Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit | steverb's comments login

Yes and I'd be loathe to spend any real time learning the SDK of a device that is so far mostly concept videos (as far as I can tell).

That won't make a whit of difference to them of course, it's not like I'm known in the gaming space anyway...

I'm pessimistically hopeful that they aren't just hype and don't spend so long trying to get it right that they're irrelevant by the time they launch.


This is the future and is going to revolutionize everything. Would be worth it (lucrative) to start now!

I am thinking of abandoning my current, well paying, web dev career just to do these types of games and experiences.


They have a ton of very high-profile investors, it can't be purely hype. It's hard to believe Google would put half a billion dollars into a company without seeing something concrete and impressive.

And Bezos and Jobs invested in the Segway, I'm not saying that it's pure hype, just that all they've shown is hype.

To be fair, the segway did what was promised, but it turned out that it wasn't so useful in practice.

Glass.

Around 1998 I was working for a small mom and pop computer/networking shop and had a customer successfully run Ethernet over barbed wire so he could network between his house (where the main computer was) and his barn.

It was about a fifty foot run at 1Mbps. He did have issues when it rained, once the posts got wet enough to ground the wires.

-----


How on earth did he manage that? Didn't the barbs cause shorts where they touched the individual twisted metal strands?

-----


Cisco actually demonstrated Ethernet over barbed wire (and other materials) back in '02.

http://slashdot.org/story/02/01/03/2039218/ethernet-over-ass...

-----


Barbs are wrapped around the twin wires, yes, but the twin wires are already touching each other. But a fence will usually have more than one strand of wire (though not always barbed) - I imagine one stand was Tx and a different strand was Rx.

-----


Yes. That was more or less how he did it.

Spliced some coax to alligator clips. One strand for the inner, one strand for the outer (if memory serves).

-----


I knew rain affected wifi cantennas, now it messes with wired networking too.

-----


Only if your wires are exposed

-----


Where does the 50 gallons of water/egg figure come from?

I've got chickens, they don't drink that much water and they don't eat that much food.

-----


I've seen numbers from 30 to 120. I think GRACE says 53 per egg. American water says 120. Orange county water says 36 gallons, etc. It's all over the board and it depends what they're including. For straight up water, I've heard an individual hen is probably a bit less than a pint of water per day. They then start including things like how much water is used to grow the grain they feed the birds (about a half cup day per). It all depends on what's _actually_ included (as well as things like egg laying / lifetimes (hens don't get into the thick of it until probably around 6 months in)).

Unfortunately I've never been able to find a _real_ number which is indicative of the food cycle, etc.

-----


I was curious about this, based on a cursory search it looks like the water claims are because the grain that most megafarm chickens are fed is a water-intensive grain.

It looks like one loaf of bread is supposedly 288 gallons of water due to the wheat.

-----


I don't do code interviews over the phone, but I always do a phone interview. It's just a smell test to see if the person has obviously over-stated their experience, and make sure they have some exposure to the technical things we care about.

Once they pass that gate, then we do an interview with our dev team. That way everyone gets a chance to talk to/ hear the candidate and get a feel for if they want to work with them. As part of that interview we do a group coding exercise, usually using Pex4Fun (http://pex4fun.com/default.aspx?language=CSharp&sample=Chall...). Basically, we give the interviewee time to start working on it, and if they get stuck, then start white-boarding the problem as a group and solve it together.

Again, we want to see how the person works and whether we think they will fit well on the team.

After the interview is over, we take a vote and if the result is not a unanimous yes, then we pass. It's tough, but I've had about 80% of interviewees tell me that it's the most fun they've ever had in an interview. So far, we've been very happy with the results.

-----


> I've had about 80% of interviewees tell me that it's the most fun they've ever had in an interview.

Did you ask them this during/immediately following the interview? That may... skew your results.

Then again, if they're offering that insight without being prompted, that's a very good sign. I think the execution of this strategy, and the general tone of the people involved is very important.

-----


Yeah, it has always been unprompted. We all try and treat as a fun exercise, occasionally with beer although I've never had an interviewee accept the offer of any drink other than water.

I also go out of my way to make sure I communicate with the candidate. We take the voice vote immediately after the interview, and I call the candidate within 24 hours. If there are any no votes I make sure to tell the candidate why, and try and give them pointers for specific areas they would need to improve on to work here and try and point them at resources they can use to improve.

We're in a relatively small market, and it pays to be nice to everyone. Anyone we interview I am pretty much guaranteed to run into at some sort of dev event. And just because someone wasn't a good fit today, it doesn't mean they won't be the perfect candidate next year or two years from now.

