BC SOFTWARE
Saved by @Alex1Powell

One of the big promises of software is composability. You can build rich, powerful experiences out of basic building blocks.

APIs add new things to the toolbox. For example: Treasury, which lets an app/platform store, move, and track a business’

 I've been a small business owner and can talk at length about SMB banking, and will later, but let's put on the software developer hat right now.

Lots of software talks about money, keeps records about money, does calculations about money, but can't *touch* money.
This is extremely frustrating when you're building SaaS apps for businesses, because you have total control over your UX right until your app needs to touch money... at which point all data about it lives in a silo you can't access.

So you generally push work to the operator.
For example, suppose you’re writing a business-in-a-box system for electricians, including an invoicing feature.

You need to be able to read bank transactions to reconcile. You probably can't. The owner can. So you ask the owner to do mind-numbing work a computer does better.
It sure would be great if your business customers had bank accounts you could actually introspect and operate on their behalves! You could just get the list of incoming payments and match against the invoices.

There is some software to write but it is not rocket science.
Stripe Billing goes to some crazy lengths to do this (virtual bank accounts, bespoke contracts with banking partners, etc); most SaaS companies offering invoicing as a feature probably shouldn't. You would want to spend your developer time elsewhere.
Stripe Treasury, now in limited beta, will allow software companies to provision money management accounts for their users, and then operate on those accounts like they expect to operate on data, servers, Stripe charges, or anything else you have an API for.
What’s the difference between a money management account and e.g. a standard banking checking account? As a user, not that much. You get a card to buy things with and get cash, and the ability to send ACH payments, bill payments, and the like.
The distinction is mostly implementation-layer concerns in banking-land.
It's difficult to envision what you can create given powerful primitives. Almost everything you see on a screen sits on top of NAND gates; looking at a NAND gate doesn't show you Twitter.

But let me speculate a bit:
B2B SaaS which deals with money, which is most of it, just got a whole lot more interesting, because it can directly operate on the money.
Take Shopify, for example. Shopify gives users an online storefront, and naturally needs to keep track of the total in the virtual register.
But with Stripe Treasury API, Shopify launched Shopify Balance, which lets them build a much better register. They always know the real total inside of it, not just what "should" be there.

They can automate its operations.

https://t.co/fMOqHh2Tlv
And because of Stripe's global payments and treasury network, we didn't just make these capabilities *accessible* to developers.

We made it *better* for your users than many business bank accounts.
What does every small business care about? Cash flow. What's a top 10 customer support request for every business which sees funds flows, like Shopify?

"When do I get my money?"

Can you imagine needing to email Google to ask when that email that you know was sent will arrive?
If the money just arrived faster, there would be less angst for users whether it would arrive at all. Less tickets opened. Less questions you can’t usefully answer.

Why is money *so slow* and *so opaque*?
*sigh* That is a complicated topic, but at the end of the day, you're generally rate limited by the slowest rail between where the money comes in and where it goes out.

In the U.S., you’ll often be blocked on the ACH network. Fast compared to stagecoach; slow compared to email.
But with Stripe Treasury, money doesn't have to lag its way through the ACH network between a customer paying it and a business receiving it.

Stripe has an arrangement with the banks that ultimately hold the business users’ funds.
So when your software says "OK, disburse the money they've earned from the platform", it's in their account (and spendable!) on the same day.

(We are working on making that even faster by default. It’s not called HTTP 200 Check Back In An Hour.)
SaaS platforms are one use case for Stripe Treasury, but you can envision another one: novel fintechs, with different UXes, brands, and target business users, built on a core set of primitives.

Putting together fintech products is historically a pain in the keister.
Every significant feature you add requires an integration with a banking partner, often a *new* banking partner, often *several* banking partners.
That integration requires lengthy negotiations, bespoke legal work, approvals, etc just to unblock your engineering team.

Then your engineering team receives the spec, and the *real* fun begins.
We did away with most of that for Stripe Treasury, just like we did for Payments before it.

No negotiation required. No bespoke legal work. More of the necessary levels of complexity in touching money businesses depend on; less of the overhead.
And, of course, the care and attention to the developer experience that you'd expect from us.
A day may come when Stripe forgets what is was like to build software, when we ship a 400 page PDF file as the sole documentation for an API, but it is not this day.
So if you want to build a vertical fintech targeting carpenters? Offering payments in and out, a place to hold insured funds, and a card to spend them with?

