m3mnoch

this is the same exact reason i use "amy" from ivona for my morning commute. as a non-brit, rather than frustratingly hard to understand, listening to her instead is totally dreamy...

that, and she doesn't stumble over names like "Abalamahalamatandra".

> In my opinion HTML/CSS/JavaScript is the best interface design technology ever invented

i thoroughly agree with this if you say "interface implementation technology" instead of "interface design technology". i also believe anyone who disagrees has never fully explored the various print/console/mobile/mfc/actionscript worlds. i mean... have you ever even USED something like pagemaker?

i'm happy to explain it to you in four easy steps.

first, look at this chart: http://www.searchmetrics.com/en/services/ranking-factors-201...

second, notice how all of the highest ranking seo factors are social.

third, google makes more money on search ads because it monetizes intent. you know what else monetizes well? recommendations.

fourth, owning both the recommendation data AND the ad data enables even better (aka more expensive) ad targeting.

i'm not really sure they're the same.

seems to me that whatsapp is more of an active "keeping in touch with friends" where facebook's forte is more of a passive "keeping in touch with friends". that would make them fairly harmonious in my book -- hence the autonomy.

heh. methinks a programmer who thinks programming is objective and not subjective has the equivalent professional experience in the field as a designer who doesn't know the difference between design and art so designs subjectively.

heh. i'd expect nothing less from zed. this comment makes me assume some of you youngsters don't know who he is.

from his site:

"Yes I say "fuck", and quite a lot of "bad words", mostly because it's funny to watch you shit your pants at them. It's not like you're going to give me a job so fuck it, I'll say fuck. fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck*

*Did I mention? fuck"

i think you're point is a bit off-the-mark, so i'm going to add a qualifier to the title to put you in the right direction.

"Flappy Bird is proof that no one knows what the audience wants..."

...in order to fully maximize revenue per employee.

ha! that's awesome!

> Ditto here :) I don't use Slackware these days I used to love that distro. Still miss it at times.

right? ...stupid redhat coming along and making it obselete!

man. i must be terrible at communicating.

> Same difference. 12% on 1 server is 12%. But if you have a dozen servers with the same 12% gain then it's still 12%. Such is the nature of percentages.

no. you said it yourself. if you save 12% on a server farm, you can drop out a server. with a single vps, you can't or else you go from one server to none. and, we're talking about self-hosting vs. shared hosting, we're talking about a single server and not an elastic cloud. so, 12% degraded perf? meh. 12,000% degraded perf? boom.

> I repeat, you do /NOT/ need to be root to edit a .htaccess file!

yessir. i understand that. i've been writing apache vhost files (tho, i think back then it was straight-up httpd.conf files and not vhosts - shrug whatever. my memory sucks.) since the late-nineties on slackware machines.

my security point:

1) shared hosting -- by default, you have the ability to tinker with .htaccess files and NOT httpd.conf. this means for it to be insecure, you have to explicitly do something silly with it. not just turn indexes on or off. (indexing security arguments not withstanding)

2) vps/managed/under-your-desk hosting -- this is where you can actually make changes to httpd.conf. but, you're responsible for the whole machine, not just apache configs. you have to secure the entire machine and its services from ssh to ftp (eek!) to security updates and everything in between.

ergo: if the answer to httpd.conf vs .htaccess is "httpd.conf gets more performance" and "httpd.conf has better security"...

i say the performance isn't relevant in the self-hosted, non-clustered model and you've probably got bigger security holes in your server to worry about than some .htaccess files in your htdocs directories owned by www-data.

does that make sense?

> I suspect you're not really understanding what those ab results are representing

ah. no, no. i'm not adequately explaining where i was going with that. lemme try again.

1) it's not 12% on a web farm. it's 12% on one server.

2) that 12% manifests in a slowly degrading experience. so, it takes 4 seconds to return during peak traffic instead of 3 and a half. meh. whatever.

therefore, if you get hit by something that will actually make a difference, it's not going to be within 12%. it's going to be like 12,000%. so, it's not going to make a whit of difference at that point whether you have httpd.conf or .htaccess.

