text
stringlengths 44
950k
| meta
dict |
|---|---|
Academic turns city into a social experiment (2004) - djoldman
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2004/03/academic-turns-city-into-a-social-experiment/
======
morley
The title of this article really doesn't do it justice. (And honestly, the
article itself really buries the lede.) Some interesting passages:
He launched a “Night for Women” and asked the city’s men to
stay home in the evening and care for the children;
700,000 women went out on the first of three nights that
Mockus dedicated to them.
Another Mockus inspiration was to ask people to call his
office if they found a kind and honest taxi driver; 150
people called and the mayor organized a meeting with all
those good taxi drivers, who advised him about how to
improve the behavior of mean taxi drivers.
Initially 20 professional mimes shadowed pedestrians who
didn’t follow crossing rules: A pedestrian running across
the road would be tracked by a mime who mocked his every
move. Mimes also poked fun at reckless drivers.
It really strikes me how the "academic" in question, Antanas Mockus, was able
to inject some whimsy and levity into the dour field of politics / civil
service. Other politicians are so obsessed with how they come across that they
sand off anything resembling humor.
~~~
quicklime
The idea of mocking pedestrians who run across the road reminds me a lot about
about the coining of the term "jaywalking", as described by 99 Percent
Invisible: [https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-
modern...](https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern-
moloch/)
------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
>Mockus, the only son of a Lithuanian artist, burst onto the Colombian
political scene in 1993 when, faced with a rowdy auditorium of the school of
arts’ students, he dropped his pants and mooned them to gain quiet.
Wouldn't that be classified as sexual harassment now?
~~~
babyArte
Actually recently in the last congress elections he ended doing that again,
but not in the university, but in the congress itself in the ceremony to
become congresist. He is a really nice guy actually the best rector the
University has had. [https://lakalle.bluradio.com/virales/antanas-mockus-
muestra-...](https://lakalle.bluradio.com/virales/antanas-mockus-muestra-las-
nalgas-en-pleno-congreso-7204-ie790430)
------
reidjs
Love this. I help organize a group in San Francisco that aims to improve it
through technology (code4SF). Considering most people in the organization
work/want to work in civic tech, many of our members (and organizers!) are
extremely PC and are afraid to take risks that might make them look bad to
their peers. I think there is a lot of good that can come out of having fun
helping others/your city, but I think most citizens are afraid of the
potential ramifications.
------
forkandwait
What I especially like is that he knew that public life should be full of art
and personality, not just pasty faced bureaucrats who try to avoid attention.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
I Watched All of the Chrome Dev Summit 2017 Videos - fanf2
https://redfin.engineering/i-watched-all-of-the-chrome-dev-summit-2017-videos-so-you-dont-have-to-9b62a593c3cb
======
microcolonel
> _It’s difficult to convince to most web developers to accept these limits,
> especially if you don’t anticipate selling a lot of products to “emerging
> markets” nations. Hitting Google’s recommended target often requires a
> ground-up rewrite, discarding well-loved JS frameworks._
That's why their target for "emerging markets" devices is _five whole seconds
of JavaScript compilation_ , which would hardly be considered acceptable on a
device five times as expensive, but that device is not five times as fast on a
given core, it's probably something more like one and a half or two, maybe two
and a half if you include faster main memory and caches.
Added: I once worked on an ecommerce site where I told my team early on that
we would probably do worse than we planned if we built and tested on the
latest iPhones and Galaxy devices, and was vindicated basically every week
after a certain point. It was so bad that, on 802.11ac WiFi connected to a
gigabit downlink with about 15ms round trip latency to the servers, the
homepage would take about 10 seconds to display anything at all on an iPhone
6s, and another 8 seconds to finish loading the visible content. Unbelievably,
more than three quarters of that time was spent parsing and compiling
JavaScript. You don't even want to know what happens when you try to open that
site on anything slower than a late 2015 flagship device.
~~~
pryelluw
After hurricane Maria hit Puerto Rico, I had to drive 15 minutes to get mobile
signal. Every website except HN and Gmail (html version) was too slow to load.
This experience has lead me to reconsider my opinions regarding performance.
~~~
katastic
Gmail on my AMD FX-8370 at 4 GHZ with 32GB RAM (and 60 MBit connection)
takes... 5 seconds to load.
Gmail (HTML)... takes 0.5 seconds. (And about the same on my Netbook with a
Celeron)
Guess which one I use? It's like the entire world has forgotten what
productivity is.
~~~
Too
On the other hand, once you are in gmail, everything is literally instant,
opening the next email is faster than many desktop clients. It's designed for
longer use, not drive-by. How long does it take to open a new mail in gmail
lite? Do you have autocomplete on contacts and keyboard shortcuts for
navigation and labeling?
------
kinlan
Organizer of Chrome Dev Summit here.
Please do keep sending feedback and thoughts through on how can keep
improving.
In terms of session length, I can see that being an issue. We had strict union
regulations, and a lot of content to get through and I took the decision for
more but shorter length talks that we can expand with textual content after
the event.
We also tried to keep the theme for day 1 to everything we've learnt in the
last year, so what is the new minimum bar for web experiences, how to load
them quickly and how we've done it in the real world with commerce and media
experiences and wordpress and pwa.
On day 2 I wanted us to showcase where we think the web could be heading in
the next year, specifically with more of a focus on developer experience
(devtools etc, polymer, lit etc)
Not saying we hit all those goals, but I do feel pretty happy with the event
as a whole.
~~~
inglor
Hey, thanks for taking feedback!
As someone who was invited to attend - I really wished the talks were more low
level and technical. I'd really enjoy talks about how things are implemented
in Chrome, how the underlying APIs (for PWAs for example) work and so on.
~~~
kinlan
We are talking about that for next year.
We need to do a better job at audience segmentation because we have ranges
from senior dev to student, and CxO's etc and that's roughly why we stay a tad
higher level with a lot of case studies.
We might end up with different days or different events for the audiences.
~~~
ldd
I wish to voice the opposite view from OP: I love the fact that you stay at a
'higher level'. My primary focus when watching these talks is knowing the
current state of chrome, and some information directly from the source on what
you worked and will be working in the future.
Because of this, I want to say thank you _precisely_ for not giving more
lower-level details in your talks.
~~~
kinlan
:) thank you - it's a balance...
------
spankalee
Regarding lit-html, which I wrote the majority of, lit-html is not a new
framework, but simply a template library. This is called out specifically in
the talk.
> You can wrap lit-HTML in WCs, just like you can wrap React components up as
> WCs, but you gain nothing from it.
This isn't true either. lit-html has no component model, so by using it to
implement WCs, you get a component model.
> it’ll be in direct competition with Polymer, Angular, Svelte, Skate, and
> Stencil
A template library is not in direct competition with Web Component base
classes/frameworks, but can be used by them. It's already integrated with
Skate, will be integrated with Polymer soon, and Stencil is looking into using
it too.
~~~
dfabulich
Author here. I must begin by saying that lit-HTML is really interesting, and I
hope it does well. It will be particularly exciting if Polymer 3 or Polymer 4
or whatever primarily uses lit-HTML out of the box.
> lit-html is not a new framework, but simply a template library.
Nobody wants to be called a framework, do they? For years, React developers
insisted that it was nothing but a "view" layer, because everybody knows that
"frameworks" suck.
> lit-html has no component model, so by using it to implement WCs, you get a
> component model.
I think you mis/underestimate the extent to which you have a component model
already. What you already have is the equivalent of React's "functional
components," where the component is nothing but its render method.
> A template library is not in direct competition with Web Component base
> classes/frameworks, but can be used by them
It's great that WCs let you interop with all WC-based frameworks, but some
folks will avoid lit-HTML in favor of Stencil's JSX approach, or in favor of
Svelte's Vue-alike HTML components, or more generally to decide whether to
_observe_ changes and respond to them or whether to regenerate the UI as a
function of state.
Interop doesn't mean you're not in competition.
~~~
rictic
> I think you mis/underestimate the extent to which you have a component model
> already. What you already have is the equivalent of React's "functional
> components," where the component is nothing but its render method.
When we (Polymer folks) think of a component model, we think of a lifecycle.
Being notified when you boot up, when you're activated, when you're
deactivated, and when the state you care about changes. React has that, Web
Components have that, lit doesn't.
Agreed that there's a lot of baggage on the term `framework`, it's probably a
good idea to taboo the word and break it apart into the pieces that we care
about. IMO that's:
- how big is the cost of adding the dependency – mostly this is
the size of the library
- how big is the ecosystem of code that it can play nicely with
- are there well documented best practices
- is there a complicated black box of internals that do a bunch
of magic, or is it composed of small modular pieces that can
be understood in isolation
------
nawitus
"Specifically, they’d like you to use Polymer. The problem is that the Web
Component API is really unpleasant to use directly, especially compared to
React. That’s really holding Polymer back in the framework marketplace. Other
WC-based frameworks like Svelte, Skate, and Stencil abstract away from WCs,
treating them as a compilation target."
That argument feels like a non-sequitur. Polymer's API is different from the
Web Component API, so even if the Web Component API would be unpleasant to use
directly, that is not a criticism of a different API (in this case the Polymer
API). Polymer's API is "similar" to the native Web Component API though, but
it's designed to be easier to use than the native API.
~~~
spankalee
Polymer's API _is_ the Web Components API, with some helpers added for
reacting to property changes, augmenting templating and a few others. Polymer
is simply a base class for your elements that sits between HTMLElement and
your component class.
But I don't really get the "Web Components APIs are unpleasant" line of
criticism. The WC APIs are just the element constructor, connectedCallback,
disconnectedCallback, attributeChangedCallback and what methods and properties
you define on your component. These lifecycle methods are nearly identical to
what you get in React and just about every other framework. If those don't
have unpleasant APIs, Web Components don't.
~~~
dfabulich
Author here. It's not just me saying that Web Components are unpleasant. In
the article, I linked to Sam Saccone of Google saying that the WC developer
experience is significantly worse than React's developer experience.
[https://twitter.com/samccone/status/914528725852663808](https://twitter.com/samccone/status/914528725852663808)
"This of course is coming from someone who has used web components every work
day for the last 2 years. Hard to ignore the DX gap that exists."
To which Alex Russell, also of Google and one of the architects of the WC API,
replies, "Who's ignoring it?"
There are certainly some developers who compare and contrast Polymer and React
and prefer Polymer, but it's fair to say that the vast majority of developers
who have made this comparison have preferred React's developer experience.
Even Polymer's advocates seem to be holding their nose and using it because
they appreciate the long-term promise of Web Components interop.
Why? It's hard to say exactly, but I think it has to do with React's
guarantees that the UI will be a pure function of state. Lots of nifty React
features emerge from that. Polymer components make no such guarantees.
I'm actually pretty enthusiastic about lit-HTML as a way to close the gap.
We'll see how it goes.
~~~
spankalee
Sam's tweet has no specifics, neither does your article, about which APIs are
painful. Care to add any?
~~~
dmitriid
This article: [https://medium.com/@emilrmoeller/grow-with-the-browser-
learn...](https://medium.com/@emilrmoeller/grow-with-the-browser-learn-web-
component-fundamentals-86c2b1c8ac08)
“To do this automatically” is followed by dosens of lines of tedious
bolierplate. And that’s _for a single most common use case of adding a
property, and an attribute that are synced_. It’s then followed by yet more
boilerplate for adding a custom event.
A lot of stuff here: [https://jeremenichelli.io/2017/10/the-web-components-
experie...](https://jeremenichelli.io/2017/10/the-web-components-experience/)
To quote:
To achieve pretty basic mutations on small components, children references and
data manipulation there’s a lot of heavy lifting that really compromises the
developer experience.
And it’s a big deal, since developer experience is one of the reasons why
React or Vue are widely used in production.
Also, web components being included in a magical global store difficults
declarative and deterministic views or any other concept which hangs on a
visual map of dependencies like code splitting.
UNFORTUNATELY THE DEVELOPER EXPERIENCE OF BUILDING AN APPLICATION WITH WEB
COMPONENTS TODAY IS QUITE PAINFUL SAM SACCONE
—- end quote —-
~~~
spankalee
I replied in general below, but I'll take some extra time to respond to the
complaint about getters and setters.
Any JavaScript class that wants to define observable properties has to define
a getter/setter pair.
Manually, this usually looks like this:
class C {
get foo() { return this._foo; }
set (foo(v) { this._foo = v; this._somethingChanged(); }
}
From the part of the article you reference, you're complaining that Web
Components don't "solve" observable properties. This is because in JavaScript
there are already ways to do this with with getters, setters,
Object.defineProperty, and while that does involve some amount of
"boilerplate" there are helpers for both Web Components and plain classes that
will create these properties for you.
I really don't see why it's a valid criticism of Web Components that they
don't magically solve this problem when it's just the way JavaScript works. Of
course frameworks like Angular solve this problem by generating accessors for
you - _but so does every major Web Components library_. They all include some
way of letting an author declare observable properties and syncing them with
attributes. Given that the end result in DX is exactly the same as with other
frameworks, why the ding on Web Components? Why are Web Components held to a
higher standard and expected to "fix" JavaScript?
To show how absolutely easy this is, and how off-base the DX complain is,
here's how easy a Polymer 2 + TypeScript element is (TypeScript just to use
decorators, which will be standards JS someday...)
class MyElement extends Polymer.Element {
@property({notify: true, reflect: true}) foo: number;
}
That will create an observable property, fire a "foo-changed" event and set
the "foo" attribute when it changes, and listen for the "foo" attribute and
deserialize it to the foo property when the attribute is set.
Even without decorators, this is pretty damn easy to do, and the first thing
any Polymer developer learns:
class MyElement extends Polymer.Element {
properties = {
foo: {type: Number, notify: true, reflect: true}
}
}
Other Web Components libraries like Skate and Stencil include their own way of
declaring properties, just like other frameworks like Angular and Ember do.
The second article is also comparing raw Web Components with no helpers to a
framework that's full of helpers. You could just as easily saw JavaScript has
a broken DX if you tried to do React-style components without React. The
higher expectation for Web Components here is kind of ridiculous, to be
honest.
~~~
dmitriid
> Javascript > you complain about objects > don't magically solve > raw WCs vs
> helpers
etc. etc. etc.
And then you wonder why I'm so set against WebComponents. Because you (and Rob
Dodson and other WebComponent proponents) are entirely blind to how bad
WebComponent APIs are. I dunno, maybe your goal isn't to "sell" WebComponents,
but to sell Polymer.
WebComponent API is bad not because "we complain about how Javascript objects
are". We complain because WebComponents API is _horrendously bad_ , and that
was a _deliberate design choice_.
Current line of defence is "oh, it's just low level API" or "oh, it's just how
Javascript is", both of which are at best patently false.
Here's code to create _one single property with one single synced attribute_.
One. single. property/attribute pair. One.
set transitionDuration(value) {
this.setAttribute('transition-duration', value);
}
get transitionDuration() {
return this.getAttribute('transition-duration');
}
static get observedAttributes() {
return ['transition-duration'];
}
attributeChangedCallback(name, oldVal, newVal) {
if (name === 'transition-duration') {
// do something
}
}
There is no reality where this is good API design. There is no reality where
"this is how objects work in Javascript" is an excuse.
This is objectivly bad API design. Bad developer experience. However, you and
all other webcomponent proponents completely ignore this fact, and dismiss any
and all complaints out of hand.
Of course you do. You've got Polymer to promote [1]. If WebComponents had
better APIs, there would be no need for Polymer, would there. Because here's
how Polymer solves the problem, despite this being "oh, that's how Javascript
works".
static get properties() {
return {
transitionDuration: {
type: Number,
readOnly: false,
reflectToAttribute: true,
observer: 'methodName'
}
}
}
Oh. My. God. This is doable without any excuses about how Javascript works?
Really? Who would've thunk it?
[1] Hell, even in your "rebuttal" of criticism towards _WebComponents_ here's
what you write:
> To show how absolutely easy this is, and how off-base the DX complain is,
> here's how easy a _Polymer 2_ \+ TypeScript element is
Were we talking about the bad DX of Polymer? No. You are totally entirely
absolutely blind to the fact though. Because in your mind WebComponents ===
Polymer. And, sadly, for all intents and purposes it's true.
_edit: removed some erroneously pasted code_
~~~
nawitus
"maybe your goal isn't to "sell" WebComponents, but to sell Polymer."
The goal of Web Components are to sell a interop layer that is supported by
many (or even all) frameworks. It's not supposed to be a framework that has
the best developing experience.
The Polymer API is better than the Web Components API. The Polymer API is more
high level than the Web Components API. This is not by mistake, it's by
design. The higher level the Web Components API is, the more difficult it is
to use by a large number of wildly different frameworks.
"We complain because WebComponents API is horrendously bad, and that was a
deliberate design choice."
I don't think it matters much to be honest, because developers should use
frameworks, just like they are using frameworks at the moment.
"Here's code to create one single property with one single synced attribute.
One. single. property/attribute pair. One."
You need a "synced attribute" only for some frameworks, not all. Also, your
example is misleading, because the two last methods are only needed to be
defined once, so if you want 2 synced properties, the total number of methods
is 6, not 8.
"Bad developer experience."
Use a framework.
"If WebComponents had better APIs, there would be no need for Polymer, would
there."
The risk is too high to use the Polymer API for the Web Componenets API. In
addition, the more complex the API is, the more likely it is for the browsers
not to implement the API. It's better to have a simple native API and provide
different frameworks for a good user experience.
"Because in your mind WebComponents === Polymer."
Or maybe he thinks that frameworks should be used, as intended.
~~~
dmitriid
> The goal of Web Components are to sell a interop layer that is supported by
> many > Or maybe he thinks that frameworks should be used, as intended.
Translation: instead of providing a good DX we're going to sell Polymer
> The Polymer API is more high level than the Web Components API. This is not
> by mistake, it's by design.
Indeed. By crappy design with horrible developer experience
> The higher level the Web Components API is, the more difficult it is to use
> by a large number of wildly different frameworks.
Hmm... How about "let's reduce the need for and dependency on multiple
frameworks"? When will that ever be a goal?
> You need a "synced attribute" only for some frameworks, not all.
Surprise, Polymer's API provides a possibility to define that.
> Also, your example is misleading, because the two last methods are only
> needed to be defined once, so if you want 2 synced properties, the total
> number of methods is 6, not 8.
Oh. Right. 6, not 8. I wonder if I ever complained about the number of methods
required? Nope, what I complained about is _the amount of tedious boilerplate
you need to write to implement the most basic and common of things_.
If I need 1 more synced property/attribute pair, I will need:
\- 1 extra setter
\- 1 extra getter
\- 1 extra item in the attributes list
\- 1 extra if clause in the callback.
>> "Bad developer experience." > Use a framework.
How about: platform provides a well-designed API that doesn't require a
framework for the most basic and common functionality?
As an example:
\- DOM APIs are horrible, and quickly devolve into tedious error-prone
boilerplate
\- jQuery API is amazing
\- Does this mean that DOM APIs _suddenly_ become developer friendly? Does
this mean they are beyond any criticism?
Same with WCs
~~~
nawitus
"Hmm... How about "let's reduce the need for and dependency on multiple
frameworks"? When will that ever be a goal?"
That's not a realistic goal, because there's no common agreement on the
framework API. If there were, every framework would have the same API already.
"Surprise, Polymer's API provides a possibility to define that."
Your point being?
"Oh. Right. 6, not 8. I wonder if I ever complained about the number of
methods required? Nope, what I complained about is the amount of tedious
boilerplate you need to write to implement the most basic and common of
things."
You're not intellectually honest, so I will stop this discussion.
~~~
dmitriid
The moment I call you out twisting my words, you call me intellectually
dishonest. Suit yourself. This entire discussion shows the actual intellectual
dishonesty of people who defend WebComponents.
> Your point being
You, and others are completely entirely blind to the fact that:
\- WebComponent API is horrible DX
\- WebComponent API can be made better _within the platform_ , without the
need to rely on third-party frameworks.
However, if the goal is not to push WebComponents forward, but to sell Polymer
to as many devs as possible, it’s not surprising.
------
daphneokeefe
I attended the event in person, and overall enjoyed it. But I keep wondering:
is the reason Google wants us to squeeze our file sizes and page load time
down to the bare minimum because they want to maximize the bandwidth available
for more and larger ads?
~~~
abalone
No, it's a much larger existential threat. It because they're fighting to keep
the web competitive with native apps. The more that the world shifts from the
web to native apps, the less people use their web search engine.
~~~
colordrops
And yet Google refuses to allow web apps / PWAs on their Play store.
~~~
kinlan
We don't refuse or disallow. We just don't take an arbitrary URL and list it
in the store automatically.
We announced Trusted Web activities
[https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2017/10/using-
twa](https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2017/10/using-twa) which give
you a fullscreen surface for web content in an Android App in the store and
allow you to offer more integration with the Android operating system
(protocol and scheme handling, quick links etc)... I do think this is
interesting, I worked on the Chrome Web Store when it launched and the number
one complaint was that the experiences "were just bookmarks" and I think
Trusted Web activities give us a chance to experiment with deeper web
integrations on the host platform before we are able to standardize it.
~~~
colordrops
Trusted web activity is not the same as a PWA. They are not cross platform.
Why can't PWAs go through a similar getting process to apps to get onto Play?
~~~
kinlan
The process of getting apps onto Play, is to create an Android app... so I'm
not clear on what you mean. Someone will create the tooling that will
automatically create this.
Trusted Web activity is just a general way to launch you PWA fullscreen from
an Android actitivy.
~~~
colordrops
How does that jive with the fact that Play also has books and movies? Those
are not Android apps. There is absolutely no technical reason that Play
couldn't also serve as a discovery and installation (i.e. icon on the desktop)
mechanism for PWA-compliant applications. Users would never know the
difference.
------
inglor
If they'd like us to start building progressive web apps - they should pull-
request webkit with PWA APIs.
Safari doesn't have those because Apple doesn't see them as a priority - but
after talking to Apple engineers who work on Safari it turns out that it's
mostly because it isn't prioritized and not because they don't want the
feature.
It's not _that_ much work either on their end.
If I knew I could get PWA capabilities on an iPhone - I would definitely
consider PWAs for replacing native development entirely.
~~~
kinlan
Service Worker and Manifest are in development in Safari. It's quite a
significant amount of work to land the APIs
It's not as simple as just forcing it in. SW can require deeper integration
with the OS and network stacks that we don't have the ability to change on iOS
or macOS.
~~~
inglor
Thanks for answering. You are correct that they are under development but
they're moving pretty slowly and I got the feeling contribution would be
really appreciated.
For example, `fetch` in service workers - caching and request intercepting
could really improve the "default" iPhone experience in PWAs.
I realize that getting this request is annoying (Build a feature in another
browser) but I really think it could significantly push the web as a whole.
It would also be great to see the Chrome team fix some of the more annoying
bugs in the existing APIs (WebRTC has some really annoying ones).
~~~
kinlan
Re: web rtc .. yes... And getting the screen share API in would be nice too.
Re: helping. I think we have some engineers supporting our predictablity
efforts on WebKit (i.e helping to smooth out edge cases) but I don't think we
are working pushing larger features in...
------
josteink
> It’s the Google Payment API. After replacing Google Checkout with Google
> Wallet, and then replacing that Android Pay, the docs have the audacity to
> call it “The newest way to pay with Google.”
> The Google Payment API only works in Chrome on Android
Why does Google even bother making this?
~~~
ascorbic
Chrome for Android is the most popular browser in the world, so it's certainly
worth bothering, even if it's not a desirable thing for them to be doing.
------
therealmarv
At least Google addresses the problems we have with Internet in
countries/continents like e.g. Afrika or Philippines.
Really... it's a whole different world if you only have 500Kbit/s download
rate and you can see easily who has done their homework good to address
countries with slow internet and who did not. Some websites will get
completely unusable in this areas! And you will find out that Opera Mini is
your new best friend.
Only want to mention one heavy media company which has done a near perfect
job: Instagram. This app is even blazing fast with slow internet. Well done,
really.
------
curt15
Given that Chrome apps are on their way out, a nice demonstration of
Progressive Web Apps would be to make Gmail into one to replace the
functionality of Gmail Offline.
------
seanwilson
Are there any good examples of progressive web apps? I made a web app recently
that had to work offline for use as a visitor display...I looked into service
workers for this (there's a Webpack plugin that helps) but they seemed
complicated plus difficult to debug. It seems like you have to be careful you
don't lock your users out with a service worker bug because now a browser
refresh might not do the same thing for everyone now.
~~~
kinlan
[https://outweb.io/](https://outweb.io/) and [https://pwa-
directory.appspot.com/](https://pwa-directory.appspot.com/) have collections
of progressive web apps. They all have differing levels of offline support
based on their needs.
------
Viper007Bond
> Dan from Automattic came up to say that their closed-source Jetpack plugin
> for WP also offers preliminary PWA support.
Closed source?
[https://github.com/Automattic/jetpack](https://github.com/Automattic/jetpack)
[https://github.com/Automattic/jetpack/pull/7963](https://github.com/Automattic/jetpack/pull/7963)
------
ronaldj
Service Workers creep me out, but maybe I'm in the minority. I don't want web
pages to be able to execute code if I'm not actually on their page. To be
honest, I don't even want most apps to background refresh on my phone.
------
Illniyar
Why should I use service workers to cache urls as opposed to using checksum
urls with cache control (I.e. script.hz15cbsj.js etc...)
Unless my site can actually do something offline, service workers for caching
is just an extra headache
------
swyx
as someone considering if I should adopt service workers or just wait for the
next shiny thing can I just ask - if service workers were on iOS today, would
any of you still have other reasons NOT to adopt it? thank you in advance
------
fiatjaf
If they want PWAs they should stop promoting and encouraging native apps.
~~~
threeaccents
PWAs are not supposed to replace native apps just to augment today's web apps.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
'Break up big tech's monopoly': Smaller rivals join growing chorus - techslave
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tech-antitrust/break-up-big-techs-monopoly-smaller-rivals-join-growing-chorus-ahead-of-congress-hearing-idUSKBN1ZG17J
======
cwxm
I definitely see the argument for why Big Tech's position in the US is
arguably too dominant.
If we look at the picture globally, Big Tech might be necessary for the
western world to prevent the proliferation of China's semi-state-backed tech
giants outside of China.
Could breaking up big tech in the United States mean ceding position to
China's tech giants?
~~~
screye
No, it would be enforcing the same requirements on chinese companies as the US
enforces on their own. If they don't then fine them just as much, to have
access to the US market.
It is not like cheap manufacturing, where the US has to cede ground to China
because they simply can't compete. Tech is where the US excels.
~~~
orcasauce
This is rapidly changing. On the international stage we're competing with
state backed monopolies that don't suffer the same burden of internal US anti-
competitive policy. It may damage access to the US market, but the expanding
global market is becoming more appetizing anyway. Consider China's Belt and
Roads initiative.
~~~
ocdtrekkie
I would argue that monopolies have a detrimental effect on innovation, as they
kill disruptive new technologies in favor of their established services.
Having a strong anti-competitive policy may help us excel over China.
~~~
Nasrudith
Even given actual monopolies (I strongly disagree with the current claims) for
competition it is a push and pull thing whose specifics vary by situation.
Monopolies have better economies of scale as an intrinsic real advantage but
tend to be more hidebound and less innovative as they both don't need it in
the moment and from a fear or cannibalization. But not always for innovation -
they may also have the resources to devote to R&D that smaller players would
lack.
The mechanism of the monopoly also has significance for it determines what
needs to be done to maintain it. Although having a "better" source like
leveraging a prior runaway success is no guarantee that they won't turn to bad
ways to preserve it like regulatory capture with no other purpose served.
~~~
Apocryphon
Xerox PARC had a ton of innovation and world-class R&D, but consumers didn’t
benefit from any of it until smaller disruptive startups made good use of it.
~~~
LargoLasskhyfv
Whereby the disruptive startups disrupted the very core of the innovations,
namely one integrated environment where every component was 'aware' of the
capabilities of others, and you could build and interconnect them in a visual
way.
Instead we have house of cards, layered up on top of each other, without
regard for the bloat, impedance mismatches, (intentional) incompabilities and
cognitive load that brings with it.
Nicely done...
------
m23khan
on one side I completely understand the need for healthy market competition in
tech industry. However, you have to realize the amount of innovation and
products FAANG companies (and Microsoft) have rolled out -- it is unimaginable
how we would be able to function equally efficiently both at personal and
commercial level.
On personal level for example, I use gmail/google search/rely on google to
tell me weather and search news and do FX rate conversion, do some unit
conversions, etc. I used to own android based phone and it made life simple to
have gmail compatible app and the likes.
Similarly, I can use amazon for shopping, trying out / learning AWS and even
get kindle to read ebooks should I desire. heck, amazon provides entire
infrastructure to efficiently deliver my parcels --- better than my
Government's mailing program.
\- Similarly majority of Business world runs mainly on backs of Microsoft
(when it comes to corporate tooling and computer OS).
\- Even take example of Apple -- their products are worldclass and its
integration with its own suite of products makes life so much simpler --
iPhone, iWatch, their storage offerings, etc.
Now imagine having to utilize products between dozens of companies instead of
these giants who you don't know would be able to survive in long run. And
those blaming these tech giants for lack of collaboration for a market
standard -- sure, that is correct but remember it was much worse to integrate
products and services among different vendors back in 1980s and 1990s when you
had dozens of medium and large companies.
~~~
sshumaker
That’s what people said about AT&T before we broke it up in 1982 - that it
would hurt innovation. This was the company that had Bell Labs after all.
Instead, we had an absolute revolution in communication technology since -
from fax lines, to modems, to cell connections, to the commercial internet.
It turns out that innovation happens more often when there is a lot of
competition in the market. And the market figures out how to build standards
for interop - you don’t need all of the products from the same company to get
them to work together.
~~~
antiterra
Your claim about innovation thriving when there is competition may be true,
but your examples run counter to that. Commercial fax machines, modems,
TCP/IP, Arpanet,and cell phones all predate the AT&T breakup.
------
jayd16
Has a break up ever worked historically? The US telecom industry is not a
great example of competition.
I'd much prefer laws preventing user lock in and lowing the burden of starting
a competitor to these companies.
~~~
s17n
You might be too young to remember, but phone calls used to cost money. So I
think you could say the break up was in fact a success.
~~~
jayd16
Landlines are still expensive. You can easily shop around with cell service
though, thanks to public management of the spectrum.
------
Despegar
This piece starts with Tile and Apple but that isn't going to go anywhere in
terms of antitrust. Tile's grievance is just the standard multi-decade
grievance of a startup that gets sherlocked by Apple and incorporated into the
OS. Unless they have patents that Apple is infringing, there's really no case
for them to make.
Google on the other hand is a straightforward antitrust case. I think
Facebook's acquisitions of Instagram and WhatsApp could potentially also be
undone. Amazon seems to have been trying to expand the market definition to
all of retail or ecommerce, at least in their PR, but an antitrust case
against them would likely define the market more narrowly to particular
verticals (like book sales).
------
Nasrudith
Really I am sick of the endless hit pieces with definitions so bad that the
authors belong in the Hague from dinosaur companies who don't realize the
reason they fell isn't because of some bogeyman but because the problem can be
found in the mirror - they are the architects of their own downfall.
Translate the subtitle "Smaller rivals join growing chorus ahead of Congress
hearing" sensationalist hit piece into reality and you get captain fucking
obvious "Rivals: Please hamper our competitors - to grandstanders interested
in maintaining lobbyist money shakedown".
The Basecamp complaint is nonsensical even in the framework of nonsense of
Trademarks. If I announce that I am selling Yamaha Jetskis and have the actual
product (not a counterfeit) their job is to shut the hell up.
~~~
skrebbel
> definitions so bad that the authors belong in the Hague
As someone from nearby The Hague, um, what does this mean?
~~~
Nasrudith
It was an oblique reference to the trials for travesties and torture. Calling
offering and promoting store brands monopolistic abuse for instance.
Not an implication that the trials are illegitimate or anything like that.
------
uncle_j
This has to be done by the ground up by offering better alternatives rather
than trying to tear down these tech companies.
Also don't use their services. It is pretty easy to remove most of Google from
your life. I don't think Google search is even that much better than the
alternatives anymore (I am using Duck Duck Go and they are about the same
these days tbh).
~~~
paxys
Competition is not the answer to monopoly, since it the monopoly status which
is preventing competition in the first place. This is why antitrust laws
exist.
~~~
bagacrap
GP claims there is healthy competition, eg ddg. Therefore I guess by your
claim that monopoly blocks competition, there's no monopoly, unless you want
to claim DDG actually sucks, which would be an unpopular stance to stake here
on hn.
~~~
Apocryphon
The claim could perhaps be rephrased as stating there is no (substantial)
competition. For instance, Sailfish OS is technically a competitor to
iOS/Android, but it is by no means one with any considerable market share.
------
echelon
If the Democrats win the election this year, I think Google and Facebook both
stand serious chances of looking at antitrust cases.
Google is in the most dire situation. They own search, own the browser and
phone walled gardens that bring you there, own all the ads, knee-kick ad
blocking attempts, have started taking over content (AMP), have a surveillance
panopticon, control standards and neuter challenges to them (HTML5 is less
semantic than XHTML), have surveillance devices in the home, embrace-extend-
extinguish entire product spaces, kill products people rely on, don't offer
support ...
Google has its hands in too many pies, actively hurts other industries, and
they're creepy af.
Facebook might have less of a case against it, but they routinely flaunt
Democratic lawmakers, shape public opinion in bad ways, and buy out the
competition. Not a strong case, but I think it would be argued from a social
good perspective.
Apple and Microsoft seem safe. I have no idea about Amazon, since they have
competition in all their markets.
~~~
ravenstine
This is making the assumption that the Democratic party doesn't have a vested
interest in these Silicon Valley giants. Democrats running for office might be
slinging virtue, but I have my doubts that the party itself is particularly
interested in breaking up institutions that are politically aligned with them.
Having a Democrat president didn't stop the expansion of the surveillance
apparatus or the monopolization of tech and communication.
~~~
eckza
I don't want to sound too blackpill, but anymore I really feel like political-
party-based virtue claims - from both sides - are, by and large, expressions
of virtue theatre that are designed to garner support.
Some people in politics really do care; but at least in the US, it's hard not
to look at the state of things and come to the conclusion that the system
lends itself to corruption that goes so deep that nobody with any real
influence has a vested interest in "virtues" outside of using them to curry
favor with the general public.
Again, I apologize for how jaded this sounds... but it's really hard to feel
any other way.
~~~
riversflow
It doesn’t sound too blackpill to me at all, in fact I’d take it a step
further. I often wonder whether the domination of Google-Amazon-Facebook
doesn’t really serve the interests of the “Deep State” making them essentially
bulletproof. Why would you want to break apart a domestic company when they
serve as an international parasurveillance apparatus? You hear more from the
feds about Apple needing to backdoor their phones than the anti-competitive
behavior or spying that the rest take part in. Like you said, it’s probably
just lip service from (most) of the Democrats.
~~~
EdSharkey
The fact that your comment here hasn't been downvoted to oblivion suggests to
me the only beef most people have with what you've said is that you criticized
the Democrats. I find this really surprising given typical HN'er political
leanings.
Is this an indication of some sort of tipping point being reached? Have most
people regardless of politics come to the same conclusion about the reality of
the silicon valley surveillance-fueled power grab?
------
s17n
Basecamp is so full of shit here, they just don't want to have to pay for
traffic and it's nothing to do with monopoly (if there were three major search
engines, they'd all be selling the Basecamp keyword, because users don't
care).
~~~
josephd79
Imagine having to pay 70k plus a month so people searching for your company
name do not get redirected to a competitor using your company name to
advertise their business.
also lets be real there's really one 1 search engine.
~~~
s17n
Personally I don't have an ethical problem with search being pay to play.
Regardless, I'm pretty sure having competition in the search space wouldn't
solve the problem (because as I said, users don't care) - what basecamp really
wants here is regulation / a stronger interpretation of trademark law.
------
40acres
A key point for me in regarding big tech monopoly parts is that some of the
biggest companies, when viewed from a potential market cap perspective, are
possibly worth less than the sum of it's parts.
