endymi0n

...to the point that (great) UX and wireframing tools like Balsamiq look crappy _on purpose_: https://balsamiq.com/wireframes/

Which all kinda makes sense, with the intuitive reasoning being: If you had time and money to sink into a pixel-perfect design, you're already one step beyond product-market fit, so creating a too good impression might not work in your favor.

Here in Germany, I'm seeing more and more emergency vehicles having their siren off by default in low to medium traffic situations (even in a large city like Berlin) and only activating it when they enter dangerous situations (like large crossings or passing red lights) or need space.

I don't know whether that's current regulation already, but I think it's a rather nice gesture and definitely reduces the noise background ever so slightly.

Couldn't this be addressed best by driving the heat on green energy and directly siphoning off the produced CO2 into either underground capture or even green fuels?

I'm still a bit at loss why Climeworks or Prometheus Fuels would pump ginormous amounts of normal air through their respective setups to extract the 0,0004% of CO2 instead of feeding from pure CO2 by industrial processes like this one.

It seems like an easy win on the low hanging fruit to me, and I think there's work on making that practical from Noya Labs: https://techcrunch.com/2021/02/24/noya-labs-turns-cooling-to...

Here‘s the deal: The mere mortal „stock package“ got pretty much worthless the day the „bridge financing“ (which actually was a down-round) got announced.

Recovering from a 70% layoff only happens once in a blue moon, and usually only when a founder led company that has already reached revenue and product-market fit makes a well executed hard cut that does an exceptional job at keeping and supporting the core team amd managing emotions.

In any other more chaotic situation, the product/emotion/revenue death spiral ensuing is usually impossible to stop.

Offering my own experiences as a counterpoint:

1. If the idea is any good, you‘ll quickly encounter others who are better funded and need to execute extremely well. „Build it and they will come“ has worked for the tiniest minority or orgs I‘ve worked with and for, it certainly hasn‘t for us.

2. If your original idea is well researched and partially proven or already sold before building, why pivot? We didn‘t regret to sink a tenth of our initial invest into a great domain and brand.

3. True that. If you can‘t put your business model into a one sentence elevator pitch that includes a real-world problem and its solution that someone will actually pay for, din‘t even start…

> Crypto will continue to fluctuate wildly as it always has.

Which is as much as an unfounded absolutism as stating the opposite. While there's not fundamental limit to what you're saying, there might be qualitative differences though going forward: I can still go into a store these days and buy tulip bulbs, it just doesn't cost me two salaries...

With fear of rejection from other people as one of my greatest anxiety drivers, I can relate a lot.

One of my favorite learnings about the topic recently though is that saying "yes", "maybe" or even just staying silent is effectively the same as saying "no", just in other dimensions: and vice versa.

Saying no to nuclear means saying yes to coal.

Saying yes to doing something I don't like because I don't want to offend someone also means saying no to being honest and enjoying myself.

Just embracing that the vast majority of decisions have the potential to offend — but that this offense is also not my own but the recipients' feeling, originating from _their_ belief systems that I have no control over — was immensely liberating to me.

It's true. I'm objectively more intelligent than my cofounder. He knows it, I know it. He's the far better manager than I am and grew to lead half the company, almost 5x more reports than me.

It's really all about empathy, structure, but first and foremost the ability to pass on the work to _someone else_ and make them succeed at it.

I tend to nerd snipe myself much more often because I like the technical challenges.

Totally honest question: WHY does everyone think it was cool? I can still remember running it in Uni on some of the prized workstations with everyone raving about it but never got the point about it.

Back then I was on Windows and everything I saw on Sun systems looked weird, laggy and just super obscure to me. The whole UI felt like a mix of enterprise and neckbeard charme despite being non-open. It did not seem to run none any of the things I cared about back then. Later on I remembered Sun mainly in context of their stewardship of Java which also didn't help connecting any good feelings to it.

So maybe in 2022 someone could enlighten me about what exactly was so cool about Sun?

