ after getting decent with Ruby and honestly it just hurts. Few things I do need speed or system access on this level. The verbosity is painful, and you need so much (ugly code) to do so little.
When you get deeper into the UX, things like A/B, optimizing load time, scaling the backend, etc, and that is where it becomes less tedious and the domain knowledge required is more respectable.
Web programming is popular because it drives the web. I don't necessarily find it an intuitive programming experience. This way of thinking is the biggest obstacle ahead of the likes of me (hackers for pleasure) for business success, i.e. primarily focusing on what's interesting from an engineering perspective. This approach is sure to fail in business because people always care about the end result. Technology is just a tool to get there.
I am constantly reminded of this by Louis CK http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1CZTLk-Gk
Still, Web Programming is fund. Having a server that answer requests is funny, for me. The author found Web Programming is hard, because it underestimated it.
Yes, it's a somewhat different skillset working with somewhat different software, but there's not that much difference.
Of course for a developer it's necessary to have some knowledge of html primarily, but no real need for deep knowledge. Not in my, somewhat limited, experience anyway.
It's something my fellow hard-core programmer friends will never understand. I love my job and what I do.
Web Development rules!
$cp file_from file_to
$ln -s link_from link_to
has a very similar effect to the cp command above. I haven't messed this up ever since.
strcat(target, source) strcpy(target, source)
cp source target
Hell, it's even the same argument order for git-clone.
Pretty much all command lines use "source destination" order.
Why is 'ln' confusing? Because people think of "linking" in a backwards way, it seems that if you're creating a link from A -> B, A is the source and B is the destination. But that's not the meaning of "source destination" that command lines expect
mv B A
cp B A
ln -s B A
B is the source, A is the destination. B is the source of the data, A is the destination for that data; the command will create 'A' (or modify it), that's why it's the destination.
For the link itself, B is the destination, but for the operation of creating the link, B is the source, and that's the meaning that's consistent with all other commands.
ln -s path1/files* path2/
ln -s path1/* .
Sometimes hardlinks are useful too. You don't always need -s
Edit: Why was this downvoted? I didn't see anyone else mention it until after my post and to me this was an easier way to remember the order than comparing it to "cp".
ln -s source fakename
You start with "ln -s A B" and realize you always make the mistake, so you force yourself to do the opposite of your natural instinct: "ln -s B A". It works until this becomes natural but you still think you always get it wrong, so start doing the opposite of your new natural: "ln -s A B". You'll now be very confused until you force yourself to learn it for good.
This happens to me all the time for various binary things.
I'm thinking like an IDE will pop up some help text when you begin typing a function name or a recognised special word. Why doesn't the standard sh (bash for me) give me similar help, as I type "ln" it could give me a pop-up with the possible completions and then as I get to "ln -s" it could remind me with "TARGET [NAME] // will create a file named NAME that is a soft link to TARGET, or use TARGET's name if NAME isn't specified". You get the picture.
In a pure text env the help could appear on the next line highlighted appropriately or could be to the right of the cursor or somesuch.
I'm hoping someone will say $CONSOLE does that already ...? Anyone?
cp original copy ln -s original link
mklink link_to link_from
* The arguments order is just the opposite of common sense. It has taken me years to really remember it, and I still have to think a little every time I use it.
* The default is to create hard link, which you almost never want. And if you do want them, you are probably doing it wrong. Making hard links is just asking for trouble.
I've read that Plan9 has somewhat corrected this whole problem. At least there is no ln command at all. Instead one uses bind, mount, and unmount. Of which bind is most similar to ln -s, but with arguments in reversed order.
ln -s new_link (onto) existing(chain)
Obviously the target isn't a chain but the association between links and chains is a strong one.
In other words I don't think of creating a link as creating something new _from_ something that already exists, I think of it as adding something new _to_ something that already exists.
ln -s target link_name
As other people have mentioned, thinking of it in terms of the files created (ala cp) has helped to learn the correct behavior. I think this is a case where some minor change in the documentation might help to avoid the whole problem.
Everyone prefers real to fake*
ln -s real fake
* Yes, I realise this isn't strictly true
"what you already know" being the existing file and the second part being the name of the link to the existing file.
I never got it wrong again.
(not "from"/"to", which is ambiguous)
ln -s file <== symlink
Always remember that. Pointing left. The symlink is pointing at the file.
It's kind of a dumb way to think of it, but it seems to work for me.
ln -s real fake
Not like that.
...because I met the `man` command.
 http://tweakers.net/nieuws/71259/politie-arresteert-16-jarig... dutch)
The most amusing thing is the comments section getting bent out of shape at the use of 'gentlemen' in the image as not being inclusive to females. Talk about a culture clash.
"I've got friends in low places."
 I agree, as noted by Nathan below, that this isn't helping Wikileaks' reputation any (despite, of course, WL having nothing to do with this). That's the problem with (and sometimes, benefit of) friends in low places -- no one ever accused them of being sophisticated.
 A related thought.... The system consisting of [ Person who leaks info + Wikileaks ] seems to be a modern instance of the Robin Hood archetype. Instead of "robbing from the rich to give to the poor," this system takes information from the powerful and gives it to the (relatively) powerless. Just as with Robin Hood, there's room for debate about the moral characteristics of this approach (particularly on the taking side). And just as with every Robin Hood reincarnation, this system is despised by modern aristocrats.
As I believe pg noted in an essay, during the time-setting of Robin Hood, wealth was nearly a zero-sum game. Today, wealth is not zero-sum, but power still is -- making this archetype all the more fitting.
Because of this action, Now I can't make money and support my family.
Aside from your personal feelings, what are the odds I blame Visa, and what are the odds I blame Wikileaks? All of a sudden Visa doesn't work, MasterCard doesn't work, some sites can't be accessed, sometimes the net is slower than it should, etc.
Maybe I'm smoking crack, but from where I sit, the more hackers thrash out over WL, the more ticked millions of people are going to become at both Wikileaks and the hackers involved.
This is a very sad development. People of all opinions need to take an active hand in trying to settle this down as quickly as possible. This is no good for anybody. No good can come from this.
EDIT: If you want to support the idea of leaking to fix governments (and not the massive attack of government nodes through information overload), which I do, then WL needs a standard of conduct: what it will and will not publish. It needs a standard of acceptable behavior: what cyber protests are in line with it's mission and what protests are not.
Without these things, I can't support WL, they're going to lose track of their message and the larger media narrative, and they are going spectacularly shoot themselves and the rest of us in the foot. This is becoming dangerously nihilistic.
I know this is a very meta idea, and its extremely easy to break this down to the component entities (Visa corporation, thousands of individuals, etc). But under the meta concept, wouldn't that be like individual t-cells talking to each other?
V for Vendetta.
A client of mine a couple of years ago selling personal protection equipment (smoke & hazmat masks, mostly). They were based out of Australia and selling globally. Apparently they breached some US advertising restriction with one of their products (disposable hygienic suit) by having the words bird flu in the description.
Simultaneously to contacting (apparently they tried to contact earlier during US work hours), they contacted paypal and had the account shut down entirely. The US was never a major market so they put a big red sign on the product page: "Not for Sale in the USA." Getting paypal back online took weeks. Whatever department shut them down was not concerned with reversing the damage and paypal seemed like they knew which side to stay on.
Basically, paypal (and apparently visa & mastercard) is the on/off switch that various players within the US government can use. It does not take a high level one off phone call. This is an issue.
And I am saying this even though I hate DDos viscerally, my business was a victim of such an attack. But I have to say, as long as no one gets killed or injured this is a legitimate form of protest.
For the attackers, instead of positioning the DDOS attack as revenge, you should give them as an easy-out. Stop blocking wikileaks and we'll stop the DDOS. Since Visa/Mastercard are loosing millions of dollars for each hour they are down, it would turn the issue into a simple business decision and they could change their position without losing face.
Suddenly corporate powers don't seem as strong. It's amazing how vulnerable something man made is.
Please continue the DDOS until they bankrupt.
Are they using the latest bunch of 'best-practices' to take down a site? (e.g. slowloris, UDP flooding, DNS or TCP amplification, TCP SYN attacks, whatever is flavour of the month)
With all the fluff and the bluster being written about them I haven't seen a good technical analysis so I'd love to hear any info you might have.
The answer is simple: People get fucking pissed when they can't spend their money where they want to.
And it holds throughout history.
1) It promotes freedom of speech and taking action as a community to promote change.
2) It is completely illegal which goes against the laws and freedoms they are trying to promote.
Right Idea - Wrong Method
edit: up for me, at least.
I'd imagine all their transaction processing happens elsewhere.
The point is that coordinated attack by terrorists or plain old criminals can cripple the entire world's economy and there is no easy and effective way to prevent it.
We do need to think about how internet can be re-organized to be 100% distributed system to prevent this of happening again.
Just use the full path "http://www.paypal.com or "https://www.paypal.com
We took down Chevron by spray painting over one of the signs at a gas Station. CHEVRON IS DOWN!!!!!
Has anyone started a non-violent protest (offline or digitally) for WikiLeaks?
EDIT: Rethinking my statement on DDoS as violent. I am still interested in knowing if there are other non-DDoS protests surrounding WikiLeaks.
Turns out that DDoS is a dime a dozen today, they don't necessarily mean anything.
I'm just saying, if you wanted to completely discredit an organization what's the fastest way to go about doing so?