Facebook has a market-cap of ~630B. Individually you could easily see how an
independent Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp would be worth more. AWS is
probably the most valuable company in the world but is tucked away with the
P&L of the various other parts of Amazon.
------
ilaksh
Breaking them up is great but you are going to end up back in a similar
situation if you can't build large platforms/marketplaces like those companies
provided.
I think the way to do that without having a conflict of interest is to
leverage decentralized technologies to create large public
platforms/marketplaces that companies can plug into.
------
6510
I had a different idea. In some areas law makers and tech companies would need
to write and follow so many vague rules it could be better to have a
government agency that does the work for them. It wouldn't be perfect but it
would create a different kind of problem that can be compared to the one we
are having right now.
Moderation for example could "simply" be part of law enforcement. Having
corporations design their own rules/laws on top of the legal system is costly
and undesirable. A proper legal formula would have punishments that scale with
the offense.
Having government manage authentication could rule out banning people across
all services without stating a reason.
Accidentally having some back ground music in a youtube video wouldn't have
cops rip your mailbox out of the ground or cancel your drivers license. It is
that absurd to have google do it.
Some processes need some type of private data, if the data is stored on
government servers access could be managed on a case by case basis. Likewise,
data transferred between google services would have to be routed though gov
servers where the request can be compared with the goals.
Google could provide a set of adverts to be shown next to email but gmail
wouldn't provide a source of information to display adds elsewhere.
~~~
asdfasgasdgasdg
> Moderation for example could "simply" be part of law enforcement.
Not in countries with freedom of speech enshrined in the constitution.
~~~
6510
Oh LOL, I see now that what I said can be taken to mean the opposite of what I
had in mind.
I think we have good laws for what goes and doesn't go in public. Much more
relaxed than the big platforms terms of service. You already get arrested if
you publish the "right" kind of video. I'm simply suggesting we should strip
away whatever social engineering facebook and google have in mind.
The dumb account termination as a punishment for everything is like revoking
peoples citizenship by administrative punishment - in a one size fits all
approach.
Google's tos literally says they can terminate your account without stating a
reason. That is much more dystopian than the Chinese social credit system.
------
Ozzie_osman
Don't break them up. Just don't allow them to act monopolistically.
~~~
Mangalor
That's like asking bees not to sting. Corporations seek monopoly. It's just
what they do.
~~~
dang
You've been posting lots of unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to HN.
Would you please stop?
The idea here is: if you have a substantive point to make, make it
thoughtfully; if you don't, please don't comment until you do.
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
------
BurningFrog
If the headline at least said "monopolies"...
------
otras
> Google allows competitors to purchase ads on Basecamp’s trademark, and then
> _blocks consumers from reaching its site_ , Co-Founder David Heinemeier
> Hansson told Reuters in an interview.
Emphasis added. What does "blocks" means in this context?
~~~
nkingsy
Blocks means puts a page of ads first. If I don’t pay to “defend my brand”, my
competitors show up first in a search for my trademarked brand name. If I do
pay, my registered users will regularly ship money from me to google just by
being lazy.
~~~
manfredo
So by "blocking" they mean, "if I don't buy ands and my competitors do, then
people will see my competitors' brands before mine". Isn't this fundamental to
how advertisement works?
~~~
satyrnein
If someone searches for "project management software" and then is shown ads
from whoever bought ads for those terms, I think everyone would agree that
feels fair. If someone clicks your ad, you are happy to pay because this is a
fresh new lead delivered into your lap.
What rankles in the Basecamp example (not saying it rises to the level of
antitrust, though) is that the user is specifically searching for Basecamp.
Basecamp has already "earned" this lead though their other marketing spend, or
word of mouth, or whatever. However, if they don't pay Google, they risk
losing this lead to competitors sniping the "Basecamp" term. In a way, Google
is selling Basecamp's leads to competitors (contrary to what the user actually
wants!) using their "monopoly" in search.
~~~
pb7
The user wants the best product for their needs. If Basecamp only survives
because its users don’t know about alternatives, then it’s not a very good
business. This is _actual_ competition: building the best product and letting
the customers decide what they prefer. They already know about Basecamp in
this scenario so seeing ads for other products will only let them make a more
informed choice. The competitors, after all, are betting their advertising
budget on the opinion that their product is better. It’s not free.
------
bawana
Apple is the largest security holding in the portfolios of the members of
Congress. It is safe from antitrust.
------
alpineidyll3
Antitrust law in general needs to come out of it's slumber if the us wants to
be a dynamic economy. I recommend the book: the myth of capitalism to anyone
who wants to get more angry about this subject.
------
_tkzm
that's like saying that it is time for a dead patient to take his medicine.
------
buboard
I can't help but think that companies like basecamp or tile, largely brought
about this situation to themselves. Neither google nor apple should be
platforms to be dependent on. They should be used as startup platforms, get
some momentum and then actively seek to build their own outreach to customers
independently. Putting all your money in someone else's bag for years and
expecting them not to steal some , is borderline delusional. Rent seeking is a
spontaneous behavior of big platforms. HN orthodoxy will suggest otherwise,
but i think everyone who depends on corporate owned platforms should start
pulling away as soon as they have momentum. Citing the lack of alternatives is
a self-fulfilling prophecy: if nobody tries to find an alternative pathway ,
there just won't be one
~~~
johnward
Google has like 80% of the search market share. How does one not become
dependent on that traffic source?
~~~
closeparen
Before Google, the local newspaper had like 80% of advertising market share in
each city, and many were owned by national conglomerates.
~~~
marcosdumay
I highly doubt that.
But anyway, I don't see how that's relevant.
~~~
closeparen
Because Google has not changed the structure of the market, only which player
sits in that position.
~~~
robbrown451
But when you advertised in a newspaper, you didn't have to fear the newspaper
suddenly becoming your competitor and then refusing to run your ads.
Well, I suppose that might've happened if you were another publication or
something. But it was relatively rare. Also, newspapers weren't the only way
people advertised, for instance the yellow pages was a big deal when I was a
kid. (and it was the subject of a Ralph Nader article calling it out as a
monopoly:
[https://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2004/08/fo...](https://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2004/08/fort_dix_vetera.html)
)
~~~
bagacrap
Google refused to run someone's ads? When I search for "cloud hosting" the
first two things I see are ads for IBM and Lenovo. The third hit is an ad for
Google.
~~~
robbrown451
Right but what about having a product in an app store and then next thing you
know Apple or Google has their own product that competes with it.
------
deevolution
We're essentially living under techno-feudalist system. I don't see breaking
up Big Tech's monopoly as fixing this. There needs to be a fundamental shift
away from centralized platforms to decentralized p2p platforms. That's the
only real way to rebel against the current system of exploitation.
~~~
snarf21
I disagree. We have no decentralized platforms that work at scale. I think
breaking up the big companies and unwinding the mergers of the last 5 years
would be a huge help. Everything from IG and WhatsApp to Whole Foods to the
Comcast, Disney, ATT, Verizon acquisitions should all go back out.
The other way to make exploitation harder is to pass some regulations that you
aren't allowed to collect data on people and sell it without explicit
permission. You must opt-in and you can't be penalized for saying no. People
complain about Facebook and Google spying on you and forget that the carriers
know where every single person is 24/7\. They know (mostly) every website that
every single person visits and at what times via DNS lookups. This data is
scary and they shouldn't be able to collect it let alone sell it.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
My Next Adventure - edward
http://textslashplain.com/2015/12/23/my-next-adventure/
======
falsedan
Kind of wish these sorts of career moves PR releases were announced like
transfers/signings for professional athletes.
~~~
ericjang
"Google has signed Fiddler engineer Eric Lawrence to a lifetime deal in what
one source familiar with the negotiations said is a fairly ordinary hiring.
“We are excited to add Eric to our lineup,” Masko Askov said. “He is a
talented player who we feel can make significant contributions to our Chrome
team.”
A company spokesperson would not say how much Google paid."
(in all seriousness, congrats to Mr. Lawrence).
------
draw_down
Sounds like a blast, good luck. I concur with the "dumbest person in the room"
advice.
~~~
brianwawok
* I prefer second dumbest in case we need a fall guy
------
hyperrail
Interesting that Eric Lawrence didn't choose to go back to Microsoft. Though
given how much vitriol he directs on Twitter at MSFT and the IE/Edge group he
was part of, I imagine neither he nor they wanted him back...
~~~
ocdtrekkie
I'm not sure going back ever seems like the right move. You aren't necessarily
opening yourself up to more opportunity in most cases, returning to a former
employer, and as your comment indicates, you may find things have changed in
ways you don't like while you were gone.
~~~
ChuckMcM
I've not seen too many cases where people going back has succeeded. It is
certainly a different sort of relationship post partum.
------
dblock
Philip Su mentioned in the article runs the London Facebook office. I am just
glad Eric is not joining that one :)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ex-Googlers penetrating Silicon Valley startup hierarchy - grellas
http://www.mercurynews.com/top-stories/ci_17574915?nclick_check=1
======
nostrademons
I think one of the biggest obstacles to the formation of a "Google mafia" on
par with the PayPal mafia is that by-and-large, Googlers don't want to leave.
Many of the key figures in the development of the search engine are still
working on search, in high-up leadership positions. Googlers generally have a
fair bit of latitude to pick their projects, so if they don't like what
they're doing, they can do something else within the company instead of
leaving and taking on the risk of founding a company.
Contrast that to PayPal, where _the whole company_ was bought by a big,
established competitor, one that they'd roundly trounced in the marketplace
beforehand. Of course a lot of the employees will leave - the culture of a
place usually completely changes after an acquisition.
~~~
joshu
There are a LOT of ex-googles startups out there. Not a huge number of
successful ones but they are around.
~~~
PakG1
I'd be curious to know how many of those ex-Googler startups were founded by
xooglers that were first-100 employees. Any "startup mafia" would seem to be
made up mostly from people in that group.
~~~
bfe
At least one startup comes to mind to qualify under that criterion, Friendfeed
(Paul Buchheit).
------
jonburs
I find it a bit amusing that articles of this sort only evaluate people's most
recent pre-startup employment. Sure, the Beluga folk previously were at
Google. Two of the three started at Microsoft after college, however -- I
worked with them both bac then. Of those two one went straight from MS to
Google; the other had a more complicated path.
------
tansey
There were only a handful of Paypal founders and virtually all were extremely
successful. There were 3,021 pre-IPO Google employees [1]. Seems like an
unfair comparison.
[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Google>
------
joshu
No we aren't.
(I am an investor in both Weatherbill and Optimizely. Hmm.)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Valve Launches Half-Life: Alyx Workshop Tools, Updates Game for Linux - evo_9
https://uploadvr.com/valve-half-life-alyx-development-tools/
======
0xdeadb00f
> Several sample maps are also included with the release alongside the “entire
> set of Half-Life: Alyx maps…as editable source for reference – this includes
> a large collection of interactive objects and prefabs.”
Holy cow! This seems huge.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Bird lays off up to 5% of workforce - pseudolus
https://techcrunch.com/2019/03/14/bird-lays-off-up-to-5-of-workforce/
======
013a
> The recent events are a reflection of shifting geographical needs
You know, I think what they're experiencing is, uh, Winter. This might be a
foreign concept for people who live in sunny Santa Monica, so I'll explain:
for about 5 months in most of the US, it gets really cold outside, kind of
like your freezer. Crystalized water falls from the sky, and riding a scooter
becomes both dangerous and very uncomfortable, so most people don't do it.
Unlike, say, Uber, your revenue will likely take a real big hit during this
time, instead of increasing.
More bad news for you, this does happen every year. Heck, in many of your
largest markets, like Minneapolis and Chicago, it can last up to 8 months!
I'm available for hire if you need boots on the ground in this part of the
country. First recommendation: Maybe don't keep hundreds of scooters on the
streets during heavy snowfall! As far as I could tell, the total scooter
capacity didn't decrease substantially over the past four months, no one was
riding them, and I'm sure they took a lot of damage from the bad weather.
Hunker down and wait for the sun!
~~~
mayneack
It's been really cold in LA for the last month. We have weather too.
[https://la.curbed.com/2019/3/1/18246745/los-angeles-cold-
wea...](https://la.curbed.com/2019/3/1/18246745/los-angeles-cold-weather-
temperature-record-february)
~~~
labster
We have four seasons in L.A.: Fire, Flash Flood, Earthquake, and Awards.
Seriously, I've been noticing the cold. I haven't had to wear long pants for
the whole season in over a decade. It feels so normal, going back to how it
was in my childhood, but I know it's only a brief respite from climate change.
~~~
Zarath
In Minneapolis, we say: Winter, and Construction.
------
graaben
I live in LA and the scooter situation is starting to get out of hand, at last
count we had 5 companies competing in my neighborhood. I think it does solve a
necessary problem, but there are easily 5+ scooters for every rider now. I
fail to see how any of them can get this to profitability soon, let alone all
5.
~~~
jdavis703
To put this in perspective, there are about 8 parking spaces for every car in
the US [0]. A parking lot costs about $5,000 to $50,000 per space, depending
on if it’s a gravel lot vs a parking garage. Yet parking lot operators and
rental car companies are still able to make a profit.
0: [https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-b-goldstein/does-every-
ca...](https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-b-goldstein/does-every-car-
need-8-parking-spaces-ride-sharing-can-save-emissions)
Edited to remove sarcastic wording.
~~~
WrtCdEvrydy
If people weren't bad actors, I bet you a ride sharing company where you can
just get into a car and drive around with it would make big money.
Just charge per minute and allow the owner to track the position continuously.
~~~
jimmy1
How do you think rental car companies stay in business? You are still liable
for the damage to the car if you blatantly abuse it, and you are still liable
for property damage or accidents in states that require insurance and insure
the driver.
This is just a car rental for a shorter amount of time. And in D.C. we had
something called ZipCar which was pretty close to that.
~~~
newnewpdro
When I was in the bay area zipcars were consistently driven by some of the
worst drivers on the road.
It's like tourists in rental cars but worse, since these people often have
_never_ owned a car and drive very infrequently. I know people who never drove
until their 30s then got a drivers license just to access zipcars. They're
exceptionally bad drivers.
~~~
jimmy1
Right but it doesn't matter if they are bad drivers. They are still liable for
damages and any accidents they cause. If you get in a wreck/get a ticket in a
ZipCar, it is still _your_ insurance that goes up, and points on _your_
license, and _you_ have to pay the ticket.
~~~
newnewpdro
Which means nothing to the other drivers and pedestrians sharing space with
these hazardous nuisances.
Personally I prefer these people use electric scooters than N-thousand-pound
>100HP vehicles.
------
kozikow
When I discuss with friends outside of Bay Area the electric scooters startups
are one of symbols of Silicon Valley loosing the touch with reality.
Not saying they are necessarily not viable, just that is how the rest of the
world sees us.
------
saintPirelli
Here in Vienna there are three companies competing, with Bird having
significantly reduced their radius of operation, it is practically unusable
now. We have a few "startup-hubs" here and I don't think you can reach a
single one by Bird, which seems like a bad strategy.
~~~
croisillon
four at the moment (Lime, Bird, Tier, Wynd) and a few more in the planning
(Flash, VOI, Arolla)
~~~
saintPirelli
I have never even heard of Wynd, tried a websearch, DDG says it's either a
Scottish poet or a small lane and Google says it's a portable air purifier. I
think it's just called WIND?
~~~
croisillon
you're right, it's a I
[https://www.wind.co/austria/](https://www.wind.co/austria/)
------
Simulacra
I love the scooters in Washington DC, and I don’t really mind that there are
all these different companies. Eventually they will consolidate and will get
two or three really good ones, and all will be great. Parking is miserable
here, but it makes it more tolerable when I park six blocks from where I need
to be, and scooter over.
------
blhack
I personally would love to see cities pouring funding into these scooter
companies. For me, at least, they are infinitely more useful than the other
public transportation options I have available.
------
smadge
These birds are out of control.
~~~
p1mrx
HR leaves the window open; pigeon lands, pecks at the Del key.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: must follow entrepreneurs on Twitter? - kodeshpa
Please submit Twitter handles - name .
======
mindcrime
A couple of existing such lists:
[http://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-best-entrepreneurs-to-
follo...](http://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-best-entrepreneurs-to-follow-on-
Twitter)
[http://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-top-entrepreneurs-to-
follow...](http://www.quora.com/Who-are-the-top-entrepreneurs-to-follow-on-
Twitter)?
~~~
kodeshpa
Thanks this list if useful
------
combiclickwise
I made this page a while back using Robert Scoble's list
[http://www.readevery.com/best?q=500_tech_entrepreneurs_to_fo...](http://www.readevery.com/best?q=500_tech_entrepreneurs_to_follow_by_Robert_Scoble)
------
kodeshpa
@paulg -- Paul Graham @
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Interview with a 419 scammer - peter123
http://www.scam-detectives.co.uk/blog/2010/01/22/interview-with-a-scammer-part-one/
======
alanthonyc
Here's a great article (from 2006) about how a theoretically smart guy fell
for, and still believes, that the scammer to whom he lost tons of money were
the real deal.
<http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/05/15/060515fa_fact>
------
JacobAldridge
_Putting aside whether I believe this is accurate or not momentarily, look at
these conversion rate._
1% Response rate for unsolicited direct mail ('spam' - heck, I used to have
that response rate doing real estate direct mail with actual letters!)
5% Conversion rate from responders to 'clients'
Average 'sale' $7,500
So 100,000 spam emails generate 100 responses, which is 5 'clients' and
$37,500 in revenue. Return per email is 37c - with a negligible cost to
harvest and send it's little wonder my spam filter works so hard.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
How to land a startup internship - aashaysanghvi
https://medium.com/@aashaysanghvi/how-to-land-a-startup-internship-269b1845857e#.kg5z1o2wu
======
forgotmysn
how to land a start-up internship: find a start up you are interested in and
offer them free labor.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Google Earth Discovers Woman Trapped On Deserted Island For 7 YEARS - rohan404
http://www.sunnyskyz.com/good-news/592/Google-Earth-Discovers-Woman-Trapped-On-Deserted-Island-For-7-YEARS
======
rohan404
My apologies, further research into this indicates it is fake, and a lot of
the text is actually pulled from here:
[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2289607/Amaz...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-2289607/Amazon-
explorer-Ed-Stafford-Stranded-He-survives-60-days-desert-island-Pacific.html)
------
atlantic
The comments below the original story indicate it's fake.
------
b0o
This story is fake.
~~~
dalke
And a dupe from about 2-3 hours ago.
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430306](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430306)
------
DiabloD3
Flagged for being fake.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Chrome sends location and WiFi name to Google for web geolocation calls - msoad
https://twitter.com/ElliottZ/status/1241813241363226629
======
JensRex
Google is an advertising business. Their software is ad-ware. I'm baffled that
people are still surprised when Google acts maliciously.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
EdgeDB 1.0 Alpha 4 - A new DB with GraphQL support and more - 1st1
https://edgedb.com/blog/edgedb-1-0-alpha-4-barnard-s-star
======
syrusakbary
Congrats on the release! I'm super bullish on EdgeDB and what it will
represent for the database ecosystem / orm space in the long term, keep up the
good work!
~~~
1st1
Thanks Syrus! BTW, we have a pretty detailed comparison of EdgeDB to some
Python ORMs here:
[https://edgedb.com/blog/edgedb-1-0-alpha-1](https://edgedb.com/blog/edgedb-1-0-alpha-1)
The post also includes benchmarks. And to see how EdgeDB stacks up against
JavaScript ORMs please see
[https://edgedb.com/blog/edgedb-1-0-alpha-2](https://edgedb.com/blog/edgedb-1-0-alpha-2)
------
yblokhin
A much needed innovation in a rather stale segment of dev tools
------
1st1
I'm one of the co-founders. Would love to answer questions!
------
tamalone
Woah. This is exciting!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
How to see a memory - ALee
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-00107-4
======
tlb
It's worth paying attention to this line of research. It kind of went nowhere
for a long time, but with increased spatial and temporal resolution of brain
imaging and the new optical recording & re-triggering tricks described in the
article, it might all come within reach soon.
There is also fascinating work on probing the mechanisms of cognition. Precise
timing analysis combined with fMRI is surprisingly powerful. Example:
[http://www.cell.com/neuron/pdf/S0896-6273(16)30057-5.pdf](http://www.cell.com/neuron/pdf/S0896-6273\(16\)30057-5.pdf)
------
koonsolo
Just a quick thought and maybe a long stretch, but maybe an AI neural network
could make the link between the info in the brain and visualizing it.
If it has enough data of visual things, and people remembering them, the
neural network might be able to learn to create the visuals by only using the
data.
wow.
~~~
mlevental
[https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/12/28/240317](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/12/28/240317)
~~~
alok-g
HN discussion:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16140054](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16140054)
------
powerslacker
I've never felt so terrified and fascinated at the same time.
~~~
Kiro
I'm too lazy to to read the article but your comment makes me intrigued. What
are you referring to? The parts I skimmed didn't make me feel anything like
that so I obviously missed something important.
~~~
c12
Not where it is now, and its a long way off but this will eventually lead to
methods of interrogation where you simply plug someone into a machine and
search their memories - not that it's necessarily a bad thing; imagine being
released because your memories proved your alibi when all other proof was
against you.
~~~
Avery3R
There was a black mirror episode about exactly this.
~~~
kahnpro
Was I the only one wondering why all these English people are living in
Iceland?
~~~
jamiethompson
No. It made no sense and I thought it was kinda off-putting to the actual
narrative.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Skoar – A musical programming language - cidermonkey
https://github.com/sofakid/Skoarcery
======
duiker101
I am by no means, an expert in music, I can't even read it, so forgive me if
this comes as a silly question, but why this syntax? It looks very foreign to
me, but at the same time, being a programming language I would have expected
something more... verbose? is there any practical reason to for something like
this?
~~~
gtani
this is a live coding language, so trying to achieve what tidal and overtone
are. EDM type genres have recognizable formulas for the drum and bass, and
then for pads and leads above so all these environments are trying to abstract
over patterns at different levels of the music.
i can't find a real tutorial, but there's lots of material to look at:
[https://github.com/overtone/overtone/wiki/Getting-
Started](https://github.com/overtone/overtone/wiki/Getting-Started)
and this is the 1st ref:
[http://akustik.hfbk.net/publications/LiveCodingInLaptopPerfo...](http://akustik.hfbk.net/publications/LiveCodingInLaptopPerformance.pdf)
in this page:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_coding](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_coding)
___________
tidal: [http://yaxu.org/tidal/](http://yaxu.org/tidal/)
disclaimer: I've been playing synths a fair amount and i have a hard time
understanding a lot of stuff on the overtone cheat sheet
------
an_ko
I've seen so many "music programming languages" recently that I'm getting
really quite confused about which one was which and does what. Has anyone done
a comparison, or even just have a list of links?
~~~
kaoD
Keep in mind there are actually two domains in music: instruments (sound
synthesis) and orchestration. Both Skoar and Alda (which was linked yesterday)
are only orchestration languages.
I've been researching about this and narrowed down by these criteria: (1)
Modern and maintained (2) Open source (3) Multiplatform (4) Supports live
coding (5) Not MIDI-only output (6) Text-based (7) Not Java (sorry JSyn :P)
For me live coding is important since I prefer to compose music in an
exploratory fashion. Also, live performances are _cool_. Read more about live
coding and resources in [http://toplap.org](http://toplap.org)
The list in no particular order (beware of the brain dump):
·
## Overtone ([https://overtone.github.io/](https://overtone.github.io/))
The coolest kid on the block is actually a frontend to SuperCollider.
\- Clojure based.
\- VJ-ready. Integration with Processing via Quil
([https://github.com/quil/quil](https://github.com/quil/quil)) and GLSL
shaders via Shadertone
([https://github.com/overtone/shadertone](https://github.com/overtone/shadertone)).
\- Lots of tooling: [https://github.com/overtone](https://github.com/overtone)
·
## SuperCollider
([https://supercollider.github.io/](https://supercollider.github.io/))
\- Object-oriented functional language (similar to Smalltalk/Ruby/C/JS).
\- Basically Overtone minus Clojure minus VJ plus IDE.
\- Client-server architecture (which is what allows Overtone to use it as a
backend).
·
## Sonic Pi ([http://sonic-pi.net/](http://sonic-pi.net/))
\- Ruby DSL + IDE.
\- Built for Raspberry PI (but runs anywhere SuperCollider and Ruby are
available).
\- Another frontend to SuperCollider.
\- Designed to be suitable for teaching children. Teacher resources available
([http://www.sonicpiliveandcoding.com/](http://www.sonicpiliveandcoding.com/)
[http://www.raspberrypi.org/learning/sonic-pi-
lessons/](http://www.raspberrypi.org/learning/sonic-pi-lessons/))
·
## Extempore
([https://github.com/digego/extempore](https://github.com/digego/extempore))
\- Scheme-like.
\- Supports both audio and graphics.
\- Defines itself as a 'cyberphysical' programming environment
([http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1869526](http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1869526)).
·
## ChucK ([http://chuck.cs.princeton.edu/](http://chuck.cs.princeton.edu/))
\- Real-time sound synthesis and music creation (real-time meant it used to
take a real amount of CPU time in non-RT kernels, not sure if it's changed).
\- Time-based, concurrent programming model (they call it 'strongly-timed').
·
## Fluxus ([http://www.pawfal.org/fluxus/](http://www.pawfal.org/fluxus/))
\- Racket based.
\- Full-fledged environment.
\- Defined as 'a 3D game engine for livecoding worlds into existence', though
it supports sound too.
\- Doesn't seem to be actively maintained (most recent release dates from
April 2012).
·
## Nyquist
([https://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/music/web/musi...](https://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/project/music/web/music.software.html))
\- (Still researching...)
·
## Csound ([http://www.csounds.com/](http://www.csounds.com/))
\- (Still researching...)
\- Live coding added in a recent version.
\- Orchestration and synthesis are separate languages.
·
## Tidal ([http://yaxu.org/tidal/](http://yaxu.org/tidal/))
\- Haskell based.
\- Seems to support audio and graphics (defines itself as live coding of
patterns).
\- (Still researching... I just came to know it in a link here.)
·
## Skoar
([https://github.com/sofakid/Skoarcery](https://github.com/sofakid/Skoarcery))
\- Another SuperCollider frontend.
\- Only orchestration, though I guess it supports different instruments
created in SuperCollider.
\- Doesn't seem to support live coding? (Added to the list until I research
more.)
·
## MORE
I just found these in the TOPLAP wiki (and Googling around) but had no time to
comb through them. Listed in no particular order:
\- [https://github.com/edne/pineal](https://github.com/edne/pineal)
\-
[https://github.com/createuniverses/praxis](https://github.com/createuniverses/praxis)
\- [http://charlie-roberts.com/gibber/about-gibber/](http://charlie-
roberts.com/gibber/about-gibber/)
\- [https://github.com/LuaAV/LuaAV](https://github.com/LuaAV/LuaAV)
\-
[http://hyperyarn.criticalartware.net](http://hyperyarn.criticalartware.net)
\-
[http://www.renickbell.net/conductive/doku.php/](http://www.renickbell.net/conductive/doku.php/)
\- EXTRA: Live coding light shows
[https://github.com/brunchboy/afterglow](https://github.com/brunchboy/afterglow)
~~~
zebproj
Several months ago, I compared musical languages, writing essentially the same
thing in each one:
[https://www.safaribooksonline.com/blog/2014/11/07/making-
com...](https://www.safaribooksonline.com/blog/2014/11/07/making-computers-
sing/)
I also wrote one myself:
[http://paulbatchelor.github.io/proj/sporth](http://paulbatchelor.github.io/proj/sporth)
~~~
kaoD
Thanks! I ended moving the information to a Gist[0] for easier updating as I
research more (hope to eventually settle for a few environments and actually
try them). I'll check your links ASAP and add relevant info to the Gist.
Sporth reminds me a lot of
[https://forthsalon.appspot.com/](https://forthsalon.appspot.com/) They'd make
great partners :)
[0] [https://gist.github.com/alvaro-
cuesta/dc714c06a8e672bebd90](https://gist.github.com/alvaro-
cuesta/dc714c06a8e672bebd90)
~~~
zebproj
I got a lot of inspiration from forthsalon.
It was only after I built Sporth that I realized how expressive a Forth can be
for creative coding.
------
zebproj
Not going to lie, this seems like a terrible language for musicians to compose
in. Maybe I need time to get used to it, but it looks more like an esoteric
programming language to me. The amount of brackets needed for it to work is
just begging for typos.
Furthermore, the syntax doesn't feel "readable" like a music score. The
symbolic notation doesn't click for me. I'd like to be able to hear what is
going on in my head, and this just doesn't seem designed for that. By
contrast, Alda (a musical language posted yesterday) is very readable to me as
a musician. ABC notation and Lilypond were very good sources of inspiration.
There are some things I like about Skoar. The use of a really good audio
engine to produce the sound wins in my book (there doesn't seem to be any
obvious way to control the sound itself, though.) I think the way you express
dynamics using hashes is pretty novel. (May want to consider using decibel
scaling instead of linear scaling.) I like the fact that you have incorporated
programming elements like conditionals, loops, and variables.
Both Alda and Skoar basically focus on conventional western music notation,
which is perhaps the most boring part of computer generated music. Sound
design plays much greater importance, and it makes me sad to see no focus on
that whatsoever (Sound is uh... the part that actually makes the music).
I'm hesitant to share this on HN because it's not done yet, but I too, made
yet another musical language:
[http://paulbatchelor.github.io/proj/sporth](http://paulbatchelor.github.io/proj/sporth)
Here's the code:
[https://github.com/paulbatchelor/sporth](https://github.com/paulbatchelor/sporth)
And here's what it can sound like (everything minus the outdoor ambient sample
is synthesized in Sporth):
[https://soundcloud.com/thebatchelorlab/scheale](https://soundcloud.com/thebatchelorlab/scheale)
~~~
gtani
I'll watch that repo, i've been thinking of going down the maxforLive rabbit
hole. never heard of soundPipe before.
The tl'dr to these languages/dev environments/whatever is that they attempt to
give you textual control over some subset of what a DAW (ableton or FL studio
or logic Pro) can do, so that you can compose/perform/synthesize on the fly. I
think all of these would be hard to understnad for somebody that hasn't
actually read a manual for, say, Ableton, or some hard synth or VST that has a
lot of sound sources, LFO/envelope/delay/effects routing matrix.
___________________________
there's another notation/synthesis framework that was bandied about, audioKit
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9903760](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9903760)
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8574558](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8574558)
__________________________
also, one of those threads had a reference to music-N, which is a good (and
short!) historical reference page:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUSIC-N](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUSIC-N)
~~~
zebproj
I'm actually the creator of soundPipe, so it makes sense that you probably
haven't heard of it.
Sporth is definitely a language for people with experience with modular
synthesis and digital signal processing. People with experience in SC or
Csound should feel pretty comfortable (in fact, many Sporth modules utilize
algorithms taken directly from Csound opcodes)
Soundpipe is a library which takes a very modular approach as well (sporth is
a language built on top of SoundPipe).
I know the AK guys quite well, and we're actually working together to get
Soundpipe working with it.
People interested in how MUSIC-N languages work should look at Csound, which
is a direct descendent of the MUSIC-V language. Their syntax is very similar,
and many MUSIC-N files have been ported to Csound.
~~~
gtani
check. I'm looking for rubber bands, like on my mopho and ms2000 i like to
rubber band the filter, resonance, key tracking and other pots/encoders
together, so... exponential/log and inverse rubber bands.
~~~
zebproj
What exactly is a "rubber band"?
~~~
gtani
it's just a pot/fader/encoder that can send lots of CC's at the same time
------
weirdkid
I don't see a way to do triplets with this notation.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Facebook Grew Twice As Fast As Twitter In July - Tiktaalik
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/08/12/facebook-grew-twice-as-fast-as-twitter-in-july/
======
forgotmypasswd
I have yet to see a web analytics report that takes into account Twitter API
usage.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Show HN: Teddy – A physical pet made possible using Estimote beacons - paramaggarwal
https://github.com/paramaggarwal/teddy
======
Animats
Coming soon, the Internet-enabled Elf on the Shelf. In stores for Xmas!
_It sees you when you 're sleeping. It knows when you're awake. It knows if
you've been bad or good, so be good for goodness sake. You better watch out._
Brought to you by Google and the U.S Department of Homeland Security.
~~~
jlees
That's one heck of a writing prompt.
------
uptown
"Take him to different places and earn check-in points. Make new Teddy friends
by meeting them often and unlock achievements!"
Okay - I'll be "that guy". Why are they doing this? Presumably the target
market is children for this specific implementation, but is it just having
them do tasks for the sake of incrementing a counter in the app, or is there
some actual benefit to encouraging the child to jump through these hoops? Not
every toy needs to be educational, but what purpose does this thing have apart
from just existing because it's possible?
I can attach a beacon to my toilet paper. It'll let me know when I'm nearby,
and I can earn check-in points every time I take a shit. But why? Some of
these things need to start asking themselves why they exist.
~~~
paramaggarwal
While we tried to think about new ways a toy could be implemented, our brains
were stuck in the ways we play today - with points and achievements. So while
the idea is radical, it suffers from having parts of it get inspiration from
today's apps.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Celery 4.0 - mlissner
http://docs.celeryproject.org/en/latest/whatsnew-4.0.html
======
parhamn
Celery is one of those things in Python that you can't (sometimes
unfortunately) live without. Earlier versions of Celery have some difficult
bugs and inconsistencies that made it feel like a very tough tool to work with
and required a lot of developer diligence and operational experience to make
sure your tool didn't break. Things like message memory explosion (multi-pass
deserialization), poor defaults, difficulties debugging and tracking
exceptions, poor monitoring tools like 'flower' etc. all lead to this.
Problems were exacerbated by the fact that simple async operations in python
(which are easily fixed in more concurrent languages with a simple go
func{}()) end up requiring a heavy distributed solution like Celery (or the
lighter RQWorker) which creates a whole host of issues.
I imagine as native async tooling improves in py3x (async/await, aiohttp, and
other tools) use of celery to do trivially concurrent things will decrease and
Celery's usage will focus on more complex workflows (chords, fanouts,
map/reduce).
Looks like many concerns we're tackled here (thanks Celery team) and I'm
looking forward to playing around with this release.
~~~
andybak
I've managed to live without it. For low and medium traffic sites it's hugely
over-engineered. For all the sites I manage, I run a single cron task that
triggers a range of background jobs. It's an approach worked very well for
nearly 10 years.
I understand there's a genuine use-case for Celery but like many technologies
people are told "if you need a task queue use this" when there are much
simpler solutions that are more than good enough for most.
~~~
asksol
Celery was never meant as a replacement for cron, it was simply a nice bonus
that fits the messaging pattern well. Writing a task queue is actually very
simple using for example Redis, but that doesn't necessarily mean Celery is
over-engineered IMHO. It's very easy to forget the support required once your
system is in production.
Disclaimer: I'm a contributor
~~~
andybak
I'm not saying Celery is over-engineered in general. It's just over-engineered
in the context I've often seen it recommended in. i.e. for people learning or
people with fairly modest requirements.
~~~
collyw
Yep, I first asked on Stack overflow the best way to achieve a background task
in a Django app, and the answers all said Celery. Considering it got run
around once a week, it was a very over engineered solution I ended up with.
Its useful to know Celery, and gets used in a proper context in my current
work, so I guess learning it wasn't a waste.
------
ceronman
"Starting from Celery 5.0 only Python 3.5+ will be supported."
This is a small detail, but I'm glad that one more big Python project is
dropping 2.x support. The 2/3 split is not good for the community.
~~~
alexhayes
Agreed!
------
ben_jones
IMO the secret ingredient to scaling almost any Python web application, or
even implementing it in the first place. It's a shame they had to curtail some
features due to lack of funding.
Edit: Apparently they curtailed some features for simplicity as well.
~~~
asksol
Thank you for the kind words, it's so very appreciated :)
I have merged many features, like broker transports, result backends, etc, and
while the initial contribution was great, it ends up being unmaintained with
issues that nobody fixes.
If there's any feature that you really want back, chances are the problems
with that feature are not super difficult to fix, so please reach out!
~~~
ergo14
Asksol we use celery at AppEnlight extensively and love it. Thank you for your
great work.
------
stuaxo
On my last project I had to use Celery. In the end, I had to look inside the
source... having done the same with Python + Django I was apprehensive.
In the end I shouldn’t have been, it was a pleasant surprise. It's great 4.0
has come out.
Almost every Django developer will touch celery at some time, if your
organisation can support development please do, it's not just an important
piece of software, but well put together too.
------
cwyers
> Nowadays it’s easy to use the requests module to write webhook tasks
> manually. We would love to use requests but we are simply unable to as
> there’s a very vocal ‘anti-dependency’ mob in the Python community
I'm not a heavy Python user, and I've never heard this before. It sounds...
less than good.
~~~
ryankask
The author may be referring to libraries themselves having dependencies. These
attitudes are changing. For example, last week the Django community published
a draft proposal that declares that "Django can have dependencies". The
"Background" section is a good read and helps explain the origins of these
attitudes:
[https://github.com/django/deps/blob/master/draft/0007-depend...](https://github.com/django/deps/blob/master/draft/0007-dependency-
policy.rst#background-and-motivation).
------
fuhrysteve
Congratulations to @asksol and the rest of the team for sealing the deal on
4.0! I've been waiting for a number of the features now in 4.0 for a long time
now. I know you guys have been busting your asses for a long time and juggling
with some complicated dependencies along the way.
Some time ago I built a little celery addon library as a sort of experimental
way to solve the problem of having dynamic celery beat scheduled tasks. I
never ended up implementing anywhere for a few different reasons:
[https://github.com/fuhrysteve/CeleryStore](https://github.com/fuhrysteve/CeleryStore)
I really like the concept behind the old djcelery project. But I don't use
django much these days, and I'd like for it to be more compatible with tools
I've become more familiar with (sqlalchemy / etc).
Do you have any advice for how to approach this? I know 4.0 introduced some
new abilities to add beat entries via API.
------
welder
In case you also run into the depreciation of sending error emails[1] I've had
to switch back to using a decorator[2] to catch unhandled exceptions and
generate error emails.
[1] CELERY_SEND_TASK_ERROR_EMAILS config removed
[http://docs.celeryproject.org/en/latest/whatsnew-4.0.html#fe...](http://docs.celeryproject.org/en/latest/whatsnew-4.0.html#features-
removed-for-simplicity)
[2]
[https://gist.github.com/alanhamlett/dc8cdd4721ea63053f14#fil...](https://gist.github.com/alanhamlett/dc8cdd4721ea63053f14#file-
tasks-py-L14)
------
kkirsche
Just started using this for the first time. It's pretty nice. I'm still trying
to figure out how to really use it with Flask/Connexion cleanly and not in the
top level module, but it's made my life much simpler for handling long running
tasks (e.g. When needing a status 202 response). Great project. Sad to see
SQLAlchemy was removed from the brokers though I understand.
~~~
brianwawok
You don't want to use a DB a broker.
For AWS they have SQS which is awesome. Now if someone would write a Google
cloud pub/sub, all would be well in the world.
~~~
pdpi
Hum, Google Pub/Sub seems roughly equivalent to SQS to me?
[https://cloud.google.com/pubsub/docs/overview](https://cloud.google.com/pubsub/docs/overview)
~~~
brianwawok
Yes but no one wrote the kombu broker for it yet to my knowledge. To use a new
broker in Celery you have to write code on how to send and receive messages.
------
sandGorgon
Has anybody compared Celery 4 to rq (which started off as a much
simpler+performant alternative to celery).
Would love to see how they stack up after this release.
~~~
asadjb
We recently moved one of our services from Rq to Celery. We are using an older
version of Celery, but this comment should still apply. While Rq is a _great_
way to go in the start, if you have a large number of messages you are
handling, you'll get into memory bottlenecks. This isn't a problem with Rq,
but with using Redis as a broker. So if anyone is considering Rq vs Celery,
they should keep this in mind.
The reason we switched to Celery was the volume of messages we were handling.
Since Rq relies on Redis, _all_ your messages need to fit in memory. While Rq
was great and simple to setup at start, as we grew we were consistently
dealing with Rq breaking because Redis was full and stopped accepting any
write operations.
We moved to Celery because it could use RabbitMQ as a broker. RabbitMQ
offloads most messages to the disk which has nicely taken care of the memory
limitation issues.
With Rq we would get stuck after 10K messages (our messages included images so
individual message size was large). With RabbitMQ I've seen the queue grow to
about 120K without so much as a single hiccup.
~~~
sandGorgon
That's very insightful. Quick question, since you are doing this in production
- how are you serializing images into a message ? Base64 or something else.
~~~
zo1
Not the person you're asking, but from the experiences I've had with Celery +
other messaging queues: Don't pass around large binary blobs if you can avoid
it. Whether that is an image or something else is irrelevant.
You can do such things as passing a database unique key, GUID, or file-path to
the raw data on disk. Obviously, you will also need to engineer around that if
you've got a distributed system. The tangential benefit is that you're not
using a "messaging" queue or system for persisting or semi-persisting your
image data. That's a big no-no as such systems are transient in nature and
that often doesn't align with binary or image processing.
Base64 is for when you want to pass around binary in a text-based format. E.g.
XML or JSON. But do keep in mind that because of the encoding format,
converting binary data to base64 does increase the payload size by about 15%
or so.
------
fuxi
I have been using celery for years now and I love it. I was excited to see 4.0
with SQS support. However after giving it a spin I run back to 3.x.
Unfortunatelly version 4.0.0 has too many bugs for now. I will need to check
back in few months. Better tests and better mocks would prevent the issues.
------
tschellenbach
Many thanks Asksol, beautiful software. Have been a happy user for many years
now. Hope to try out 4.0 soon!
------
ledil
can you suggest a monitoring tool for celery? I want to view what tasks are
currently working... is flower the only solution? thx
~~~
alexhayes
Have you tried running 'celery events' on the command line? I find this
sufficient in most cases.
~~~
ledil
should I enable something to activate celery events?
------
gcb0
a rabbitMQ client? what's so awesome that everyone here says it is essential
for python web projects? Honest question, never used python for that.
~~~
pandler
I haven't used Django in a while, but, if I'm not mistaken, it's basically the
easiest way to add any kind of asynchronous behavior to a python web server.
There are few other options, and I don't think any of them are as mature as
Celery.
~~~
zo1
The python Tornado web server does have the ability to do async tasks.
However, it'd better be non-blocking otherwise your nice async web-server is
going to stop serving requests while your task is processing.
------
logronoide
Worst experience with a python toolkit ever. I hope new versions fix all bugs
and issues.
~~~
alexhayes
Of course, all other software is bug free...
Honestly this is a complex problem area and I think the Celery developers have
done an excellent job of making it pretty trivial to get up and running while
providing lots of flexibility for more advanced users! Not an easy feat.
Are there bugs? Of course - but I've never come up against one that I can't
work around. Is that annoying? Sometimes but that's software development.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: What do you do for SEO? - harryzhang
Curious to hear how other people think about SEO. What are you guys doing for SEO today and when do you start worrying about SEO? Are you using agencies, doing it yourself, etc.?
======
sixQuarks
I've attracted over 50 million unique visitors to my sites using organic SEO
over the past 10 years. I've always focused on the content and never tried to
game the system. I never tried to do link building, etc.
I started out reading highrankings.com - they are a whitehat seo proponent.
Just been following white hat all along and Google has rewarded me throughout.
~~~
rfnslyr
Hijacking top comment: I follow guidelines in:
[http://www.google.com/webmasters/docs/search-engine-
optimiza...](http://www.google.com/webmasters/docs/search-engine-optimization-
starter-guide.pdf) \+ SEOMoz.
------
hcarvalhoalves
The only "SEO strategy" that works is being relevant so the relevant people
link to you and having a technically correct site (parseable HTML, appropriate
status codes).
Not even keywords on domains or URLs matter as much anymore after Google's
Panda. Agencies are snake oil vendors and a great way to waste time and money.
~~~
smartwater
Agencies know more than your average joe. They aren't snake oil at all. It's a
thriving industry.
~~~
27182818284
The problem is that 10 years ago, the cutting edge marketing companies did
SEO. Now, _EVERY_ marketing company does SEO because it is a death sentence to
say you don't.
That means there are plenty of agencies that do little more than
Facebook+AdWords, pretty URLs, and the other usual suspects.
~~~
smartwater
If pretty URLs provides value to a business, that might be all they need.
------
livestyle
I actually wrote about this very subject a couple of months ago regarding a
craigslist web app I help create.
[http://blendah.com/post/37787050142/how-to-get-a-top-
google-...](http://blendah.com/post/37787050142/how-to-get-a-top-google-
ranking)
Hope this helps.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Many criminals are intelligent people with good heads for business and healthy appetites for risk - daviday
http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10880952
======
inovica
I once did some research into this whilst at university. Basically the
criminal mindset is often very very close to an entrepreneurial one - if not
the same. It comes down to value systems generally with the individual,
although entrepreneurs are often found to bend or change the rules to suit
themselves. For example Richard Branson, when he first started, ended up in
trouble with the law as he exploited what an export-import system for records,
ultimately ending up with a heavy fine, though no jail time.
------
astine
Right, lets take violent criminals and place them in upper management. I can
see it now:
"I used to be a drug dealer; now I'm your boss. Now get to work bitch before I
cap, I mean, fire your ass!"
...
In all seriousness, I see a danger in using people who have a demonstrated
disregard for the lives and property of others. At least with the current
individuals we have reasonable doubt as to whether they would kill or steal to
get their way. In highering ex-conns we know.
~~~
inovica
Is it nature or nurture that makes people this way? The debate on that will go
on forever, however it has been demonstrated that through good education
people (not all I agree) can discover that they have a true worth and can make
money whilst giving back to society. Its bringing these people back into
society that they probably felt outside of. According to the story, the people
who have been on the program have a very low potential for re-offending. This,
combined with criminal -> entrepreneur I think is a positive step. Breaking
the cycle and giving people a purpose in life, embracing them, can make a
difference
~~~
Shooter
"Breaking the cycle and giving people a purpose in life, embracing them, can
make a difference"
This article doesn't remind me of the gang stuff in Freakonomics so much as it
reminds me of a bonus feature on the "Sicko" DVD. Michael Moore goes to a
prison in Norway that allows everyone, including murderers and rapists, the
opportunity to work amongst the general population doing fulfilling work.
[They mention a prisoner, for example, that killed two people with a chainsaw.
He was allowed to finish his sentence by working in the forest freely with a
chainsaw!] Norway doesn't have a death sentence, nor even a life sentence. The
maximum prison sentence is 21 years. And, by the way, Norway usually has the
lowest murder rate in the world.
------
icky
> She is particularly interested in people who have already demonstrated these
> skills—for example by running a successful drug business or achieving a high
> rank in a gang.
That's what you list under "Extracurricular Activiites" on your Harvard
application! ;-)
~~~
amohr
There was actually a study at the University of Chicago that Steven Levitt
writes about in "Freakonomics." A sociology student got really close with a
gang in downtown chicago - and it turned out that the local gang leader had a
business degree and kept fastidious records of the gang's income and
expenditures.
------
uuilly
I think this is a great idea and I can relate. I was a wayward youth. I never
did anything serious but I was constantly on the wrong side of the law and my
success / failure rate was pretty impressive. Though it's not as bad anymore
think I was just allergic to authority. I eventually turned my need for risk
and self determination to mountaineering and entrepreneurship. A life of crime
is very dynamic and intense. Quite similar to startup life. I can see this
program being successful and I wish these gentlemen luck.
As for the moral dilemma people are concerned about, I don't think it's such a
problem. My rebellion was much more rooted in an inability to walk lockstep
through a life of following directions than a rotten soul. I tended toward and
environment that I thrived in, one of raw risk and raw reward. A program that
recognizes these folks and steers them away from the brink sounds like a
really good idea. The only laws I've broken in the last 8 years have been
speeding and running stop signs. And I refuse to ever give that up.
------
Mistone
many people startoff in bad situations - may be hard to believe but not
everyone gets pushed along the path of grad'ing from a good school. there is
no excuse for hurting and stealing from others, but we must also recognize
that the odds are so stacked against poor people that there options are very
slim. poverty is a major problem in the US, currently the best solution the
govt has come up with is build more prisons to house the poor when they get
arrested in the projects.
according to pg, it all comes down to building something people want, many
people in prison don't want to come back, and want to actually do something
legit with their lives, building a business is the best way I know to change
your life and make something of yourself. bravo. next step is too make sure
they get a bit of tech skills with the biz classes.
~~~
strey
This is from talks I've had with parole officers. Often, the prisons can
merely act as Criminal U. Coming out it is hard to get a legitimate job, and
they've learned more criminal skills while in prison. It's much easier to just
go right back into the criminal lifestyle, a vicious cycle.
However, a concern I have with this program is that gang members can bring
their criminal connections with them into business. In times of tough
competition they may be tempted to use these connections.
------
daniel-cussen
YConbinator
------
joshwa
Somebody's been watching too much "The Wire" ...
------
ojbyrne
My main problem is that this is for people who got caught. If all criminals
have something in common with entrepreneurs, then it seems logical to assume
that this program isn't getting the cream of the crop (those who don't get
caught). Though perhaps that group succeeds without any help or notoriety.
~~~
Mistone
nice point - but just as failing does not make you a bad entrep., getting
caught doesn't mean your a bad crook, repeat offenders my be the most
determined.
------
ssharp
I've always been fairly impressed with organized crime's ability to locate new
areas to exploit.
Then again, how much of an advantage is it to use "illegal leverage"? I'm sure
Movable Type would have a larger install base if they could send goons to the
doorsteps of those using Wordpress.
------
falsestprophet
I want to know how she is managing to spend $3.2 million on just 39 prisioners
($82,051/prisioner).
------
emmett
It sounds like it could be a promising program, but my question is:
Why do you have to go to prison to be offered a chance like that?
~~~
dgabriel
If you can afford a suit, have an idea, and can find a mentor, you're leagues
ahead of the men with criminal records. This program provides a framework for
people who have nothing and are likely to relapse, and it helps integrate them
into normal society.
If you're already integrated (which I'll unfairly assume you are), then you
probably wouldn't get much out of this program. You'd be better off joining
the local rotary club.
------
staunch
The story about the drug-dealing gang in Freakonomics comes to mind.
------
pistoriusp
This _really_ explains my previous boss.
------
nazgulnarsil
has anyone read The Demolished Man? :)
~~~
Shooter
No. Summary?
~~~
nazgulnarsil
a businessman plots to kill a rival in a Minority Report esque future where
"peepers" (people with esp) are used to prevent crime.
it draws some interesting conclusions on the subject of this thread.
~~~
Shooter
Thanks. I just picked it up from the library.
------
edw519
yconfinorator
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: How do you measure contributions to a coding project? - harshgupta
I am curious to know what metrics do people use to measure relative contributions to a project. Bare git metrics like Lines of Code, Number of commits seem to be partial (and at worse) dangerous sources of accounting.
======
aawalton
Measuring coding contribution is hard. The most robust attribution models
calculate the difference between the success of the project with and without
the contribution, but in practice, we almost never know how successful the
project would have been without the contribution. The closest we can get are
isolated A/B tests, where we can measure the value of a specific code change
in terms of business outcomes.
Measuring the volume of changes in any form is problematic, since it’s
possible that the programmers who add the most code are actually making the
code worse by accumulating technical debt faster than business value (instead
of refactoring so that important changes can be made simply).
------
harshgupta
I found one measure: Hits of Code
It measures the "the amount of times programmers touch the lines". Source :
[https://www.yegor256.com/2014/11/14/hits-of-
code.html](https://www.yegor256.com/2014/11/14/hits-of-code.html)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: Best Time to Submit to HN? - maxcameron
Does anyone know the best time to submit an article to HN? The best time would be:<p>- When there are the lowest number of articles being posted<p>&<p>- When there are the most people visiting the site<p>Has anyone studied this before?<p>Thanks<p>Max
======
brk
When I submit articles, I tend to submit them as a I find them.
Really truly valuable "news" tends to end up on dozens of channels,so there is
little danger of an "important" topic being missed because I submitted it at
6AM instead of 11:30.
It also depends which version of "best" you are trying to optimize for...
"Best" in terms of trying to get really good information out to as many people
as possible, or "best" in terms of trying to find maximum karma-whoring
potential, or "best" in terms of trying to get front-page ranking... and so
on.
~~~
maxcameron
I was talking about linking to a home-made blog post written by a start up,
not a third-party article from TechCrunch.
It's not about spamming people, it's just common sense. If you were a
musician, wouldn't you want your song to be on the radio during rush hour, and
not at the 3:50AM slot?
------
rick888
Most likely, the best time to submit is between the hours of 9am and 5pm. Most
people are at work surfing the Internet. Usually after 5, traffic slowly
starts tapering off.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Outlook certificate fail - dalegaard
https://bofh.zone/2015/10/25/outlook-certificate-fail/
======
mdeeks
We most certainly are checking cert validity. It is possible your cert is
self-signed, or from a non trusted CA, or expired.
We also check for secure cipher suites and either fail or prompt the user to
accept an insecure connection. We recently deprecated RC4 which caused quite a
few support tickets. That could causing your connections to fail.
It sounds like you just got a confusing response from a CS agent (it is a
complicated topic). They might be mixing up instructions for IMAP and Exchange
which typically runs on 443.
Contact support again and ask them to assign it to Mike from Engineering and I
will look into your problem.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: Why can I not record a mediation meeting? - jelliclesfarm
I have been asked by the board of the non profit managing the land I license for a mediation/dispute resolution meeting.<p>There are four on their side and just me representing my farm. I asked permission to record the meeting on audio as I won’t be able to take minutes. English is not my first language and even if I am fluent, there are almost always ‘no, that’s not what we meant’...<p>I now have resorted to referencing a dictionary to get my point across. I am just exhausted trying to decipher every sentence and making sure I understand the import of it as they meant it.<p>They refused, but said that I can bring a ‘friend or family member’ for support.<p>I don’t want support. I want documentation. Is this normal? I am in California.<p>It’s just bizarre to me. If both parties are aware and both can record the meeting, why is it not a fair means of keeping minutes of a meeting?
======
aphextim
I am not a lawyer with that being said from my limited understanding...
No you cannot record if not all parties agree. Mediations are generally
considered confidential and cannot be used in court so recording the
conversation for any purpose would be a violation of the confidentiality.
That being said, even if were allowed to record it, anything said in that
mediation cannot be used in any litigation, as the mediation is confidential.
If you want to record it instead of taking notes, that might be a legitimate
reason to record it. However, for all practical purposes, recording a
mediation is unnecessary. If you get the dispute resolved, a formal agreement
will be drafted. If not, you will continue to litigate the issues.
------
pwg
To add to @aphextim's comment, California is also a "two-party consent" state.
See: [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-
law](http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law)
That means (ignoring any other rules surrounding meditations) that to be
legally able to record the conversation, you need everyone who is being
recorded to consent. If even one person says no, you can not, legally, record
the meeting.
------
sarcasmatwork
Not sure if its state or federal, but I just did one in federal court as
Plaintiff.
Mediation is usually off the record, therefore nothing said or done can be
used against the other party. Mediation only goal is for both parties to try
and or settle the day of the mediation.
You should have a lawyer present and be able to ask them all the questions if
you dont understand something.
------
jelliclesfarm
Honestly, I don’t want to use it for litigation. I just want it for minutes of
the meeting.
I just find the language they use rather stilted and confusing. We end up
going round and round in circles clarifying meaning of words.
They are affiliated with the state and govt...so instead of stating something
simply in one sentence, it’s a bunch of words distributed amidst a couple of
sentences.
It’s frustrating because we are all speaking English. If I didn’t know
English, I could ask for a translator.
If mediation meetings can’t be used for litigation, what would their objection
be to be recorded? I am willing to be recorded too.
~~~
sarcasmatwork
This is the mediators role and duty/job is to make sure all parties are on the
same page and or speaking the same language.
You are always free to tell the mediator that you want to define something, so
both parties are on the same page.
You're assuming that all parties will be in the same room. Sometimes parties
are not. Sometimes parties are in the same room at the very start and then
split off to different rooms. Sometimes one party arrives early and they go
into a private room while the mediator gets their offers/story (usually
Plaintiff first) then the mediator goes to the Defense and see's their
side/demands/offers in another private room.
Not sure what stage your're in, but before the mediation even started we had
to go at least two rounds of offers in a 2-week period of time. I had a
federal judge (free) acting as my mediator, yours might be a judge, 3rd party
etc.. Depends what everyone agrees on.
It's not about you're okay with being recorded... its all parties and the
mediator. The mediator runs the show.
Please talk to your lawyer asap and PLEASE ask him/her as many questions as
you can before, and during mediation. There is no time limit and remember
mediation is not required unless the judge says it is. Mediation can last 1
hour, or 8 hours. You can always walk away and also have the choice to do
mediation again if all parties agree.
Good luck!
~~~
jelliclesfarm
Thank you. I appreciate all the pointers. It isn’t as formal as that they
follow protocols. That’s what throws me off. It’s all supposed to be
‘informal’ and ‘friendly’ but when I bring up something..they keep shaking the
contract I signed in front of my face. It’s very frustrating. I have never
encountered anything like this before. Getting legal representation is only
going to make things hostile. And I don’t know if is worth it for me except to
win a battle of hurt ego after feeling ‘wronged’. I am trying to act in good
faith but it’s very intimidating to face the board ..and being asked to just
bring ‘a friend or family member’ is just weird. I might ask around for other
options so I can feel better going into this.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
ReactJS for Stupid People - stevekinney
http://blog.andrewray.me/reactjs-for-stupid-people/
======
poseid
i still wonder where/what the difference between state and props are. Say, I
render a collection where user selects one item at a time. where is the state?
what are properties of that collectionview?
~~~
gcanti
I think there is no "proper" difference. For what I understand it's only a
practical way to have a segregated state only the component is interested of.
React.js is a valuable precursor but I hope we'll have something different
soon.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Version Control for Poetic Time Travelers - listrophy
http://blog.begriffs.com/2012/08/version-control-for-poetic-time.html
======
csense
This article eloquently summarizes how I try to use git: To efficiently write
a story of the code's development history that maximizes the productivity of
your future self and/or other developers who may read it later. If the story
does not consist entirely of literal historical truth, so be it. A developer's
concern should not be the exact preservation of the way things were created,
but the telling of a story in a way that is most easily understood.
If there are complicated merges, dead-end changes or separate lines of
development that inadvertently became interleaved, the branch is crying out
for a rebase. (As a practical matter, you should do rebases on a local
throwaway temp branch, then either delete and recreate the original branch, or
checkout orig-branch and git reset --hard temp-branch.)
------
twopoint718
I like how Joe points out that rebasing raises the same issues as time travel,
namely paradoxes. If you have rebased commits that others have pulled, then
you've created a situation where a commit both does and does not exist.
Also interesting is how rebasing can reorder the dates as seen in the log. All
that git _really_ cares about is the parentage of some commit.
Good and insightful post.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Show HN: Capture, rewrite and debug any Android HTTP(S) - pimterry
https://httptoolkit.tech/android
======
pimterry
Hi HN! I've been working on Android support in HTTP Toolkit for ages now, and
it's finally ready! There's details & a demo video on the site, but the
highlights:
\- You can inspect, rewrite and mock all HTTPS traffic sent by pretty much any
Android app you might care to mess around with.
\- Super easy setup, with zero messing around with certificates or proxy
settings.
\- Intercepts HTTPS from modern 3rd party apps without manual reverse
engineering, if you're using either an emulator or a rooted device. It
automatically injects a temporary system-trusted root certificate authority,
which works out of the box to debug Netflix, Google Play, BBC News, Slack, etc
etc etc.
\- All 100% open-source:
[https://github.com/httptoolkit/](https://github.com/httptoolkit/)
Let me know if you have any questions, happy to explain anything :-)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Apple’s HomePod Has Arrived. Don’t Rush to Buy It - IntronExon
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/06/technology/personaltech/apple-homepod-review.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Ftechnology
======
dkonofalski
I don't understand this article and I guess I can just add it to the list of
biased crap about Apple. Why would you expect the HomePod to be successful in
tests of features that it's not advertised as having? It's like giving a car a
crappy review for not being able to fly when comparing it against an airplane.
The HomePod is a speaker, first and foremost. Apple has planned to add Siri
features. I don't think it's reasonable to test for features that haven't been
released just because competitors have them. If you care about the features
that the competitors have, buy those. If you care about the audio on the
speaker, buy the HomePod and then be pleasantly surprised when they add those
features. Seems silly to me...
Example:
>I figured a week should have been enough.
Based on what?
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
The Truth About Low-Protein, High-Carb Diets and Brain Aging - octosphere
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/diagnosis-diet/201812/the-truth-about-low-protein-high-carb-diets-and-brain-aging
======
kitanata
A low protein, high carb diet is how I got type 2 diabetes at age 30. This
article isn’t just wrong, it is dangerous. Lower your carb intake folks. You
don’t have to be extreme or anything. 45 grams of carbs or less per meal is a
good barometer for everyone.
~~~
gcatalfamo
Lowering carb is a good idea but I think that the type of carb matters.
If it’s pure sugar (a soda) I’d say 45grams it definitely an upper limit to
never overshoot.
If it’s home cooked pasta 100g at lunch won’t do you any harm depending on
what you serve it with.
Especially if you start avoiding all carbs at dinner, which is not a bad idea,
having some carbs at lunch in the form of pasta or bread (but halving the
dose) will keep your metabolism spinning.
Keep in mind I am Italian so when I say pasta or bread I am talking about
prepared food so no macaroni and cheese or garlic bread (FWIW, as benchmark,
do not eat at olive’s garden. If I have to indulge in junk food macdonalds
better)
------
bootsz
Seeing studies like this publicized constantly, it's hard to take nutrition
science seriously. I know bad journalism is partly to blame though. All this
affirms is that we still know nothing really.
Someone should make a matrix of all possible high-X-low-Y diet combinations
and fill each cell with research studies claiming that said diet is good for
you.
------
arisAlexis
The author makes a huge blunder when citing a pubmed article that argues dairy
products are beneficial for glucose/diabetes control and in the next paragraph
suggest that one should limit dairy because it hurts glucose/diabetes. Makes
me question all the article too.
~~~
happymellon
> Makes me question all the article too
This is the correct position to take regardless.
------
wthigo
Solid closing line - "The unfortunate truth is that this study was simply not
designed in a way that can tell you anything about human diets, meat, or how
much protein or carbohydrate you should eat."
------
foxyv
This article isn't very convincing. Personally I recommend the books and
videos by Dr. Jason Fung.
([https://twitter.com/drjasonfung](https://twitter.com/drjasonfung)) If you
are obese it is remarkably easy to become depressed and anxious. Especially if
you aren't getting exercise because your energy level is so low.
The remarkable thing about Dr. Fung's lectures is he lays down the exact
mechanisms which cause obesity. About how insulin resistance leads to reduced
ability to utilize body fat. Then about why caloric restriction doesn't work
due to the unavailability of fat and reduced metabolic activity. He isn't
basing it off empirical work but a detailed study of the endocrine system.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Google Assistant Will Soon Support Controlling Stylers and More Doorbells - baseread
https://baseread.com/google-assistant-will-soon-support-controlling-stylers-and-more-doorbells/
======
mark_l_watson
Anyone who installs IoT devices without reading terms and conditions
(especially the selling/sharing your data with 3rd parties) is an idiot.
IoT devices that have the potential to sell every little detail of your
personal and business life to 3rd parties are not inevitable. Tech companies
and more traditional companies will happily co-opt information on your life
and use this information for their own benefit.
Just say NO.
Also, do non-tech friends and family a solid favor and explain this to them
and why they don’t want to pay for such devices.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Amplemarket, AI-Powered Sales Assistant - zinedine
http://amplemarket.com/
======
tuyguntn
How is everything AI-powered these days?
Do you guys mean template/rule/pattern based when you write AI-powered?
Once in a while someone posts something AI-powered and I will immediately
check is there any breakthrough in this field, after testing product will get
disappointed.
In my opinion AI-powered Sales Assistant, should check old/new customers, get
information about their needs, check whether they need to buy product again,
find new leads, tell Sales Manager about them, for further decision making and
many more things it should capable of doing.
And all of them should be in automated/intelligent way, not
if (hello|hi|dear) -> respond(Hi xyz,....)
~~~
mattvot
> In my opinion AI-powered Sales Assistant, should check old/new customers,
> get information about their needs, check whether they need to buy product
> again, find new leads, tell Sales Manager about them, for further decision
> making and many more things it should capable of doing.
Not to detract from your point, but as an aside I always find it interesting
when comments like this are made.
I'll paraphrase a thought from Nick Bostrom in "Superintelligence: Paths,
Dangers, Strategies" that development in AI for the most part will be a series
of small incremental steps, to the extent as to redefine our definition of AI
as we solve each seemingly astonishing problem. The redefinition occurs as we
understand how these solutions work, label them and let them become as
familiar to us as Goal Trees, Rule-Based Expert Systems and Neural Nets are to
us now.
Would we be as similarly disappointed at the level of intelligence of "AI" at
a time when we do have products capable of doing as tuyguntn indicates?
------
glossyscr
Can anyone confirm: What I heard from VCs is that the hype AI is over again.
Not that they don't see a future in AI but ...
\- It's more difficult than expected; even narrow focussed Ai powered bots
have huge difficulties to understand
\- It's just another channel for existing products/business
\- Often 'AI' means a chat based interface with a well defined command set
like a CLI we all know
So, is it still wise to write AI-powered on a pitch deck?
------
anemitz
Does anyone know what about this is using AI? Seems like it's just using their
Midas product and then sending emails to contacts using uploaded templates.
~~~
Xorlev
AI is the new buzzword except even more weasely than machine learning or
machine intelligence.
------
rrggrr
Am I right that they are combining a call center with a list generation
service? Where is the AI part of this?
------
the_watcher
I've been using Amplemarket's Slack integration for about a month and have
been very impressed. It's basic, but very useful.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Laughter Doesn’t Scale - joshwa
https://trackchanges.postlight.com/laughter-doesn-t-scale-89d3e5687a24#.aba785fx4
======
blakeyrat
The problem isn't that it's a joke. The problem is that Google didn't do any
kind of UX thinking behind the change. (It doesn't matter whether the change
is serious or a joke, you can't just ignore the user experience.)
The new button performed a destructive action (because it blocked the
recipient from responding to the email thread) without any kind of
confirmation. Additionally, it was placed where it was likely to be hit by
accident. (Apparently where the "Send & Archive" button used to be, although I
don't have that on my Gmail theme.)
In short, they didn't _test_ the damned thing. Even a half-hour of user-
testing would have shown how easily the button was pressed by accident, and
how devastating an accidental press was.
And again: it doesn't matter if the change is a joke or not, you _don 't_ push
up a change unless you've done some basic UX work on it.
~~~
shogun21
Good UX is every action should be reversible. And have confirmations before
any destructive behavior.
However, that completely goes against the point of this joke. It's not a prank
if they prompted, "Are you sure you want to send a Minion gif and mute
yourself from this conversation?"
~~~
eru
> Good UX is every action should be reversible. And have confirmations before
> any destructive behavior.
Nah, people just click through. GMail has a much better model: mask
destructive / un-undoable behaviour behind a short timer, make the action
undo-able until the timer is up.
~~~
ketralnis
Is that not what reversible means?
~~~
eru
In some sense, yes. I guess it depends on how you want to define your words.
Strictly, the action you start when you click `Send' is reversible for a few
seconds, before it actually launches the nukes. But I'd rather call it
`delayed' when talking to a human about it.
Delaying is a way to make some non-reversible actions sort-of reversible.
------
danso
I think the bigger lesson is...don't mess with interfaces that a billion users
have gotten accustomed to. Think of the massive outcry that happens on a
redesign...With so many users, even a rarely used button like Send + Archive,
is going to be used in thousands of ways that you do not anticipate. And I'm
guessing a fairly innocuous feature change did not go through many levels of
QA testing before they rolled it out on April 1
~~~
dkersten
Don't mess with interfaces that a billion users _rely_ on.
------
studentrob
Hmm. Laughter doesn't scale when you're not funny. Plenty of viral YouTube
videos have shown that it sure as heck can scale.
The problem with this button is fairly obvious in hindsight. Google injected
humor into many people's business and personal worlds where it wasn't wanted
or expected.
This article is yet another apologist for what is clearly a lack of foresight
by Google.
By the way, I notice society explaining away a lot of behavior by others
lately. People seem afraid to criticize products and other people these days.
Let's call this what it is: a massive mistake. Google corrected it as soon as
they realized it and apologized. We can move on.
~~~
13thLetter
If the stories of people missing out on job offers and so forth are true,
Google did real damage to their lives and should make amends somehow.
I'll freely grant that I don't know what, specifically, they should do, but
"sorry lol" doesn't really cut it.
~~~
arghimonmobile
If I were one of those duped users, I'd expect a service subscription refund
from Google. Or maybe a few months' service on the house. At least.
/s
~~~
13thLetter
Well, that's the interesting question, isn't it.
Google offered a high quality service for free. (Well, "free" as in they're
selling eyeballs to advertisers, but, you know. Internet free.) They
aggressively promoted it to the entire world. Literally a billion people took
them up on it and, after years of reliable service, have made it a central
part of their professional and personal lives.
What is Google's responsibility at this point to not grief those billion
people? Whether by bad April Fool's pranks, or anything else?
If the takeaway from your comment is that the world would be better if people
paid for their email service, I wouldn't disagree. But how we get back to that
point is not at all clear.
------
jmduke
I've been reading _Design for Real Life_
([https://abookapart.com/products/design-for-real-
life](https://abookapart.com/products/design-for-real-life)), and its
introduction is a fairly similar mirror of this kind of snafu -- using
Facebook's "Your Year in Moments" feature as a stand-in.
When Facebook first launched it, they positioned it as a "look at all the
awesome things that happened this year!" sort of feature, with lots of smiling
faces and positive, upbeat language. However, the reality often didn't match
up -- Facebook would add sad or otherwise unideal photos/statuses to the
collage, such as houses burning down, depictions of illness, etc. etc. Lots of
users complained, and as a result they shifted the tone of the feature to be
more neutral. ("We thought you might like to take a look back at the past
year")
Put another way: edge cases (or as the book refers to them, _stress cases_ )
exist not just in code paths but in your user's expectations and emotions.
Just as a good architecture can handle these appropriately, a good design and
UX accounts for the entire spectrum of users.
~~~
mgkimsal
What's so odd about that is it's literally trivial to see that trainwreck well
in advance. Maybe not if the entirety of your internal culture caters to sub
35 years old.
~~~
jmduke
The willful ignorance of the assumption that everyone using your product is a
happy, well-off individual with no sad/traumatic events in recent history is
akin to the willful ignorance that nobody will try passing in a negative
number to a method which takes an integer as an argument.
------
mcguire
" _There is no science behind this chart, but we’re consultants._ "
And they say humor doesn't scale.
------
skybrian
Laughter is an all clear signal indicating that something looks weird but is
actually harmless. If someone doesn't think you're funny, maybe they don't
trust you enough to think you're harmless.
Strangers are always going to require more convincing than friends.
~~~
gohrt
Exactly. Humor requires context, and _context_ doesn't scale easily.
------
minimaxir
It is _entirely_ possible to be comedic in tech. But the risks outweigh the
benefits, unless you have a strong comedic background and a _very_ strong
understanding of your audience and context.
"My friends laughed at it!" is a common standard for tech humor nowadays. It's
highly misleading especially if you are a part of the echo chamber.
~~~
girvo
Agreed. As an example, the Pinboard dev (idlewords?) is quite hilarious in a
dry, caustic but extremely cheerful way. I could never be as funny as they
are, it's just not part of my skill set!
------
aantix
Laughter definitely scales, it's just not infinitely scalable..
The Onion scales. It doesn't scale past the Generation X audience, but oh, it
scales.
~~~
coldtea
You'd be amazed at how many of the "Generation X" have taken the Onion for
real, or stand for the exactly inverse ideals.
It's like people think every 20 something in the sixties was progressive, but
there were tens of millions of conservative kids that grew up into
conservative adults...
~~~
gohrt
What are Onion's ideals?
~~~
evan_
The onion doesn't have a strongly-defined partisan political stance, but it
overwhelming "punches up" rather than punching down- meaning the butt of the
joke is a person or organization with more power than the audience.
To me, this point-of-view tends to look more progressive than conservative,
but I might be overlaying my own biases.
------
kuschku
A joke should be simple, globally understandable – and if it isn’t
understandable, shouldn’t be too annoying – and it should never be
destructive.
Changing GMail to render (but not send!) all emails in Comic Sans would be
such a change. (With a notification at top to turn it off)
Offering "Clippy" now also in Hotmail would be such a change. (with the
ability to hide it)
Adding a "Send (and attach a gif that makes me seem like an idiot, and nuke
the conversation)" button where a normal send button used to be is not.
A good joke is hard, and we all have made jokes that backfired before. But for
a corporation, such as Google, in a huge project of theirs, they should try to
double and triple check each joke for damage it might do.
~~~
lotharbot
> _" it should never be destructive"_
it's particularly important to account for psychological or social
destructiveness.
Rickrolling someone can be funny. Pretending that you're pregnant and then
saying "April Fools" later in the day can be psychologically harmful to those
who struggle with infertility or who have lost a child. Replacing someone's PC
startup sound with flatulence can be hilarious. Posting a fake, mean story
about someone else can prompt others to pile on thinking that you're serious,
and damage a relationship. Rendering all webpages in Comic Sans is worth a
chuckle. Nuking someone's e-mail conversation can cost people their jobs, or
at the very least can result in important (business-critical or even life-
critical) information getting lost in the shuffle.
This joke could have been funny, if it had been carefully tailored to be non-
dangerous and non-destructive. It wasn't.
------
Animats
Was this Gail Harrison's doing?[1] She's Illumination Entertainment's head of
marketing and branding. She would have had to sign off on this for Google to
use a Minions™ character.
Gail is a major figure in the branding industry. She was behind the branding
of The Simpsons characters. She managed the Disney Princesses branding. Before
her work, there were princesses in Disney films, but they hadn't been
harnessed into a supergroup merchandising team, pulling over $3 billion a year
in tie-in sales.
"Mic drop" had to have her approval.
[1] [http://variety.com/2016/film/news/illumination-gail-
harrison...](http://variety.com/2016/film/news/illumination-gail-harrison-
marketing-branding-president-1201725127/)
~~~
aerovistae
This small profile of Gail Harrison seems largely irrelevant and reads like
you're trying to hype her up to make some sort of a sell.
~~~
Animats
It's more about blame. Someone whose job implies a professional understanding
of humor at scale signed off on this. How did that happen? A good question for
the trades (Variety, THR) to take up.
~~~
Absentinsomniac
Maybe google just licensed or asked to use it as a part of an undefined April
fools joke, and she / they assumed Google wouldn't do something irresponsible?
~~~
Animats
We don't know. But she should, and the trade magazines can ask her. Hollywood
talks to the press.
------
exolymph
If you're interesting in this garbage fire, I recommend reading Andy Baio's
whole Twitter thread:
[https://twitter.com/waxpancake/status/715747304444002304](https://twitter.com/waxpancake/status/715747304444002304)
~~~
Grue3
This seems hilarious to me, sounds like an outcome of a good prank. Why
exactly does Google need to apologize to these users? What are they gonna do,
switch to Hotmail? When you're as big as Google, you can completely shut down
entire services like Google Reader and get away with it.
~~~
cauterized
Maybe they don't need to apologize to the users tweeting at them. But maybe
you heard about people who, for instance, got fired because they hit this
accidentally?
~~~
djrogers
> maybe you heard about people who, for instance, got fired because they hit
> this accidentally?
I would be willing to wager large sums of money that this didn't happen, and
even larger sums that if it did, it was resolved in about 18 seconds, and the
person is still employed come Monday (with a good laugh to share with
coworkers).
~~~
CamperBob2
Even with at-will employment in the US, when someone gets fired it often comes
at the end of a lengthy and combative process. Picking up the last straw may
not bring the proverbial camel back to life, if your manager was already
looking for an excuse to get rid of you.
------
wodenokoto
A typical Google April 1st joke is a product announcement (Google Japan hit
the front page with theirs earlier) but this one is the opportunity for users
to prank other users (and easily doing it by mistake)
Since users are quite good at doing everything you don't want them to do, this
create great opportunities for mistakes and abuse.
------
CM30
Laughter definitely scales. I mean, how many other tech companies did April
Fools Day jokes yesterday? Tons of them, yet it's mostly Google that's getting
the criticism for messing up here.
Google's problem was this joke was forced on people, even when they weren't in
a mood to make any jokes. If it was an optional button to the right, or
activated by some other means that wasn't 'click a button that many people
used, or sometimes have it wotk automatically', then people wouldn't be
complaining about it.
------
jkot
Some jokes are not scalable. Funny cats on youtube are scalable.
------
swiley
This is why web apps are bad. (among other reasons) The UI can change for any
reason without you knowing and with no way to stop it.
~~~
sergiosgc
That is also why they are good. The UI will change and evolve and perfect,
without you thinking about it.
\--
Glass half-full kind of guy.
~~~
swiley
Hahaha. I don't think I've ever used a single web app where the UI got better
over time. Perhaps hn is the only exception.
------
anotherevan
For me, the best April Fools’ joke was when GitHub added SVN support[1]. It
was funny, ironic, useful, and best of all, real. I always think of it as the
April Fools’ joke that keeps on giving.
[1] [https://github.com/blog/626-announcing-svn-
support](https://github.com/blog/626-announcing-svn-support)
------
amelius
Does anybody know of a book containing a good analysis of humor? I'm wondering
if there is some structure to be found in the things we find funny.
~~~
js8
Not sure if it's what you're asking for, but I found
[http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Jokes-Using-Humor-Reverse-
Engin...](http://www.amazon.com/Inside-Jokes-Using-Humor-Reverse-
Engineer/dp/0262518694) interesting.
------
Apocryphon
Between Gmail being announced an April 1st, and Apple being founded on
another, maybe the best way to celebrate this day is with the truth.
------
keyle
That highlighted quote really nailed it deep for me. I've felt that network
effect on twitter for many people.
------
draw_down
Everyone should just stop this shit. I too enjoyed these things years ago, but
not anymore. There are too many now, but it also seems a bit sneakier or more
malicious now than it used to, the Gmail thing is a great example. And it just
seems de rigeur rather than fun or funny.
------
gragas
>and, sometimes, if you’re a woman, by a miscellany of invasive threats
What the heck? I'm not a woman, so apparently no one can threaten me on the
internet?
Sure women probably receive far more internet threats, but we should use
language to reflect _that_ , rather than outright lying and trivializing all
the instances where men were threatened.
~~~
iopq
Actually, men receive just as many Internet threats, but they tend to ignore
them, while women tend to take them seriously.
------
tigershark
I can't imagine the overall impact, I guess that the child that pushed this
"feature" is sweating a lot right now.
------
grahamburger
I'd say the popularity of sitcoms (in the US at least) proves that comedy
scales pretty well as long as you don't stray from the formula. (Bump, set,
spike!)
------
gexla
Bad move on Google's part. But I would think by now people would be used to
seeing media being inserted into a free service. If you want to get rid of the
ads, get a paid service.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
First geologic map of Ganymede made with Voyager data - nealabq
http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/first-geologic-map-of-ganymede-made-with-voyager-data/
======
throwaway_yy2Di
Imagine the satellite images we could be looking at, if NASA had different
funding priorities:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_Icy_Moons_Orbiter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_Icy_Moons_Orbiter)
[pdf] [http://trs-
new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/38185/1/05...](http://trs-
new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/38185/1/05-3441.pdf)
tl;dr: A low-orbiting (100-200 km), 37-ton science probe, jumping from moon to
moon using nuclear-powered ion rockets.
* 1.5 tons of science instruments
* 1 meter telescope (25 cm surface resolution)
* 100 kW power supply
------
tephra
Here is a link to the companion paper published in 2010 for anyone interested:
[http://www.planetary.brown.edu/pdfs/3805.pdf](http://www.planetary.brown.edu/pdfs/3805.pdf)
------
devindotcom
This is gorgeous stuff. I can't get the PDF to render the way it looks on the
USGS site, though. Lots of layers and outlines. Looks the same in Foxit and
Sumatra.
~~~
deletes
[http://www.space.com/images/i/000/036/889/original/ganymede-...](http://www.space.com/images/i/000/036/889/original/ganymede-
map.jpg?1392246285)
Found it using google image search with the small image in the article.
I had to narrow the search to find the original source.
Original source: [http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/multimedia/ganymede-
pia17901/](http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/multimedia/ganymede-pia17901/)
Article:
[http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/news/ganymede20140212/index.html](http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/news/ganymede20140212/index.html)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Seattle Is Dying - SQL2219
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpAi70WWBlw
======
theophrastus
There should be a healthy caveat attached to this one. This was produced and
presented by Sinclair broadcast group[1]. Whose devotion to promulgating
conservative interests is almost unparalleled. And while some valid points are
mixed into this documentary, there is a whole lot of mitigating information
left out[2] the better to create outrage.
[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group)
[2]
[https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2019/03/18/39630856/komos-s...](https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2019/03/18/39630856/komos-
seattle-is-dying-news-special-is-killing-me)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Show HN: MobileGamePatterns.com - rrhoover
I'm a big fan of mobile patterns sites like pttrns.com and mobile-patterns.com but neither cover mobile gaming. With oDesk's help and some patience with Tumblr theming, I created mobilegamepatterns.com.<p>What do you think?
======
colig
<http://mobilegamepatterns.com/tagged/options_menu> does not work.
~~~
rrhoover
Ah, thanks! I forgot to change the URL to /settings.
------
coryl
Hey, I like it. A very great place to draw artistic and design inspiration.
Maybe it would be better as a blog?
~~~
rrhoover
Thanks, Cory!
What do you mean by "better as a blog"? It's currently presenting the most
recent entries (like a blog) and includes category links (like a blog). I'm
curious what ideas you have.
~~~
coryl
Ah, I guess it is a blog, I was thinking just the layout so it would be easier
to recognize newer post updates.
------
rrhoover
clicky: <http://mobilegamepatterns.com>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Show HN: Data Analytics on Programmer Jobs - camspill
http://jprathipati.me
======
camspill
Interesting programmer job statistics, someone's in class project for CS 3654:
Intro to Data Visualization and Data Analytics @ Virginia Tech
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
The Next Big Language (2007) - tosh
https://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2007/02/next-big-language.html?m=1
======
mpweiher
(2007)
~~~
moomin
He was not wrong. The optional typing took longer to materialise than he
expected, though.
~~~
tosh
Also now there is Rust as potential C++ successor. Time flies.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
The incredible reason east sides of cities are poorer than west sides - SQL2219
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-incredible-reason-east-sides-of-cities-are-poorer-than-west-sides-2016-11-02?mod=mw_share_twitter
======
FrancoDiaz
For some reason, I was thinking about this the other day. But I have another
reason, at least for the U.S. The east side is most likely to be older because
people migrated from east to west.
The wealthier people would move to the west as the east side of town got more
crowded and older.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
How (And Why) I'm Circumventing Twitter's API Instead of Using It - livestyle
http://pandawhale.com/convo/7179/how-and-why-im-circumventing-twitters-api-instead-of-using-it
======
desbest
Why are third parties important in the Twitter ecosystem?
Let Twitterrific count the ways:
First use of “tweet” to describe an update (see page 86 of Dom Sagolla’s
book.) First use of a bird icon. First native client on Macintosh. First
character counter as you type. First to support replies and conversations (in
collaboration with Twitter engineering.) First native client on iPhone. And
more.
<http://furbo.org/2011/03/11/twitterrific-firsts/>
~~~
juniorplenty
Expanded for ecosystem firsts beyond Twitterrific:
[http://blog.140proof.com/post/30593225507/twitter-
features-i...](http://blog.140proof.com/post/30593225507/twitter-features-
invented-by-the-ecosystem)
------
vizzah
PhantomJS is great for scrapping, but the proposed solution can still be
easily recognized as a bot behaviour. Twitter can easily block it for
excessive page loads, for example serving CAPTCHA the same way Google does to
prevent search scrappers. I can't see how this solution would be more solid
and future-proof.
~~~
zapt02
Completely right. A lot of social sites, notably Facebook do this when you for
example post bit.ly links, so users are already groomed to accept it.
Then again, you could buy external captcha solving services and keep on
trucking. :)
------
annon
I'm sure it will work great, until they alter their page layout ever so
slightly. Change an id here or there. Then you have to scramble to fix for the
new layout while your 'API' is down.
------
benregenspan
Needless to say, this is an awful idea for anything besides a small personal
project. PhantomJS or no, it's easy to detect this behavior, and also easy to
understand why Twitter would be against it.
------
desbest
Twitter has been around for its first 5 years without putting a single advert
on their site, and only NOW they want to make profits after realising the
third party developers are hosting Twitter based content elsewhere with mobile
client apps?
That is a totally bad business decision from the start if you ask me.
~~~
jimminy
You've not seen the Promoted Trends and Promoted Tweets in Search, that have
been there for nearly 2 years. They've been profitable, on a monthly basis for
a while.
------
jdotjdot89
A big problem with this is from my own experiences, despite the rate limiting
on the API, it has far more access to historical data (eg, past tweets) than
the browser.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
The Strangely Underreported Decline in the Incarceration Rate - ph0rque
http://www.samefacts.com/2013/01/crime-control/the-strangely-underreported-decline-in-the-incarceration-rate/
======
jetti
If you take a look at the report that was linked you can see the following
line:
" Persons supervised by the adult correctional systems include those in the
community under the authority of probation or parole agencies that supervise
adults and those in the custody of state or federal prisons or local jails."
It doesn't look like private prisons are included. Which means prisoners could
be offloaded to the private sector making the public sector look much better.
I dug around for a few minutes and couldn't find any statistics on the number
of inmates in private prisons, so I don't know for sure if the number of
incarcerated inmates in private prisons rose from 2010 (the last year of stats
I could find) or not. But it is still some food for thought.
~~~
glhaynes
I would have expected privately-operated prisons to still be classified as
"state or federal prisons", but I'm no expert.
~~~
jetti
You are correct. After a little more digging, I found this:
"BJS’s official measure of the prison population is the count of prisoners
under the jurisdiction or legal authority of state and federal adult
correctional officials (1,598,780 in 2011). The jurisdiction population count
is reported in Prisoners in 2011, BJS website, NCJ 239808, December 2012.
These prisoners may be held in prison or jail facilities located outside of
the state or federal prison systems. The prison population reported in table 2
in this report is the number held in custody or physically housed in state
(1,289,376 in 2011) and federal (214,774 in 2011) adult correctional
facilities, regardless of which entity has legal authority over the prisoners
(appendix table 1). This includes state and federal prisoners held in
privately operated facilities. The difference between the number of prisoners
in custody and the number under jurisdiction is the number of state and
federal prisoners held in the custody of local jails, inmates out to court,
and those in transit from the jurisdiction of legal authority to the custody
of a confinement facility outside that jurisdiction."
from <http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus11.pdf>
------
betterunix
Perhaps this is related to the decriminalization of marijuana in some states
at that time.
I welcome this news. We have far too many prisoners; any reduction in the
incarceration rate is a good thing, and we have a long way to go.
------
kevin_morrill
This was just talked about on EconTalk, a great podcast.
[http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/12/pettit_on_the_p.htm...](http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2012/12/pettit_on_the_p.html)
(link includes transcript if you don't like podcasts)
Ironically, the researcher being interviewed is pretty negative on the whole
situation, given that we are still a world leader in incarceration. It's a
useful discussion even if you disagree with her, because I think she puts some
useful data on the table.
------
hollerith
It's still higher than any other large country in the world (and probably any
other country period):
[http://www.prisonstudies.org/info/worldbrief/wpb_stats.php?a...](http://www.prisonstudies.org/info/worldbrief/wpb_stats.php?area=all&category=wb_poprate)
(The article is about the decline in the incarceration rate _in the U.S._ )
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Magic Leap said to be ‘doing 1,000 things badly’ after raising $1.4B - JumpCrisscross
http://venturebeat.com/2017/02/13/ar-startup-magic-leap-reportedly-stumbles-after-raising-1-4-billion/
======
dharmon
Every time there is a post about Magic Leap, someone inevitably asks the
question if there has ever been a case of a hyped-up tech actually living up
to its claims.
I've thought about this and I'll be damned if I can't think of a single
example. The closest I can come is some of the old steam engine tech, where
they would have a huge public competition and one demo engine would be crazy
fast, but the hype was never at these levels.
Basically, as a student of business history of sorts, just considering the
base rates for these situations, I'd be willing to give generous odds that
Magic Leap absolutely fails to deliver anything worthwhile. It just doesn't
seem to happen. The true breakthroughs are built by those quietly plugging
away, scared to death that if they take a breath to talk about it their
competitors lurking in the shadows will pull ahead.
It really makes me wonder who these investors are that piled on. The first
$100M or so I understand; they thought they were getting in on something new
and great. But the next $1B? Did they never read a business history book
during their MBA program?
~~~
nostrademons
The Internet. It just took 10-15 years longer than everyone thought it would.
Mobile phones & PDAs as well - they were super-hyped right around 1992, it
just took 15 years after that before someone produced a device that was
_actually_ exciting.
Actually, it's generally been a pretty good business strategy to take whatever
was hyped up 10-15 years ago but was then written off as unworkable, and then
reimagine it with modern technology. Think of Javascript apps (DHTML 1997 ->
Angular 2012), streaming video (RealAudio 1996 -> YouTube 2006), e-commerce
(everybody 1995 -> everybody 2012), webmail (HotMail 1997 -> GMail 2004), GUI
interface builders (NeXTStep 1992 -> XCode 2007), mobile phones (Newton &
General Magic 1992 -> iPhone & Android 2007/09), lithium-ion batteries (first
prototypes late-80s -> widespread cellphone/laptop use mid-00s), etc.
It doesn't do much good for the investors of those early waves of companies,
though.
~~~
AndrewKemendo
These are different than what the OP was talking about. He's basically asking
about stealth products like segway etc...
All your examples were ones where the initial hype around the technology/idea
just wasn't ready yet, it wasn't one company playing coy and then coming out
with some groundbreaking thing like the iPod/iPhone was.
~~~
Nursie
Why do people think the iPhone was groundbreaking?
It was evolutionary, it was very, very well polished (something apple are good
at) and it was advertised massively. But it wasn't streets ahead of the
competition.
~~~
tempestn
When the first iphone came out, it was the only mainstream device to ditch the
physical keyboard, allowing for a very large (for the time) touchscreen, while
keeping the device thinner and lighter than high-end competitors. This screen,
along with pinch to zoom, allowed desktop websites (which were basically all
websites at the time) to realistically be used on a mobile device. You
certainly _could_ browse websites on other devices, but you wouldn't want to,
given a choice. The original iphone is what really started mobile browsing.
~~~
Nursie
Mobile browsing had been around for quite a while, and I had used Opera Mobile
on various phones for some time. PDAs, when they existed as separate devices,
tended to have larger screens than phones, and allowed reasonable browsing
too.
The iPhone was a great product, I'm not denying it, but I wonder if the
perception that it was revolutionary comes from the state of the US market at
the time - generally thought to have been years behind Europe and Asia.
~~~
maverick_iceman
I browsed web in phones before iPhone, the experience was awful. Though there
is some truth in your saying that the US market was much behind Japan and
Korea at that point. (Europe and rest of Asia was definitely not significantly
ahead.)
------
IshKebab
I've tried a hololens and it's pretty amazing. Yes, the field of view is bad,
but the tracking (6 DoF tracking!) is absolutely rock solid. Better than a
Vive or Rift, and it is using inside-out tracking. There's also no perceptible
latency (again in my unscientific head-shaking test I'd say it is slightly
better than a Rift or Vive).
Magic Leap are going to have to do something seriously amazing to beat the
hololens, especially when they inevitably upgrade the FoV.
~~~
ChicagoBoy11
When I used the Hololens I had the same impression you did. I too was blown
away by the incredible accuracy of the tracking. What I don't understand is
how Microsoft didn't launch a VR product to compete with Vive and Oculus.
Given the strength of the tracking, it felt to me like they were so close to
building a VR device that did not require all the cables and tower set-ups
that the other two do. Clearly I must be missing something, but I just don't
know what it is.
~~~
astannard
Microsoft have Windows Holographic coming soon that will launch on 3rd party
sets for Dell Lenovo etc. These are VR headsets with inside out tracking but
without the AR tech. I guess they will be a good rival to the Vive but details
are thin
------
throwaway2016a
Every time I see a post about Magic Leap I think to myself that a lot of smart
people invested a lot of money into this... they must know something we don't.
There is no way they are investing in a company that can't deliver, right? But
that might be naive / optimistic of me.
Meanwhile my startup has a working product with traction and a revenue model
but we are having issues getting funding. At least partially because we aren't
in Silicon Valley. (not bitter at all... no I won't name the company)
~~~
deelowe
Are you 10x though? Gotta be 10x or more.
------
lsh123
Technology companies raising significant amount of money without a product are
usually not very successful. There were many examples: Color is probably the
poster child of such a company, but there are many more.
~~~
ExactoKnight
A Better Place was another massive, $1 billion example of such a failure.
[https://www.fastcompany.com/3028159/a-broken-place-better-
pl...](https://www.fastcompany.com/3028159/a-broken-place-better-place)
------
draw_down
I dunno what's going on over there but they need some PR people or better PR
people than the ones they have now.
~~~
aphextron
>I dunno what's going on over there but they need some PR people or better PR
people than the ones they have now.
No, that's the problem. The entire company is PR. They need engineers.
------
bobosha
Theranos all over again
------
vernie
I believe that Abovitz has something amazing on his hands. All those faked
demo videos were very convincing.
------
mileycyrusXOXO
Meanwhile Meta is taking pre-orders...
~~~
Eridrus
I wish everyone in this space well, and huge funding rounds can be a huge
weight dragging a company down, but I feel like Meta is severely
undercapitalized to be in this market.
Microsoft doesn't have a tethered product right now, but it seems very likely
that an OEM will[0] and Microsoft will help them build it and will provide the
software - somewhere that Meta 2 has been struggling with.
[0] [https://news.microsoft.com/2016/06/01/microsoft-opens-
window...](https://news.microsoft.com/2016/06/01/microsoft-opens-windows-
holographic-to-partners-for-a-new-era-of-mixed-reality/)
------
arcaster
Wouldn't be too surprised if Magic Leap becomes the next Theranos.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Social media encourages us to follow those we envy - nomadictribe
http://nautil.us/issue/31/stress/is-facebook-luring-you-into-being-depressed
======
jerf
Here on HN, over the years I've mentioned my "spouse firewall" for Facebook,
which I considered to be the perfect level of involvement.
Well, about a month ago my spouse firewall very nearly failed entirely. The
problem was that with her mature Facebook account, with dozens of "friends"
with a ton of other "friends", the stream of continuous bad news just became
too much. Partially that's particular to some relationships we have, but even
ignoring those, it was _still_ an unrelenting stream of people having surgery,
complications, financial troubles, and then very bizarrely mixed in with cute
puppy photos, and then mixed in with political shitfits, to say nothing of
some _other_ family's "drama", all mixed with a "healthy" helping of
continuous ads.
As it turns out, my firewall "recovered", but usage has been toned _way_ down,
and a lot of people got themselves hidden.
It gets said on HN every so often, but MySpace and the previous social
networks often collapsed virtually overnight. I still think there's a good
chance Facebook could still go that way.
Edit: Sorry, my "spouse firewall" is that my wife is on Facebook and I have no
account. I hear about the family gatherings and other such things announced
only on Facebook that way, but don't have to have an account myself. So it's
like a "firewall" filtering out only the most important stuff.
~~~
qntty
I'm interested to hear what a "spouse firewall" is
~~~
blowski
If it's the same as mine, it means that I don't have a Facebook account, but
my spouse tells me what's on Facebook that I need to know.
------
markatkinson
I deleted (deleted, not deactivated) my Facebook profile 4 years ago. It had
clearly become an addiction, kinda like my mobile phone is now (cost/benefit
balance of mobile phone is still too good to throw away).
I remember actually having withdrawals in the first few weeks. Not sure if it
was withdrawals or muscle memory that kept kicking in to check my feed, but
there was an element of angst not being connected to the feed.
Now I am quite happy without it (almost liberated), and trying to spend that
time I would have spent on Facebook doing something that adds value to my life
like reading HN! Surprisingly my circle (more of a triangle) of friends still
exists, even without Facebook.
~~~
SmellyGeekBoy
Ex-heavy Facebook user here (multiple times per hour) - I stopped checking it
altogether and uninstalled the app about 3 weeks ago, just to see how I would
get on. I know exactly the feelings you're talking about. After a week cold
turkey I'm now back to checking much more infrequently (a couple of times a
day) but it takes a huge amount of willpower to use it passively and not like
/ comment / post anything.
I'd delete my account altogether but I find the Messenger really useful and I
manage a few pages / events on there, not to mention wanting to keep up with
some distant family. It's amazing how they've managed to create this feeling
of dependence.
What's also amazing is just how much more productive I've been over the past
few weeks without the constant (self-inflicted) interruptions!
~~~
gnrme
It's the fear of missing out. All the social media services build their
foundation on that addiction. Once you delete the accounts then the feeling
slowly goes away and you get back to what life was like before all this
nonsense started.
~~~
gherkin0
> It's the fear of missing out. All the social media services build their
> foundation on that addiction. Once you delete the accounts then the feeling
> slowly goes away and you get back to what life was like before all this
> nonsense started.
And Facebook explicitly tries to prevent you from getting rid of that
addiction. They have a "feature" that kicks in after a few days of non-use to
incessantly remind you via email that you're missing out. So-and-so posted a
picture, etc.
As far as I can tell, there's no way to disable them without also disabling
emails for event invites and direct messages, which is just shitty. I've had
to setup gmail filters to get rid of them.
------
jonstokes
This is probably the primary reason that I can't get behind the Zuckerberg
worship, no matter how much philanthropy he's involved in or how dedicated he
is to self-improvement and so on. The man's main contribution to humanity is
the spiritual equivalent of cigarettes -- toxic, addictive by design, and
marketed to young people. It's gross. FB is gross, and that makes Zuckerberg
gross.
~~~
BenderV
Zuckerberg is not responsable for the existence of the Friendship Paradox or
our natural instinct to envy, etc. Facebook mission in itself, is good. We
have no reason to doubt Zuckerberg honesty to do good. Do you have any example
where Facebook did something that they knew was bad but still did it?
It's true that social network bring bad side effects, everything does. They
can only try to correct them.
~~~
bad_user
> _Do you have any example where Facebook did something that they knew was bad
> but still did it?_
Yes, here's a study on manipulating the feed of over 600,000 users, in order
to elicit an emotional response. Without asking for permission of course,
because apparently you agree to FB playing mind tricks on you when "agreeing"
to their terms and conditions. Really, it can't get worse than this and they
have no justification.
Here's the resulting paper:
[http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full.pdf](http://www.pnas.org/content/111/24/8788.full.pdf)
~~~
cryoshon
Ah yes, I had forgotten about this unethical chestnut you have brought forth.
This is the kind of research which would never (and I do mean literally
never-- no chance, zero, nada, zilch) get approved by an institutional review
board (IRB) if a scientist wanted to perform a similar experiment. There was
no consent process, and the study aimed to effect a tangible and measurable
emotional change, for no real greater good/purpose.
~~~
res0nat0r
You are aware that every advertisement you look at every day has been designed
to elicit an emotional response yes? The advertisers in the newspaper,
Internet and billboard down the street didn't get your opt in permission
either.
~~~
saiya-jin
that doesn't make it any more moral. just because others are already doing it,
is it automatically OK?
~~~
TeMPOraL
Actually it does. They did something relatively harmless for science (and
maybe, indirectly, for profit). The whole advertising industry is based on
doing worse things, all the time, for pure profit. That this Facebook study is
a subject of an outrage is, frankly, ridiculous.
~~~
fbbbbb
That is an appeal to tradition, and it a fallacy. It isn't moral for
advertisers to do harmful things to users just because most advertisers do it.
Most scientist do not do harmful things to their subjects. Modern science
requires consent. So your fallacious argument, even if it weren't, fails to
argue correctly in the first place, because scientists aren't advertisers.
Facebook study was done without consent. It was harmful to their users
(subjects) because it interfered with their emotions. It is immoral.
The outrage might seem ridiculous, from the perspective of an advertiser,
because, as you said, they do worst things all the time, so this study is
hardly appalling for them. But from the perspective of other people, it is.
I hope this gave you an insight into (our) reaction to the study.
------
iolothebard
I just unsubscribed from everyone's feed. No need to be that drastic (deleting
facebook). If I want to catch up on someone's life, I simply look at their
page (like in 2005 pre-feed).
If you're so concerned about people's "staged moments", it seems you should
create the life you want for yourself instead of assuming their moments are
"staged". I'll never understand envy, such a childish emotion.
~~~
cylinder
Yep, this is the key. I like occassionally sharing our photos with family, and
the messaging is convenient. Feed doesn't make me depressed, it makes me
annoyed at how stupid my "friends" are. I've just been hiding people more and
more and then I'm liberated of their stressful stupidity.
------
kartan
"...we inadvertently make our friends feel like losers and contribute to a
swirling vortex of envy, in which we ourselves risk drowning."
I always had the feeling that this attitude is worst in the United States than
in other places. I guess that it is related to the way society tries to
categorize others as winners/losers instead of looking at life as a shadow of
greys. And how it blames people for being poor instead of taking into account
different circumstances. (But, of course, is not an USA only problem)
If you want to be happier on-line and off-line stop looking at others with
envy and begin to look them for inspiration. Have they meaningful lives? How
can I improve mine?
If being connected to social networks makes you unhappy disconnecting is the
right thing to do. But if envy is what makes you disconnect then your problem
is also off-line and sooner or later you will need to get over it if you want
to be realised and happy.
~~~
unclebucknasty
> _envy is what makes you disconnect then your problem is also off-line and
> sooner or later you will need to get over it if you want to be realised and
> happy._
While I somewhat agree with this in spirit, the truth of it is that our well-
being is a relative proposition. We are social creatures, living within a
social construct.
Hence, even in your suggestion that we look to others to ask whether they have
meaningful lives and seek inspiration from them, you are encouraging people to
measure themselves against others.
But that begs the question that is the subject of this article. The notion
that others have more meaningful lives is itself skewed by Facebook. So,
viewed through that lens, nothing I do will make my life as meaningful as it
"should" be.
And, this need not have anything to do with the typical negative connotation
of envy--that is, jealousy--in order to be harmful. I can be genuinely happy
for the success I perceive in others, while simultaneously receiving the
message that my own life is lacking.
~~~
kartan
> our well-being is a relative proposition Yes. But you can change the
> framework you work with. You can relativize the situation (e.g. take into
> account that some one had a better starting position in life than you). You
> can compare different things (e.g. wealth vs wisdom). Even you can compare
> agains worst scenarios instead of ideal situations. To be happy at all costs
> will be delusional. But I believe that to achieve small goals, to move
> forward to the person that you want to be should improve your well-being.
> nothing I do will make my life as meaningful as it "should" be If you change
> "should" by "can" then I agree. We never will achieve our "full potential"
> as seen on some not-so-good self-help books. Because that is unrealistic. We
> will make mistakes. We will change goals. That idealised state is no
> achievable but I think that having it as a moving target is helpful.
> typical negative connotation of envy--that is, jealousy--in order to be
> harmful Agree. I made a bad use of words. I meant jealousy.
> I can be genuinely happy for the success I perceive in others, while
> simultaneously receiving the message that my own life is lacking. I agree.
> And that's a good thing about comparisons. You can find things that you lack
> and you can try to achieve them.
------
compactmani
Hmm, I've always thought that communication filtered and manipulated by
corporate incentive was the most depressing part of Facebook.
It looks like there are other reasons to find Facebook depressing.
------
l1n
Nautil.us seems to be down right now. Cache link:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:lhjrzN6...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:lhjrzN6OLJ0J:nautil.us/issue/31/stress/is-
facebook-luring-you-into-being-depressed+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us) EDIT:
seems to be back up now. Archive just in case:
[https://archive.is/l2oWo](https://archive.is/l2oWo)
------
Mikeb85
The main problem with social media is that we (generally) post only the good
moments in our lives. Leading to the idea that everyone else's lives are
always awesome.
We see the good and bad in our own lives, but see only the absolute best of
other peoples' lives, leading to feelings of inadequacy.
Now that's not to say it's Facebook's fault. We also generally keep pictures
of our 'best' moments in our house. The problem is that, when everyone else's
'best' is on tap, visible so easily, we often forget that everyone is mortal.
If someone were to look on my Facebook (which is now deactivated), they'd see
travel adventures, me and my wife dressed up, doing fun things, etc... They
wouldn't see me stressed out drinking cup after cup of coffee before a test.
Even if I post the dinner I make every day, they wouldn't see the pile of
dishes afterwards.
Anyhow, I don't think Facebook is necessarily the cause, it just magnifies our
weaknesses. And people have become so vain that I see people who go out just
to get that 1 picture to post, not to enjoy themselves. The current generation
are becoming more vain, because too many are obsessed with social media and
the need to always appear perfect. In the old days when you saw your friends
only once a week, it was far easier to hide weakness.
As far as following celebrities, the problem is that it's a celebrity's JOB to
appear perfect all the time. The 40-60 hours we spend trying to be good at our
profession is 40-60 hours they spend trying to be good at promoting themselves
and appearing perfect.
Furthermore, celebrity worship just reinforces the lottery nature of our
society. It's not good enough any more to have money, or to have friends. You
need to be rich, and have followers...
------
jarmitage
In a perfect world we would have the social plumbing without the psychological
manipulation. But we're not, so here's how I've found how to make do with
Facebook without it poisoning my brain. And yes I do benefit from it a lot,
which is why I'm not leaving.
This is what my redux version of Facebook looks like, using custom uBlock
filters - basically just news feed and notifications. Manages to eliminate
~90% of their manipulation attempts I reckon.
[http://i.imgur.com/kRTI7Un.png](http://i.imgur.com/kRTI7Un.png)
Other tips: unsubscribe from anything/one whose posts you don't want to see
(sounds obvious if you're disciplined about this it makes a lot of
difference), stick to messages only but inbox 0 it so you aren't storing
useful info there, get event requests sync'd to an external calendar, untick
'remember' when you login.
I've found it totally manageable this way, and am cautiously hopeful that one
day it wont be necessary once the Silicon Valley psychopaths grow up.
~~~
legulere
Also don't use the like button for anything except stuff friends post
themselves. Otherwise you will get spammed with that stuff and you will get
less of what your actual facebook friends post. You can remove likes also
afterwards.
------
markyc
i manually unfollowed everyone on my list, so now my facebook home page is
empty. i still go on other people's profiles from time to time, but way less
than i used to
this way it feels like i'm more in control of my activity and not getting
flooded with "news" helps a lot for my peace of mind
~~~
xyzzy4
I did this also. You get all the benefits of deactivating your Facebook
account, but without feeling like you lost something.
------
mapleoin
It's weird how this article finds so many things wrong with Facebook, but it
cannot even think of an alternative. Instea it talks about how Facebook can
adapt (and has adapted by every year introducing a revolutionary feature like
"unfollow"), how it's not so bad, how _we_ need to change to adapt to _it_
like it's a new body in the sky.
How about just spend more time in real-life and less time photoshopping and
broadcasting life-in-front-of-a-selfie-stick?
~~~
cactux
> It's weird how this article finds so many things wrong with Facebook, but it
> cannot even think of an alternative.
Why should we think of an alternative? One can "find so many things wrong with
smoking or using drugs", without being requested to "think of an alternative".
Did I miss something?
~~~
mapleoin
I guess I misspoke. I was thinking more of looking beyond/away from Facebook
rather than looking for a Facebook replacement.
------
BenderV
For people who also feel this feeling, I suggest you to try some browser
extensions that will hide the news feed while letting you use the fb
messengers & group function.
I basically turn the notification for my best friends post, etc and delete the
FB app. So I'm always connected and only receive notifications when one of my
best friend posted something.
I admit that it's not the ideal solution but it's the best one so far.
\- [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/news-feed-
eradicat...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/news-feed-eradicator-
for/fjcldmjmjhkklehbacihaiopjklihlgg) \-
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/kill-news-
feed/hjo...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/kill-news-
feed/hjobfcedfgohjkaieocljfcppjbkglfd) (no inspirational quote but will also
hide group recommendation).
------
jMyles
Micah Daigle pointed out to me, four years ago now, that Facebook forces to
user to view their life as "my day-to-day compared to all my friends'
highlight reels."
It was at that moment that I realize that Facebook leverages the darkest parts
of emotional hurt in order to convert sales.
It took my another year before I quit, but once I did, I felt better almost
immediately and have never gone back.
And I don't feel any less socially connected.
------
dayon
I've been depressed since I quit Facebook. I no longer have access to the
groups I used for countless purposes. Yea, there's alternatives, but I'm
starting to see how many bridges I burned deleting a useful tool.
~~~
Jtsummers
How'd you burn the bridges? You closed one channel of communication. If it was
your only channel to those individuals and groups, then that may have been a
mistake.
I use FB strictly for scheduling and coordinating events with friends, it's
easier and it shows up on everyone's calendar (except the handful that I text
because they don't have FB). But I did this just as well, with a bit more
friction, before by using texts and emails (primarily texts, it proved more
reliable with more people). It takes more effort to maintain relationships
without the passive FB connection, but it's very doable.
EDIT: Leaving what I wrote, but an apology since, on rereading, it's
dismissive of your plight.
But I'll maintain, unless it was your only channel of communication the
bridges aren't burned. And if it was, they still aren't, you can go back. If
folks don't accept you back, then that's on them, not you.
~~~
dayon
For many of the connections I refer to, Facebook was my only way of contacting
them. You're right, I could return. It still makes me think that this implicit
claim that leaving Facebook improves our mood is faulty. Rarely or never do I
see disclaimers about possibly increasing depression by quitting.
~~~
Jtsummers
I think it depends on how people use Facebook more than merely presence or
absence on it.
I barely use it. I have an account for two things: An exercise/health
accountability group I started with friends (so we could post achievements,
and failures, in a private to us spot that doesn't come off as bragging and
doesn't discourage honest discussion of issues); to organize events (movies
out, dinners in, parties, trips, etc.) with friends.
I'm effectively not a Facebook user 99% of the time, and I'm happier for it.
If someone really wants _me_ to know about their accomplishments or pains
they'll let me know, or they're too many degrees away (off Facebook) for my
awareness to matter to either of us.
The depression you're experiencing from quitting is the depression of social
isolation (opinion from two comments, but this was my experience with moving
cross country several times and not having any connections in the new locale,
so maybe projecting a bit too). Explore other social connections in your
physical area if it's possible, or reestablish your Facebook connections if
it's not.
~~~
dayon
You're right, and I expected some of this since I knew I was severing some
connections.
------
JimboOmega
I always thought the depressing aspect of Facebook wasn't the demands or
negative content, but the "positive" content: The feeling that everyone else
is more successful and doing cooler things than me.
------
tonylemesmer
I haven't got the app installed and only check it once or twice a week via
browser.
Its useful for invitations every now and again, but its still a conscious
effort to keep it out of my life for the most part.
------
sjg007
I really want a tool besides a chrome or no script add on to mass edit friends
and friends lists.. I have so many people I want to remove.
------
VOYD
Cult of Celebrity knows no bounds.
------
aburan28
Absolutely, you only see positive things on Facebook and if your not doing
great I have no doubt it negatively affects depression
~~~
morganvachon
I have the opposite issue, especially in the current political climate. I have
people I consider true friends who are on both extremes of the current
election cycle, so right now my news feed is nothing but extremely negative
left vs right bullshit. It's made me stop following people who I genuinely
care about and would otherwise like to keep up with, and it's so depressing
that it's beginning to affect my daily life. The only positive posts I see
anymore are silly memes or the occasional "I accomplished something cool"
status updates.
~~~
explorer666
> current election cycle
In the US or where?
~~~
morganvachon
The US. It's always a circus during presidential election season, but this
year seems to be particularly insane.
------
joonoro
> _no matter how much philanthropy he 's involved in_
Not even that, I had the fortune of glossing over this gem earlier today:
[https://www.jwz.org/blog/2015/12/zuckerberg-has-not-
donated-...](https://www.jwz.org/blog/2015/12/zuckerberg-has-not-donated-
anything-you-gullible-credulous-pinheads/)
EDIT: apparently the site I linked doesn't like linking from HN, sorry folks I
had no idea.
~~~
l1n
That site seems to block hotlinking from HN: here's a mirror
[https://archive.is/jjS21](https://archive.is/jjS21)
~~~
striking
Your link is blocked too. As long as you paste it into a new tab you're fine.
I'm not going to bother looking up the specific tweet he said this in but jwz
has "no time for HN"
~~~
kuschku
Breaking the web in such a way is completely inacceptable.
[http://www.donotlink.com/hkjc](http://www.donotlink.com/hkjc)
~~~
striking
It's his website. By design, the Internet lets you do whatever you think is
best, even if what you think is best is totally misguided.
I actually almost agree, that perhaps HN should create some sort of gateway
that decreases the bandwidth costs of content creators.
~~~
colanderman
I mean, I can walk around the street yelling "penis" at anyone wearing orange.
Doesn't mean I'm not an asshole for doing so.
------
grobbles
Gamification is a demand dropped on users, seemingly forcing self-promotion
and social reciprocity in an endless circle.
And for what? In the end there is absolutely no gain, but many like and
favorite and heart primarily to ensure that people like and favorite and heart
whatever they do. We follow to be followed. We comment to be noticed.
Because the metrics are front and center. I stopped using Flickr when I
couldn't post a simple picture for any random passerby or my own storage
without having the embarrassment of a low view count sitting highlighted on
the page, the site imploring me to evangelize for me.
If you build a site and try to leverage users by forced social metrics to
encourage them to become ambassadors and self promoters...well I'd like to
pretend it will hurt you, but sadly it won't.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Toronto or Vancouver: Which is better for startups? - gotrecruit
I'm currently planning to study CS in Canada, and have received offers from both UBC and UofT. My main objective going to school, however, is to go find the right people to found a startup with, or to recruit the right people to join me.<p>Which has a better startup ecosystem? Which school would be better for recruitment for this purpose? Which school has a better pedigree?
======
kpatrick
In BC, UBC and SFU are considered recruiting universities with UBC being
slightly ahead of SFU, but behind Waterloo in Ontario. Vancouver is quite hot
now for startups and tech in general. SAP alone has 1,000 employees in
Vancouver, plus Microsoft which is doubling. IBM is decreasing its size
though. Vancouver is often considered better for lifestyle except for the cost
of housing. If you like the outdoors, Vancouver is the obvious choice.
~~~
gotrecruit
one reasons i'm seriously considering UBC is because the degree i'm offered
can be completed in only 20 months, and i've also heard the weather in
vancouver can be very nice.
but there is an overwhelmingly larger number of articles and people saying
toronto is the better place for startups and i can't help but feel that i
might find better talent in UofT vs UBC.
is cost of housing in vancouver really sky high? and i do like the outdoors -
i enjoying skiing and intend to do that perhaps once a month or so.
~~~
gyardley
Toronto might be a little better than Vancouver, but the difference isn't
_that_ extreme - we're not talking Silicon Valley vs. Des Moines here.
You're concerned about the weather - Vancouver's the clear winner here. You
can finish your degree in twenty months - again, Vancouver's the clear winner.
Finally, that twenty-month UBC program's got extra resources to get people who
aren't programmers and are switching careers up to speed - it's designed for
your situation, while Toronto's ordinary CS program is just going to throw you
in with everyone else.
------
fananta
I would say Toronto. There's a growing startup ecosystem here and the
entrepreneurship culture at UofT is taking off.
I'm building my second startup here (and also helping UofT with
entrepreneurship initiatives). If you have more questions, send me an email:
[email protected]
~~~
gotrecruit
hey, i would be keen to connect with you when i'm about ready to go to
toronto. i'm leaning towards toronto at the moment, but i'm also reading many
articles and forum posts about how vancouver is actually heating up in terms
of its startup ecosystem as well and it's swaying me a little.
if my goal to attend school (either UBC or UofT) is to recruit my team to
found a startup, which school would you think is better?
------
isuraed
Toronto. Waterloo is an enormous talent pool and there is much start-up
activity happening. Even better for networking if you can take courses or do
some projects with Waterloo students.
Disclaimer: Waterloo grad.
------
Mankhool
I'm in Vancouver and I would have to say . . . Toronto. The West is the Best,
but for startups the East is the, er, Beast?
------
coffeecodecouch
_Full disclosure: I live in Vancouver._ Searching for "startup" on meetup.com
returns 78 groups for Vancouver and only 31 groups for Toronto. While Toronto
is said to be better for startups the difference is small enough that it comes
down to a personal choice of schools and lifestyle.
------
gabchan
TORONTO: for its proximity to Waterloo, the centre of Canada's startup
universe. Many UW students are from the GTA anyway.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal - Reltair
http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/05/08/report-apple-to-acquire-beats/8868913/
======
iambateman
Beats headphones are crap, sure. And their streaming service isn't as mature
as Spotify. But three billion dollars isn't about headphones or online music
streaming or Dr Dre's drunken celebration. It's about growth.
Apple has a chokehold on the iPod market. They've rocked the market with the
iPod, iPhone, iPad and those products will be cash cows for a long time. But
where is their next growth going to come from? A watch? I doubt it.
All the granola 16-year-old white girls already have their iPhone. There's no
room for crazy growth among middle class white people. Apple needs to use it's
expertise to pursue new markets, which is exactly what they're doing.
Tim Cook isn't afraid, he's strategic. Beats by Dre is a high-end consumer
lifestyle brand that GREATLY appeals to black, hispanic, urban-context, young
men and women. They sell expensive products. They care about design. They
represent a way of living. They're Apple in another market.
Beats is about to be Apple's international foray into a completely new growth
segment. And it's genius.
~~~
sharkweek
I was given a pair of Beats Studios almost two years ago, so maybe that makes
it easier to say this but, speaking as a non-audiophile, they're... good? I
read a lot about how terrible they are, but in my experience, they're
comfortable, their noise cancellation is great at work, and I have never
noticed degraded audio quality (once again, as a non-audiophile).
Could someone point me to a defacto better pair of headphones in the same
price range as the studios ($200)? I'll give them a shot; I have no problem
admitting that I might very well be missing something when listening to music.
~~~
pdubs
Sony MDR-V6/MDR-7506 [http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-150-over-ear-
headp...](http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-150-over-ear-headphones/)
~~~
epaladin
Agreed. The MDR-7506 is a "studio standard" for reference/monitor headphones
in pro audio and video. The frequency response is not "enhanced" at the low
end like the Beats and many other modern headphones. I don't think the curve
is really flat- they always sound a little bright to me (thought in that hear-
more-detail sort of naturally pleasant way), but they're definitely more flat
than the Beats. The 7506 is like $90. The V6 has the same drivers, but doesn't
have a gold plated plug (seriously). I got my V6s refurbed for $50. The closed
earpads passively block external sound pretty well, and they're relatively
comfortable. They don't come in green or pink, but they sound good, are still
made with some metal parts for durability, and they're way cheaper than Beats.
Source: work in a couple different TV production studios, a friend that's in
the audio/acoustics industry, and a lot of reviews at B & H.
------
parasubvert
Beats Studio released a new model in 2013 that is significantly better than
the 2008-2012 model. Beats is not "crap". Overpriced, perhaps, but there's not
much competition to stop that.
Reading the audiophile boards, the trends seems to be that the Beats Studio is
now roughly competitive to the venerable Audio Technica ATH M50 , widely
considered to be one of the most popular entry-level audiophile quality over-
ear headphones. The main difference is not audio quality (the M50 probably has
an edge here) but rather comfort and ear fatigue, with the Beats just being
more comfortable.
I love my M50s but admit they do lead to sweaty-ear.
Examples:
[http://www.head-fi.org/t/683959/new-beats-studios-2013-vs-
au...](http://www.head-fi.org/t/683959/new-beats-studios-2013-vs-audio-
technica-ath-m50) [http://www.head-fi.org/products/beats-studio-over-ear-
headph...](http://www.head-fi.org/products/beats-studio-over-ear-headphone-
black-new) [http://www.head-fi.org/t/673273/new-2013-beats-
studios](http://www.head-fi.org/t/673273/new-2013-beats-studios)
[http://www.head-fi.org/t/675031/new-redesigned-2013-beats-
by...](http://www.head-fi.org/t/675031/new-redesigned-2013-beats-by-dre-
studio-v2-in-red-white-unboxing-newbeatsstudio)
The main legitimate complaint about Beats is not that they're one of the two
best sounding headphones under $300. It's that the market will bear that much
of a price difference when the ATH M50 is $150. But, people will pay a lot for
a wide selection of colours and a bit more comfort. And price can be seen as a
feature.
In short - Beats sells decent quality for its class, overpriced for what you
get, but between comfort and colour selection, customers don't seem to mind.
These guys will fit with Apple's philosophy well.
------
rwhitman
What Beats has in its corner, that Spotify doesn't, is a favorable
relationship with the music industry, particularly the artists themselves.
I've never used Beats streaming service but I was aware of it because of
musicians like Trent Reznor plugging for it before it even came to market.
Apparently they make deals where the artists get paid substantially more than
Spotify. Beats is in a unique position to get music that other services can't,
and could potentially have a monopoly on distribution of new releases from
some major artists in a few years.
Thats what Apple just bought here, I'm fairly certain they could give a hoot
about the technology, its the artist relationships and favorable streaming
contracts that they're after.
~~~
return0
Doesn't apple itself have a great relationship with the music industry and a
huge foothold in the consumers mind? Apple seems more than capable to build
their own streaming service if they wanted to
~~~
adwf
Apple may have a great relationship with the music _corporations_ , but not
necessarily with the artists themselves. The big businesses are still taking
the large slice of the pie and giving the artist very little back.
A streaming service where the artists can sell directly and pick up a larger
percentage of the pie will quickly gather a large catalogue of new music.
------
mavaso
Beats aren't that amazing, yet so many people wear them. My v-moda's cost $300
and have incredible sound. Worth every penny!
[http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00A39PPDK?pc_redir=1399523882...](http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00A39PPDK?pc_redir=1399523882&robot_redir=1)
------
encoderer
If the deal closes _, any guess on what happens to Beats Music?
Doesn't seem to be room for that and iTunes radio (and iTunes itself) as
separate brands.
_I think it will based on, eg, the Dr Dre video where he's bragging about it
-- makes me think the deal is already done.
~~~
gdilla
it'll be itunes radio 2.0.
------
scelerat
This is not a snark at all: was there any more information in this clip that
hasn't already been discussed in FT, NYT, etc. USA Today almost makes it sound
like a done deal, but there's nothing substantial here that I can see.
------
epistasis
I'm not sure how much of any of this I believe until we have some word from
Apple. Under the Jobs regime, such premature talk would have almost certainly
spoiled the deal. We'll have to see how Cook responds to that.
~~~
k-mcgrady
The drunken celebration video featuring Dre was all the proof I needed. He
wouldn't do something that stupid unless everything was agreed. They're
probably waiting until the markets close to officially announce.
------
DonGateley
Has anyone looked to see if Beats might have an interesting patent portfolio?
Something perhaps to augment Apple's recently granted patent on bioinformatic
earphones?
------
gdilla
Now samsung will buy Chambers by RZA [1]! j/k
[1] [http://wesc.com/chambersbyrza](http://wesc.com/chambersbyrza)
------
taksintik
3.2 billion for an equalizer with deep brand recognition. AAPL must be
swimming in cash.
------
msane
Please tell me this is bullshit.
------
bitwarrior
Billion is the new million.
------
canvia
Apple's next acquisition is going to be Monster Cable.
------
arjn
I dont understand this. I've never even heard of "Beats" before today. Does
apple know something I dont ?
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
OS X Screencast to animated GIF - gabamnml
https://gist.github.com/dergachev/4627207
======
juandazapata
Or just use the free tool LICECAP
([http://www.cockos.com/licecap/](http://www.cockos.com/licecap/)), record
directly from the screen, export to GIF and avoid all that hassle.
However, I can see why this could be a cool learning experiment.
~~~
courtewing
If you can get beyond the ancient website design, this is actually an
amazingly simple tool. It is trivial to record a small portion of your screen,
and it saves directly to your desktop as a gif. No file saving, exporting,
etc. At Engine Yard, we use these gifs for UI related pull requests, bug
requests, etc. A picture is worth a thousand words, or something like that.
~~~
petercooper
I use LICEcap a lot too, it's really cool. The only downside is the file sizes
can quickly become gigantic compared to MP4. I wonder if imgur's new
conversion feature could be useful here though if they're uploaded there..
~~~
manachar
That's not because of LICEcap, that's because of the nature of gifs. Gifs are
a horrible format for longform motion. All Imgur or gyfcat do is convert it
from a gif to a mp4.
If you're worried about size, just use the mp4.
------
dergachev
Oh cool this is my old gif gist. I ended up writing a ruby wrapper around it
these open source tools, check it out at
[https://github.com/dergachev/screengif](https://github.com/dergachev/screengif)
~~~
manto
Thanks for making this. Have you tried to use lossygif
[https://pornel.net/lossygif](https://pornel.net/lossygif) (which is based on
gifsicle)? We've seen a consistent 20% reduction in file size.
------
jameshawkins
I highly recommend CloudApp. Hosts screenshots and gifs, auto posts URLs to
screenshots to your clipboard.
[http://www.getcloudapp.com/](http://www.getcloudapp.com/)
------
reubenmorais
Please mind the accessibility loss when doing something like this in a pull
request or, even more importantly, in documentation. Include a text
description that's good enough for anyone to grasp what's going on without
looking at the GIF. Your vision impaired contributors will thank you. It'll
also be friendlier to people who watch repos via email.
------
proksoup
licecap is an application that allows direct screen recording to gif.
I personally find it more useful than this OP project, and so wanted to share
in case others also find it useful.
~~~
sync
[http://www.cockos.com/licecap/](http://www.cockos.com/licecap/)
Works super great!
------
m_mueller
I think Sublime's animated image encoder would be a great tool if someone took
over support for it. Both compression and quality should be miles ahead of any
gif converter, I just think it's a bit too much of a hassle to use.
[https://github.com/sublimehq/anim_encoder](https://github.com/sublimehq/anim_encoder)
------
colanderman
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but isn't a screencast supposed to be live? Like a
broadcast?
Anyway I bet an actual live broadcast wouldn't be too hard to do, although
your poor viewers' browser caches would fill up pretty easy. But then that's
what multipart/x-mixed-replace is for.
~~~
protomyth
a lot of Screencasts were Podcasts so live is not required.
------
mejackreed
There's this gem that simplifies the steps needed.
[https://github.com/jkeck/make-me-a-gif](https://github.com/jkeck/make-me-a-
gif) . Full disclosure my awesome coworker made it.
------
Aissen
Yeah, let's all collectively waste more bandwidth because browsers couldn't
agree on a common video codec… At least gfycat and imgur's gifv are try to
solve this problem.
------
swhitt
Now we just need ShareX for OS X (and have it deal with the damn hidpi
screenshots correctly).
------
Thev00d00
Amazing people are still doing this in this age of HTML5 video.
------
joelrunyon
I like recordit.co
------
tshadwell
byzanz was created for this purpose.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Study: ADHD linked to pesticide exposure - mcantelon
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/05/17/pesticides.adhd/index.html?hpt=T2
======
ilkhd2
So was mad cow disease: phosphororganics are bad for brain.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
HubNotify - Get updates on Github repos - wise_young_man
http://hubnotify.com
======
wise_young_man
Just launched. Free service to get updates when repos you watch are updated
with new tags. You can select which ones you want notifications for and how
often you want emails. Currently only support Github, but if enough demand, we
can add support for BitBucket.
For those who are wondering the purpose, Github's newsfeed isn't enough to
really know when repos are updated. The ideas is to choose repos you use
often, say Twitter Bootstrap, htmlpurifier, etc and then you can update
however you are using these repos into your projects.
Hope you guys find it useful.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Putin reportedly oversaw Clinton email dump and election hacks personally - AliCollins
http://thenextweb.com/politics/2016/12/15/putin-clinton-election-hack-email-dump/
======
dragonbonheur
> Reportedly... Anonymous US intelligence sources... CIA... Suspicions...
Seriously. Anonymous US "intelligence" sources having suspicions about Russian
hacking are not PROOF of ANYTHING AT ALL.
Has everyone forgotten about Colin Powell shaking his little flask of
"evidence" of weapons of mass destruction before the whole UN assembly?
Has everyone forgotten how NINETEEN SAUDIS boarded airplanes that they flew
into your buildings and killing more than THREE THOUSAND US CITIZENS and the
US government decided to invade Iraq which eventually led to the rise of
Daesh?
How much more bloodshed does the USA need? How much meat for the grinder?
Those cheering on the war will not send their own children to die. It's always
poor people who pay, either side of the gun.
~~~
tdb7893
Hold your horses it's not like there are tons of people yelling for war.
People attacked the US election, which is a huge deal in a democracy, so it's
going to be a story with a ton of interest and there are going to be a bunch
of random leaks and shoddy journalism. If Russia really did attack the
election would you rather no one said anything?
~~~
dragonbonheur
If. That's the key word. Even the FBI isn't sure. The CIA yelling "Russia did
it" on all rooftops is only a sign that it's a last-ditch effort to prevent a
Trump presidency. This whole rigmarole is hilarious to watch, especially when
it comes from the country that invades other countries for "democracy".
------
Fjolsvith
So.... Its a big deal that the Clinton email hack matters now that Trump won,
but didn't matter back when Clinton was under the microscope for mishandling
secret material.
------
beedogs
This is essentially an act of war. Does the US have the courage to actually do
anything about it, or do we just let Russia decide who our next President is?
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: how should I build my invite beta landing page? - rush-tea
I come from a technical background and have little experience in marketing and internet space. I am currently working on my startup that is ready to launch within few weeks.<p>I am having difficulties to think about how I am going to launch it. I am thinking of doing a closed beta first and then after few weeks of beta, then open it up.<p>my question is how do I build my landing page? Should I use a free landing page like launchrock.co, prefinery.com, or build my own?<p>I think what I want on my landing page are a space for people to ask for an invite by entering their email address (hence I am mining email) and a login link for people who have credentials to login. I would then do manual work by sorting email address and manually send invite to the email addresses that are legit (not spam).<p>Would that be enough? Should I use free landing page tools like launchrock? Paid like prefinery? or build my own landing page as it's simple enough?<p>Thank you for your input
======
hansy
Landing pages are mostly just a loose proxy for interest in your product. I
wouldn't worry too much about how you get one up, just that you do so. Focus
on messaging more than anything else while making sure the call to action is
readily apparent and easy to act upon.
Good luck. I'd be interested to see what you put up.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
LP Cover Art - smacktoward
https://lpcover.wordpress.com/
======
lou1306
Ew, the entry for The Dark Side of the Moon [0] is totally ruined by that
"original master recording" label.
[0]: [https://lpcover.wordpress.com/2014/04/19/the-dark-side-of-
th...](https://lpcover.wordpress.com/2014/04/19/the-dark-side-of-the-moon/)
------
benj111
I'm a bit confused by the concept. The covers on the front page don't seem to
be notable in any way. And there isn't anything to explain why they are
notable.
~~~
tiben_
Seems more of a covers images repository than anything else. Worth to mention
that covers scan quality is very good, far higher than average discogs cover
scan quality.
~~~
benj111
Yes perhaps.
From what I understand the recent vinyl resurgence is a very physical thing,
possibly not a rejection of digital, but certainly trying to make up for
digital's short comings. So I can't quite make sense of it in the regard.
Another way of looking at it is as 'Art', but these don't seem to be artistic
pieces.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it.
Its a niche about sound track albums, I'd just prefer something to pull me in,
explain why I should appreciate it, not in a confrontational sense, just that
I like to hear people communicating their passion for something, even if I
don't see I personally.
------
B1FF_PSUVM
> addicted to vinyl …
Actually, it's way too easy to get awful snap crackle and pop from vinyl, and
digital media at least spare us that.
But the large format album art ... especially when labels went to the trouble
of making it double, opening like a large book, even for a single LP ...
~~~
asutekku
A lot of people say that digital is the way to listen to the music, because it
doesn’t have the cracks and pops of the vinyl but in my honest opinion those
are the things that makes listening to vinyls interesting.
Now a lot of people probably disagree with me, but having small cracks, pops
and hissing sound (as long as they don’t hinder the listening experience) give
the record an unique feeling. The record having these cracks and pops usually
means it’s been used and liked.
But if you want the “perfect” experience, go for digital.
~~~
pimeys
It's even nicer if you DJ and mix with two Technics turntables. The feel of
vinyl is a big part of the fun.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Designing Schemaless, Uber Engineering’s Scalable Datastore Using MySQL (2016) - mangatmodi
https://eng.uber.com/schemaless-part-one/
======
dcposch
FYI, MySQL has a fresh new JSON data type now.
It has some great properties. It lets you mix data with a strict schema and
data without a strict schema, getting some of the benefits of both worlds.
The JSON datatype avoids many of the annoying legacy considerations that other
SQL column types have. You don't have to specify a length--so you won't make a
VARCHAR(255), then get burned when one day a value has more than 255
characters. You don't have specify a character encoding--JSON is always
utf8mb4, the right one. (MySQL's 'utf8' encoding, perversely, supports only a
subset of utf8 and will break if you try to write an emoji.)
Here's a table that illustrates some of the power:
create table unitType (
id bigint not null auto_increment,
buildingId bigint not null,
info json,
name varchar(255) as (info->>'$.name') not null,
primary key(id),
foreign key (buildingId) references building(id) on delete cascade,
unique key(buildingId, name)
);
We're modeling unit types in a building. For example, one building might
contain 1-bedrooms, some nicer 1-bedrooms, and some 2-bedroom units.
\- It's very easy to add new fields. If, tomorrow, we decide that each unit
type needs a `minSqft` and `maxSqft`, I can add them with no database
migration.
\- We still get most of the benefits of a schema. The database makes it
impossible for a unitType to exist that does not belong to a building. The
database also makes it impossible for a single building to have two unitTypes
with the same name. (With a truly schemaless DB like Mongo, the complexity of
preventing or dealing with those kinds of invalid data end up in the
application code.)
\- It makes it easy to use SQL directly, with no ORM. SQL is a powerful
language; ORMs are often a leaky abstraction and a source of unessential
complexity. With JSON columns for extensibility, you end up with way fewer
migrations and way less need for auto-generated SQL.
\- Computed columns (like name above) are really powerful.
Most of the above is possible in Postgres as well. Postgres does not have
computed columns, as far as I can tell.
\--
This is just to say: 99% of people on Hacker News are closer to where we are
(rapid prototype phase) than where Uber is (Web ScaleTM). If that's you,
consider just using JSON columns to maximize your development velocity! You
can always do something fancier (like Schemaless) later on.
~~~
nerfhammer
> MySQL's 'utf8' encoding, perversely, supports only a subset of utf8 and will
> break if you try to write an emoji.
Almost every programming platform makes the same mistake. Characters outside
of the basic multilingual plane (i.e., characters taking more than two bytes
to store) will break certain string functions.
It's due to using (fixed length) ucs2 for in-memory storage, instead of
variable-length utf8. Imagine, for example, if you tried to replace a one-byte
ascii character at a given index with a 4 byte cuneiform character - you would
need to reallocate, copy+transpose the entire string buffer. Every string
function would need to take variable byte length into account and would need
to traverse the entire string with a state machine to do any operation, plus
maybe a full reallocate+strcpy.
So instead we can make every character a fixed byte length. We could make
every character 4 bytes in memory, but since strings are 99% ascii that seems
wasteful, so instead let's just make every character a fixed-length 2 bytes
(ucs2), that should cover 99.9% of it.
~~~
dcposch
Well, sort of.
Java and Javascript use 2-byte strings in memory, yet both can represent an
emoji just fine. (They do so via a hack that uses multiple indices in a String
to represent a single character. If you want to go down the rabbit hole of how
much this sucks, check out the MDN pages for charCodeAt vs codePointAt ...)
Modern languages like Go just represent strings as UTF8 in memory. This has
lots of advantages:
\- Most strings are mostly 1-byte-per-character, saving memory
\- Full Unicode support.
\- Faster IO, since you don't have to re-encode UTF8 strings to/from the
network or disk.
MySQL did something weird and enormously stupid with its `utf8` encoding. It
supports up-to-3-byte-per-character UTF8. This is idiosyncratic, nobody else
does this. It supports _some_ emoji and _some_ Chinese characters but not
others.
Fortunately, you don't have to worry about it or learn about it. When using
MySQL, just always use utf8mb4 ; never use utf8.
~~~
nerfhammer
huh, I had remembered unicode as being broken in javascript, python and mysql
in the same way. I hadn't remembered three-byte utf8. mysql also is the only
platform that I can think of that supports three byte integers.
------
ronnier
Summary:
> We ended up building a key-value store which allows you to save any JSON
> data without strict schema validation, in a schemaless fashion (hence the
> name). It has append-only sharded MySQL with buffered writes to support
> failing MySQL masters and a publish-subscribe feature for data change
> notification which we call triggers. Lastly, Schemaless supports global
> indexes over the data.
~~~
samstave
Let’s also not be smug, let’s explain for everyone who comes here: why is this
good or why is it bad. So describe why this is good or describe why it’s bad
That comment was edited with more info...
------
whalesalad
Still blows my mind that it took Uber so long to migrate away from a single db
solution. The bit about wanting an event system to handle downstream trip
processing w/o having one failure block the whole job was shocking.
I’m all for avoiding premature optimization but this was taken to the extreme.
PostgreSQL is capable of all of this out of the box. Wonder why a custom tool
was built instead?
~~~
subway
_Still blows my mind that it took Uber so long to migrate away from a single
db solution. The bit about wanting an event system to handle downstream trip
processing w /o having one failure block the whole job was shocking._
I'm pretty sure they've seen a few iterations on their data stores. I remember
attending a meetup at Urban Airship in 2012 or so where Uber engineers gave a
presentation about a data store migration (I _think_ from Mongo to MySQL)
------
mewse
I wish I had video of the faces I was undoubtedly pulling, during the few
seconds I spent puzzling out the pronunciation and meaning of the word
"Schemaless". /Shema-leez/ ? /Szhee-males/ ?
Naming products is demonstrably a hard problem.
~~~
singularity2001
God forgive me for reading 'she-males'
------
mangatmodi
Any critique on Uber's use of Triggers for triggering billing service? I have
been reading that Triggers shouldn't be used to esp, call external services
as, the external service might not be ACID compliant(no rollback?) and if
expensive, they can hold the DB lock on the row for really long time.
------
verst
This was discussed here 2 years ago.
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10894047](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10894047)
~~~
alpb
Indeed discussed 4 times before
[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=schemaless%20datastore%20mysql...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=schemaless%20datastore%20mysql&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)
This also should be titled "(2016)"
------
rubyn00bie
Can this have a 2016 added to it, please?
~~~
dang
Yes.
~~~
stmw
Great catch!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
3D XPoint Steps into the Light - krishna2
http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1328682
======
krishna2
"In an NVMe-based solid state drive, XPoint chips can deliver more than 95,000
I/O operations per second at a 9 microsecond latency, compared to 13,400 IOPs
and 73 ms latency for flash."
and
"A version of XPoint in DIMMs will enable up to 6 TBytes main memory in a two-
socket Xeon server at about half the cost of DRAM".
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Is Haskell the right language for teaching functional programming principles? - ingve
http://profsjt.blogspot.com/2017/10/is-haskell-right-language-for-teaching.html
======
polyfish42
Beginner programmer here – I just want to say that I credit Elm with getting
me hooked on programming. I tried other languages (Ruby, Javascript, even
Elixir) but I never made it past the first project. With Elm, I've made a few
projects and show no sign of stopping. Here's the best I can determine why:
1\. Elm is simple, so I have fewer options to choose from when solving a
problem. This means I learn a few ideas really well.
2\. Even thought Elm is very much about the web (as the article mentioned),
it's awesome to be able to see things in your browser immediately. It's also
helpful to be able to build an application without a backend. You can see your
model in the same file that you see your view, which helps you more easily
think about each part together.
3\. Complier/Type System: Once I finally figured out Union Types, the compiler
is super helpful and friendly.
4\. Elm forces you to handle errors, functions that can fail, and "Nothing",
all things that you have to (a) know about and (b) remember to do in other
languages.
5\. Lack of tutorials, documentation and libraries to rely on means less
"productivity" but it forced me to really learn the language and how things
worked. I had to implement OAuth without a library, read source code to figure
out what a function did, and couldn't google every problem.
I'm too new to know if Elm taught me the most important things a I should know
about programming, or if there are better options out there. I do know that
it's really fun. As a beginner, that might be the most important thing.
~~~
BoiledCabbage
This is so true. Anyone who wants to see the ideas behind Haskell and It's
style of languages succeed should be doing everything they can to support elm.
You can't find and easier, more straightforward introduction to the concepts
and style of programming than it.
Yes purists will complain about the bells and whistles it does have, and
that's exactly the point.
You can learn elm and be productive in it in after a single weekend. And it's
error messages should be _the_ industry standard for language messages in any
language. It's incredible how simple and accurate they are. It will change
your view of what a compiler is capable of.
Not to mention it's not a far leap for people already doing web coding.
~~~
anthonybullard
I would just like to mention that as of 1.5, Elixir has stepped it's game up
on error messaging as well, to get as close it can get to Elm's(which truly
are fantastic) without static typing.
------
norswap
As much as I hate to say this, I think untyped functional programming is the
way to go to teach about the virtues of functional programming.
We do this at my university using the obscure but awesome Oz programming
language (1). But then students (and some professors, truth be told) complain
that it's obscure...
If I had to pick one, I'd say Elixir. It's like Erland with less wonky syntax.
Another option is a pure scheme. But people hate on the parens (yes, it's not
very smart, but people are going to do it anyway).
Pyret (2) is also made for this purpose, but that's sort of the caveat: it's a
teaching language and people don't like that.
(1)
[https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/book.html](https://www.info.ucl.ac.be/~pvr/book.html)
(2) [https://www.pyret.org/](https://www.pyret.org/)
~~~
pivo
Too bad about scheme, that's the language I used to learn functional
programming and it seemed to make so much sense in that context.
~~~
submeta
I got in touch with Scheme twenty years ago. Read the specification (R5RS) and
that was the first time programming in Lisp made sense to me. Because the
specification was so short, I could remember every detail after a short time.
Also the syntax was so predictable unlike Common Lisp with its myriad of
operations. Without reading too many books about Scheme I started programming
in it. Learned about tail recursion. About destructive vs non destructive
operations. About functions that always returned values. Then I got in touch
with SICP ("Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs"). Man, that
book was a revelation.
Scheme was a breathe of fresh air coming from C/Pascal/Java. It was a totally
different way to tell the computer what I wanted to do (although I had similar
thoughts several years earlier programming my HP28s calculator in a Forth like
language, then later when I started using Mathematica).
------
hellofunk
Haskell is really the intersection of functional programming and static typing
at the highest level, and these are 2 very different things, and it will be
very easy to get lost in the typing aspect for fear of not grasping the
functional aspect.
If your goal is to teach just functional programming, then Haskell may be too
much since the language is about a lot more than just functional programming.
Scheme or a light lisp (including Clojure) is often the way FP is initially
taught, since you can focus directly on the functional aspects and leave the
complexities of static typing out of it. This was the tradition at MIT for a
long time (maybe still is).
~~~
jdeisenberg
Hackett ([https://github.com/lexi-lambda/hackett](https://github.com/lexi-
lambda/hackett)) seems like an interesting project in this regard.
