bsuvc

In light of recent AI advancements, deciding not to buy a search engine seems like it might have been a good decision.

A lot is going to change in how search, and the associated business model, works in the next few years.

Context: P.T. Barnum, 1880

https://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/barnum/moneygetting/mone...

The example code is vey simplistic, so of course that linear code is more readable, but the idea doesn’t scale.

I think you have to consider things like reusability and unit-test-ability as well, and having all your code in a single function can make reasoning about it more difficult due to all the local variables in scope that you need to consider as possibly (maybe or maybe not) relevant to the block of code you’re reading.

That being said, when I look back on my younger, less experienced days, I often fell into the trap of over-refactoring perfectly fine linear code into something more modular, yet less maintainable due to all the jumping around. There is something to be said for leaving the code as you initially wrote it, because it is closer to how your mind was thinking at the time, and how a readers mind will also probably be interpreting the code as well. When you over-refactor, that can be lost.

So I guess in summary, this is one of those “programming is a craft” things, where experience helps you determine what is right in a situation.

So in other words:

People are tricked into thinking something improbable is more probable than it really is by coupling it with a separate, highly probable thing.

At first I thought this was just an obvious statistics thing, but it is psychological. You are distracted by the probable part of the combination and unless you think intentionally, are prone to make a mistake in how you perceive the combined probability.

And the ones they do lose are "difficult customers".

Not all customers are equal.

In the US, what you describe is often referred to as being an "independent contractor".

Also, it appears to never suggest an autocomplete containing the number 1776 either.

For example, if I type "July 4 177" it shows "July 4 1774" and "July 4 1775", but not "July 4 1776".

This obviously is intentional, but why? Searching for 1776 still produces results, but why censor the auto-complete?

I find if I type some other obviously controversial phrases, it auto-completes for them. (Edit: not that I think 1776 is controversial personally, but I am assuming someone at Google does)

It depends on your business, but I seem to recall Authorize.net works better with some "high risk" business types.

There is a list of business types that Stripe doesn't like to have as customers, some obvious, but some not so obvious.

https://stripe.com/legal/restricted-businesses

Yes. Yes I would.

It is clear there are some use cases where straw usage is a necessity.

I do wonder if that should just be something people use when they need it.

The analogy would be, some people use mobility scooters at the grocery store, but not everyone uses one, only the people who choose to them (presumably because they need it, but the point stands either way, need or want)

Got one and sippy cup was the thing to use, but yeah straws were also helpful for a while after graduating from the sippy cup.

Great point.

Now that you mention it, I did work with a person who had a condition that extremely affected his ability to move and yes, straw usage was essential for him.

Ah makes sense. I didn't think about that scenario.

I'm sure someone probably feels strongly about this, but I will ask anyway:

Do we as a society even need straws?

I never use a straw at home.

The only time I would consider wanting one would be for a milkshake maybe, due to its thickness making it hard to sip otherwise.

I am not anti-straw, just think it is sort of a weird thing for our society to use when I stop to think about it.

> Yet every close call or collision has been due to motorist impatience, inattention, and/or lawlessness.

This reminds me of how every driver thinks they are at least above average and most people think they are even an excellent driver.

I guess the same applies to cyclists.

Interesting window into the history that likely shaped Microsoft's view of customers for decades since then.

I'd say MS still probably has that attitude baked into their company, treating customers as adversaries that need to be protected against.

They are definitely not known for their customer service, but they ARE known for their complex licensing and sometimes heavy-handed enforcement, that I guess maybe one could draw a line back to this as the source.

It's kind of fun, but pretty difficult and I would like to have an option for more time.

Also, I'm not so sure about the scoring.

I got over 80% just painting solid color rectangles filling the entire width stacked top to bottom.

That is better than I got when I actually tried drawing the picture as accurately as I could.

Bootstrapping is a fine alternative to VC and more appropriate for many businesses.

But it isn't hostile to want a return on your investments, and investors are not operating as a charity to support the local economy, although that does incidentally happen as a result of investments.

TLDR: dilution is a thing and investor incentives are not always aligned with founder, when it comes to early exit opportunities.

---

But...

I don't think there are really a lot of opportunities to exit at $38m in the early stages of a startup, even if your valuation says it is possible on paper. There just isn't much of a market for companies at that stage of growth.

Imo, the more likely scenario is for a startup to either 1. fail to raise and run out of money, or 2. Become self-sustaining, but never successful enough to achieve a meaningful exit for the founders or investors, basically a "zombie" company that may never exit.

In the second case, it is the investors that get screwed, as the founder has made a nice lifestyle business out of their investment. I think most investors realize this is one of the outcomes though, so "screwed" is probably too harsh of a term to use to describe it.

And they will almost certainly be leetcoded once they interview for a full time position.

Question for those involved in hiring:

Do you have DEI metrics and objectives and if so, does that factor into the interview process and style?

I didn't say any of that.

No, Musk is the one doing the trolling.

Just look at the attention he is getting.

If you think Musk is somehow upset about this, you are wrong.

> customers’ applications that support the “login with Microsoft” functionality

That's a lot of corporate line-of-business applications though, right?

And it could end up being the worst part of this hack.

Is it really that bad for you, as long as it goes back down to the healthy range soon?

I have always noticed it spiking while cooking, but never worried about it because it wasn't sustained.

I already worry about enough things, so I have to draw the line somewhere I guess.

This submission is yet another attempt to steer HN towards political discussion.

There are enough other sites for doing that.

I think I agree with you, but to play devil's advocate:

> Which were not required

Sure they were not required by Ed, but they were required by other stakeholders who are responsible for testing and maintaining this system.

I agree though, it would be frustrating to get into this sort of "yak shaving" situation where you don't even care about all these other requirements that are being added.

Like I said in a sibling comment, this is really more of a communication problem on Ed's part, and maybe he could have neutralized all these problems with better communication.

That's a good point.

The urgency of this problem was not communicated broadly enough and the impact of the simple fix was not communicated back up the organization so that it could be prioritized correctly.

It seems like Ed is just being "helpless" and blaming the organization when maybe he could have raised the issue back up to the president saying "my 1 line of code fix to your problem is being blocked by these people. Can you help?"

This was a communication problem as much as anything.

It sucks when you say it like the title: "6 days to change 1 line of code",

But... The system improved in a few other ways:

1. The setting became configurable via the parameters table instead of being hard coded.

2. Auditing was introduced to track changes to that setting.

I'm not trying to defend bureaucracy, because I truly hate that aspect of large organizations, but just point out that additional value was created during those 6 days beyond what was originally set out to be achieved.

Incidentally, this is why you have to bake in a set amount of overhead into your estimates, and need to take this red tape into consideration if you do story pointing.

Yeah, you're probably right. I guess maybe I read the mood wrong on this.

It's a little sad to see the amount of cynicism and negativity here around quantum computing.

It's so early. To compare this to traditional computers, we are basically in the stage of a mainframe taking up an entire room. Where they are a novelty, not something every business has yet.

I'm sure there was a lot of skepticism from so-called "smart people" back then too.

Sure, maybe some PR people have over-hyped quantum computing for publicity, but that doesn't say anything about the future if the technology itself.