Step 1: Manufacture accusations against it's founder for which there is no defence, where the individual is guilty before a trial even begins. Oh, I don't know, how about accusing a man of a sex crime? (Especially a funny looking foreign one!)
Step 2: Manufacture scary "hackers" who do scary "hacker" things. Hide your children!
Step 3: Let CNN and Fox do what they're paid to do. Spin and spin and spin.
I would love to use this for a number of things I'm involved with, but I am surprised by the package that is offered.
I'm not saying that what they offer (1 year of 350 GB for $800) is not worth the price, but I am disappointed that there isn't a smaller package.
My needs for this kind of thing are more like 10-20GB. The team features are very attractive, but there's no way I am going to sign up for a package that large.
I'm sure Dropbox has put a lot of thought into the decision though. I'm very curious about where they are going with this and if they will ever offer a smaller team account.
Personally I'd love to see a team account somewhere around $10 a month for 10 GB and 5 users. Basically same price as their Pro 50 individual account, but with 5 users and 1/5th of the capacity.
As I understand it (and perhaps I'm wrong), your dropbox password is not your encryption key. The fact that I can change my password and then still have instant access to all of my data (ie - it is not batch re-encrypted with new key) all but confirms this, correct? If that's the case, then it implies that, somewhere on their servers, they store an encryption key for each user (or gasp a single encryption key for all users).
If that's the case and someone is able to access those keys (employee, breakin, etc.), then they can decrypt the data for any user.
If this is all true, then this makes the service too risky (for me) for anything that could be considered medium to high security. I'd prefer it if the good folks at dropbox offer me the option to provide my own encryption key that is only known to me and is provided by me each time I want to gain access to the dropbox files.
In fact, given that Dropbox Pro 50 is $100/user/year and this scales up at $125/user/year, Dropbox Pro 50 remains cheaper forever. So the only reason to upgrade to this is if you need more than 50GB of team storage.
Bad pricing for startups.
The best encryption doesn't help (me as a user) if I'm not the one in control of it. And even if I would fully trust Dropbox this does not help, as Dropbox must still surrender the data if, e.g., requested by law enforcement (which would not be an issue if the data were encrypted on the client, so that the user is the only one able to decrypt it).
Using software like encfs inside a Dropbox container does not help either. Once I start hacking around on such solutions it's easier to just use a service with client-side encryption. So if anyone from Dropbox is reading this: Consider this as a "feature request". I absolutely love the way how Dropbox works, but right now I don't really use it due to this security issue.
Value + convenience > Consequences of being caught
This concept is great - and no doubt you've thought about what I'm about to suggest. But how about an on-site managed solution? These IT departments simply aren't allowed to put stuff in the cloud!
Remember, there's pretty much ubiquitous hate all-round for Sharepoint.
1) reliable and relatively secure backups
2) access over multiple computers, networks, devices
i only wish they had remembered the "low cost" part when adding the new functionality because at that price point it's better for me to just set up X number of s3 buckets and assign users/roles to each bucket and let them mount the drive via transmit 4 or sign up for jungledisk. yes, not as eloquent but it'll work for our needs.
Is it possible to link a computer to both a personal and a team account?
They never got back to me......
I'd like a small team version, that would be pretty sweet. 50GB would suffice.
I was really excited until I hit the pricing page. Should so a small biz edition at $25-$50 per month for 3-4 people.
Is this classification widely used in the US ? I'm in France and only saw that with psychologically-savvy consultants.
I think the quality of stories on HN is pretty good. What I'd much prefer to see any amount of attention given to is things like:
1) Let me take back a vote. Particularly on mobile, I misclick those tiny arrows a lot.
2) Let me comment inline. Having other comments, besides the parent around for examination while commenting would probably help overall comment quality.
4) Support someone making an app, or commission one. As far as I can tell, the current HN apps are all kind of buggy and have little updating. There are lots of young neophytes who'd love to work on this, particularly if sanctioned, and a funded effort would lead to a better product.
These basic UI improvements don't even seem to be on the radar. Also, I'll add, the story-killing on this site is pretty heavy-handed, yet capricious. Same with the title-editing. What constitutes a "hacker-centric" story changes with the mood of the moderators, and the tendency to just change each title to the original headline is misguided. I also think that the special privileges given to YC companies corrupts the whole system.
If there were any other community like this, people would be driven away by the neglected UI and the Star Chamber that governs the content. But there isn't, so there's no pressure to do anything but midnight HN science experiments. I should just pray for some competition I guess...
pg, I'm sure you considered this problem; could you talk a bit about your thinking behind this filter?