-----


The two times I've had that response, I've just taken my current estimate of high salary, added $20,000 and then asked them to confirm that that amount is in their definition of competitive.

First time, they said no and we stopped talking. Second time got me my current job. YMMV.

-----


That is an excellent approach to this problem. Thanks.

-----


Personally, I've always thought they should put a speed limit on pitching. These days watching baseball feels like watching two guys play catch.

-----


There actually already is a rule on this, the pitcher has to release the ball within 12 seconds of receiving the ball, as long as the batter is ready to receive the pitch. It's just never enforced. But there has been a lot of talk about possibly starting to enforce this rule, primarily using a visible clock/timer in games - though I think MLB were talking about changing from 12 to 20 seconds if they do start enforcing it.

-----


if you mean that you want them to nerf pitching, I think that the appropriate way to do that is to lower the mound

-----


I think he wants MLB to implement a timer between pitches, which already exists (it's 12 seconds), but is rarely enforced.

Source: http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/official_info/official_rules/pitcher_... (Rule 8.04)

-----


Yes, nerfing pitching was what I was thinking, and I think lowering the mound would be an excellent idea.

Not that MLB is listening to me. :-)

-----


The only metric I've found personally useful is cycle time / complexity. How long does it take to go from a request to deployed, working software?

Yes, it can be gamed, but if you're incentivizing developers to game your system, then you're probably using it wrong.

-----


My personal solution has been to own two clunkers, but my wife says it's a personal sickness on my part (I like clunkers).

I blame the fact that while I am not personally a redneck, I am descended from a very long line of rednecks and can't remember a time when we didn't own at least one car that didn't run.

And that's not even counting the beloved "donor" cars. :-)

-----


Just think of it as "cloud transporting". One automobile instance goes down, fail back to another. You could start a new business like... maybe EngineYard? :)

-----


That is almost exactly how I view it. I can buy two super cheap cars for less than one very reliable one, and when it's something that I can't fix cheaply or quickly enough I sell off the car and go buy another.

I also stick to the one pay check rule for cars, in that no car I buy should cost more than one paycheck, although I did make an exception for the van we use to haul the younguns around in.

-----


You not only have HA cluster, you can also do some load-balancing - this way you have two cars with 30k miles on each instead of just one car with 60k :) Just basic math - which one setup will depreciate faster?

-----


Ha, for a Minute I forgot that I was on HN.

-----


My solution was to buy another clunker when I was in the financial position to be able to afford having two cars. It hasn't stopped running yet, the real challenge will be convincing the wife to let me keep it after it does stop running.

There's something relaxing about spending a weekend under a truck, putting it all back together, and driving it around knowing it's only alive because you saved it.

-----


As long as one (or more) of those clunkers isn't hiding under un-mowed grass and surrounded by broken garden gnomes :)

-----


I did not get that from the article at all. Just that there are certain costs to owning a used car that you don't usually incur when owning a new one.

I thought the author was acknowledging that he was better equipped to deal with those costs than someone else might be in a different life situation. And for those other people, it might actually make more sense for them to own a newer car even if it might appear at first blush that they were being less responsible with their money than we might think they should be.

In other words, there's no such thing as a free lunch.

-----


I thought the author was trying to ingratiate himself with people who use "privilege" as if it were an actually smart thing to say, even though he mocks those same people ("Normally I consider the use of the word 'privilege' in a conversation to be the brilliant peacock plumage that identifies a third-rate pseudo-intellectual from ten paces away").

-----


The article needs a new title. "You gotta be rich to own a car with almost a million miles on it" would be much better. Of course, this is a pretty obvious thing to say, so it probably wouldn't get as many clicks. But at least it would be honest.

It makes no sense to talk about costs of "owning a used car." The costs involved in owning a two-year-old midrange Toyota with 20,000 miles on it are completely different from the costs involved in owning an ancient luxury car that's driven the equivalent of to the Moon and back twice.

Buying a Lexus with 900,000 miles on it is so unusual that there's no way to generalize the story beyond it.

-----


I'm not sure what it read when you wrote this comment, but it currently reads "to own a cheap car." Used is implied, certainly, but I don't think "barely used" is part of it.

Basically, a two-year-old Toyota with 20k miles doesn't qualify.

-----


Which "it"? The comment I'm replying to says, "Just that there are certain costs to owning a used car that you don't usually incur when owning a new one."

In any case, there's a wide universe of cheap cars (and what exactly is the threshold for "cheap" anyway?) just as there is a wide universe of used cars.

-----


Thank you so much for the link to learning ally. That is going to solve so many problems for my wife. We've been searching for audio versions of some of the text books they have listed there for months.

-----

More

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: