blakeross

This is definitely pre-2009, I built this at Stanford w/ the others and I was only at Stanford until around 2005. (But they may have continued updating it given the Firefox version number referenced.)

No, but I'm bummed they didn't steal the name "Pricks"!

Biannual reshare of a pilot I wrote for a TV parody of Theranos: http://www.blakeross.com/pricks.pdf

:)

Hah good memory! I guess I'll resurrect it for the trial :)

I know lots of platforms-of-the-month come through HN, and it's hard to filter the signal from the noise...just wanted to add another voice that Exponent is indeed awesome. Built by one of the sharpest (and most humble) teams in the valley.

My semi-annual plug for the parody television show I wrote about Theranos last year:

http://www.pricks.com

"One of the most useful lessons I learned from working at Facebook had nothing to do with technology: Doubt the media. Always doubt the media."

(https://medium.com/@blakeross/don-t-outsource-your-thinking-...)

I'm happy to see that The Economist, at least, has a healthy sense of skepticism.

Hm I guess I didn't make that clear. Doriane is just another friend of mine, not my mother.

I haven't.

Whatever you want to believe about semantics (which I addressed in the article), the Exeter neurologists did see a difference in the man's MRI scans versus the control group.

Sure, we can call that a "variability in human ability" rather than a "disorder". I never used the word "disorder" anyway.

I drink socially. It seems to have pretty typical effects -- less social inhibition and so forth. Why do you ask?

I'd like to. I just don't know how I'd even begin. It's like telling me to start working out my third arm.

I would be curious to see how the HN community scores on this aphantasia survey embedded in the BBC article: http://www.bbc.com/news/health-34039054. Perhaps there's a connection between programmers and this condition. Will you take it and report your score?

The survey is oversimplified, obviously, but it was devised by the Exeter neurologists who are studying this. I got the lowest score (8/40) since none of the questions make sense to me (no image on any of them).

That's one of the FAQ's in the piece:

8. Do you dream? No, or I don’t recall them. I’ve had a couple dreams but there was no visual or sensory component to them. When I woke up, I just knew a list of “plot points” about things that happened. This is also how I digest fiction.

Really?! That is fascinating to me. I am 100% language on the inside.

Meditating has never done anything for me visually. I thought the idea of "visualizing" while you meditate was just a figure of speech.

I haven't tried psychedelic drugs. Maybe I should start.

I think I've stored basic information as to color degree, like "X is very dark blue" and "Y is light blue." I'd have to actually see the objects to settle a close contest.

Trial and error for matching colors.

Thanks for the insight on the "milk voice." You'd think by now I'd learn not to assume anything. I thought the "neutral inner voice" was universal.

I'm the author of this post, happy to answer any questions.

About me: I was formerly a director of product at FB and a founder of Firefox. My YC startup became FB's first acquisition. I'm focusing more on creative writing these days (wrote the Silicon Valley spec script and the Theranos parody that have come up on HN a few times.) Aphantasia was a pretty weird discovery for me given this new focus.

This is great, I hadn't heard of it before.

I appreciate it.

You can't sell a script for a show to the show itself. In fact, the staff isn't even allowed to read it for legal reasons (if they happen to conceive a similar idea, they're worried you'll sue them later).

However, an agent could shop your script to other shows to demonstrate that you're able to integrate well into a world you didn't create. It's rather strange: If you want to write for Breaking Bad, you should write a script for The Wire.

Thank you! Currently it's a hobby; my background is in tech. This is the second script I've written. The first was a fake premiere for S3 of Silicon Valley (http://bit.ly/1LOZZpT).

Here's a television parody I wrote about Theranos that ends right where this story begins... http://pricks.com

He was seeing a number of psychiatrists, and 41 doctors total, in part because he thought he was going blind and that the blindness would destroy his career. But doctors thought that problem was psychosomatic (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-27/germanwing...).

I'm not a psychologist though, so not qualified to weigh in on questions of sanity. For the same reason, I also agree with your point about crew judging each other's mental states. The part that resonated with me was more that there's now one more person in the cockpit who could potentially pull this off.

The fact that he waited for the pilot to leave doesn't prove that he wasn't prepared to pull off the same attack if the pilot didn't leave. He'd still choose to do it this way given the option. We'll never know, but regardless, it remains a possible vector in the future, yet the cockpit security remains in place (for good reason).

Yeah, I'm aware of this. But I don't think this prevents the germanwings outcome (which was, indeed, orchestrated by the "completely insane pilot" you mention).

The person plotting to commandeer the cockpit always has the upper hand, because they'll be the first to act. It's hard to defend against a sucker punch or a knife from first-class.

You could even argue that the two-in-the-cockpit rule is less secure, because it introduces one additional person who could pull off a germanwings scenario into the impenetrable control room. This is the same concern raised by the pilot quoted in this article (http://www.smh.com.au/business/aviation/germanwings-australi...):

"It exposes the cockpit to more security risks than the isolated case of a homicidal pilot," he said. "I think flight crew are a better judge of fellow pilots' mental state. Now I have to judge the cabin crew member's mental state too before leaving them in the cockpit with access to things like the crash axe."

Originally I had a long aside in the article to deal with this point, but I axed it because I don't think it changes the core argument. Unfortunately Medium seems to have removed footnoting capabilities. But it's still a valid note. Thanks.

I appreciate that. I've been working in tech since I was a kid and have been transitioning over to writing recently. It's been an interesting shift because it doesn't offer the same kind of motivating fuel (up-and-to-the-right graphs, etc). So comments like this are more encouraging than you know. Thank you.

Well, I did say at the end: "For as much money and time as we’ve wasted on printer-powered air security, only one innovation has prevented another 9/11: Locked, reinforced cockpit doors."

I agree that it's generally theater all the way down.

Thanks. And, I agree: https://twitter.com/blakeross/status/706191059185872896

Usually I go in the other direction and redefine bland, e.g. https://medium.com/@blakeross/don-t-outsource-your-thinking-.... Had a little Friday fun with this one.

For context, this is a TV show I wrote as a Theranos parody. Didn't realize someone would submit it standalone (but thanks empressplay!)

I wrote a parody of Theranos as a TV pilot that is increasingly becoming true: http://www.pricks.com/

(I'm sharing this here because the Hacker News community seemed to enjoy my Season 3 premiere of Silicon Valley [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10179894], but apologies if others feel it detracts from the discussion.)

Facebook's PR team did zero outreach on the professional services page. It was live for a month before a Social Media Manager at Acodez IT Solutions stumbled on it and blogged about it.