Well, maybe. As in: sure, a lot of breathing techniques and sometimes even useful natural remedies are some of the oldest recorded ones if they are coming from "the east", but in the end that corpus of wisdom is mostly a spaghetti mess of helpful and harmful techniques that is really hard to disentangle from cultism, oogie-boogie and autocratic belief systems.

There's no shortage of stupidity in eastern "wisdom":

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/08/magazine/how-yoga-can-wre... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6790910/

I for one prefer the clean extraction (or parallel invention/construction, whatever your take on that is) of single techniques based on double-blind evidence instead of being told that I can't just do breathing exercises properly without also listening to the incoherent ramblings of a random guru:

https://www.wimhofmethod.com/science

Yep, the Wim Hof method was original research too, but that guy basically just said: I tried some things, these seem to work, here's the proof, take it or leave it. Goes on to break some records and just STFU's otherwise.

There is never a free market in health care.

> […] As I lie unconscious under a bus, I am in no position to shop for the best provider of ambulance services at the most reasonable price. All personal volition is lost. Whatever happens next, it will not be a market transaction.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chrisladd/2017/03/07/there-is-n...

True, who could possibly know they were dealing with an incredibly malicious, manipulative and unreliable dictator before Bucha? /s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_war_crimes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_web_brigades

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20...

There are sleep versions of customs as well. I originally got them for working at home with two kids in lockdown: the combo of Airpods Max, rain noise and custom earplugs is a godsend.

For sleep they weren‘t quite as good as they were too hard for situations when I was laying on that ear. I got new ones from the same molds with the softest silicone they had and these are better.

All in all, it was worth it for me. They clocked in at a third of my Airpods Max and while they don‘t make a big difference in sound to soft silicone, they are much less of a mess to remove and clean. I can pull them our in order to listen to someone and put them right back in.

Honestly, I'm astounded how good Apple got with it. And I say this at the risk of coming across like a fanboy which I'm definitely not. I'm very, _very_ rarely delighted by features that get pushed into my face, but the automatic categorization of "Moments" and unobtrusive integration into the UI is something I really enjoy a lot.

It really gets the mix incredibly well between editorial ideas (i.e. "Among the trees" with lots of very different adventures in the forest), machine learning aided curation (including cutting videos to cue scenes!) and overall format: Fitting, vibrant but non-annoying music in the background, the format isn't too short or too long. Plus, at the end you can choose between more pre-curated moments.

The privacy-preserving curation that just takes some background cycles on my mobile GPU while it's charging is the cherry on the cake and I think Apple really got a bullseye there.

Well, it depends on your viewpoint. Just today somebody celebrated a fusion Q of 0.005, while each year since many now Tesla‘s Autopilot pulls off more accident-less miles than humans.

Sure, it‘s apples to oranges, but for self-driving, we‘re solving the last (and obviously hardest) percent, while for fusion, we‘re still stuck solving the first.

To say it with the words of my first boss that stuck with me:

"Love it, change it or leave it. No amount of complaining will ever do anything else than paint you as a naysayer."

Was a hard pill to swallow, but my own experience proved me again and again he was spot on.

Have a look at the Silence S01 too, they have a quite different and interesting system that solves for more energy: The battery converts itself into a heavy trolley that you can just pull out, roll to any plug, charge it and put back again.

I seriously ponder getting one as it‘s a nice match for a city apartment with no charging ports.

Spot on. This is just the anti-trend to minimalism, which again was the anti-trend to what I grew up with:

https://www.cameronsworld.net/

(which was the anti-trend to the original, booooooring beginnings of hypertext)

'All grown-ups were once children... but only few of them remember it.' — Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

I've had the same thought. I've never seen it confirmed by anyone, but to me, a lot of the original design patterns were stopgap conventions to patch shortcomings in the languages of their time (mainly early Java).

Just look at the Visitor pattern. It's a convention to expose an "accept" method that can be "visited". That's pretty much what you'd do far easier and more naturally with functional programming these days, even in Java. Going in depth, you can see the same possibilities everywhere. "Proxy" should probably be a registerable middleware, etc. etc.