>You have things completely backwards there

again, i'm not explaining myself well. i fully understand that, in theory, httpd.conf is more secure. i'm not talking about that.

if you have access to httpd.conf, you also probably have access to /etc/ssh/sshd_config -- did you configure that securely? does your server allow root logins? what about your mysql config? what about the latest security update to the distro?

i'm just saying, if you've got access to httpd.conf, you've got the whole server. that means you've probably got bigger fish to fry as to worrying about security than a pretty harmless, defaulted as secure, .htaccess file.

way back in the late 90s stone age of interactive ad agencies, we were doing our first really big gig for hp. it was a demo shipping out to retail stores showcasing one of their products -- a run of 30,000 stamped cd roms.

i was the one developing the macromedia director app running on the cd.

we were on-time.

we were ready to send them out the door.

it was awesome.

and then we tested the rom outside of our network...

in some far-off corner of code, i had baked in a hard reference to one of our file servers on our network for some streaming assets. the cd failed as soon as you put it in the drive due to that reference to the missing file.

by the time we discovered this, we'd already glass-mastered and stamped 30,000 discs to the tune of $40k or so. or, about $6k per employee. in a company that booked about $50k the previous year. where i worked for free for 9 months.

so, my line of code cost our little company the equivalent of almost all of our previous year's revenue -- not profit, but revenue.

we, of course, had to make the run again -- only this time at the emergency rush prices. and this time, we were running late.

we managed to book some time in the middle of the night at the stamping plant. it was 4am. i had a courier standing over my shoulder watching me run the final build again, this time without the dreaded line of code -- which broke other things i had to fix when i removed it -- before he could take it.

i finished testing. ejected the disc. handed it to the courier, who started running as he was placing it into its case. he drove like hell to make it to the airport where we counter-to-countered it on a 2-hour, 6am flight to vegas for stamping.

oh, and it almost got even worse from there. almost.

we didn't know if they would be able to stuff the cds into the packaging because this was an emergency run and they didn't have the people available.

so...

we were actually on our way to rent a uhaul which we calculated we could drive to vegas just in time for the stamping run to finish. from there, we would load the discs on their spindles, and 4 of us were going to sit in the back of the van, stuffing 30,000 discs while we drove the uhaul to palo alto. from vegas. yes, stuffing discs in the back of a traveling uhaul.

we even had the patio furniture from one of the employees yards already picked out to sit in while we were in the back of the truck.

luckily, the plant managed to squeeze in our packaging (at rush pricing, of course) and all we needed to do was have one of our guys take them as luggage on a later flight that day to the bay area instead.

as to a couple, big lessons learned?

1) i can honestly tell you, i've never, ever had a hard-coded, local network link in anything i've shipped since and never will again. always test off-network. especially these days with mobile apps and their on-off-network states.

2) a strong, non-finger-pointing team is where you need to be. i felt appropriately awful, but we handled it as a team and proceeded to grow that little company to about $40 million a year before a merger.

p.s. oh, and next time, remind me to tell you about the time i ran a database query on production that nuked the entire website for the publicly-traded software company which relied on -- wait for it -- the website to do all its commerce.

so, what you're saying here is that if you skip the ease and convenience of .htaccess files, you can get better performance?

as in, if you get slasdotted (ha! i'm old!) your site will stay up either way as long as you're getting less than 215 rps. and it goes down either way if you're getting more than 245 rps. that's a pretty tiny window in the grand scheme of things.

yeah... i'd rather my personal site be easier to maintain.

and, as to the security of it -- if you have access to the httpd.conf file, i GUARANTEE you've got bigger holes in your own hodge-podge, whole-system security than something like an .htaccess file on which you'd have to work really hard and explicitly make insecure.

just sayin'.

tldr: like most things in life, there is no "one correct answer". basically, the cheaper the property, the better idea it is to buy.

yes. this tool illustrates it perfectly. [http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/business/buy-rent-calcula...] it actually shows why the khan video is seriously flawed.

if you plug in the values he uses in the video: (which are stupid and no money manager in the world would tell you to buy a house like that)

  - $1,000,000 house
  - 25% down (all $250k?  really?)
  - 6% interest  (ouch...)
  - $3,000 a month in rent for 1600 square feet? (in the bay area!?!?  hahahahahah)

that, of course, adds up to a terrible loss of $200k after six years for buying.

now, let's change the numbers to something more reasonable.