I suppose there are some out there that would like to know an individual user's karma as a quick indicator of worthiness for X. Aside from this I'd be thrilled to see the number games and measuring sticks go away.
http://news.ycombinator.com/over?points=489 (489) doesn't see a thread with 490 points, but http://news.ycombinator.com/over?points=484 (484) does. Caching? Rounding? Thread in question: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1990498
Still, awesome, many thanks! Especially because it drags up a bunch of good-but-older entries that I may have missed.
pg â€" care to share any traffic data?
For your view only, it hides the karma in the top right, and hides the number of points next to each article and comment.
I, personally, find karma to be a distraction...I'm not afraid to admit that I subconsciously check my karma score every time I log in, and very occasionally catch myself "karma whoring"...that is, writing comments or submitting articles in a way that will improve my karma, instead of concentrating on writing something intelligent (yes, they should be the same, but they're not).
Of course, adding another nav element gets tricky. How many nav links do you need before you start culling or redesigning? FWIW, it seems that grouping nav into 2 sections might be useful. One section would be focused on sorting the stream (top, new, popular). The other section would be focused on filtering the stream (threads, comments, ask, jobs). "Submit" is more of an action than a filter or sort, and might be better positioned as a control outside of the nav.
The last 4 entries are duplicated.
Maybe the top menu should be Hacker News new 100+ searchterm best active bestcomments etc.
EDIT: Why the downvotes?
The very highly upvoted articles seem more likely to be trendy and/or sensational.
One thing the author doesn't really touch on, though, is the acquisitions that would appear to be directed right at remedying these problems. QNX has already been integrated into the Playbook, and by all appearances it's destined for BlackBerries, where hopefully it will sport things like a non-ludicrous contacts list API. The acquisition earlier this month of Swedish UI design firm TAT shows they understand that need, and could actually be a huge turnaround if TAT is actually given enough latitude within the company.
When has Blackberry ever really dared to cannibalize itself?
How is that any kind of rebuttal? How does saying that it was inevitable Android would eat up a bunch of market share hand-wave away the fact that it was really bad for RIM's situation that it happened?
>> "Yes, RIM's not good at sexy marketing, but it has always been that way."
Again with the rebuttals that don't actually make a point that helps RIM's case. The fact that RIM has always been poor at marketing doesn't somehow make it OK. Especially since now, as pointed out above, Android is eating up share. RIM's inability to market is becoming more of a liability. Saying "gee, it's always been that way" does not legitimately hand-wave the issue away.
Saying that the criticisms against RIM are "superficial and petty" and offering those kinds of nonsense counterarguments against them drove me up the wall.
If that is true, why doesn't the Linux desktop have the unit lead? I mean its free, installable on everything, and easily obtainable. This kinda of reasoning simply does not hold. There a loads of reasons why Android is doing well, but I don't think that being free is necessarily one of them.
[Edit: I should note that other than that one line, I thought his analysis was excellent.]
FWIW, when I was looking into mobile support for a start-up I'm involved with, using Blackberries was the obvious choice: business focus, we all prefer keyboards to touch screens, etc. Unfortunately, after much time looking through RIM's web site trying to figure out which of the various centralised IT systems we're setting up could easily be hooked into Blackberries for mobile access, I had gone nowhere. Their web site is full of buzzword bovine excrement, but it told me little or nothing about what sorts of protocols were supported for e-mail, calendaring, etc. They kept mentioning integration with a couple of big name tools like Exchange Server, which might be helpful for larger and more established businesses that use that kind of tool, but the fact is, we're a start-up on a budget and we don't. We're also a start-up with finite time to consider our options for infrastructure stuff like phones that don't actually make a product we can sell, and RIM's time expired before I had even scratched the surface of knowing what I needed to know.
All the older BlackBerry users I know have switched to iPhone/Android, and at most carry their BB as a secondary, mandated work phone. One friend complained that "it's like they took an old desktop pc and just decided to shrink all the icons".
I hope RIM can pull it together but it doesn't sound too healthy.
In the App driven world, BB development cycles tend to run 1.5-2x longer than iOS and Android because of the inconsistencies, even for seasoned devs, at least at my last company.
BB will die because nobody will develop for it.
It's clear that HTC and Apple are taking off. Nokia's peak was around 2000, with a second (dead cat bounce) at the end of 2007. RIM's peak was 2008 - and that correlates with my experiences.
>it seems to have lost the ability to create great products.
yep, that's natural in such an environment. Pundits can discuss various small details of marketing, product, leadership ... It all just noise. Once the rot has spread through the company ... Everybody who worked in similarly failed companies can recognize the symptoms.
(Disclaimer: I'm a former RIM employee.)
I wonder if all these very public proclamations are going to shift people's attitude towards taxes? Most people think of the government as wasteful, inefficient, incompetent, and corrupt to more or less degrees, and I know I'd prefer to see money allocated by smart people like Gates, Buffet, Zuckerberg than by politicians who need to keep constituents happy and win votes.