Then again, I might be biased. Design Patterns already let my BS detector go bonkers 15 years ago when I encountered them first, as as academization and complication of software by self-indulgent "enterprise programmers" that I couldn't ever see any advantages to (and these days, I feel enjoyably vindicated).

Funnily enough, in this way they were quite anti-academic, as they came from original research of the "Gang of Four" and I've never seen scientific proof they actually made anything better. I stand to be corrected though.

Beautiful. If computer science and physics had a child, this would be their Euler's Identiy.

> They are western centric, and unfortunately, in this current state of the web they're still essentially the authority on DNS.

I‘m curious to see your evidence on that or which future state you would see as a more fortunate one.

“Whoopee! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that’s a long one for me.”

“Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”

So you think it‘s better to use a search engine openly spewing propaganda than one that tries to curb it?

It sounds like the Putin fans who seem to like him „because he‘s a strong willed man who does not change his mind“ as if that was some kind of qualification.

Interesting, seems like the Russian „Firehose of Falsehoods“ model seemed to work pretty well on a sizeable demographic of even HN to make them distrust anything:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE198.html

I‘m not saying I‘m blindly following either sides‘ narrative, but to me there is a clear trustworthyness hierarchy between the narrative of a society where I can still freely read, discuss and criticize these obvious pieces of misinformation (while they stay on the record!) and a society that changes its own narrative every other day and where just mentioning the word „war“ can lock me up in jail for 15 years by now.

The issue with standards is that they only capture a very, very small part of the problem.

Let‘s look at the results: NASA probably uses some of the most rigorous development and testing methods in the world, but I‘d still rather trust my life to the flight control software of SpaceX who doesn‘t give a damn about education.

The banks losing data mentioned by OP are way more rigid in their hiring and certification standards than a Stripe for example. Who would you rather trust on security?

My point is: I’m all for better code, but Culture trumps certification and standards every single time.

Oh my.

First off, most people would disagree in the first place whether coding is a „craft“, a science or even an art. He‘s saying craft (which is taught by other craftsmen), but what he probably means with his certification is college/uni.

Now I‘ve seen some of the worst sins of coding ever done by CompSci „master crafters“, with PhDs producing the cherries on the cake, with Java classes having longer names than the 80 character line limit.

And I don‘t even mean the designed-by-engineers frontends with UX level „crime against humanity“ (hello, early Hadoop).

I mean actual backends where CompSci education should shine, but even very smart people don‘t grasp the inherent cumulated complexity of massive systems. Because creating complexity is what you learn at Uni, rarely removing it.

Log4J wasn‘t a bug. It wasn‘t a backdoor. It was working as specified.

Look, this stuff is hard, one way or the other. I don‘t think we need even more gatekeeping and cover-your-ass to keep out the smart people who fail at university because they challenge the status quo and an outdated curriculum.

This. I remember the day when I casually asked my cofounder, an amazing storyteller, how his day was.

He answered: „Awesome. I had 8 slides this morning. Now I have three.“

That day, something fundamentally clicked in me.

I learned that day that condensing and sharpening information towards a punchline is real, hard and meaningful work.

Or, as Mark Twain once said, “I didn’t have time to write you a short letter, so I wrote you a long one.”

Found this in a subthread and thought it was too relevant to just stay there: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30551252

This resonates a lot with me. Early on, I had a good mentor when going into a leadership position who basically told me: "Screw the biblical saying about the sick who need the doctors. Try to spend 80% of your time with the good ones. You'll have more fun and be more productive"

It sounded very harsh and emotionally wrong at the time, but I've learned the hard way that at least for the purpose of building a working team and business, he was spot on.

As a lead, I've learned my most precious resource is my time and attention and one thing I didn't realize until very recently is that I'm rewarding the high performers by spending it on them.

But negative attention is attention as well, and if my team gets the impression I'm rewarding the ones who don't pull their own weight with excessive nurturing and pampering, they will get demotivated and eventually move on.

This is still distinct from abandoning, as I try my best to give everyone an equal chance to get started. But I've regretted more than once investing heavily into employees who ended up quitting anyway over their perceived complaints.

Wanters will always find a way. Not-wanters will always find a reason.