You can build all of that on Stripe APIs now.
And if your users need financing? Snap in Stripe Capital for Platforms and we can facilitate access to loans based on their predicted future revenue through your platform. https://t.co/Ye28gyMPRh (This also came out this week.)
And now, back to being an erstwhile small businessman who has had bank accounts for many years.

AAAAAAAARGH.
Small business banking has a poor UX, because of structural issues.

It is managed at most banks as an offshoot of personal banking, because the userbase is basically the same people who show up at the branch.

But the needs are quite different.
Banks specialize in one-size-fits-most products. The basic checking account you have is designed to cover more than 60% of the total population. It functions effectively the same for almost all of its users.
This kinda makes sense for individuals. Financial circumstances differ, but tend to rhyme: money in from a job or pension; money out to housing, utilities, debit card payments; some cash management.

(Narrator: This is not, in fact, an adequate spec for a checking account.)
But the needs of businesses are _wildly different_ from each other!
A small scale landlord cares quite a bit about mortgages and timely rent collection (and super-timely notice of non-payment), but rather little about payroll or expenses for consumables, and probably almost nothing for cash management.
A pizzeria, on the other hand, thinks it is inconceivable to make almost all the money on one day a month, spends most of revenue on payroll and consumables, and cares quite a bit about cash management.
These businesses deserve fundamentally different application-layer experiences from their banking. And they don't get them, because banks are incapable of offering hundreds of vertical software solutions.
(Just making the one-size-fits-most personal banking and mobile apps *actually good* is hard enough! It seems like we’re just getting there in the last 5 years!)
Who does offer hundreds of vertically-specialized application experiences? The software industry. Shopify specializes in e-commerce merchants and understands them, thoroughly. They don't sell to dentists.
Dentists have thriving ecosystems of firms that live and breathe every aspect of their practices.

So do graveyards. And hotels. And landlords. And spas. And tutors. And yoga teachers. And...
Why is software so varied but banking so… not? One reason is that businesses pay an awful lot for software, but pay relatively little for banking. Banking is a scale game.

Not enough dentists pay not enough dollars for banks to put software teams against dental practice UX.
But because a software company can address dentists by the nation, not by the square-mile-around-a-branch, and because they charge more, a software company serving dentists can reliably generate enough money to pay an engineering team.
Here Stripe acts as an aggregator: we can gather up *many* businesses attached to *many* software companies. These product teams understand their customers’ businesses *thoroughly*.

We can then take that package to leading banks. That reach is *very interesting* to them.
That is why Goldman Sachs, Citi, Barclays, and Evolve Bank and Trust partner with us.

A pizzeria can't walk into Goldman Sachs and walk out with a bank account.

A software company serving pizzerias could if they had, uh, a lot of dough.
But a material chunk of the software industry, that's a different story altogether.

And so our partner banks have made great products available, at pricing and terms that small businesses just don't usually get in direct banking relationships.
Take account maintenance fees. Please.

I know exactly how many times I paid the $14 account maintenance fee for my software businesses, ten years later. That’s how much I hated them.
I had gone below $X,000 in deposits (I was bootstrapped! Rent was due!) and hadn’t managed to spend at least $250 on the debit card because, whoops, mis-timed a billing cycle by two days.
(Being a bit older and wiser I probably should have just considered that $14 a cost-of-doing-business and spent my time on sales, not timing debit card transactions, but my emotional state at the time was closer to “Gah I feel like a chump.”)
We have agreed, with our partners, on a pricing structure where a SaaS company or fintech doesn't need to charge an account maintenance fee.
(As the software company, you *could*, because you control your pricing, but presumably you will make better choices, and your users will not say, ten years later, “I trusted you, and you made me feel like a chump. Six times.”)
How is this possible, and why didn't the banking system do it years ago?

One way to think of it is that banks have huge expenses to attract SMB deposits, including marketing campaigns and branch networks, and those drive the pricing of SMB banking.
The cost of *servicing* SMB accounts has gone down over the years, now that account statements are not calculated by highly-trained artisans, but the cost of *acquiring* them is increasing over time.

Nationwide advertising, branches, and sales reps aren’t as cheap as cron jobs.
Since the software industry is doing their own customer acquisition, and there is sharply less need for the branch network (itself more a sales tool than a servicing tool), some banks are happy to pass the savings back to Main Street.
There's obviously a lot more detail here (hosted onboarding flows, KYC and AML compliance workflows built for you, all accounts have deposit insurance, etc), but I have to end this tweetstorm somewhere.

I'm very excited to see what software people do with the Stripe Treasury.
Anticipating a FAQ: "Is this the product you were referring to here?"

No. This was my number two. You're welcome to your guess at the number one. (Though, who knows, I heard of a new project last week and might steal the zeroth spot for it.)

https://t.co/osjjx8gNM0

More from Patrick McKenzie

Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
I like this heuristic, and have a few which are similar in intent to it:


Hiring efficiency:

How long does it take, measured from initial expression of interest through offer of employment signed, for a typical candidate cold inbounding to the company?

What is the *theoretical minimum* for *any* candidate?

How long does it take, as a developer newly hired at the company:

* To get a fully credentialed machine issued to you
* To get a fully functional development environment on that machine which could push code to production immediately
* To solo ship one material quanta of work

How long does it take, from first idea floated to "It's on the Internet", to create a piece of marketing collateral.

(For bonus points: break down by ambitiousness / form factor.)

How many people have to say yes to do something which is clearly worth doing which costs $5,000 / $15,000 / $250,000 and has never been done before.
ALL
Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
If an employer is willing to be abusive to you prior to hiring you, when you have maximum leverage and they are maximally incentivized to play nice, I think that gives you *extremely actionable* signal as to how they'll treat you when you're working there and dependent on them.

For candidates: evaluate prospective employers accordingly.

For startups employing e.g. engineers: given that your candidates should evaluate you accordingly, be *extra special* careful to operate like professionals with regards to e.g. interviewing, offers, and negotiation.

"Can you be more explicit about 'abusive' here?"

Not without violating a confidence, but as someone who has been on hiring side of table and is a capitalist, there are *clearly* things you could do which would be "sharp operating, but we're all sharp operators" in some contexts.

Hiring employees is often not one of those contexts. The nature of the relationship, the asymmetry in power, and the social contract strongly counsel you to be a lot better there than you are minimally required by law / contract.

A thing which aesthetically frustrates me is that a lot of the things I've heard companies do here serve *no legitimate business purpose.* In some cases it's getting tens of dollars of advantage. TENS! On an engineering candidate!
ALL
Advertisement
Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
My friends @robwalling and @einarvollset just launched TinySeed, an accelerator for software companies where a successful outcome is a healthy, sustainable business rather than attempting to ride the rocketship trajectory. https://t.co/LSHqZNcVid

I have some thoughts:

As somebody who bootstrapped ~4 companies, I feel like I had to make some clearly suboptimal decisions early in them for lack of what is, in hindsight, not all that much money. But there's a huge gap in the product space for investment options.

It's weird: you can get $25k from Amex trivially, and angels are very willing to write a check for that much, but you have to make representations about your goals/ambitions/market/etc which don't really apply to everyone.

And so you see the traditional angel/VC ecosystem fund companies where honestly the returns are probably not there, and this is knowable pretty early, but the chase of them will wreck what could have been a perfectly happy business.

(To make the math work for traditional VCs the company has to at least have a market-appropriate shot of $100 million a year. There are a lot more $10 million a year companies than $100 million a year companies. That is *not* a bad terminal outcome for founders/employees.)
ALL
Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
A thread on HN about bad code in legacy projects both makes me think how little we've learned as a discipline over the years and, honestly, how little credit we give ourselves for some pretty major

Fun going down this list and thinking: "Hmm, plausible at a well-run modern software shop", "Hmm, possible, but requires implausible tradeoffs", "Literally disallowed by languages", and "If you were to attempt doing that our test suite wouldn't let you merge."

I think we as an industry celebrate (not quite the right word) failure too much and don't celebrate success nearly enough. There is no DailyWTF for competent execution, word of which generally stays pretty local to the source while incompetence passes into legend.

Alrighty let me try to thread the needle on being the change I want to see in the world while not giving away anything that will get me in trouble:

Ruby has wonderful developer ergonomics. Typed languages are easier for machines to guarantee the correctness of. We built a type checker for Ruby (and I believe it is slated for OSS release sometime).

c.f.
TECH
Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
It’s underremarked upon that stablecoins accomplish basically all of the original design goals for Bitcoin qua a transactional mechanism (instant free value transfer anywhere), but that nobody cares about this because nobody ever cared about that part of the pitch.

“Why do people care about stablecoins then?”

A mix of “they encourage dollar-denominated liquidity in the cryptocurrency ecosystem and discourage withdrawal of the same” and “they’re good for money laundering.”

“But they make value transfer between exchanges much faster!”

This was a solved problem in traditional finance, too, mostly through the extension of credit. (It doesn’t matter how long settlement takes if there is sufficient trust to enable credit.)

The Bitcoin ecosystem is *positively allergic* to credit, so you have to call it a coin for them to accept it. And after you call it a coin they ignore everything the world has learned about credit, like risk management.

“Stablecoins aren’t credit!”

They’re pretty much exactly credit? A tether is a zero-coupon Bitfinex bond with a non-functioning call option. I
TECH

More from Software

Abhiram Reddy
Abhiram Reddy
@nrabhiram
It’s been a minute since I’ve written code. So, I figured that now might be a good time to start learning how to use the Blueprint system in #UnrealEngine. I felt that it’d be interesting to share my progress and mistakes. So here goes!
🧵

1.
Firstly, I made use of the auto-rigging feature in Mixamo to give my character a skeleton. This allows you to use the Mixamo animations for the character in Unreal Engine.


2.
In the Animation Blueprint, I tried to add a punching state to the character. The problem I faced initially was that the character glides while punching. This occurs because multiple states of the animation are active (as their transition conditions are satisfied).


3.
There are a couple of solutions for this:

👉Blending the punch and idle states (character can punch while running) by using the Layered Blend Per Bone node.

👉Disabling input while the punch occurs.


4.
I didn’t like the outcome when I blended the animations. as the hip rotates more than we’d like it to. This leads to the character punching upwards and to the left. This isn’t favorable as the enemy is usually straight ahead. Disabling the input worked way better!
SOFTWARE
Ron
Ron
@CodeMonkeyZ
Oct 1, 2020 - Fulton CTY
"Mr. Gilstrap stated that he did not feel comfortable installing a last-minute software change, and did not want Fulton County staff to be responsible for installing it. He told us that he told Dominion to conduct this
SOFTWARE
Advertisement
John Fetterman
John Fetterman
@JohnFetterman
buffalo uses dominion scoreboard software so not really


DEAD PEOPLE SCORED FOR BUFFALO!

A truck delivered off a suitcase full of points at halftime from Canada for Buffalo.

#StopTheSteel !!!!

I’ll be submitting sworn affidavits from Steelers fans than they saw the Buffalo rigging the game but I want to emphasize that I’m not under oath.
SOFTWARE
Harsh Bothra
Harsh Bothra
@harshbothra_
#Learn365 Day-4: Unauthenticated & Exploitable JIRA Vulnerabilities

There are multiple security vulnerabilities associated with the various versions of JIRA software which are exploited in wild and is one of my personal favourite 3rd Party apps to hunt.

#BugBountyTips

(1/n)

(2/n)
1. CVE-2020-14179 (Information Disclosure)
a. Navigate to /secure/QueryComponent!Default.jspa
b. It leaks information about custom fields, custom SLA, etc.

2. CVE-2020-14181 (User Enumeration)
a. Navigate to /secure/ViewUserHover.jspa?username=

(3/n)
3. CVE-2020-14178 (Project Key Enumeration)
a. Navigate to /browse.
b. Observe the error message on valid vs. invalid project key. Apart from the Enumeration, you can often get unauthenticated access to the project if the protections are not in place.