  - $1,000,000 house. (1600 square foot house in the bay area)
  - 10% down.  (that's all you need and this leaves $150k for investment)
  - $4,500 a month in rent (according to zillow, that's what a 1600 square foot house rents for)
  - 5% interest is more realistic.

that is still a loss for the buyer, but it's $45k instead. plus, you haven't completely destroyed your cash flow and investment capital.

still bad tho, huh?

yeah. because buying a $1,000,000 house in an over-inflated area is dumb.

now, let's look at something where it actually makes sense.

- same house.

- cheaper area -- not everyone wants to live in the bay area.

from some real numbers on a house i actually own (tho, i don't live in it - we're renting it out)

  - $120,000 house.
  - 10% down.  (you have almost *ALL* of that fictional $250k left...)
  - 5% interest
  - $1200 a month in rent (again, zillow for that area)

that's a net win of $59k if you buy.

if i lived in the bay area and didn't need all my intangibles (like, putting in new countertops in my kitchen or adding solar panels if i wanted to), i would totally rent.

if i lived in kirkland? i'd sure as hell buy.

probably not since all the other rocks (many an order of magnitude smaller) are still in their same places.

indeed.

as a guy who's modeled and built economies for mmos, i can confidently say the more movement and activity in your economy, the healthier your economy is. consistent, steady growth and activity, rather than spikes (unbridled liquidity events) and valleys (accumulation stagnation), is the most desirable mode.

for a real world microcosm view, just look at the last six months of bitcoin activity. who on earth would consider that healthy?

no.

the music recording is the manifestation of the performance/service. so, not viable as a product.

cd players perform the service of playing the music. (aka automates the performance) totally viable as a product.

think of it like a many-to-one relationship. the "one" is what can be productized. the "many" cannot. scarcity is key for what can be economically considered product-viable.

playing fast and loose with formal definitions here, but basically because services, by their very nature, are scarce goods -- you are paying for someone's time. once you productize/automate that, it becomes non-scarce and the marginal cost falls through the floor.

so, like the whole ideas and sharing flames analogy.

now, note, this does not pertain to products that perform services. that's a whole 'nuther ball of wax. but, in our example, that'd be like cloning the musician rather than the music.

two quick things.

on the cars -- horses were bought and sold. trains. boats. you name it. buying a product that is transformed by technology is not the same as trying to take a service and transform it into a product through technology. you can augment the service (large margins) or automate the service (thin margins), but you can't turn it into a product.

on the sheet music -- precisely! that's the exact analogy. note the incredible consumer demand for sheet music today! it's not exactly a booming market outside of the niche training/instruction arena.

edit: btw, that last bit about the incredible demand today for sheet music was sarcasm. just in case it didn't come across....

the relationship between the two is "true fans".

where are the true fans? they're where all the piracy is happening. what do true fans pay for? live performances and a chance to connect with the artists. hence, the epic money they're making in a place you wouldn't normally think of as a money-generating location.

while not "in-store sales", i think this helps: "The result was massive sellouts. The São Paolo show alone grossed £1.58 million (US$2.58 million) alone."

personally, i'm with you. in-store sales are a red herring.

for the entire history of music -- aside from the last 60 years or so -- musicians have been paid for performances or on commission. music, my friends, is a service, not a product. and it has been for century upon century.

it's really this recent machination created by the recording industry that is the anomaly. music piracy is really just the correction back to the mean.

to put it succinctly and in gamer terms: would you rather have a giant sword that does 16 points of damage with a 10% chance to hit? or a dagger that does 4 points of damage, but with an 80% chance to hit?

it's all about the dps, baby.

note: that metaphor obviously assumes "A little over 12% of the money-making developers" means that it's 8x easier to actually make money in the consumer space. not that 80% of consumer plays make money. not to mention it's way, way easier to build a company with 10 people than 45.

not to be a parade-rainer (because this is really cool!), but it's not really a 'clone'. it's really just a cube rendering engine with a handful of textures and a barebones python socket server.

in my very humble opinion, a minecraft clone would have (at least stubbed out):

- ui. if you've never made a game, you'd be amazed at the amount of code ui takes up. even ugly ui. good lord.

- mobs. while you can data-drive a lots of your mobs, something like minecraft still has vast swaths of business logic to drive interactions with everything from creepers to mating wolves to the ender dragon.

- crafting. again, you can get a long way with data-driving your crafting system, but you've still got to build in all the mechanics that control your crafted items behavior among all the other various items in the game.

and none of that counts any of the polish that publishing a game requires. as a guy who's shipped games, it's really (even more so than traditional enterprise software) a case of the last 20% of the work takes 80% of the time allotted to the entire project.

in my experience, that's where "indie devs" fall down. they solve the hard, interesting problems (look! i've got an environment rendering! boom! the combat code works!), but then lose interest and chase other shiny things when it comes to the rote, painful tasks (wait... i've got to data-bind the hud? and handle socket disconnects without crashing? and the camera behavior? the animation has to blend? what about handling a network timeout on the dynamically loaded textures? you want to deliver "news and updates" to the client? from what server? and you want a cms with that? oh, and write the checkbox code for options screen? and qa insists we can apply and skip the first 30 levels so they can test 31 without playing the entire game? but, but, but... look! the environment loads on my machine! what kind of video card do you have?)

anyway.

sorry about the rant.

this really is super-cool. just more of render-plumbing and not really a clone.

personally, i don't suspect any of the obstacles really matter.

look at it like a cart-before-the-horse problem. similar to the ebook/kindle, amazon will simply create something that solves an enormous pain point for people and then effectively whitelist the delivery of it.

meaning, the ebook is to the kindle as air prime is to pre-determined-as-safe landing spot in your yard. you can't have your 30 minute delivery unless you've gotten your landing spot signed off by amazon. just like (back then anyway) you couldn't read your amazon ebook unless you had a place to deliver it.

or when everyone sets up corporations, take a dollar salary, and run all of their expenses through petty cash?

if 100 million miles isn't enough to gain statistical significance, what number is?

keep in mind, these are ivy league heavies, not local state school middle-of-the-pack undergrads.

no -- not really.

for that, i would use second life as your measuring stick.

people will pay professional developers for toys to play with (eq next, for example), but enabling hobby developers to make money off their efforts using your platform? that's hard. and expensive. you wouldn't believe the support nightmare much less things like anti-money-laundering laws you have to deal with from country to country. it'll make you cry.

have you ever tried to push a platform update out underneath an already money-making-but-that's-my-livelihood audience? yeah, i wish whomever luck with that.

prolly because i am not afraid of being hellbanned or whatever hacker news calls it these days. been there before. remind me to tell you about the time i was banned from the quarter-to-three forums sometime.

or maybe i'm more of an austin-game-guy rather than a bay-area-groupthink guy?

or maybe it's because i've only recently bothered to comment? in fact, i think this one may push me over into a double-digit comment count!

shrug

most likely, tho, it's because i've been commenting like that forever and a day (in internet time). a quick google search nets me this example from about 8 years ago: http://gillen.cream.org/wordpress_html/839/something-awful-3...

thanks for pointing it out tho. i'll try to remember going forward that, unlike the rest of the internet, there's a pretentious law here not to sign your posts.

                     <-- look!  no sig!

sorry to hear your country doesn't have solid support for those streaming providers. that sucks.

my country, however, does. as do all (well, most) of my friends' countries. that would be why i used "i know no one" as the qualifier for my comment. shrug

basically, i answered his anecdote with my own. (oh, the delicious irony!) sorry again if you missed the connotation there.

> Who cares about a market chart?

only people who value data over anecdote it appears.