------
CJefferson
My feeling is Haskell is a bad teaching language for the same reason C++ is --
there is too much "this is some crazy stuff you have to learn about the
language" early on.
One reason I have learned to love teaching Java over C++ is that the language-
based bugs tend to be "shallow", at least in the first few weeks. The error
messages tend to be easy to interpret, and when programs crash it is easy to
understand why (how to fix it might be hard of course!)
For later year students, it's fine to expect them to learn the weirdnesses of
Haskell and C++, but not for a student on day one.
~~~
jorvi
It's all in the approach. I've noticed most universities these days either get
students started on Python or C. I believe the idea behind starting with
Python is that most beginning students will hit the ground running, whereas
the idea for C is that you get thrown in the deep end but will have a deeper
understanding (and perhaps foundation) going forward. Which approach is better
I dare not say..
~~~
msla
C is good for teaching a simplified machine model, one with a distinction
between stack and heap, pointers, and a purely sequential execution model.
This is enhanced if you use it to program an Arduino or similar trivial
hardware, collapsing the division between hardware and software to one piece
of hardware (the single-board computer) and one piece of software (the code
the student wrote) and nothing else.
C, in short, gives a good way to control actual hardware without having to
introduce students to the complexities of actual hardware.
Python is good for teaching algorithms and OO design, precisely because it
allows students to focus on the algorithm while not having to slow down the
course with memory management.
In both cases, the idea is clear: Only teach one hard thing at a time, and
then build.
------
adjkant
Racket / HtDP is the best way to teach functional programming to beginners.
[http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/Thoughts/Growing_a_Prog...](http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/Thoughts/Growing_a_Programmer.html)
Haskell obviously has its place, but it is much better used when looking at
something like PL Theory at a 3000-400 level.
~~~
cglouch
Definitely agreed. I was introduced to functional programming via Pyret, which
is similar to Racket and draws from HtDP in terms of pedagogy. It's a much
gentler introduction than being thrown to the wolves with Haskell or OCaml.
I'm sure one could learn FP effectively with those languages too, but if
you're still trying to wrap your head around the functional paradigm you don't
really want to have to stumble across words like "endofunctor" while reading
the documentation. I even have a good math background but I would have found
that confusing at the time.
[https://www.pyret.org/](https://www.pyret.org/)
~~~
adjkant
Glad to see people are enjoying Pyret! If you don't like the parenthesis in
Racket, this is the path for you.
------
MBCook
I wouldn’t think so. Maybe Clojure?
I kind of like Haskell but I’ve been turned off by the way some of the
development is done.
There is, for all intents and purposes, only GHC. Yet everyone uses it by
tuning on all sorts of special options to make it more usable. Why are they
options? To remain ‘compatible’ with the ‘other Haskell compilers’ that
basically no one seems to use.
It’s like if JS all defaulted to 1.0 and you had to pile on options to use any
features after 1998.
It just makes things much more confusing and odd than necessary. To support
something it seems like no one uses.
It will also be easier once the whole applicable/monad thing is done.
~~~
slowmovintarget
Clojure's focus, after simplicity, is functional programming.
Haskell's focus is as an experimental vehicle for type system theory. If you
want to teach type system and category theory, use Haskell.
Functional programming does not require Hindley-Milner type inference, and
that happens to be one of the larger cognitive hurdles in Haskell. Algorithm W
is a layer on top of the Lambda Calculus, not something essential for
understanding it.
+1 for using Clojure to teach Lambda Calculus^h^h^h functional programming.
~~~
platz
Just because there are _some_ folks that use Haskell for for experimental
studies, doesn't mean that Haskell is _not_ a great language for line-of-
business programming.
I can't say it better than Gabriel Gonzalez:
"Haskell is unbelievably awesome for maintaining large projects. There's
nothing that I can say that will fully convey how nice it is to modify
existing Haskell code. You can only appreciate this through experience.
When I say that Haskell is easy to maintain, I mean that you can easily
approach a large Haskell code base written by somebody else and make sweeping
architectural changes to the project without breaking the code."
------
oggyhead
Having learnt Haskell as my first programming language, sure it has a high
learning curve but it pays off in so many ways. It is without doubt the most
beautiful language ever conceived. Without doubt it is the right language to
unlearn imperative bs and the right language to learn functional programming
principles. Even against the likes the of lispy langs and other ml flava,
Haskell reigns supreme with it's purity
~~~
gnaritas
The question is about learning functional programming, Haskell forces you to
learn much more than that to use it. Functional programming should be taught
in something like Scheme, which lets you focus on the functional without being
forced to also deal with a crazy Hindley-Milner type system that has nothing
to do with functional programming. Haskell is not the right language to learn
functional programming in, it's not the right language to learn anything in,
beginners should start in easier languages.
> It is without doubt the most beautiful language ever conceived.
Only if you're a masochist.
~~~
oggyhead
Quite honestly, I feel if you think Haskell's beauty is somehow in any way
associated with masochist mindset , you most likely think Maths is associated
with a masochist mindset and (assuming math defines reality) the true nature
reality is only viewable to those with a masochist mind. Then friend, I truly
am a masochist
~~~
gnaritas
Yep :). I don't agree math defines reality however; it can describe reality,
it doesn't define it.
------
meebob
I think there is also an emotional/social dimension to choosing a beginner's
language that is important to take into account.
Imagine (putting Haskell's static typing aside), the difference in feeling
between learning the basics of FP (say higher order functions, streams, all
the different ways of dispatching function calls, etc.) in Haskell, vs OCaml,
vs Clojure, vs scheme, vs javascript. Poking around on the internet, the
beginner is going to get really different aesthetic vibes from each of these
languages.
To shamelessly generalize: \- Haskell/OCaml feels cerebral, academic,
Mathematical, maybe even elitist \- Clojure/scheme has that dark-terminal
screen, classic 80s vibe- to me it feels nostalgic and quirky. \- Javascript
is, of course, javascript- it's bright, active, and, most of all, popular
All of these will bore/intimidate/comfort/excite different student
demographics in different ways, completely independently of the programming
concepts that you're teaching. So I think it's important to keep in mind the
aesthetic preferences of the students you're trying to catch.
------
sddfd
What do you think about Standard ML as a language for teaching?
I like it because the syntax is clean, it is functional and higher-order, but
also has an explicit concept of references (i.e. mutable memory) and using
functions with side effects (i.e. printing) is no trouble at all.
~~~
mahmud
I have been programming for over 20 years, most of it in FP land. ML is
tractable, a beautiful prism through which one can peek at Computer Science as
a subject, but it has a frustrating lack of _practical_ tooling and beginner-
friendly community. For anything outside basic I/O, you will need to dust off
compiler-specific extensions, most of them last used on "Un*x Workstations".
Just look at the Basis library. Safe to say it's nowhere near Racket, Scala,
Clojure, Kotlin, ...
[http://sml-family.org/Basis/manpages.html](http://sml-
family.org/Basis/manpages.html)
~~~
tytytytytytytyt
I never understood why a lack of tooling would be a serious problem for a
language used for teaching FP.
~~~
yawaramin
It's a tough sell if the language has no hope of industry adoption. Also tough
to use a language, especially one with type inference, without editor support.
~~~
tytytytytytytyt
Most people in my SML class seemed to have no problem with either of those.
~~~
yawaramin
Maybe some classes are just that good. A lot aren't, I'm guessing, and you
would want to at least take away something you could use in the real world
from them.
------
hackermailman
Robert Harper has written a few posts on his personal blog why they use SML to
teach functional programming, why they teach it to freshmen, why they don't
use Haskell ect [https://existentialtype.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/the-dog-
tha...](https://existentialtype.wordpress.com/2011/03/21/the-dog-that-didnt-
bark/)
_" Finally, this article explains why Haskell is not suitable for my
purposes: the principle of induction is never valid for a Haskell program! The
problem is that Haskell is a lazy language, rather than a language with
laziness. It forces on you the existence of “undefined” values of every type,
invalidating the bedrock principle of proof by induction. Put in other terms
suggested to me by John Launchbury, Haskell has a paucity of types, lacking
even the bog standard type of natural numbers."_
------
erik14th
I think Haskell is a beautiful language, but it's community seems too elitist
and pedantic, which from my perspective makes people value sophistication and
"elegance" over readability and ease of comprehension. I'd recommend Elixir,
it's code is beautifully readable, it's pragmatically functional since it's
based on Erlang, I'm not refuting Haskell usefulness in the real world, I'm
just pointing out it's functional nature is academic, while Erlang's
functional essence is pretty much a colateral effect of the problems it was
aimed to solve. edit: Thinking again, even from the academic perspective, I'd
still go for something like Racket, in my sense of aesthetic there's no
competition to the beautiful simplicity of lisp.
~~~
neilparikh
Could you clarify what you mean by elitist/pedantic? I've found the Haskell
community to be fairly friendly, and very open to beginners (including when
they ask basic questions).
I've mostly been on /r/haskell and Quora, and watched talks by Haskellers
though, so maybe the community is different on other platforms.
~~~
Sophistifunk
I'd say this thread is a perfect microcosm of it. In JavaScript, the general
attitude is "you're right, this thing you're complaining about _is_ kinda
stupid, here's this tool to make it go away" versus "no, you're wrong, Haskell
is great, STFU"
~~~
neilparikh
I don't think that's really true in the Haskell community. I've seen lots of
self-criticism of Haskell on /r/haskell. Even SPJ himself is willing to admit
that Haskell has design mistakes.
Some things Haskellers readily admit as issues with Haskell:
\- the String type
\- records
\- laziness (more contentious, but many people agree that this might not have
been the right choice)
\- error messages
\- the prelude
Essentially, my experience has been that Haskellers are willing to accept that
Haskell is not perfect.
~~~
tome
Indeed, the Haskell community is very self critical, much to its credit.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/3b498l/if_you_coul...](https://www.reddit.com/r/haskell/comments/3b498l/if_you_could_change_one_thing_about_haskell_what/)
------
lisardo
I learned FP using Racket. It was a good experience, but the parenthesis were
really annoying. It makes you feel stupid.
I believe Elm would be better choice. It would allow to get a visual result
easily (html), there is a clear convention about code formatting and the
compiler errors are really friendly.
------
alaties
I think Haskell is very akin to C++ in terms of learning curve.
There are a ton of concepts you have to learn up front to even get started.
The compiler is generally unhelpful if you've never dealt with it before.
There are a lot of approaches to solving a problem and the language does not
make it clear which approach is preferred when. Unless you're a masochist,
these qualities can be quite off putting.
I think a language like OCaml is a good entry point into functional
programming. The compiler errors are really useful. The language pushes you
towards a sane functional approach. The learning curve is pretty smooth, too.
My alma mater seems to agree and FP with OCaml in the upper level CS intro
course
([https://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cis120/current/index.shtml](https://www.seas.upenn.edu/~cis120/current/index.shtml)).
------
justinhj
My path to functional programming started with Paul Graham’s lisp essays and
books and then SICP and Scheme. I visited the world of Haskell but only half
heartedly as I was much happier in a dynamically typed world for my hobby
projects. As a daytime C++ coder I found types an annoyance; so much time
wasted getting something to compile. Later I came to discover types again with
Scala and now I’m fully sold. I will revisit Haskell again some day but most
likely will learn Elm first. Elm is a much friendlier ML style language and
much more explicit about things like monads. Moving from Elm to Haskell is
much easier since the programmer will have “aha” moments mapping what they did
explicitly in Elm to what you can do more generically with type classes in
Haskell
~~~
cryptonector
I'm lucky enough to own copies of On Lisp and ANSI Common Lisp. These books
are a pure pleasure to read -- a lot like reading a novel.
~~~
flavio81
May the warm light of Lisp enlightenment shine on you -- CL blew my mind!!
~~~
cryptonector
I strongly recommend these two books. They are amazing!
------
mjhoy
I love Purescript, but I think in some ways it is even more arcane than
Haskell for a beginner.
e.g.,
> :t (+)
forall a. Semiring a => a -> a -> a
> :t (&&)
forall a. HeytingAlgebra a => a -> a -> a
~~~
kccqzy
But it requires a different kind of skill altogether. A semiring is a concept
in abstract algebra that’s quite independent from general functional
programming.
~~~
mjhoy
That's kind of my point. Usually when you're just learning "general functional
programming", you're thinking about, say, (+) as a function that takes two
numbers, and returns a number, because you're at the stage of figuring out how
something like
fold (+) 0 [1,2,3]
works. Introducing "Semiring" as a concept at the same time can be a bit much
for a beginner!
I do think it's a useful concept, and that Purescript is an excellent,
intermediate-level FP language.
------
crimsonalucard
I do believe that Haskell is the wrong language to learn functional
programming principles. Right off of the bat Haskell forces learners to use
monads for IO. Monads are an advanced concept; too advanced for beginners. If
learners end up do kind of getting the IO monad, a big number of them actually
end up not being able to understand why it's good or even understanding what a
monad is completely... and see it as a pointless overcomplicated abstraction.
I knew a person who learned Haskell then moved on to javascript due to the
wall he hit while trying to understand monads. I've looked at his javascript
code and his idea of functional programming is just littering his imperative
javascript code with maps, reduces and filters.
Thanks to redux, a lot of people are getting a broken view of what functional
programming really is via javascript. If you think you've learned functional
programming via react/redux and javascript... chances are you haven't really
understood it yet. Ask yourself, why is functional programming called
functional programming and not called immutable programming? If you don't know
the answer... you haven't really grokked functional programming yet.
The right language? Racket maybe?
~~~
yawaramin
I disagree that you have to learn monads for IO. I know some tutorials mention
monads right off the bat while teaching IO but that is not a recommended
teaching approach.
For IO what you would need to learn is that all IO actions are values of the
`IO` type and they can be sequenced together for guaranteed ordering using the
`do` notation. That's it. No monads. We can introduce monads after we show
using the same `do` notation for lists, `Maybe`s, and `IO`.
~~~
crimsonalucard
>For IO what you would need to learn is that all IO actions are values of the
`IO` type and they can be sequenced together for guaranteed ordering using the
`do` notation. That's it. No monads. We can introduce monads after we show
using the same `do` notation for lists, `Maybe`s, and `IO`.
This is an awkward teaching approach. Forcing learners to use advanced
concepts without fully understanding them. Why can't haskell just have a print
function that returns a void? How come when I use haskell with input it starts
polluting the input with this IO thing? This all seems stupid initially and it
takes a lot of learning to understand why things are done this way.... I mean
that person I know thinks javascript is better than haskell because
console.log("hello") is ten times more straightforward.
~~~
yawaramin
I disagree that it's forcing learners to use advanced concepts. It's giving
them syntax sugar and a fairly clear introductory explanation (IO is done only
with the `IO` type for safety reasons) and giving them all the capabilities of
IO in other languages straight from day one.
Forgetting about types for a second, can you really say that `putStrLn
"hello"` is harder to understand than `console.log("hello")`? Trust me when I
say this, plenty of people have taught Haskell to kids and the result has
always been that they pick it up easily. Programmers from other backgrounds
worry away too much of their mental capacity thinking about monads. Stop
worrying about it and just hack away.
~~~
crimsonalucard
Understanding a pattern is different from copying a pattern. Our disagreement
lies not with kids copying a pattern but with people fully comprehending the
philosophy and true nature of the monad abstraction. This is not easy for a
beginner. Allow me to elucidate:
Here is a an example of a trivial operation in imperative programming that
becomes a bit more complicated in Haskell: Create a function that prints
everything in an array:
naive implementation in haskell (won't work):
printElements arrayOfStrings= map putStrLn arrayOfStrings
main = printElements ["Hello", "World"]
True implementation:
printElements [] = return ()
printElements x:xs = (putStrLn x) >> (printElements xs)
main = printElements ["Hello", "World"]
The second implementation requires understanding of types and the IO monad
while the first implementation is a naive and broken implementation that most
people turn to when learning Haskell.
It is not trivial to explain to a person why it must be done the second way...
All of this and all we were doing was printing something to the console! It's
too much! Monads aren't even a required part of functional programming.
Haskell is not a great language to learn about functional programming.
~~~
tome
Actually the "true" implementation is
printElements arrayOfStrings = traverse putStrLn arrayOfStrings
main = printElements ["Hello", "World"]
but the difference between map and traverse is sufficient for your point to
still hold water.
~~~
yawaramin
I think we would actually use `mapM_` rather than `traverse`.
~~~
tome
Or rather `traverse_`. (I still don't know why `traverse` is not renamed
`mapA`.)
~~~
yawaramin
Interesting, I don't see `traverse_` in Prelude in 8.0.2 that I have on my
machine.
~~~
tome
It's not in Prelude, it's in Data.Foldable.
------
shados
Absolutely not. You need a gateway drug before Haskell becomes interesting.
It's one of those things where you should not use a solution to a problem
until you understand what the problem IS. Otherwise you'll feel like things
are complicated for no reason.
ML, Elm, Elixir, Closure or even (yes, really) JavaScript are much better
places to start.
~~~
hellofunk
I think you mean Clojure, not Closure. The latter is a library by Google.
~~~
shados
Yes, Clojure :) I wasn't even thinking the library, but the programming
concept when I typoed it. Whoops!
------
hbbio
I have taught FP to more than one thousand students over 5 years. For all of
them, the language was OCaml (at several universities, in Paris).
At the time and still today, I think that OCaml is a very good language to
learn FP. Students that learn FP before any other programming language get it
quickly, and others can compare and write both the imperative and the
functional form of a given program. But as a whole, the installation is easy
and uniform (which matters a lot when teaching) and the standard library
sufficient for everything, as you never want to have a lot of dependencies for
the same reason.
Of course, OCaml has its drawbacks: A weird syntax, terrible tooling... but
you don't really see that when learning programming concepts. The only
students which complained were the ones which already spent a lot of time
programming before class _and_ trollers at the same time.
~~~
yawaramin
For dismissing syntax complaints, have you looked at ReasonML?
------
galaxyLogic
Haskell syntax is terse but not simple. Not good for teaching Functional
Programming PRINCIPLES. See:
[https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/haskell2010/haskellch10...](https://www.haskell.org/onlinereport/haskell2010/haskellch10.html)
.
How about using Lisp to teach functional programming? Lisp syntax is small,
simple. You don't need to teach so much Lisp as teach with Lisp.
------
crusso
Given your constraints, I'd say that Elm is an excellent choice. It's
simplistic enough to be approachable, the easy web integration is a feature
(not a drawback as you mentioned), and people are doing "real work" in Elm so
they will be able to use it for years moving forward.
------
bpyne
This question leaves me with more questions. The post looks at a few
alternatives without giving context.
1\. How does the course fit the overall curriculum? 2\. What is the experience
and maturity of the people taking the course? 3\. How strong are the teaching
skills of the instructor?
The density of functional features taught in a certain time period matters. A
drastic change in mindset simply takes time that, I would say, is greater than
a standard semester. A single semester is fine if FP is going to be
reinforced, thereafter, in other courses.
Also, starting students with FP instead of imperative or OO means less to
break down and relearn.
I've read numerous debates that try to define functional programming. I don't
want to start another one because they're tedious. My experience is that
functional programming is a change in mindset in how to solve a problem and
organize code. The instructor's ability to teach matters. The time given to
learn matters. Reinforcing the concepts throughout a curriculum matters.
For each point I make above, you could make a valid case for a different FP
language/ecosystem. As much as I like Haskell, it's not a "one size fits all".
------
nicolashahn
I learned Haskell in a course called "Comparative Programming Languages" by
Cormac Flannigan
([https://users.soe.ucsc.edu/~cormac/](https://users.soe.ucsc.edu/~cormac/))
my last year in college, so I had done a lot of procedural, object oriented
programming by then, but no real emphasis on functional and especially not
purely functional.
It was probably my favorite course I took in college, owing a lot to his
outstanding teaching style. It awoke an interest in programming languages and
a strange fetish for the beauty of them. I was probably the odd one out, few
other students enjoyed it as much as I did. I became a slightly rabid Haskell
promoter for a little while. I realize it's not great to build most things in
but I think everyone should have the same experience I did with it (after
learning some basic programming and gaining a working knowledge of at least
one "easy" language like Java or Python, but before you've spent too much time
with them and have solidified your opinions).
------
te_chris
In my personal experience: No. I tried Haskell and Scala multiple times but
never worked. Once I got to elixir everything just sunk in and felt easy. YMMV
------
chasedehan
Buy this: [http://haskellbook.com/](http://haskellbook.com/)
I tried LYAH and some other sources a few times, but was really turned off by
those approaches. It wasn't until i found HaskellBook that I really started
liking it.
I think a lot of it depends on the background of the person learning. I came
from a strong math/stats background before I learned to code and so much of it
clicked a lot better than other imperative languages.
------
amatecha
I'm currently learning Haskell from "Haskell Programming From First
Principles"[1] and enjoying it so far (even attending a local weekly study
group). I'm absolutely learning functional programming principles and then
some. Pretty effective thus far, and I find it extremely accessible.
[1] [http://haskellbook.com/](http://haskellbook.com/)
------
ajuc
I've mostly learned functional programming with SML at university, and then I
learned Clojure with no problems, and after that I still had problems with
learning Haskell.
So I'd say - no.
I especially had problems with searching for varios operators and what exactly
they do. Also (despite having some experience with SML) - currying makes
function definitions hard to read.
~~~
yorwba
I have never seen an operator that I couldn't find with Hoogle.
E.g. for (&&&):
[https://www.haskell.org/hoogle/?hoogle=%26%26%26](https://www.haskell.org/hoogle/?hoogle=%26%26%26)
You can also search by type:
[https://www.haskell.org/hoogle/?hoogle=%3A%3A+String+-%3E+IO...](https://www.haskell.org/hoogle/?hoogle=%3A%3A+String+-%3E+IO+%28%29)
------
js8
It worked for me, but I guess (also based on comments here) it depends on
personality. I like to learn (work things out) from theory and I generally
prefer to learn elegant languages that introduced some concept rather than a
watered down version of that concept as it was adopted in more pragmatic
languages. Some other people might prefer to be more practical and understand
the theory later, and so prefer languages that are more pragmatic before they
accept a new paradigm.
Haskell, due to its annoying insistence on pure functions, made functional
programming click for me. I have seen functional style in impure languages
before (Common Lisp) but I didn't have the discipline to really code that way
- I only saw the downsides. Haskell forced that discipline on me, so I could
also see the upsides. One significant upside is that one is forced to make
functions really small, which leads to more readable and composable code.
------
greencore
Haskell itself is difficult to understand unless you give someone to read
"Learn you a Haskell for great good". I was giving this book to my junior
developers to read for understanding such principles like recursion, list
manipulation functions like map, filter, reduce etc. and it worked pretty
well.
------
GarvielLoken
SICP in Scheme is the only true answer. You are all heretics.
------
joelhaasnoot
I actually enjoy the benefits of my course in Clean at university (
[http://clean.cs.ru.nl/Clean](http://clean.cs.ru.nl/Clean) => "Clean is a
general purpose, state-of-the-art, pure and lazy functional programming
language"). While challenging, it taught me all the functional principles.
Many of the language features and principles can be applied and useful for
understanding Python, Scala, Kotlin, etc.
Applying it to something that wasn't just plain 'ol boring was slightly hard,
but creating soccer team logic as the final project with a pre-written GUI
module was lots of fun. Before that I never thought exams that required
writing actual code were a good idea, but this one pulled it off well.
------
opaqe
Why not ML? Our programming languages course had a unit in ML and the transfer
to Haskell after that was not trivial but still a smooth learning curve -- I
could read not just getting-start or for-beginner guides.
------
davesque
One might consider using a functional language which isn't lazy. Haskell's
laziness makes its behavior harder to understand and is not necessary to
illustrate the core concepts of FP.
------
sriku
Not entirely on topic, but related, I have an evolving attempt at introducing
programming language concepts by building a forth-like language in JavaScript
-
[https://github.com/srikumarks/nospoon](https://github.com/srikumarks/nospoon)
It is written in a stream-of-thought literate style. Feedback welcome as
issues.
------
pacala
Use a good _library_ of persistent immutable data structures. In any language
your audience is already familiar with.
~~~
adrianN
Functional programming is not just about using immutable data structures.
------
ShareDVI
I had an FP course on F#, really liked it.
------
Chiba-City
Haskell Type Classes are brilliant. But I would recommend a strict evaluation
language like ML (and modules with signatures) for Semester #1 and lazy
Haskell for Semester #2. Anyone could cover a ton of useful contextual
material taking just a little more time.
------
kevinSuttle
I'm in the boat of learning FP right now. What would really help me, and folks
in the same process, is for people to suggest languages that _would_ be
better, and why, instead of doing the stereotypically HN commenter thing that
I'm already seeing.
~~~
yawaramin
I always recommend [https://www.coursera.org/learn/programming-
languages](https://www.coursera.org/learn/programming-languages) for learning
FP, the professor has fantastic explanatory videos that are really clear and
concise. You'll get the most out of it from doing the exercises, but you can
still take away a lot from just watching the videos.
~~~
kevinSuttle
Thank you. I'll check that out.
------
k__
Probably not, because it's lazily evaluated and almost no other language is.
------
jgtrosh
> Full disclosure: at Kent, after teaching Haskell for many years, we
> currently a compulsory second year course on “functional and concurrent
> programming”
s/currently/currently dispense/
------
gurelkaynak
We were thought functional programming with Dr. Scheme and Miranda. I think
they were ok. Never had any problems with them. Have no idea about haskell.
~~~
dualogy
> Have no idea about haskell
Born as a non-proprietary Miranda alternative, but instructors would have to
be careful to side-step various modern quirks across the libs ("SQL as a free-
monadic-profunctor-optics" and such broohaha) for a similar teaching
experience.
------
pklausler
Is there any other language with purity, laziness, and static types that could
possibly be put forward as an alternative to Haskell?
------
bitwize
Functional programmers practice a form of no-true-Scotsmanism wherein type and
category theory are an intrinsic part of "true" functional programming. So
unless you are working in something with a type system _at least_ as
expressive as Haskell's, you are -- arguably -- not doing _true_ functional
programming. (Sorry, Schemers.)
------
latj
I knew the answer after just reading "Is Haskell the right language..."
------
galvs
Go SJT! He taught me haskell back in 2003 - rotating ascii horses
------
sitkack
I think Python is a wonderful language to teach functional programming since
it is so accessible for many definitions. One has to go a little off the rails
to get all the functional features, but it is possible.
~~~
Myrmornis
I also suspect this makes sense for an introductory FP class (FP, not static
typing). The students have already already met the language, and they can
compare functional and imperative styles of solutions to the same problem. I
think I’d go with python, and then have one or two lectures near the end
showing a language dedicated to FP / static typing.
~~~
sitkack
Yeah, and by using a widely available language, they can actually use these
techniques in the field.
------
megaman22
No. It's a great way to turn people off from the whole idea.
I suffered through a course in Haskell and functional programming in college,
and the course material was so up its own butt about monads and type classes
and algebraic data types and such, that I essentially wrote the whole thing
off as academic flubbery. It didn't help that whatever version of GHC we had
then gave off error messages more cryptic than C++ template metaprogramming,
and it was such a cluster to have to bounce into the IO monad to just to do
some intermediate printf debugging.
It wasn't until years later and exposure to .NET LINQ that it started to click
and the motivations for why you would want to use functional programming
became apparent.
~~~
bad_user
While I agree that many courses on Haskell are no good ...
>> " _up its own butt about monads and type classes and algebraic data types_
"
Well, those are some of the best things about doing functional programming in
languages that can afford them.
>> " _I essentially wrote the whole thing off as academic flubbery_ "
And maybe it was your attitude to the whole thing.
>> " _It wasn 't until years later and exposure to .NET LINQ that it started
to click..._"
So seriously, can't you find anything else that changed " _years later_ "?
Haven't _you_ changed? Aren't we talking about years of accumulated
experience?
Also, .NET LINQ might be a cool example of what you can do with FP, there are
elements of FP in it, certainly that's a monadic interface that makes it tick.
But filtering an IEnumerable or an IQueryable is as interesting as executing
an SQL query.
What have you learned about FP from executing SQL queries? Probably nothing.
Just saying.
~~~
NightMKoder
Functional languages and strongly typed languages are not the same set. Most
functional languages focus on typing (e.g. Haskell, Scala), but there are
functional languages that do not (e.g. Clojure, Common LISP). You can easily
do functional programming in clojure without using any monad concepts directly
(though obviously it’s easy to say “that’s just a monad” in a lot of cases).
IMO the biggest win from functional programming is referential transparency.
Automated verification (i.e. type checking) can definitely be useful on larger
projects with bigger teams since it’s self documenting. That’s just my
personal take on it though - there’s plenty for everyone to like.
~~~
bad_user
You're mentioning Clojure.
Clojure has _protocols_ which are probably inspired by type classes. Just like
Clojure's protocols, type classes are a mechanism for ad hoc polymorphism that
allows decoupling between data and the functions operating on that data.
Clojure indeed doesn't have monads, but this has to do with Clojure's culture
(like all LISPs) of using macros for describing APIs for composing stuff. But
those APIs aren't unified and some of the DSLs I've seen do not have a
theoretical foundation, which really means they aren't reusable and some of
them are flawed.
Due to its evolution and backwards compatibility concerns, some of its design
shows its age as well. You can't make operations like "map" work on your own
data types because it doesn't have a protocol defined for it.
Don't get me wrong, I actually like Clojure, but that the community is not
using types like monads to drive their design is a flaw.
~~~
slowmovintarget
What do you mean by "doesn't have monads?" You just write monads in Clojure.
They are only a structural formalism. [1]
If you meant doesn't have the Maybe monad built in... why would you want that
tangled up in your data? [2]
[1] https://github.com/khinsen/monads-in-clojure/blob/master/PART1.md
[2] https://youtu.be/2V1FtfBDsLU?t=2381
------
gnaritas
No, teach in Scheme; functional programming has shit to do with advanced
static type systems.
------
abritinthebay
No. The best language is likely the one you know best. Be that Ruby, JS, Rust,
or C++.
That way you can concentrate learning the _principles_ and you’ll immediately
know how to apply them.
The basic principles aren’t hard anyhow - you can learn them completely in a
day. The hard part is _applying_ them and understanding the trade offs.
------
walterstucco
No
------
lonk
No. You need to understand monads before learning FP and you need to learn FP
for understanding monads. This is chicken/egg problem. Functional programming
is overrated.
~~~
dragonwriter
> You need to understand monads before learning FP
No, you don't. You don't even need to understand them before learning Haskell,
much less before learning FP using a language which doesn't use monads as
pervasively as Haskell does.
You obviously need to learn at least something about monads _as_ you learn
Haskell, but understanding them is not a prerequisite.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
How to Do Philosophy - samb
http://www.paulgraham.com/philosophy.html
======
DanielBMarkham
I skipped philosophy and always regretted it, for the same reasons pg mentions
(it seems to be the ultimate in reality)
In the last 3 years, however, I've picked up some great philosophy CDs from
The Teaching Company. I spent 400 bucks instead of all that tuition, and I
learned enough philosophy to really appreciate it.
I agree somewhat and disagree somewhat with Paul's essay. On one hand,
pragmatism seems to be the only rational resposne to so much generalizing! And
he's right -- philosopher's have continuously pushed the boundaries of
language well past the breaking point.
But I think Paul overgeneralizes, which is ironic since that seems to be part
of the claim he's making against philosophy. I view the field as really smart
people trying to come to grasp ultimate truths on which the rest of science
can be constructed. Many times they have succeede, like J.S. Mills, or Newton.
Philosophy generates science.
But you can't take it too seriously. Philosophy is like a dance, or a way to
play the tuba. If you're having fun with it, and you're generating something
of value (I would agree with the life-changing criteria but simply making a
buck from geralizing where nobody else did is enough for me) then you're a
philosopher. Anybody who's ever sat designing a program where you get that "a
ha!" moment, where you realize by generalizing in these few areas you've made
a whole new practical and valuable thing, is right up there with Russell in my
book. Anybody who has went through requirements sessions, only to have the
code still not match the needs because of the slipperiness of language
understands Wittgenstein.
------
ingenium
I'm currently a philosophy of science and molecular biology double major, and
I have to say I agree with Paul Graham's criticisms of traditional philosophy.
None of it really makes sense, and is generally nothing more than someone's
opinion. Yet we hold philosophers such as Aristotle in high regard.
Philosophy of science is different from classical philosophy in that it
focuses on more concrete aspects. One of the best classes I took was the
philosophy of artificial intelligence. We discussed what it is to be
conscious, and how we differed from a computer, it at all.
Other classes focused on the history of evolution or relativity and studied
how these theories were formed and the arguments from the scientific community
against them. While a lot of the readings are books or essays by people simply
giving their opinions, I've learned to consider what they have to say, but
that it is OK and in fact encouraged to disagree and give your own opinion.
Since philosophy cannot be "proven" like a mathematical proof, another's
opinions are not any more correct than my own as long as both are formed
logically.
What I took from philosophy was not the opinions of the "great philosophers",
but rather was the ability to think about things logically and confidently
make my own opinions on them.
~~~
euccastro
So what's your take on consciousness, and how/whether we differ from
computers?
~~~
ingenium
Basically, consciousness is nothing special and we don't differ from computer
at all in that we're simply a more complex computer than anything we've
created thus far.
~~~
the900
Can you offer defense of that position please?
~~~
ingenium
The brain is composed of neurons. Each neuron either fires or it doesn't, just
like on or off in a computer. This is determined by chemical reactions in and
outside the cell. A powerful enough computer can simulate this down to the
atomic level, it's just physics. Just because the computers we build don't
function the same as the brain doesn't mean that the brain isn't a computer.
Some attempts at AI have taken this approach, and while they generally work,
we don't yet have the processing power to scale it.
When a certain stimulus happens, the effects it has on the brain, which
include thoughts, is predictable and computable by doing the physics. We just
have this illusion of "free will" and making choices. Our personalities are
simply the result of how our brain's wiring developed from our environmental
stimuli.
This also brings to light an important topic in philosophy of science:
determinism. Is the world deterministic or not? If it's not, then physics and
the sciences simply don't work. If the world is deterministic, which all
evidence we have says that it is, then free will cannot exist. It's just
easier and more comforting for people to pretend we have free will.
~~~
euccastro
Yet that doesn't even address consciousness. Just behaviour.
I don't mean consciousness as in functioning state of the brain (i.e., as
opposed to unconsciousness), or about the ability of a representational system
to picture and reason about itself. I talk about the _feeling_ of being (I
wrote a semi-serious comment about this in this thread: search for
metaesthesia).
You can rightly claim that this is not observable beyond the first person, and
thus it's out of the scope of science. But I guess we all have a personal
unscientific take on it, or we can make up one as good as any other when so
prompted. That was what I was asking you about.
~~~
rms
My take is that consciousness is probably unique to humanity. Yet other great
entities, probably have something better than consciousness. Because of the
limitations of our own consciousness and what our language allows us to
express, we won't ever be able to comprehend the supreme state of existence
that makes up what a star has that is better than consciousness. It just
doesn't make sense to me to look at a star and somehow perceive ourselves as
better or different than that dumb object because we think.
~~~
euccastro
Better? What does that mean in this context? How do you compare a
consciousness to a 'supreme state of existence', for value or otherwise? Who
can perceive both, to perform such a comparison?
Hate to be unpoetic, but how is a star anything more than a big ball of
burning gas? I don't feel humans are 'better' than stars. The only loosely
related comparison I can think of is complexity: there is more to know about
humans than about stars.
~~~
rms
>Who can perceive both, to perform such a comparison?
Our fourth dimensional overlords.
It's really tough to go anywhere with this conversation because it quickly
hits the limits of what our consciousness can express. I feel that our
consciousness is missing something that would allow us to understand why the
big ball of burning gas exists on a higher plane of existence than us. This is
of course completely impossible to justify.
~~~
euccastro
Yes, our reasoning platform is not made to deal with this kind of stuff, but
it's fun, in a perverse way, to see where can it take us.
Kinda like passing a bitmap image to an audio player, or passing it through a
mp3 compressor and loading the resulting data in an image viewer, trying to
discover anything interesting in the output.
------
pmetzger
In addition to Sokal's hack on "Social Text", I believe that Rob Pike did a
test in which random texts produced by running a Markov chain over Derrida
were found to be indistinguishable by informed readers from actual Derrida.