(4/n)
4. CVE-2019-3402 (XSS)
a. Navigate to /secure/ConfigurePortalPages!default.jspa?view=search&searchOwnerUserName=%3Cscript%3Ealert(1)%3C/script%3E&Search=Search

5. CVE-2019-11581 (SSTI)
a. Navigate to /secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa

(5/n)
6. CVE-2019-3396 (Path Traversal)
7. CVE-2019-8451 (SSRF)
a. Navigate to /plugins/servlet/gadgets/makeRequest?url=https://:[email protected]
8. CVE-2019-8451 (SSRF)
a. Navigate to
SOFTWARE
Pratham \U0001f468\u200d\U0001f4bb\U0001f680
Pratham 👨‍💻🚀...
@Prathkum
Let's create Phineas using CSS in few simple steps😄

THREAD🧵


STEP 1. Create a head

create a triangle and rotate it so that it looks like a head


STEP 2. Create smile and ear

We have a pseudo elements in CSS, so we can create smile and ear using head::after and head::before


STEP 3. Create eyes

This is the most trickiest part because in order to make an eye we have to create

- One bigger white circle
- then a small black pupil inside white circle
- then a small white reflection in black pupil

Let's create a outer white circle first


STEP 3(I). Create a black pupil

We can create pupil using pseudo element
SOFTWARE , SNIPPETS

You May Also Like

Patrick McKenzie
Patrick McKenzie
@patio11
Most software founders, particularly in B2B, need to get radically better at sales. @Steli , who is the best person for explaining the scrappy stages in the beginning and then building out a team with scripts and processes, wrote a guide to:

For technical founders it is irrationally, obscenely hard to reverse years of programming (ba dum bum) that sales is a value-destroying activity. Sales is CLEARLY a value-creating activity, contingent on you have a value-creating product.

The world will not drop what they are doing to adopt your work. This is particularly true in B2B, where simply building a better mousetrap won't overcome the activation energy required to get people with additional non-mice problems to prioritize changing mousetraps today.

This is very non-obvious for founders because founders are not often people who *want* to be sold to. We often come from a background where trying out tools is a bit of a fun hobby. We like looking at all the options, making charts, and ripping out partially complete tests.

"This week I unsuccessfully trialed four software options for automating that thing that has been killing us. Our actual production process remains the same as last week. Don't worry; this was a great use of time." is not a thing you want to write in a progress report to manager.
TECH
George Mack
George Mack
@george__mack
THREAD: 15 of the most useful razors and rules I've found.

Rules of thumb that simplify decisions.

Bezos' Razors:

• If unsure what action to take, let your 80-year-old self make it.

• If unsure who to work with, pick the person that has the best chances of breaking you out of a 3rd world prison.

Skinner's Law:

• If procrastinating on an item, you only have 2 options:

1. Make the pain of not doing it greater than the pain of doing it.

2. Make the pleasure of doing it greater than the pleasure of not doing it.

Luck Razor:

• If stuck with 2 equal options, pick the one that feels like it will produce the most luck later down the line.

I used this razor to go for drinks with a stranger rather than watch Netflix.

In hindsight, it was the highest ROI decision I've ever made.

Bragging Razor:

• If someone brags about their success or happiness, assume it’s half what they claim.

• If someone downplays their success or happiness, assume it’s double what they claim.

The map is not the terrain.
ALL , BUSINESS
Advertisement
Erin
Erin
@erinruberry
Here’s how you weigh a baby giraffe.

(📸: @VirginiaZoo)


Here’s how you weigh a baby penguin.

(📸: @TNAquarium)


Here’s how you weigh a baby red panda.

(📸: @BinghamtonZoo)


Here’s how you weigh a baby aardvark.

(📽: @CincinnatiZoo)

Here’s how you weigh a baby cheetah.

(📸: @ZooSalzburg)
ALL
PMO India
PMO India
@PMOIndia
Warm welcome, warm conversations.

A glimpse of how Indians based in France welcomed PM @narendramodi.
PMO
Robin Wigglesworth
Robin Wigglesworth
@RobinWigg
A thread on an interesting report by Goldman Sachs' Peter Oppenheimer, the bank's chief global equity strategist. He points out that Goldman's "Bear Market Risk Indicator" is looking ominous.


There are three factors that suggest that the recent stability could evaporate and that equities are "about to enter a sustained bear market", Oppenheimer says.

First is the fact that growth, inflation and interest rate outlook is unfriendly for equities.


Second is that greater volatility, such as multiple corrections and new peaks (which we've seen in 2018) tend to presage a full bear market.


Here is Goldman's data showing how falls and bounces tend to come ahead of "the dramatic final fall".
ECONOMY