I committed a while back to giving 10% of my income to charity henceforth, probably for my whole life. I know I've felt much better when I raised money for St. Jude's or Grand Ormond Street children's hospitals than when I wrote a check to the IRS to fund the latest special interest-fueled debacle.
There's a "the evil rich are against us" narrative in movies and stories a lot, but I wonder if the perception will start to change when all the good from these endeavors is realized. I think it's quite likely that smart people allocating resources intelligently will do 10x, 20x, 50x more good with the money than a politician possibly could.
"I want to leave enough money to my children that they can do anything, but no so much that they will do nothing".
It would be wonderful to see some of SV's glitterati create more for-profit investment networks (bigger than Kiva, smaller than VC (...YC?)) in other hungry markets.
Kudos to Mark for committing to this. If he applies his product-brilliance to how he goes about it I'm sure he will do wonderful things.
(Alexis this has your name written all over it BTW ;)
It's ultimately a socially lauded thing to do that divorces the donor from any ultimate responsibility for the amount of "greater good" done with the funds. I think they do it out of fear that they were a lucky, one-hit wonder... and out of low self-esteem or fear of the angry mob.
YC is a great example of a way to use wealth to make a real difference. PG uses his acumen to help a lot more people level up. This multiplies wealth. Spending it on charities simply redistributes it.
It makes me very pessimistic to see that the world's wealthiest people feel the need simply to pledge the money away, and no need to risk total failure by going out on a limb to do something bigger than whatever got them there.
What if Bill Gates tried some long shot idea and it flopped? What if Zuckerberg or Case did? That would take real courage. This pledge nonsense reminds me of the self-satisfied smirks people emit when publicly putting money into the collection basket in a church. Why isn't one of these rich guys going to bat for Wikileaks? (Probably because it feels a lot better to be praised all the time for being such a great person by all the sycophants trying to get you to write a check!)
I'd pledge if I had any hugely significant sum like the others in the pledge, but alas.
But wouldn't it be amusing if Facebook were to go the way of preceding social networks, and leave the "world's youngest billionaire" looking a little silly for pledging a fortune that never materialized?
But I wonder why more ridiculously wealthy entrepreneurs don't, ya know, preneur? Especially in the nonprofit "make a difference space".
A billion dollars to charity is cool. You know what's really cool? A billion dollars towards a celebrity billionaire-spearheaded do-good project. (Or 1 million dollars each towards 1000 projects, etc.)
Maybe I'm missing something, and I'm certainly no billionaire, so I probably am. But if I were a billionaire, I'd be more interested in angel investing (in promising, impactful projects) and my bringing my own ideas to life.
But I digress. Bravo to the billionaires. Really, this is awesome.
That's a story about the eight philanthropies Thiel is funding, which are much more oriented along the lines of "give a man the plans for a new fishing machine" than traditional philanthropy.
"The pledge does not involve pooling money or supporting a particular set of causes or organizations. The pledge asks only that the individual give the majority of their wealth to philanthropic causes or charitable organizations either before or after their death."
Interesting way to do this. I still don't really understand the need for a pledge of this magnitude, but at least they aren't pooling the money or soliciting for specific causes.
That being said, I still think Zuck is far too young to make such a strong commitment.
These guys all have around the same net worth as Zuck, but much more liquidity. Sergey "don't be evil" Brin's absence from the list is a particularly curious... Anyone know what his philanthropic track record is like? Is it mostly through Google.org?
Another billionaire signs up for Gate's depopulation agenda.
Though I loathe the way he's built Facebook, I trust someone like Zuck with several billion more than I trust someone without the ability to earn it. Who is going to be managing this money, and where is it going? Is this just a pledge, with no strings attached?
The article isn't very forthcoming, and neither is the website: givingpledge.org
I don't understand what's happened with Gates, and though I admire his sentiment, I think putting pressure on young entrepreneurs, who already have thousands of voices in their heads, is a wrong move.
Call me callous, but this whole thing seems insane. Mark can do more good with his money by building new technologies than this fund could do manage multiple billions of dollars. It's rare that money on that scale is managed well.
<% ab_test('determine_the_best_page_with_numbers_to_back_you_up', ['page1', 'page2']) do |action_name| %> render :action => action_name <% end %>
You may find it a nice complement for the infographic
I'll keep them in mind the next time I'm choosing the colour scheme for a new site.
Plus, now I can see why Facebook is all blueish.
I think this page is far too cluttered.
I like less and less content on a landing page for anything other than a link aggregation(LA) site (HN/Reddit/etc)
I am at your place (if not said LA site) for a specific reason; get me to that reason asap.
More and more, I have less time and less attention..
Another great resource to build perfect landing page. Makes great reading to compare these two resources together
Get a check list to go through and design it however you (and your users) like it. If you're patio11, don't add any social media fluff.
Why not put the picture just at the top and write their 10 points in html ? They could have linked to their reference in context, the text would be easier to correct, possibly prettier and definitely more accessible. And I could adjust it to a decent font size. Aaaaaaaaaaaargh.
An item like that to spring in to existence without any record of a history leading up to it or a history of devices descending from it really makes you wonder whose imagination it sprang from and why it wasn't recognized that these principles had further application, or, alternatively could point to lots of stuff (including knowledge) getting lost.
What an impressive achievement. I think this is what we want all of our pet projects to be...
None of those have much discussion, but it's interesting just how many submissions there have been about the antikythera:
I've seen both the devices in the flesh, and they are little works of art. Not sure if he's planning on building any more.
"Astronomers and astrologers probably could not have afforded it. It could have been used as an education tool. Most likely it was built for wealthy Romans who had some interest in its features, probably not too different from early adopters who wanted to have the first iPhone with all the cool apps."
Related to that, the way it was posted on CNET added nothing to the information in the video and reminded me that I'm getting increasingly irked by reposting culture.
Hacker News is good because it links to original content with a snappy title and then space to discuss below. Which leads me to wonder why this item links to the CNET article and not straight to the youtube video?
Anyone know what Mr. Carol works on at Apple?
I have one of these. It's amazing.
I wonder if the Ancient Astronaut theories could actually hold water.
Then realize they figured that out over 2000 years ago.
I've often thought a similar distinction can be made in engineering, where the product is created for its own sake, for the sheer pleasure of seeing it exist. This is one of those. An amazing piece of work. Bravo.
It's been a pleasure to use thus far. Thank you, again, Colin.
Could you explain in layman's terms, where did the difficulties lie in using FreeBSD on EC2? Since I think I heard an announcement that FreeBSD 8 supports Xen domU, though I can't find any information to this effect now and FreeBSD Handbook doesn't mention it either: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/vi...
Looks like I can't use any of the Community AMIs on Spot Instances at the moment.
Update: Yes, I can run ami-c01aeca9 on us-east as a Spot Instance! Though any other Community AMI I tried (e.g. Turnkey Linux AMIs) refused to work for me. Any comment on this is still welcome.
csup -L 2 -h cvsup.FreeBSD.org /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile
looking forward to seeing stable on here
Joel is such an enjoyable author to read that it really doesn't matter what he's writing about. He could be writing about some random Distributed Version Control system you have no intention of using (and he has) and you could still be pretty sure you'd be in for a pleasant 15 minutes.
I hope somebody can convince the guy to put stuff like this up on JoelOnSoftware. I mean sure, somebody might accuse him of blogging again (god forbid), but selfishly it would be nice not to have to rely on HackerNews to find little gems like this for me.
Simple rule: if you're the smartest person in the room, go look for a room with smarter people in it.
And I bet the chairs they give you at that company are awesome.
On one of those occasions where their crowd was full of freshman girls who were really looking forward to getting wasted and laid that night, in drunken stupor Ashton heard Wayne calling out to him. He hasn't seen Wayne since he joined the Army 2 years ago. Man it was good to see him again, he's the kind of buddy who'd get in a fight for you without asking a single question. Wayne knows what's up, Ashton thought to himself as they talked about Wikileaks and f__king sh__ up. Giggly girls just kept interrupting his conversation and, irritated, he asked one of them if she would give away a government secret if all it was doing was covering someone's ass for raping some 9 year old dancing boys in Afghanistan. Janice just clammed up and some of her ditsiness immediately disappeared. Not having much to say, feeling put on the spot, a bit shamed and a bit embarassed, she remembered him well that night, but that's another story.
Wayne and Ashton went to Bobbie's Diner to sober up with some greasy burgers and shoot the sh_t. Soon enough they weren't talking about tits, even though Janice had a really nice pair... Wayne kept telling him how much of cool stuff the military really does and how he could hook him up. Man, Wayne knows what's up, he thought to himself. Besides, if it came to working with guys like Wayne or the dweebs in San Francisco, it was a no brainer....
That's at least how Ashton thought about things back then... but then again, he was only 20. Nowadays he spends his time working for DISA on new worms. Everyone needs a botnet nowadays, even the government. It's really cool work, he learned a lot. But he knows damn well that's something he's never going to be able to talk about. At least Wayne gets to post bullshit on Twitter as th3j3st3r, he thinks to himself. His $80k salary is pretty damn good, and even his Mom is better, she dumped that dickwad. Though she is really getting old, all that alcohol just turned har brain to mush and she sometimes doesn't make sense. Maybe it'd be better he went to Silicon Valley, but then, just glancing over at the picture of him, Janice and their adorable 3 year old made him say "fuck no!" loud enough that his officemate looked up at him with that "dude, are you allright?" look.. He would've never met Jen and would probably still be chasing money like a wannabe pornstar in Los Angeles...
This strategy is extremely reliable. I have seen it used successfully at every company I've ever worked at, large and small, in multiple industries.
Another approach is to develop an internal professional ethic and pursue it irrespective of office politics. It's not as good for career stability but you sleep better.
"Write code that people use, and ship it."
Was there anything else?
My favourite quote.
I guess being on the other side of the table - a merchant - I resent the whole 'rewards' racket. A) I end up getting charged more as a merchant, and I can't not accept your card. B) It's encouraged a culture of chasing after rewards that often aren't really something you need or end up being hard to use for most people (airline miles).
Yes, there are a few people who can really 'make out' (like this guy) but in the end this is mostly just another way for banks to make extra profits off people's greed ('something for nothing').
"If I were to pay for this adventure with cash and book individual flights, it would cost almost $6,000"
I'm guessing there was a lot more than $6k spent on 'stuff' to get this.
But, he still got a great deal using the OneWorld Awards program and it's definitely a great option for those who have the free time to do this.
As far as rewards go, amazon's reward card gives a good return without cognitive effort.
It'll help you get bonus miles for flights you're doing anyway, and AA is actually not a bad airline when you have decent status with them.
"I'm not kidding when I say that I spent probably more than 24 total hours in the past three weeks having a blast on this thing creating itineraries, checking mileage, and figuring out where the heck I could go without going over the limit."
In truth, this trip cost well in excess of $418 due to the other purchases and time tie-ins involved.
I'm all for leveraging advantages, but there's leveraging, and then there's outright "gaming". The former can yield value when you factor in your time & attention, reasonable workflow safety margins, and compliance with spirit of a policy. The latter is merely a mental exercise to optimize a series of transactions around a single parameter, in this case the present dollar cost, to the complete exclusion of externalities.
At least he got some follow-on web traffic for his efforts.
Sure, it requires twice as many miles, but if you're going to be flying multiple transcontinental flights, first class is nothing to scoff at. The total cash value of that many first class flights is going to be far north of $100k, so in some sense you're also getting more value out of it.
It was all possible until there was a crack down. This guy essentially did just that.
130,000 American Airline miles 105,000 British Airways Miles 40,000 Starwood Preferred Guest points 25,000 American Express points
Having said that, I admire his sense of adventure to just pull-up stops from his life and travel the world for 9 months. It is something I really need to get around to myself.
"The worst thing to post or upvote is something that's intensely but shallowly interesting."
Frankly, I think this happens way too much. Any post about Zuckerberg, Assange, Arrington, and others probably gets way more upvotes than necessary. While they have definitely created interesting things, the product is probably more important than the person.
I am guilty of upvoting it. Five seconds of thinking before upvoting would have prevented me from doing so - the linked comment just doesn't support the headline and Microsoft being hostile/oblivious to open standards isn't such big news anyway.
My point is that maybe we should be able to cancel upvotes. This would give upvoters the chance to read the comments (shallow stories usually have some comments pointing out that they are not that interesting) get convinced that they made a mistake and fix it.
Well, I understand that this might not be as simple as decreasing the counter. I suspect that there might be some impact on the ranking algorithm and probably a dozen things I haven't thought about. Still it might be worth it.
Where there are no bright lines, your side of the road becomes mine. Rudeness banned (mostly). Condescension, upvoted. Dumb, downvoted. Groupthink, upvoted.
My favorite condescension indicator: Post that include the sentence "Sigh."
F.ex. I found the 7 comments and a brief appearance on a thoughtful article like the "Tracking all releases by Etsy"  disappointing. That would have been a great discussion, we all together didn't have.
: http://codeascraft.etsy.com/2010/12/08/track-every-release/(Couldn't find the HN article anymore)
Someone who wants to be a troll isn't going to be discouraged by a few words in the welcome page. That type of user isn't likely to even read the page in the first place.
On the other hand, that's not the point of a welcome page either. It's to welcome those people that do want to be a friendly new user. However, then I read HN's hypothesis about popular community sites declining in quality, the first thing that went through my mind was 'Oh no, how does HN solve that?'
HN has obviously been successful at it so far. Maybe it's the utilitarian nature of the site. Perhaps HN's biggest benefit here is its name. The subject matter might not be limited to 'hacking', but the thought lingers in people's head when they hear it, and probably keeps a good number of people at bay who would otherwise post the latest Justin Bieber gossip.
HN approach to comments in a nutshell!
Edit: Or at least make it invite-only.
"Well the marginal cost of a copy of [some digital good] is 0 so it isn't stealing!"