(I'm probably misremembering at least some details of the actual incident but
the gist is, I'm pretty sure, true.)
~~~
pmetzger
I've done a bit of research -- the Pike incident involved Baudrillard, not
Derrida.
~~~
kcl
All that proves is that Baudrillard's message is invariant under Markov
chains. I'd like see a mathematician produce an argument of such fine
structure.
~~~
jey
In other words, contains 0 bits of information?
------
JeffL
Although unpopular with many people, Ayn Rand approached philosophy in some
ways as you are proposing. She strove to discover general principles that,
once grasped, change the way one acts. Personally, reading and understanding
her philosophy has changed my life and the decisions I make a great deal.
For anyone interested, I have a site <http://www.ImportanceOfPhilosophy.com>
that explains why I think philosophy is so important and which is mainly based
on Ayn Rand's philosophy.
~~~
byrneseyeview
One of the ways I (and others) knock Ayn is that she didn't have an effect on
later developments in philosophy. But she _did_ have an effect on people's
lives. By pg's definition, is she more relevant -- or is she reheated
Nietzsche with some Stirner stirred in?
~~~
neilc
IMHO Rand is vastly different from Nietzsche. There is obviously some degree
of influence, but Nietzsche is subjective, anti-systematic and anti-rational,
while Rand is almost the canonical example of a philosophy that attempts to be
objective, systematic and rational.
As for Rand's limited influence on subsequent development in philosophy,
that's an interesting point. Why is this the case? Even if you disagree with
Rand's philosophy, I think it's pretty outrageous that her work isn't even
mentioned in more university philosophy programs. There are only a few other
philosophers whose work provides as complete a system for understanding
reality, the nature of knowledge, and the nature of ethics (I'd include
Aristotle, Plato, and Hegel as others that are similarly complete, but there
aren't too many after that).
So why is Rand's work not taught more often? I'd say that is mostly the result
of the biases and predilections of the typical university philosophy
department.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
No, it's for the same reason that intelligent design isn't taught in biology
classes, or that the timecube theory isn't taught in physics classes, or that
homeopathy isn't taught in med school. Rand's output was pseudophilosophy.
~~~
neilc
On what grounds would you call Rand's work "pseudophilosophy", rather than
philosophy proper? Just because you don't like something does not mean it is
automatically disqualified from the class of philosophies.
I think that to qualify as a philosophy, something must be a system of thought
that proposes a notion of metaphysics, epistemology, and a system of ethics.
Rand's "output" obviously qualifies, whether you happen to agree with it or
not.
Intelligent design and time cube theory ought not to be taught because they
can be objectively verified as false. Such a test plainly does not apply to
philosophy -- and even if it did, it would disqualify plenty of philosophers
who _are_ taught, such as the pre-Socratic philosopher Thales.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
> On what grounds would you call Rand's work "pseudophilosophy", rather than
> philosophy proper?
Well, for a start, there was the fact that she reviewed, and dismissed on
"philosophical" grounds, a book of Immanuel Kant's _after she read the back
cover_. Sure, that's an example, but by no means an atypical one. She
dismissed nearly everything after Aristotle, usually on superficial grounds.
Such wholesale dismissal of the established field, such grandiosity of claims
(especially in the face of such shallow thinking) has direct parallels with
pseudoscience.
> I would personally say that to qualify as a philosophy, something must be a
> system of thought that proposes a notion of metaphysics, epistemology, and a
> system of ethics. Rand's "output" obviously qualifies
...for a definition of "philosophy" you have pretty much quoted verbatim from
her work, but without admitting that or even acknowledging the existence of
alternative perspectives? You _do see_ the problem with that, don't you...?
> Intelligent design and time cube theory ought not to be taught because they
> can be objectively verified as false.
No. They can't. That's the whole _point_ of pseudoscience - if their claims
were verifiable but wrong, it would just be forgotten. But pseudoscientists
make unverifiable claims _precisely_ in order to claim that because their
claims have not been disproven, they should be given parity.
As for teaching Thales, how does one teach that Socrates was an advance if one
does not teach what he was advancing from? Similarly, the Rutherford model of
the atom is still mentioned in science classes - by your logic it should be
forgotten as pseudoscience, but it wasn't. One cannot teach science _without_
teaching that models are superseded by better models as they are created -
that is the _very nature_ of the scientific process. And the reason science
and philosophy were commingled until a couple of centuries ago is that it's at
the heart of the philosophical process too. One rejects models because one can
demonstrate that an alternative model better fits the observable reality; one
doesn't superficially reject them without bothering to understand them first
because one finds their implications in disagreement with the conclusions one
is seeking to prove!
~~~
axiom
1\. You claim that she dismissed a book by Kant after reading the back cover.
Please provide a reference.
2\. You don't like his definition of philsophy.
What definition do you like?
3\. You claim pseudophilosophy should not be taught in philosophy classes.
Anyone and everyone agrees with that point. You still leave open the issue of
whether Rand's work is in fact pseudophilosophy. Please support your claims.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
> Please provide a reference.
See above. The books in which I could have located a reference are long gone;
but it's in one of her short essays (if pushed, I'd suggest that it might be
found in For the New Intellectual... but wouldn't want to be held to that).
> What definition do you like?
From wikipedia: "Different philosophers have had varied ideas about the nature
of reason, and there is also disagreement about the subject matter of
philosophy." If not even the people who do it professionally can agree on a
definition, it would be presumptuous of me to try.
Nonetheless, you misread my objection. I am objecting to the assertion that
Rand's work is without question philosophy, using the definition of philosophy
by which Rand identified herself as one. It's tautological; it begs the
question.
Likewise, my criticism of Rand is not that her conclusions are not reasonable
conclusions (although I have my own opinions on that). It is that the methods
by which she reached those conclusions are not those of a serious
philosophical investigation. Rand's entire "philosophy" was carefully
contrived to justify the conclusions she wanted justified, and that makes it
worthless as philosophy - and inherently dishonest, to boot.
> You still leave open the issue of whether Rand's work is in fact
> pseudophilosophy.
I haven't even presented a definition of pseudophilosophy, let alone one you
have agreed upon, so it's hard to see how you can assert that I haven't proved
my case. So:
: I define "pseudophilosophy" as "justification masquerading as philosophy" -
or, to elaborate, "a contrived rationalisation of _a priori_ conclusions,
constructed primarily to justify those conclusions rather than to examine
their validity".
: I claim that the evidence of Rand's flight to the US from revolutionary
Russia, and the emotions expressed in her early fiction (primarily We the
Living and Anthem, but even back as far as The Husband I Bought) demonstrate
the _a priori_ nature of her strident individualism and anti-collectivism. I
do not criticise this; indeed, I have a _lot_ of sympathy with it.
: I note that her philosophical _oeuvre_ developed over the next few decades,
from its clumsy emotive (and none the worse for that) beginnings in Anthem,
through its 30-year gestation in The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, to its
expression in direct form in works such as For The New Intellectual and
Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.
: I therefore conclude that in this case, she contrived her philosophical
justification to fit her _a priori_ conclusions about the rightness of
capitalism and the abhorrence of altruism.
Note that I remain in sympathy with the feelings that drove her; indeed, I
would go so far as to say that I share them. But to look upon her
rationalisation of those feelings as anything other than a rationalisation,
the self-justification of a woman who could not allow herself to simply _be_ ,
is something I find absurd.
~~~
neilc
> Rand's entire philosophy was carefully contrived to justify the conclusions
> she wanted justified, and that makes it worthless as philosophy
"Worthless" is far overstating the case: in general it is hard to prove very
much about the true motivations of philosophers, particularly long-dead ones.
For example, it is quite likely that the exact lines of reasoning in
Descartes' _Meditations_ was contrived to reach the conclusions he wanted to
reach beforehand, but to say that makes the whole thing "worthless" is pretty
silly. Many philosophers can be criticized as developing rational arguments
for positions they hold intuitively.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
Considering that one of his "results" is a philosophical proof of the
existence of God, I'd say he might have gone up a bit of a garden path...
> Many philosophers can be criticized as developing rational arguments for
> positions they hold intuitively.
Indeed, but the key is doing so from a position of trying to prove your
intuitively-held position _wrong_ , and I'd suggest that this is what
distinguishes philosophers. Some of them - for instance, Wittgenstein - even
manage to do it.
Going back to the science analogy, new hypotheses are accepted not once
supporting evidence is found - even UFOs have supporting evidence, after all!
- but only for as long as attempts to produce confounding evidence fail.
------
memetics
One should not so blithely throw away the concept of science as a type of
philosophy and that philosophy is a type of religion.
Natural philosophy is a very good name for science, because it reminds us that
"science" is based on a philosophy. This philosophy includes the concepts of
control of degrees of freedom, replication of process and result as the axiom
for "proof", and objectivity, among other things.
As an example, math is not science, it is a sub-class of philosophy. It is
important to realize that the math used in science is fully in tune with the
philosophy of science, and MUST BE in order to be a valid tool in scientific
inquiry.
Philosophy, properly done, is a way of helping both group and differentiate
(to classify) things. A fundamental difference, for example, is between the
constructed experiential (such as a belief), and something that is physical
and non-experiential (the atomic weight of iron). This difference, properly
understood, is one of the beneficial results of studying philosophy, and it
HAS changed the world.
------
axiom
Two points:
1\. I'm actually very surprised at how many Ayn Rand fans there are on this
site. For a fringe philosophy that has fewer followers than Scientology there
seems to be an unusually high concentration here. I am a big Ayn Rand fan, so
this is a pleasant surprise for me.
2\. Ayn Rand's book Intorduction to Objectivist Epistemology is the most
interesting book on the theory of concept formation I've read. I have not come
across anything that I found more plausible. One of the most appealing parts
of it was that she tied concept formation to a similar process as algebra.
Specifically to the point of this article, I would certainly say that it
changes the way you think. The chapters on definitions and concept hierarchy
make your thinking radically more efficient. Even if you're a programmer and
have no interest in philosophy I'd say it's definitely worth a read.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
Considering that the people on this site are more or less _exactly_ the kind
of people with whom Rand surrounded herself, and anyone who fancies themselves
at all creative or exceptional is likely to identify with the Roark or Galt
characters (who are, nonetheless, only ever described from an external
perspective) - and frankly, the more likely to so identify the less their
achievements tally with their self-estimation - I'd say it's not at all
surprising.
I'd also say it doesn't bode well for the future. From my perspective, being a
Rand fan is a demonstration of an unfortunate lack of either insight or
critical thinking. Maybe the ability to believe bullshit, so long as it's
positive bullshit, is a strength in an entrepreneur. But being unable to
distinguish harsh truth from desirable illusion is not a strength in someone
who is truly creative, whether in thought or in anything else.
~~~
axiom
I like how you call Rand's work bullshit but don't provide a single example.
In fact it wouldn't surprise me if you haven't read any of her work. Most of
her critics haven't.
Also, it's interesting that you don't try to reconcile the fact that the Y
Combinator is one of the most successful startup incubators ever, and that
there is a large presence of Ayn Rand fans on here. Do ya think there might be
a connection there? no of course not, it's just that entrepreneurs like to
believe in bullshit.
In my experience it's very rare to meet a person who calls themselves an
Objectivist who isn't way above average in intelligence and ambition. And
don't tell me about the 14 yearolds you've talked to on various online forums
- I don't think you'd want people to judge you by how you behaved when you
were a kid. I'm talking about people 25+. All the guys I knew from university
who were Objectivists are now either working at Google, some big time law
firm, or have started their own company (I'm in the lattermost category.)
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
> In fact it wouldn't surprise me if you haven't read any of her work.
Try "all her novels and at least 4 books of essays". In fact, I seem to have
read more Rand than many Objectivists. It was a while ago, though, and the
books have long since left my possession.
Let me guess - your next argument will be "you didn't understand it then". If
so, we're done here, for the same reason I don't argue with Christian
fundamentalists who claim I don't understand Christianity.
_edit_ : Sorry, some of your other assertions amuse me.
> Also, it's interesting that you don't try to reconcile the fact that the Y
> Combinator is one of the most successful startup incubators ever, and that
> there is a large presence of Ayn Rand fans on here.
I guess you found "maybe the ability to believe bullshit... is a strength"
confusing. I chose the word "strength" for a reason, although "advantage"
would fit well too.
I also covered that in another thread, where you were perfectly welcome to
reply. Nobody did.
> Do ya think there might be a connection there?
Correlation? Not without better data. But even if there is a correlation, that
is not causation; and I find it hard to take someone who would assert
otherwise seriously as a thinker.
So here's one for you. What proportion of successful YC startups were founded
by Objectivists? What proportion of failed or abandoned ones were?
> In my experience it's very rare to meet a person who calls themselves an
> Objectivist who isn't way above average in intelligence and ambition.
In my experience it's very rare to meet a person who ridicules Objectivism who
isn't way above average in intelligence, perceptiveness and sensitivity.
Shall we get into a pissing match about whose experience is better, or shall
we simply agree that personal experience is not a useful data point?
> All the guys I knew from university who were Objectivists are now either
> working at Google
...so no self-compromise there, then...
> some big time law firm
...where integrity is _so highly_ prized...
~~~
axiom
What argument of yours should I respond to? then one where you assert without
any evidence that her work is bullshit?
You think you can just dismiss an entire body of thought by throwing out ad
hominems?
Look, I know that you're smart enough to know that I'm a pretty smart guy, so
comparing me to a "Christian fundamentalist" just makes you look ridiculous.
Offer a serious argument to support your claims (as I did to support mine, if
you read the above posts) or just don't bother posting.
Edit (response to above "edit", since you didn't feel like writing a new
post): This really isn't going anywhere, let's just leave it here. I'm sure
you're a top notch programmer, but seriously man it's just not cool to go
around name-calling people you disagree with. I replied to your posts with
respect, so did everyone else on this site.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
> then one where you assert without any evidence that her work is bullshit?
I didn't _assert_ that, I _implied_ that in the course of _asserting_
something else.
> You think you can just dismiss an entire body of thought by throwing out ad
> hominems?
Yeah, actually I do, if it's a very small body and hasn't done much thinking.
> comparing me to a "Christian fundamentalist"
Again (and this is REALLY getting tedious), I didn't compare _you_ to a
Christian fundamentalist, I compared _Objectivist arguments that I have heard
before_ (and predicted that you would use, partly in order to ensure that you
didn't) with those of Christian fundamentalists.
> I know that you're smart enough to know that I'm a pretty smart guy
Er, no - at the moment that is a conclusion I simply cannot draw. Your
thinking displays evidence of being muddled and irrational, with little grasp
of logic or ability to distinguish between claims made of the argument and
claims made of the arguer.
I have no doubt that you _think_ you're a pretty smart guy, and I bet you
didn't have to work too hard at school to achieve results. But I also think
that because of this, you tend to interpret criticism as a personal attack,
and you are slow to recognise when someone really does have something to teach
you, especially when you don't think that person is as bright as you think you
are.
~~~
pg
Will you stop it, you two? Your dispute is now mostly about itself.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
Someone else has come along and downmodded every single post I made in this
thread. Result? Instant karma drop of 10%. By _one person_. Because I said
something they didn't like.
pg, please delete or disable my account forthwith. I am not prepared to stay
in a place where that's acceptable - and by allowing the behaviour, you make
it acceptable. I would do it myself, but _news.yc doesn't even allow me to
change my fucking password_. (I hope you're not storing them as plaintext.)
------
karzeem
Occam's Razor is a pretty lovely bit of guidance, if not philosophy, that's
both general and useful. My college had a great books curriculum, and the few
books from the last 100 years changed my thinking as much as all the earlier
ones combined. Rawls' veil of ignorance is especially elegant.
One note about modern philosophy, though. One of my cofounders enjoys reading
about neuroscience, and I was talking to him about modern philosophy a few
months ago. He suggested, quite wisely, that in a few hundred years, the early
21st century work that philosophers read is as likely to come from science-
oriented guys like Steven Pinker and Daniel Dennett (i.e. the meaningoflife.tv
cohort) as it is from traditional philosophers.
------
DanielBMarkham
Sorry to post twice, but this is a pet topic.
Software is applied philosophy. Where else can you deal with everything that
western philosophy offers, from classification to epistemology to the
philosophy of language and science -- and at the end of the day produce
something that has immediate value for someone? All of this working, real-
world stuff we're doing, from heuristics to machine learning and meta-
programming -- it's all applied philosophy.
~~~
bdr
_Everything_ is applied philosophy. That's the point!
~~~
yters
But software has the shortest feedback loop between high metaphysical concepts
and practical instantiation. For example, OO is a variation on the notion of
Forms.
------
yters
It'd be useful to see some support for your claims about the history of
philosophy. Specifically:
1\. Aristotle's Metaphysics, and the like, had no effect on its readers. I'd
also like a clearer definition of "did something." I.e. does changing the way
one thinks about practically theoretical fields "do something?"
2\. No one challenged the two until the 1600s. Kant, by himself, isn't a good
source since his philosophical agenda was to overthrow the relevance of
religion (which was tightly coupled with classical thought). See Allan Bloom's
Closing of the American Mind for details.
For my undergrad I studied the classics, and I'd say your generalizations are
too general. People, such as Aristophanes, said the same things about Plato in
his day that you say in your essay. Yet, generations of great thinkers have
chosen Plato over the Cynics and Epicureans, today's relativists and
materialists. Your critique of the uselessness of philosophy is more
indicative of the fact that many of the humanities in academia today are
purposely biased towards relativism or materialism.
While I agree that philosophy should be tested with practice, I don't think
practicality should restrict inquiry. Otherwise, we become very short sighted.
Math is a great example of this, which you've pointed out in one of your
essays.
Finally, you misunderstand Aristotle's support for 'useless' theory. You're
confusing 'useless' with 'pointless.' All useful activities are done for a
specific goal, they aren't important in themselves. Therefore, the ultimate
point of useful activities is by definition 'useless.' Aristotle thinks the
final goal we all aim for is happiness, and the highest form of happiness is a
kind of knowledge.
~~~
yters
That being said, I am very much in favor of hacker philosophers.
1\. Creative, logical thinking is an inherent part of what we do and love.
2\. We created and own the best communication and research network in history.
3\. Programming brings our ideas into existence in very short order, and
allows us to model pretty much every aspect of reality.
Unfortunately, we also tend to get stuck in our own little world of ideas, a
important strength which is our major flaw.
------
lackbeard
This pair of sentences is confusing: "All societies invent cosmologies.
Occam's razor suggests their motivation was whatever it usually is."
I can't figure out what the second sentence is trying to tell me. That
societies' motivations for inventing cosmologies are their motivations for
inventing cosmologies? And what does this have to do with writing in verse
rather than prose?
~~~
pg
I meant the presocratic philosophers were probably driven by the same motives
that drive people in any other society to make up stories about the origins
and nature of the world.
I'll see if I can rephrase that...
Edit: I did. Clearer now?
~~~
lackbeard
Yes.
------
rkabir
I'm of the opinion that [good] Sci Fi is a weak form of philosophy. Societies
that don't exist are constructed and described, and then readers can read and
digest the implications.
------
forgotmylastone
"There are things I know I learned from studying philosophy. The most dramatic
I learned immediately, in the first semester of freshman year, in a class
taught by Sydney Shoemaker. I learned that I don't exist. I am (and you are) a
collection of cells that lurches around driven by various forces, and calls
itself I. But there's no central, indivisible thing that your identity goes
with. You could conceivably lose half your brain and live. Which means your
brain could conceivably be split into two halves and each transplanted into
different bodies. Imagine waking up after such an operation. You have to
imagine being two people."
Whew, I'm glad I just watched Star Trek to learn this, and didn't spend tens
of thousands at Harvard. (I'm referring to the numerous times someone was
'duplicated' in a transporter accident)
~~~
euccastro
Someone suggested mind uploading too:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42607>
But that, like your Star Trek example, is more pie-in-the-sky science fiction.
While it may make you think about the issue, it doesn't force you to confront
it in the same way. Brain splitting seems more plausible; I wouldn't be
surprised to see something like that in a few years.
------
greendestiny
I definitely agree with the criticisms of philosophy. I did a minor in
philosophy, and its an absolute complete waste of time.
PG's redefinition of philosophy is something I've been thinking/writing about
a bit recently. I prefer to call it insight, and I don't think its worth
trying to define by itself. Insight is the abstract thinking that gets to the
heart of a real problem or class of problems, it by definition illuminates our
understanding. Calling it philosophy will just cause everyone who attempts it
to miss the point. Plus philosophy has a history and a workforce, all of which
will completely derail any attempt to redefine the field.
------
gabrielroth
I'm surprised that your essay doesn't deal directly with the branch of
philosophy known as ethics, as practiced by such canonical philosophers as
Kant, Hume, Bentham and Mill, and by contemporary philosophers like Peter
Singer, Michael Walzer, Jonathan Glover, and John Rawls. Their work addresses
some of the most general questions (what is a just action or a just society?),
and it seems to meet your utility criterion: if you find it convincing, you
have to do things differently.
Is this not an example, from within the mainstream of philosophy, of the thing
you're calling for?
------
jraines
Reading philosophy is still good mental exercise, and it gives you interesting
ways to think about the world. Learning to call bullshit on intimidating ideas
is a good thing to learn.
I agree that one test of it is whether it changes the way you do things -- or
at least gives you an imperative to do so that you're too weak or cowardly to
heed (see Nietzche, Thoreau, Schopenhauer, Seneca).
But I dunno -- the whole math versus the world mentality always strikes me as
a symptom of too much craving for certainty. Math never told us anything about
the rights of man.
~~~
bluishgreen
I dunno about math. But conclusively telling people in clear terms that we
were all monkeys once asserts equality of humankind in a brutally ironic way.
~~~
euccastro
Does it? Gorillas were all monkeys too, and they are not equal to us[1].
I agree thinking about evolution can give you an insight on human rights. It's
interesting to reason about how moral rules emerge from certain social traits,
and why have such traits proven evolutionarily stable.
[1] I don't mean humans intrinsically 'deserve' 'rights' that other living
beings don't.
~~~
bluishgreen
Historically one of the tools that was used to keep racism on the move was
stories about ancistry.eg.Africans were told that they have no history, that
all the ancient historic structures that they saw were built by a lost white
race that lived there. Similar stories can be found in all cultures
propagating racism, Inside Hinduism they had stories which claimed some people
descending from the gods while the others just happened to be standing around.
This is what was broken quiet unintentionally by Darwin,
~~~
euccastro
I can't see how Darwin's theses refute that history about the African white
aboriginals, unless that "they have no history" is supposed to mean that their
ancestors didn't exist anywhere (?).
Did Hinduism revise their creational myths, or was the whole creed discredited
as a result of Darwin?
For all I know, which is not much in this topic, Darwin may have helped debunk
racist stories. OTOH, Darwinism offers new pretexts for racism. Didn't Nazis
abuse a good deal of Darwin (along with Nietzsche) to cook their ideologies?
------
irrevenant
"Of all the useful things we can say, which are the most general?"
As a hill-climbing algorithm, wouldn't this approach tend to result in the
local optimum rather than the most general truths?
~~~
pg
That is an interesting question. I wonder if there is even a way to know if
the space has merely local maximums.
------
hilbert
Paul Graham wrote: "Greek philosophers before Plato wrote in verse. This must
have affected what they said. If you try to write about the nature of the
world in verse, it inevitably turns into incantation. Prose lets you be more
precise, and more tentative."
I've written some poetry in my time, and I've read enough of it too, to know
that verse can be even more precise than prose -- but it is generally less
tentative, mainly because it takes more effort and thought _per_word_ to write
poetry. Verse is crafted; prose tumbles out of discussion.
One can imagine Plato or Aristotle stumbling back home after a long night of
drinking and talking philosophy, and then quickly jotting down a particularly
juicy discussion in prose. However, good poetry (especially when it's highly
philosophical) tends to require a lot of thought, and it tends to come from
individual reflection. Wordsworth's "Daffodils" talks about this:
For oft, when on my couch I lie In vacant or in pensive mood, They flash upon
that inward eye Which is the bliss of solitude; And then my heart with
pleasure fills, And dances with the daffodils.
Poetry comes out of individual reflection, and usually not directly from a
discussion. However, the classical Greek philosophers produced philosophy by
discussion -- hence the "Socratic method."
Verse is no more or less suited to philosophy than prose, but the classical
Greeks preferred prose, because it reflected their approach to philosophy.
Ironically, especially nowadays, prose cloaks philosophy in a garb of
officialness. Prose claims precision through official-sounding vocabulary and
structure; poetry _exhibits_ precision through careful choice of sound, word,
image, and structure.
mfh <http://hilbertastronaut.blogspot.com/>
------
euccastro
Metaesthesia (1/3)
[This was meant as a reply to a comment about soul, but I drifted too bad to
claim it's really a reply to anything.]
The word 'soul' has a lot of baggage I don't care for, but I need some word
that expresses the concept of 'feeling', 'perception', 'consciousness' in me.
Not my ability to perceive this or that, to feel this or that, but the quality
of experiencing stuff at all. Just to get rid of some of the implications of
the words above, I could call this feeling of self _autoesthesia_ , or, for an
even more pretentious neologism, _metaesthesia_. I'll conjure a ridiculous,
but convenient, word for the act of exercising metaesthesia: _metafeel_ ing.
Note that in the paragraph above I have talked about myself rather than about
humans as a species. This is for several crucial reasons. To confront the
thorny one first: quite honestly, I haven't established yet that any of you
guys have this.
No offense; most of you folks look convincing enough, especially when I only
have myself to compare to. In any event, I have to say most of you other
people are quite alright phenomenons to perceive. I hope we can still continue
this discussion in civilized terms[1].
But I'm trying to be rigorous here (heh..), and for all I know, you could all
be replicants, NPCs, or hallucinations. I can only metafeel my own stuff!
Another reason why I didn't speak of 'us' is, who are us? What is _not_ us? As
soon as I go happily assuming metaesthesia in other stuff, I have no good
reason to limit myself to humans, animals, living beings, computational
systems, complex systems, material things, or whatever else, if anything, is
there.
Do my cells metafeel? Do the mitochondria within them? Do cities, societies?
Does the world as a whole, does the universe as a whole have a definite
consciousness that metafeels itself?
[I had to split this. Search in page for "Metaesthesia (2/3)"]
------
yelsgib
Consider any "vocalizable concept" X. There are 4 directions you can move from
X.
"Meta" - you can ask the set of questions "what can we say about claims about
X?"
"Anti-meta" - you can ask the questions "what can X say about other things?"
(make X a meta-concept of some other concept)
"General" - you can ask the question "do there exist generalizations of X?"
(commonly known as abstraction, although the term is ambiguous -
generalization is more precise)
"Specific" - you can ask the question "do there exist instances of X?"
Answering questions in these 4 directions gives you information about what you
really want to know - what is X? What is "true" of X?
Philosophy is exploration and characterization of this "idea space." Nothing
more. Nothing less. Very useful, if people would only do it once in a while.
\---
Quick example:
"What is free-will?" = X
Meta:
Does free-will correspond to a thing? What classes of things is it in? What
are our intuitions? What can we meaningfully say about free-will?
Anti-meta:
Suppose we define free-will well. What concepts does it enable? Are those
concepts meaningful?
General:
Are there generalizations of free-will? How about just plain old "will"? What
can we say about "will"? How about "freedom?" What's that?
Specific:
Are there any hard-and fast examples of free will? Are there any "thought-
experiments" we can perform to try to shake out our intuitions? For instance,
if everything were systematic/deterministic, what would this imply?
\---
My claim is that this method is useful for getting terms to be well-defined in
the way that PG requires of math. You just keep doing this sort of analysis
over and over until you get down to essential definitions.
Best to start from the bottom, though.
------
soundsop
I haven't finished reading yet, but for what it's worth, I'm having trouble
parsing this sentence:
Few were sufficiently correct that people have forgotten who discovered what
they discovered.
~~~
forgotmylastone
I think he meant something along the lines of "Few were sufficiently correct
that they were remembered for their discovery."
~~~
pg
No, I meant that when you learn about e.g. the chemical elements, you don't
also learn who discovered each of them. It's accepted knowledge; you're taught
it as facts.
In philosophy, most of the exam questions have someone's name in them. E.g.
"explain x's concept of y."
~~~
ced
I also had problems with the sentence, probably because it doesn't ring
especially true. I can name the discoverer of most of what I know about
physics, right from the names: Newtonian physics, Bohr's model, the
Schrodinger equation, Euclidian geometry, Gaussian curves... E=Mc2...
~~~
euccastro
FWIW, I too got stuck at that sentence like nowhere else in the text; it took
me some tries to macro-expand. Maybe your proofreaders got past it without
blinking because they are more acquainted with that point?
(Although Newtonian physics and Euclidean geometry are not really
counterexamples.)
------
bdr
"They were in effect arguing about artifacts induced by sampling at too low a
resolution."
Sampling from what -- "meaning-space"?
~~~
pg
The observable world. That's what meaning-space is.
------
dpapathanasiou
Disappointing that this essay (like so many others) talks about Plato without
mentioning Diogenes.
Plato is the stuffed shirt know-it-all, and Diogenes is the smart-alecky
devil's advocate ready to poke holes in Plato's ideas, thereby cutting him
down a few notches:
[http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/libraries/tballard/diogenes.ht...](http://faculty.quinnipiac.edu/libraries/tballard/diogenes.htm)
and
[http://members.optushome.com.au/davidquinn000/Diogenes%20Fol...](http://members.optushome.com.au/davidquinn000/Diogenes%20Folder/Diogenes.html)
Ultimately, Diogenes is more important.
~~~
yters
Uh, have you read Plato's dialogues? The defining characteristic is that they
aren't philosophical treatises, i.e. not pedantic monologues claiming all
knowledge. Their whole point is to stimulate the reader to think for
themselves on very interesting questions.
~~~
dpapathanasiou
Never ask a person of Greek descent if he's read Plato.
The very idea! ;)
~~~
yters
The Diogenes quotes are interesting, but don't they lampoon Neo Platonic
thought more than Plato himself?
------
flashpoint
Thanks, your essays are excellent. I studied philosophy for the same reason
you did, I thought it had something to do with finding wisdom. However, it
wasn't my bread and butter option, thank heavens, otherwise I would have died
of starvation by now. My own feeling is that if words break down after a
certain point the next step would be the Eastern Philosophy's idea of insight
into reality. Words do not really bring insight, words can only go so far in
bringing insight. Words can only point in the right direction perhaps through
logic and even poetry. To find the true basis of reality would be a step above
words - I don't know exactly what that means - perhaps it is the sound of one
hand clapping? To me philosophy is basically a way to determine reality and it
forms a building block of our quest to find the true nature of reality. It is
a bit sad that in our present time people do not seem interested in the fact
that there are ways that reality has been studied and that our lives are often
only based on escaping the reality of the moment. Last is not my idea but I
read it somewhere probably in some book on Eastern Philosophy. I am convinced
that the day we all start living in reality is the day that we find God.
Furthermore, the upside to philosohy and the study of it is to make sure you
don't make basic logical errors in your thinking for example realising that
there are things such as sweeping statements, generalisations, ambiguity,
prejudice, bias etc. It is often a mind strain to get through the day
surrounded by people who never realise the limit that words have and the
limits that untrained minds have. It is heartbreaking to realise the lost
potential and the absence of meaning that is in front of peoples eyes without
them ever realising it. Quite painful . . .
------
barce
Maybe you should read the Dialogues Between Hylas and Philonous. It's so much
clearer.
Like you, I studied philosophy in college, and then ended up in the tech
industry. I've tried really hard to repress my philosophical urges because
when I express their questions, I get into trouble.
I've had managers in the tech industry tell me to quit it with the philosophy,
and I used to think there was something wrong with me for being philosophical.
If you look at Socrates, he was killed for his philosophizing. If philosophy
is really as you, and the early Wittgenstein say it is, then why do people get
so upset about philosophy?
I think (like Plato and Socrates) it's because the questioning in philosophy
puts people face to face with their ignorance. And most people if they've had
some success in life, like to believe it's because they know.
You wrote: "The real lesson here is that the concepts we use in everyday life
are fuzzy, and break down if pushed too hard."
You've clearly identified the source of upset people have at philosophy. But
what if the concept is really broken and doesn't fit the world it was born
into? Ptolemaic physics is pretty fuzzy. Many have pushed it too hard. Does
that mean we should kill someone?
You might be disillusioned in philosophy, but I find it liberating. What makes
me fear for the future, especially since now, the study of philosophy in terms
of student enrollments has doubled, is that people will suppress it.
------
tigerthink
How does self-improvement (ala lifehack.org) fit it? I personally think it
fits very well. The trouble is that these sorts of personal development blogs
are still mainly in it for the money and they aren't scientific enough (e.g.
they'll tell you what to do and maybe how to do it, but not necessarily why to
do it.)
Also, they often focus on superficial behaviors instead of underlying thinking
patterns. For instance, here's a way of thinking that I've found to be useful:
99% of the time, there's no logical reason to feel fear in any social
situation. Whatever happens, when all is said and done, _it really doesn't
matter what other people think of you_. If that seems like a "no-duh" way of
thinking to you, think back to when you were in high school.
A superficial example of this behavior is learning to meet new people. But
someone who hasn't grasped the underlying concept will have a hard time
meeting people, no matter how often they read about how to meet people on
personal development blogs.
Besides money, another reason for this personal development blog bullshit is
that a lot of the bloggers are themselves in the process of figuring out how
to be successful, etc. It's much easier to write instructions for someone else
than yourself, so they start blogging about what they _think_ will work for
them without necessarily having tried it for very long. Thus the field of
personal development can be something like an echo chamber, where the same
ideas are repeated over and over.
------
Grue
Having studied philosophy (and maths and CS) myself, I mostly agree with your
essay. However, here are a few things in defense of studying philosophy:
1\. Just as it can be useful to be able to consider what makes a _good_
burrito, it can be useful to consider what makes a _tortilla_ (as opposed to
pita or lavash or other flat breads). A large part of metaphysics is about
carving up and categorising concepts and analysing and clarifying
distinctions. These skills (taken in moderation) turn out to be quite useful
in everyday life.
2\. Symbolic logic is great exercise for the brain. Analytic philosophy is
great for learning to write precisely. Becoming a better thinker and writer
will serve you well. (Philosophy is a good way to get these skills, but not
the only way.)
3\. Philosophy is the subject which encompasses studies that are not yet
mature enough to be their own disciplines. Some such subjects may never
mature, but others will (think Kuhnian protoscience, iff you like Kuhn). Most
maths and sciences have spun off from philosophy. The boundaries are
fascinating: go read the so-called natural philosophers (the term "scientists"
is anachronistic) like Descartes, Galileo, Huygens, Newton, and Leibniz.
4\. There's a wealth of "philosophy of $foo" subjects to study. The degree of
BS involved in Phil($foo) seems proportional to the degree of BS in $foo. Pick
the right $foo, and study _both_ $foo and Phil($foo), and you've likely found
someting meaningful to study.
~~~
lvecsey
I think thats what we got with the Paul Graham article; Philosophy of Computer
Science ;)
The article says its not good enough for those of us otherwise interested in
philosophy but dissappointed by its exactness, to back off from it. Rather we
need to demand accuracy, precision, and practicality. And that for the sake of
progress its important to recognize the field is in poor condition and not
silently pass it off, in its current state, as having higher merit.
------
salmonax
I didn't start taking classes in philosophy until several quarters ago and had
merely read out of interest for some years. It has always been a matter of
some discomfort that people hold even THIS sort of knowledge at arm's length,
fail to truly enter into it, mistake a kind of aimless and wandering
detachment from the essential questions for objectivity, and fail to develop
any understanding whatever of philosophy as a _project._
I have no stake in this matter except an intellectual one. It's quite
saddening for me to see yet another formal student of philosophy produce such
a boring, typical, and downright naive treatise on the subject, a writer who
has chosen to convert into assertions of half-truths a thinly veiled myopia.
If this is the sort of intellectual cynicism that the modern institution
produces, then I am quite happy that I've had no part in it.