That argument is actually completly irrelevant.
I took a train the other night, and there were only 2 people in my whole car. The previous week it was packed. Both times I had to buy a ticket at the same price.
If you don't see what that has to do with pirating music (or software, or movies, or TV), then you don't really understand economics.
Everyone compares it to widgets where there is some fixed cost and some marginal cost, and suddenly the marginal cost is 0 so we should be able to have it for free right? Right?
Wrong. The train has 0 marginal costs, and all fixed costs. Whether that train is empty or full, they pay for the conductor, the engineer, the maitanence and the gas. But you are expected to pay for your ride whether you are 1/1000th of the total population on the train or 1/20th. And if you don't pay, you are breaking the law. Stealing services.
Digital goods are things with a high fixed costs (software developers, authors, directors, actors etc) and 0 marginal costs. There are plenty of other things out there with the same economic model and you are expected to pay for all of them. The only difference is that it is far easier to steal from content creators than service providers.
So please correct everyone you see making that arguement. The fact that copying the music costs nothing really doesn't matter. It comes down to dividing the fixed costs by a certain amount of customers, or there simply won't be content creators anymore. Maybe the songs need to be 2 cents each, I don't know, but the fact is there are high fixed costs and they need to be covered somehow by someone. The lack of marginal cost just doesn't matter.
It also doesn't help that our intellectual property laws have a lot of inconsistencies. If I steal your ideas for a startup, that's ok unless you have patented technology. But if I make a copy of something that I own and share it with a friend, that's illegal.
Up until now there had never been a way to take a material possession and duplicate it at essentially no cost. I think that we have a long way to go before we develop strong cultural norms on how to deal with intellectual property.
Not condoning piracy, but simply an observation. (I'm skeptical that people who pirate the e-books would necessarily otherwise purchase them, so I'm always uncertain about estimates of "losses" like in this article. Many times someone will download it to just check it out, similar to flipping through it in a bookstore, which you don't have to pay for.)
The sad fact is that piracy is only getting worse. Even when you can get a song for 99 cents with no DRM or restrictions, music piracy is still rampant. I'm waiting for the next set of excuses.
In '99, it was because music was too expensive and the artists were getting screwed (which is a funny excuse, because 1% of something is something, but 1% of 0 is 0). Later, it was because DRM made it too difficult to play music. This is why you don't negociate with criminals. They will just keep bleeding you dry. The music industry is learning this lesson at the expense of their profits.
Now there is a new generation of kids that feel entitled to music, software, and movies for free.
This is one of the main reasons why I no longer sell applications. I have converted them all to services. This way, there is no way someone can pirate it.
And so the progress of virtual goods has turned their producers into teachers. The consequences are still unknown.
I don't think he (the "pirat") has an idea of how much time has to be invested in the production of good books. I personally think that books are drastically undervalued and that people are not willing to pay enough for good books which has the consequence that they are either served well targeted bestsellers, which can be produced at that price, or junk. Big publishing companies and bestseller authors don't have that much of a problem selling their books at a lower price so that people are less inclined to download a pirated book.
EDIT: changed "everyone agrees its wrong" to "everyone agrees hypocrisy is wrong"
In order to thwart piracy, she refused to allow her latest novel to be released as an audiobook since the format is popular with file-sharers and also denied the publication of Russian and Chinese versions.
Isn't it like taping on the cover of the book: "Only for white"?
The same honeybees that are providing us with 1 in 3 meals every single friggin day! Maybe big-pharma is confident that it can feed the humanity - but I see it as an incredibly shortsighted strategy that WILL cause us our lives - before global warming or nukes - since we're apparently trying extremely hard to exterminate the little critters.
The timing seems incredible.
edit: Actually, now I look at your wiki it seems to be focused on the whole Bay Area while just claiming to be about the valley. This is wrong: San Francisco isn't part of SV and certainly the East Bay isn't either. (San Jose is debatable.) Now, while most of the early errors made in a wiki will get corrected eventually, giving it the wrong name is an uncorrectable error, so I'd recommend changing the name before you do anything else.
I know PG owns http://startupwiki.com, and has some longterm plans for it, but it'd be nice to see a easily rememberable centralized location for all this information. Somewhere down the line it could gain sponsorships in order to pay for itself, and (BFAD) become a centralized location for startups to lobby for things then benefit all of them (i.e. legislation, at least in the US)
EDIT: Also, for others looking where to start, take a peek at this page for a full list of pages that need to be created: http://svstartup.com/~svstartu/index.php?title=Special:Wante...
Hope you find the content useful.
Anybody know of similar resources for Seattle? I'm moving there inside of 6 weeks with a half-time telecommute job and I'm looking to get involved in the tech scene and find people to hack with.