And why on earth is there no mention of the Americans? Is that once
burdgeoning and scientifically literate pragmatist tradition completely lost
to us? Why are we still dwelling on the befuddled analytic solution to
continental problems when such great American minds as Charles Sanders Pierce
have made such sharpening new developments without precociously discarding the
old? And their writing is as far as anything out there from being mealy-
mouthed or inexact.
I'm sorry, but we can do a hell of a lot better than this. And we ought to;
our current level of science demands it.
~~~
ww
A degree in Philosophy = the same value as a degree in computer science. You
come out knowing about as much as someone with 2 to 12 months of real life
experience depending on how much you applied yourself. You shouldn't expect
anyone who 'majored' in something to actually have applied it.
To get that experience I would challenge PG to go around the internet and
debate something like universalism vs nominalism. You would have to take the
nominalism side if you think 'math' is 'science' and not philosophy. Remember
though, that bertrand russel was a universalist .. you know .. that strange
believe that numbers exist outside of the human mind and are not physical,
sort of like what Plato believed.
PS forget Wittgenstein. To quote him: 'My propositions are elucidatory in this
way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless'.
------
sorgeangel
Listen, I can understand your frustration...I am a philosophy major also. The
problem lies in two things the answer does not lie in you, self-reflection
leads to the emptiness of yourself (not from the eastern perspective) and toy
must have a concern for others, and the openness to accept God as Being, not
Possibility. If God under our definition falls under Possibility, He is then
ruled by existence, and limited. Is God Possible denies God...Does God Exist?
This question is also limited, as God does not come into Existence? So you
work with the idea God is Existence, how, why, and do I have any respect for
people who have died for Him? Philosophy is difficult because we have to read
all the history of some senseless ideas to reach to the point we have today.
The reason for this is retracing steps if a mistake is made and so that you do
not think you did this all by yourself, and like Socrates said to reach the
points of other men easily. A pursuit for Goodness, and a surrender to it,
instead of Goodness surrendering to you might be another approach, for you are
not the God of Goodness.
------
Alex3917
Sometimes we find ourselves working with schemas that clearly have elements of
truth, but that for some reason don't seem to hold up well empirically. Often
times this is because the schema we have in our heads is more broadly defined
than the underlying phenomenon.
A good example of this is the phenomenon of prodigies. We know there are some
people in society who are exceptionally talented in certain areas, and we call
these people prodigies. We then have certain schemas that we apply to these
prodigies in our quest for wisdom.
But even though prodigies clearly exist, our schemas often seem to not hold up
so well. For example, studies have shown that child prodigies are often not
significantly more successful than the rest of us when they grow up. And
similarly, many prodigious adults were completely unremarkable as children.
Why is this? How is it possible for such exceptional children not to make
anything of themselves, and for such exceptional adults to have been
completely average as children?
Malcolm Gladwell observes that the reason for this is because when we describe
child prodigies, we are describing people who are gifted at learning. Whereas
when we describe adult prodigies, we are actually describing people are gifted
at doing.
Because we are applying one set of sensemaking tools to both groups, our
schemas tend to not hold up so well even though they are based on an
underlying truth. The solution to this is to create one set of schemas for
understanding and dealing with child prodigies, and another set of schemas for
understanding and dealing with adult prodigies.
There are often areas where we engage in fuzzy thinking, and apply one toolset
to multiple distinct phenomena. Philosophers and thinkers can create enormous
value by identifying distinct phenomena, and giving suggestions for how to
think about each one.
PG actually does this in his essay How to Make Wealth. He observes that money
and wealth are not the same thing so we should think about them differently.
Specifically, that money is sort of an abstraction of wealth, but for various
reasons we can benefit from thinking about wealth on a lower level. Providing
the sort of disambiguation that this essay does is really valuable, which is
why this is arguably the most useful of all the PG essays.
It seems like with math we start with something we know is true but not
necessarily useful (like just the concept of a line) and then we abstract our
way to usefulness. This is opposed to philosophy, which generally takes the
stance that all models are false but some models are useful. In philosophy we
usually start with something that is useful in certain situations but not
necessarily universally true, and then we disambiguate our way down toward
truthfulness. I don't really see a problem with philosophy as long as it is
empirically useful under at least in certain conditions.
I feel there are two major issues with philosophy today:
1\. No "philosophical method" the same way there is a scientific method, which
means philosophy doesn't really build on each other from one philosopher to
the next.
2\. No real way to categorize ideas the same way you can categorize physics
research, which makes it hard to find prior art. So even though Malcolm
Gladwell and PG make really good arguments, there is no guarantee that people
in the future will use these arguments. As opposed to science where is
something is proven true it becomes the basis for future works.
~~~
bluishgreen
Ok, I am hitting a wall here. I can imagine ways to classify ideas and put
them in boxes. It will take some work, but I can see it there. But as for the
method, it keeps slipping me. What more, I have this uneasy feeling that we
might not have one which will be unlike the scientific method. For me the
scientific method is obvious, common sense, of course-it-is kind of method.
Just like Darwin's evolution. Once I saw it I simply cannot imagine how else
things could have been. If I am right, then we should just open another branch
of science for this. Its like one of those big company buys small unsuccessful
company and makes it rock kinda stuff.
------
MiklosHollender
1\. Seems to me Paul partly rediscovered Buddhism: great Buddhist philosophers
of the Great Middle Way school use philosophy to demonstrate philosophy does
not work. There is a great analysis of it:
[http://www.bahai-
library.org/personal/jw/other.pubs/nagarjun...](http://www.bahai-
library.org/personal/jw/other.pubs/nagarjuna/)
(This is where the Great Middle Way comes from: the middle way between
existence and non-existence. We can prove Berkeley wrong just by kicking
stone: it would be wrong to assert that that the phenomena don't exist in the
casual, everyday sense. However, they don't exist in that sense that if we
look deep into it the entity we casually define as a "stone" does not actually
have a true and lasting essence, or identity.)
2\. However, I believe philosophy, even though usually it is a bluff, is a
necessary evil. How can we talk about politics without philosophy? How can one
have any political opinion without at least having some ideas of what "good",
esp. "a good life" is? (OK you can be an anarcho-capitalist without it but
otherwise basically both Liberalism and Conservativism requires some
definition of "good".)
Miklos Hollender
------
eusman
Isn't an essay based on the assumption we don't exist doomed from the
beggining?
We are not cells and molecules. We are souls. Strange that an essay that talks
about philosophy doesn't have even once the word soul.
Ancient Greek philosopher Aristotel seperates animals from humans as beings
that have soul and the ability to think.
His work "Physics" tried to capture concepts people ignore even these days,
and tried to examine in an amazing use of reason various metaphysical
phenomena trying to find balance between whats real, fake and imaginary.
If you read the works of Aristotel and others, in original Greek you will be
amazed by his astonishing ability to convey truth in a wonderful ingenious
word of speech.
\--
Plato talked about many not-connected subjects in a very indirect way to put
the reader in becoming part of his works. Ingenius!
A very important concept of Socrates and Plato is the world of ideas. A
seperate existance/entity/world that we all have access to. Modern science
doesn't accept that, as there is not proof for that. But doesn't the fact that
a lot of people share similar ideas at different place and time may be a small
clue of exactly that?
~~~
ingenium
See, the problem is that you are simply wrong. I do not believe in the soul,
and I cannot say for certain that it does not exist. I CAN say for certain
that we are just cells and molecules. Our brains are composed of neurons,
which are simply complex chemical reactions. The cell is basically a test
tube, separating off the chemicals from everything else. A certain threshold
of a chemical interacts with a molecule on the neuron surface, and it "fires",
which causes it to release chemicals to an adjacent neuron, and this repeats.
If we had a powerful enough computer to simulate the physics of how each cell
works or simulated the connections of neurons, do you really think it won't be
able to "think" like we do? Our brains really aren't any different from a
computer. A neuron either fires or it doesn't; on or off; 1 or 0.
Humans aren't special. Other animals can clearly think and react to their
environment to make "decisions", but they just aren't as powerful of a
computer as we are.
On that note, I assume you also believe we have free will? Well, we don't.
With a certain set of stimuli, you will make the same decision/"choice" every
time. If you understand what I said above, this would become apparent.
With regards to the soul, where did the soul come from? Do primates have
souls? If they don't, then it had to come into existence at some point. Was
there a set of parents who were soulless and had a child who magically had a
soul? What about groups of people that had a long time in isolation to evolve
separately, such as the indigenous peoples of Australia and the Americas? Do
they have souls? How about the "hobbit" that was found in Indonesia that's
12,000 years old and is a separate branch from homo sapiens? What about
neanderthals?
If a human gets a soul upon conception, and identical twins are caused by a
zygote that splits, does each twin only have half a soul?
~~~
eusman
DNA evolved from RNA and it took billion years to do just that. DNA tried to
perfect it self through its evolution. Your human body to evolve during its
growth a lot of cells are destroyed of course while you are shaping.
So basically we are all derivatives of that process. Everybody knows that.
The point is that philosophy is not about getting a claim and considering it
substantial to eliminate other probabilities.
Metaphysics is not feasible they are part of a material world. they react with
it of course but it exists whether you can accept it or not.
Everyone is trying to understand what happened to all that antimatter that was
created during the bing bang. For every molecule there is another anti.
And what about time? who can explain that mystical concept? in the possibility
that you can go beyond it, means it may not even be valid as a concept as we
know it.
In all these strange ideas, it's impossible to be satisfied that everything is
only molecules.
If everything is a chemical random chain reaction how can we all have similar
ideas or visions of the future? and note that Greeks never considered
chemistry as different from Physics. Only recently did Chemistry claim it's
independence.
~~~
kc5tja
_The point is that philosophy is not about getting a claim and considering it
substantial to eliminate other probabilities._
But this is precisely what PG identified as _being wrong_ with philosophy as
it is currently taught.
_Metaphysics is not feasible they are part of a material world._
What?
_they react with it of course but it exists whether you can accept it or
not._
If it reacts with the material world, it leaves the realm of philosophy, and
enters the realm of testability (and hence, science). It ceases to be
metaphysics, and becomes normal physics.
_Everyone is trying to understand what happened to all that antimatter that
was created during the bing bang. For every molecule there is another anti._
As I understand it, we have a pretty good idea as to what happened to all the
anti-particles. Nature seeks the state of equilibrium at all times. Anti-
particles would be attracted to their opposites, and destroy each other; this
would be detected today as the cosmic background radiation, and represents the
boundary in time at which the universe ceases to be opaque.
The question should be, why is there _more_ matter than anti-matter? This is
the actual question that is being pondered by cosmologists.
_And what about time? who can explain that mystical concept?_
Einstein.
_In all these strange ideas, it's impossible to be satisfied that everything
is only molecules._
These ideas happen to be testable in a laboratory, and the results are
reproducable.
_If everything is a chemical random chain reaction how can we all have
similar ideas or visions of the future?_
Because we communicate with each other. You didn't learn what you know today
in a total vacuum. You were raised in a family. You went to school. Everything
you know and value in your life is through indoctrination via institutions
external to you. As you grow older, you internalize them. And as we all know
from studying everything from perceptrons to propeganda, the more you beat
something into someone's brain, the more they're going to accept it as truth.
This is what happened in philosophy. Three Greeks decided to write down what
they thought they knew. Three people. Only three. Yet, they shaped the course
of ALL humanity, directly or indirectly. We're still feeling the repurcussions
of their thoughts today. The very fact we're having this discussion is because
of them.
_Only recently did Chemistry claim it's independence._
You state this as if it were some kind of political movement, just in its
ways, and noble in its endeavors. In fact, most chemists of yesteryear thought
that chemistry (which evolved from alchemy, remember, and had nothing to do
with physics at all) was not related to physics. But as time progressed, there
was an ever-increasing unification between physics and chemistry. Today, a
chemist will more often than not agree that it's a narrow subset of what we
call physics.
It's very highly specialized, but it is still physics. When I was most
recently going through college, that was the first thing that the instructor
mentioned. Chemistry is so thoroughly influenced by quantum mechanics that to
deny it is itself pseudo-science. Nearly all of the early atomic research was
performed by _chemists_ (who, at the time, did NOT think of chemistry as a
branch of physics). It was only when chemists wanted to peer into the behavior
of their chemical reactions (from ionic bonds to fission, and all points in
between) that the seeds for what we now call Quantum Physics were planted.
No, the realization that (quantum) physics and chemistry are essentially
concerned with the same things is itself a very recent phenomina -- late 20th
century at the earliest.
------
astine
There is a slight error here: when Aristotle makes this distinction, it is not
between things that are useful and things that are not, but between things
that are sought for their utility and things that are sought for their own
sake.
We make art supplies in order to make art. We make art because we like art.
Aristotle pursued knowledge, not because he wanted to use it, but because he
valued it for its own sake; much like a hacker will write a program, not so
that he can do his taxes with it or watch really cool videos, so much as
because he enjoys the craft. This attitude, that knowledge is not just a means
to and end but rather an end in and of itself, today is usually called
'curiosity.'
I think the lesson here is that people who aren't curious about the questions
that philosophy attempts to answer probably shouldn't study it to any great
deal. It's just like people who don't like to program shouldn't become
programmers; they won't get anything out of it.
------
evilmonkey
Philosophy is not about proving scientific theory as this article suggests. It
is about understanding how to think (thereby understanding why there is
scientific theory). Basing an initial premise or blame against Aristotle whose
works are not complete and not understood in historical terms is like accusing
a toddler of not understanding how to order a pizza.
It amazes me every now and then how smart people can get lost. I have and I'm
not that smart. But I am smart enough to know that many of the attempted
arguments in this essay are off.
Consolidating the history of a field of thought to a few authors and blaming
one of the "fathers" as making a mistake is a false argument. It doesn't
address the core framework of the field or address applied thinking.
Philosophy is about logic and understanding how to get to a point where one
human can explain to another in clear terms what that means.
I enjoy Mr. Graham's articles and read all of them, in this case I would avoid
reading this and instead read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
instead.
------
paulvonhippel
It's a little misleading to say that philosophy is useless. You can get that
feeling by looking at what's called philosophy today, but that's because
branches of philosophy that became useful are now called something else.
Many useful studies started out as branches of philosophy. As a topic develops
standards of evidence, it tends to calve off from philosophy. So natural
philosophy turned into physics, biology, astronomy, etc. as practitioners got
serious about observation and modeling. Likewise, logic and geometry grew into
mathematics, parts of epistemology turned into psychology, and social theory
is turning into social science. Today psychologists and evolutionary theorists
are starting to take a fresh look at questions in ethics and aesthetics.
What's left in the philosophy department, then, are topics that have been
hard, so far, to get purchase on. If you focus on these topics, you can get a
feeling of futility, but it's like staring at the bare patch in an otherwise
fertile garden.
------
EmRyall
Really interesting post - thanks. For me, the most important thing that
studying Philosophy can do is to get people to ask questions and to consider
the assumptions that are traditionally made. That is not to say their actions
might ultimately be different, but at least they are able to recognise
particular problems and difficulties... even if there are no absoultely
convincing solutions. I currently teach Philosophy in a Sports faculty and
believe that it is useful in getting students that are not 'naturally'
philosophical to realise there are philosophical and ethical problems that
don't have 'easy' solutions. This is what I think is important and it is up to
those of us with the more traditional philosophical training to make
philosophy a useful enterprise in other disciplines.
------
bdr
"in fact, it would not be a bad definition of math to call it the study of
terms that have precise meanings."
What meanings? I think that math is made of structure, not meaning. The latter
is a human phenomenon. For example, a proof using geometry and one using
algebra might be mathematically identical, but have different meanings
(created when they are perceived).
~~~
kc5tja
The symbology used to form each proof is universally accepted and agreed upon.
The symbol "=", for example, is taken not as a verb (a becomes b), but as a
statement of truth (a IS b). Likewise, "+" has a specific meaning. The
juxtaposition of terms is implicitly understood (e.g., all mankind agrees to
interpret it as) as multiplication of some form (which is generalized in
higher mathematics to function composition, which makes sense once it's
explained). It is the ultimate language, where one symbol has one, and only
one, meaning.
It is the structure which is a human phenomenon. The fact that you can express
any algebraic expression in reverse polish notation is a great example of
this. 1 2 + 3 4 <asterisk> / has the same meaning as (1+2)/(3*4). (Sorry for
the <asterisk> thing -- the markup system of this blog is positively broken
since it doesn't provide a means of escaping the markup characters.) The
symbols, and hence the meaning behind them, remain the same.
------
dfree693
I think the basis of progress in any field of study is the degree and
precision of inquiry. This is what Socrates recognized as the way to know.
It’s what scientists use with physical reality. I’m guessing it’s how Paul
Graham finds start-ups to invest in. Where you have genuine inquiry, you have
new knowledge being unfolded and developed. Where you don’t have inquiry, or
have insincere inquiry, or have taboos against inquiry, you have stagnation,
dogma, and useless speculation. It’s as simple as that.
There’s an author, A. H. Almaas, that has articulated a way of inquiry that is
quite penetrating in its quality. He became a physics student because he
wanted to know reality. At some point his love of knowing reality turned a
corner towards the human condition, and a way of inquiring into human
existence gradually became clear to him. So he uses this way of inquiry to
help people investigate their experience. And this has the effect of revealing
the nature of their existence.
So he and his students use inquiry for inner knowing, but it could also be
used in any field of study. And he says as much in his book “Spacecruiser
Inquiry” (page 372). Turns out inquiry is a general truth, broadly applicable
like Paul’s examples of the controlled experiment and evolution. And when
Almaas turned inquiry towards inquiry itself, the basic elements of inquiry
became clear: ordinary knowledge, basic knowledge, not-knowing, dynamic
questioning, loving the truth, the personal thread, and journey without a goal
(chapters 5 through 11). When all these elements are in place, inquiry can be
quite effective and efficient, no matter where used.
So to get back to Paul’s essay, I think he’s onto something when he suggests
to start with something very specific and then to follow it to something more
general. Following the thread of a small, specific experience or observation
can lead with inquiry, persistence, and time to larger and more general
truths. This is real philosophy. Starting with someone else’s large truths and
commenting and speculating on them and adding a few of your own will not do
much to add to our understanding of reality or to develop new, useful
knowledge and things.
------
krispykreme
PG, you ought to read Chuang Tzu and then revise your essay accordingly. Not
only was his work relevant to the topic, but also he started before Aristotle
and affected a greater fraction of humanity. Until then you better rename your
essay "How to do 3 Greeks + 1 Austrian". Parochial.
------
earcaraxe
I'm surprised that nobody brought up the calvin and hobbes strip that works
really well with this article.
[http://www.c2i.ntu.edu.sg/AI+CI/Humor/AI_Jokes/Academia-
Bill...](http://www.c2i.ntu.edu.sg/AI+CI/Humor/AI_Jokes/Academia-
BillWatterson.html)
------
walterk
FWIW, PG's thoughts on philosophy are largely confined to "analytic
philosophy", which I agree suffers from the problems he talks about. There is
a whole other tradition of sorts (sometimes referred to as "continental
philosophy"), taking a different path from Kant, including Hegel, Nietzsche,
Heidegger, Derrida, Foucault, Badiou, etc. This side of philosophy tends to
suffer from being extremely difficult to understand, but yields much genuine
insight for those who take the time to study it.
There's also the pragmatic tradition, as DanielBMarkham notes. I'm less
familiar with it, but many have seen commonalities between Heidegger and the
Pragmatists.
Ayn Rand's writing can be inspirational, but her philosophy was poorly
conceived.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
If Rand's fans accepted that she was worthless as a philosopher, but half a
century ahead of the self-help curve, they'd be a _lot_ less annoying.
------
uglyduckling
When I graduated college as a philosophy major, I left with an uneasy feeling.
Craving utility and connection with my childhood interests I took up software
development.
I'm glad to finally see an explanation for the letdown I experienced as an
enthusiastic but inexperienced scholar. I remember when I asked my first
philosophy professor, someone I had struggled with intellectually (and
physically during a dinner party) for a recommendation letter to leave
philosophy and study law, and his reply that I had "not spent enough time with
the classics" for him to feel confident that I was a real enough philosopher.
I am glad now to state that I am not, and that like many my response to its
flaws was to turn to other pursuits.
------
whoami
It is true that many works on philosophy are complicated because they fail to
accurately define the meaning of the terms they are discussing. However, the
solution proposed by this essay would result in the reduction of philosophy to
self-improvement books like the 7 Habits of this and that.
In his book, Wittgenstein said that one must be silent on those things about
which one cannot speak. The idea as advanced in his lecture on ethics is that
some things simply cannot be expressed in human language and one should not
try to speak about them. But is there really any harm in trying?
Anything useful that came out of philosophy is called something else:
mathematics, science, etc. It has not failed. We should keep on trying.
------
euccastro
Metaesthesia (2/3)
[This follows from anoter post in this page. Search for Metaesthesia (1/3) if
interested.]
In the interest of agility, I'll go one level deeper into insanity and present
the rest of my drivel as an interview with myself:
_How can things metafeel if they don't have nervous systems, or any mechanism
for reacting to their environments?_
Well, they can have very peaceful feelings. I know where you're coming from: I
can relate my feelings to the flow of information through my nervous system. I
can see how different conditions that alter the quality of that flow alter the
quality of my feelings similarly. Extrapolating, I'd say that feeling emerges
somehow from complex order.
_Ha! Typical nervous system chauvinism._
(sigh) What's a neural network to do?
_No, really. Why are my metafeelings bound to my physical body? If everything
metafeels, why don't_ I _metafeel everything? Why this fragmentation?_
I imagine there is some _I_ that emerges from the interactions of my body with
other entities. My matter, my actions serve that consciousness too, although I
am a less significant part of it. Just as most of my cells are replaced often
(and thus, I presume, their tiny consciousnesses are born and die), while my
perceived self stays mostly constant.
_So what if half my brain was transplanted to other body?_
I hope you'll go on the other half.
No, seriously: after some initial weirdness and confusion, it will be business
as usual. The other body will be a different person. A very affine person, to
be sure. Maybe like someone you've spent all your life with and told all your
secrets to, probably someone you'll care a lot about. But I bet you can get
something similar without surgery, if you were willing to go all the way to
get that level of intimacy with someone. It's scary and it wouldn't be easy to
know yourself well enough, nor it would be easy for the other person to
understand you well enough, but I bet some approximation is possible by good
old interpersonal communication means.
_So what about the converse? Could it be possible to merge consciousnesses by
merging nervous systems?_
I bet. That would be an even more interesting experiment. For maybe different
degrees of metaesthetical merging, you could link brains temporarily or
permanently, and you could do it with more or less bandwidth.
[Continued in Metaesthesia (3/3), which search for.]
------
tarmik
Unfortunately I have to agree with some ideas in this article. Long time ago
I've had artificial intelligence forum, and kept it alive for two or three
years, but decided to give up on it - because most of posts where exactly
philofophing on theme "AI", not really useful. You cannot make a program based
on those posts. Also one of comments here also suggests that "Software is
applied philosophy." - I have to agree on that one as well. I've seen software
source code, which were "overabstract", or over philosophical - if you could
say so. Finally I've concluded that native language walks hand by hand with
programming languages, and they should become one language eventually. Now I'm
looking deeper into programming languages, especially C and C++, and how they
are constructed, and trying to find resemblance to native language.
Unfortunately trying to extract the essence/core of languages is non-trivial
thing. I have hit basically the same wall as psilophy - operating on
I-don't-know-what by using I-don't-know-which-terms using I-don't-know-which-
logic. Also on some wiki page language definition page I have found a mention
that languages in which you can express easily one thing, it's more difficult
to express another thing. This basically means that exact atomic terms or
definitions does not exist, and it's up to language to define them, and fluent
communication is a result of language construction. So basically any language
can be defined, using any terms, side effect is "how easily language can be
used". Philosophy walks on shaky ground, since they try to define their own
terms, concepts and logic, (or in other words their own language) after a
while that newly defined language becomes completely detached from reality of
this world. Or it might be even not completely detached, but not
understandible by most of people, after that it still can be considered as
detached.
I'm afraid of such detached situations, and so I'm trying to get highest
possible abstraction of source code taking into account current programming
environment / developers mental world. Each small abtraction step, which I'm
achieving is one step forward - I can identify of what was done correctly and
what was done wrong and take into consideration on making the next step.
Unfortunately the further I go - more resistance I feel is hitting me back.
For example programming language compilers are made by whole teams, and
architecture and design - even if they exists require enormous effort to
develop similar compiler.
I however still think there is a way to simplify things, but it's very hard to
find a better way / solution, as it is probably with philosophy. I'm inspired
by language like Toki Pona, and that what drives me forward.
~~~
DanielBMarkham
To me philosophy is a way to make life easier. Philosophy is also a way to
make technology solutions easier.
I see no conflict between using the same tool for both types of work. However
I would not go so far as to say both types of work are identical. As a deep
pragmatist, I pick and choose philosophies of living and idea development
concentrating on what works and ditching what doesn't. It doesn't matter to me
that on different projects, or on different days, different philosophies which
might be mutually contradictory are required. Philosophy is always a work in
progress. I have a small enough moral sense that stealing what works isn't a
problem and a small enough ego that I don't worry with trying to come up with
the ultimate philosophy of everything.
------
gregwebs
I have always thought that the goal of philosophy was to change the way I
behaved or thought. Likewise, I minored in psychology to understand the nature
of my own behavior so that I would be more capable of changing it. To loosely
quote everyone's favorite philosopher "everyone is a philosopher whether they
realize it or not". Meaning most people are living by their subconscious
impulses, but the philosopher becomes introspective and question how they are
living. Nothing could be more practical, but as PG points out philosophy does
not usually have this goal in mind.
------
kinet
A useful link
<http://sriramanamaharshi.org/>
Happiness All beings desire happiness. Everybody loves himself best. The cause
for this love is only happiness. So, that happiness must lie in one self.
Further, that happiness is daily experienced by everyone in sleep, when there
is no mind. To attain that natural happiness one must know oneself. For that,
Self-Enquiry 'Who am I?' is the chief means.
[email protected]
------
ato
"You could conceivably lose half your brain and live. Which means your brain
could conceivably be split into two halves and each transplanted into
different bodies."
Unfortunately this does not follow. In most cases, if you lose half your brain
you would die. If by chance, after losing half your brain you continue to
live, that means the physical half that is gone was the less essential part. I
am not a neurologist but I'd guess it is very unlikely that if you lost the
part that survived you could still live.
Regards,
Atakan Gurkan
~~~
william42
Actually, people have had entire hemispheres of their brain removed and
continued to survive, with other parts of the brain taking over for the jobs
of the removed parts.
In addition, to treat epilepsy brain surgeons sometimes cut the corpus
callosum, or the nerves connecting the two hemispheres. The two halves of the
body act almost like the bodies of two different people who just happen to be
connected.
------
rodrigobraz
Paul, what do you think of Modern Art, especially painting? It seems to me the
very same arguments you made about philosophy hold there. People try to look
impressive by doing something opaque and incomprehensible and calling it art.
If you don't "get it" that is used as even further evidence as to their
genius. It seems to me the same situation you talk about, when there is a
market for people producing and consuming such things.
I would love to know your take on the subject.
------
pknz61
<http://peter.allmedia.googlepages.com/pottedphilosophy>
You talk about the "meaning of words" in a very English school way. Obviously
the meaning of meaning is the branch where Wittgenstein left the British for
dead and led to Heidegger and Derrida. Meaning of meaning is an important
issue as we begin the task of programming computers that will be more
intelligent than we are.
------
tyche
Descartes - I think, therefore I am. Berkeley - To be is to be perceived (his
version is prettied up in fancy words with religion thrown in). Kierkegaard -
To exist is to have the ability to feel angst.
Craig A. Eddy - I am, therefore I think, I am perceived, and I have the
ability to feel angst. One should always start with what one knows.
Craig A. Eddy, B.A. Philosophy (which is to say a Bachelor of Arts degree in
BS)
------
benhoyt
Cause and effect is a complex thing, but at least partly because of Paul
Graham, I quit a 9-5 job and tried to start a startup. Whether that was a
_wise_ thing to do or not, given the circumstances, is quite another question.
:-)
So PG's a pretty useful philosopher, at least according to his own test: "The
test of utility I propose is whether we cause people who read what we've
written to do anything differently afterward." Good stuff, PG.
~~~
euccastro
That only follows if the arguments that prompted you to quit are of
philosophical nature.
------
Neoryder
PG, Does this mean you are starting a project of some sort?
~~~
pg
<http://paulgraham.com/articles.html>
~~~
zoltz
Really that's what I thought when reading this essay. And I agree that some of
your essays are exactly what philosophy should be. But most are advice about
startups rather than philosophy (although you can still see they were written
by a philosopher), and some state specific observations. Maybe the philosophy
essays deserve their own directory?
------
mdemare
pg: Are there any philosophical texts that you'd recommend?
~~~
rms
<http://www.paulgraham.com/raq.html>
though it's really starting to turn into a faq
------
stickler
This essay needs to be corrected. There is a major historical error. Several
times, it is implied that Aristotle's work held back European thought for
hundreds of years, up until the seventeenth century. This isn't true.
Aristotle's influence was absent from Europe for several of the intervening
centuries, only really returning with the influx of ideas from the great Arab
philosophers like Averroes.
~~~
lst
> needs to be corrected
It's only an opinion, and it's situated in a certain culture and situation.
If you look closer, quite everything needs a 'correction'.
If you want something perfect, humans are the wrong place to search for.
------
ncm
No, modern science was invented by ibn al-Haytham a thousand years ago.
(Spellings vary, but include "Alhazen" and "Alhacen".) He is generally
credited with inventing modern optics (along with various geometric results),
but the method he invented to give a firm foundation to his investigations
into optics was what, today, we call science. Bacon studied him.
------
olavk
Those that don't know the history of philosophy are doomed to repeat it. For
example Marx wrote in 1845 "Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the
world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it." This is almost
exactly what PG is proposing.
Also, that statement that "all previous philosophy is bollocks" is a literary
device used by numerous philosophers.
------
rahulkjha
I've usually found good philosophy hidden in good novels, movies and science
fiction. It's a bit paradoxical, the generalaties become clear only in a more
specific presentation; it requires a lovely balance, and few can manage.
That's what makes it all the more intresting I guess. I think this is one of
your finest essays.
------
tones
Paul, Vico and Pirsig both address the problem you outline in constructive
ways, Vico through a pragmatic view of history as a Science, an evolutionary
philosophy if you will, and Pirsig by a link to anthropology and a distinction
between philosophy and "philosophilogy" which is what is mostly going on
today. Tones
------
lewisb
On the use of language, try reading up on E-prime. When you change a sentence
from "This food is tasty" to "This food tastes good to me" or "That is a tree"
to "That looks like what I understand to be a tree", a lot of these issues
around language become clearer.
Who is the master who makes the grass green?
------
dratman
I offer the following idea as both useful and general.
Beliefs, or articles of faith, may be defined as intrinsically untestable
assertions. Under that assumption, people can and should feel at liberty to
maintain whatever beliefs they like. Their beliefs need be of no concern to
anyone else, as they can never have any consequences. For if a belief had
definite consequences, it would be testable, contrary to our assumed
definition.
As an example, suppose I assert a belief that the world was created 6,000
years ago, and that God at that time laid down the fossil record and all the
related evidence which has made scientists believe in geological history and
biological evolution. My belief should bother no one, as it is untestable and
has no observable consequences.
Continuing the example, if I later throw a stone at a scientist who fails to
share my belief, that action of mine must stand on its own. It cannot be
ascribed to my belief. "I believed that I must..." is rightly not an
acceptable argument in any court.
------
khan194
But isn't the fuzziness of words and their inability to convey the most
general truths a very old idea? The Tao says, "the tao that can be told is not
the true tao" and then goes on to describe the limits of words in more detail.
------
mynameishere
Metaphysics: Physics without a laboratory.
[branch of philosophy]: [equiv. branch of science] without a laboratory.
I'm not sure philosophy can really be improved beyond the obvious: ie,
introducing experimentation after the theorization. But then it's no longer
philosophy.
------
dudeman
If you haven't already, I highly recommend reading, "Philosophy for Dummies"
by Tom Morris, Ph.D.. You may find some of the presuppositions you present in
your essay to be challenged.
~~~
pg
Really? Which ones?
------
janm
Interesting. Sounds a lot like Christopher Alexeander's "Nature of Order"
work. Specifically, trying to answer the question: "What makes something
good?"
------
niloc
What you are advocating is not exactly new. Pragmatism has been around for a
little over a century now.
------
jbonnet
Hi! Do you think countries like Portugal should stimulate students to go to
Science courses, instead of Humanistics (Philosofy, Languages, History...)?
jb
------
Neptune
Maybe philosophy could be also used as psychotherapy. It's funny, but
sometimes Paul himself tries to push words too far:)
------
gregboutin
excellent article Paul. I am part of those who changed their mind about a
degree in philosophy after realizing that most debates were rooted in language
imprecisions. I was leading the pack in my philosophy class. I studied
commerce instead and don't regret one second to be an entrepreneur! thanks for
the enlightening thoughts!
------
thales1940
I take your point and suggest you go back and explain 'the Greek miracle' as
everything after Pythagoras is a distortion.
~~~
thales1940
There is no science before Thales, 600BC. There is general agreement that
Thales is first to deduce certainties, implicitly building on inductions. So,
the key to explaining the Greek miracle is an inspection of what we know about
Thales. Pythagoras reversed Thales in that he took the integration of
induction and deduction and when applied to numbers reified them making them
subjective. The history of mathematics argued over the source of a numbers
certainty (cardinality) for 2350 years which mostly consisted of arguments to
explain the relation between god and cardinality. God is a bogus concept, it
has no existential content. Kant refusing to accept the obvious devloped an
argument that took the god/cardinal problem and made it impossible to
integrate them in the hope of saving the god part from reasoned inspection.
From Kant developes a new aecular, subjective view of cardinality. Excepting
Ayn Rand, no one has ever gone back to Pythagoras to correct his mystic error.
------
euccastro
Metaesthesia (3/3)
[This is a multi-part post. Read it before I'm killed from the site! :P Search
for Metaesthesia to find the other parts.]
_Bandwidth?_
Yeah. If you have a connection as dense (or more) as your hemispheres have
with each other, you can get some pretty strong integration, to the point the
two selves dissolve into a new one. With a narrower link, like the one you
have with your feet, each brain will still metafeel mostly autonomously, with
a small window of empathy and ultra fast communication to the other end.
_How would brains make sense of each other, if the wiring in each of us is
unique?_
Just as we make sense of the world in general: by rewiring until it 'works'.
It would take some time until each brain makes sense of the other, and in the
case of hardcore brain mergers, it would take some more time until some supra-
consciousness emerges from both.
For low bandwidth-- if this technology became casual enough, conventional
wirings could emerge. As we try more peer brains, our own brains pick patterns
and get better at negotiating this kind of stuff. I don't rule out computer
assisted training either. This would allow good old neural rigging.
_In the case of high-bandwidth brain merges, would the emerging new
consciousness replace both original consciousnesses?_
I think it depends mainly on bandwidth. Time and plasticity of the brain also
matter. If you merge brains in unborn children, I'm pretty sure they'll grow
to have an unified consciousness. The older the subjects are, the longer it
will take, in principle, to dissolve the old selves. But we have to assume
that there is some medical way to stimulate and assist brain rewiring. It's
part of the required technology, lest both brains go nuts before they can
integrate.
_But do you see both the original selves and the supra-self coexisting at
some point?_
The rewiring takes time. It doesn't just click and voila, you're merged. It's
more of a cross-fade.
_Do they metafeel each other?_
Yes, but not necessarily in any meaningful way. Most of the time it will feel
like a terrible LSD trip.
_If my city metafeels, why doesn't it talk to me?_
Why don't I talk to my mythocondria?
_I bet you do._
That was uncalled for.
_Let's continue this in private, shall we?_
Sure, my email is in my profile.
[And thus, there is no Metaesthesia (4/x).]
- - -
[1] And seriously, folks, if this was all that important to you,
metaesthesia.com would be taken.
~~~
rms
Do you think stars metafeel? The universe as a whole?
~~~
euccastro
How do you even think about this stuff? It's almost orthogonal to reason. The
only useful engagement point I can find is observing the characteristics,
especially the limits, of my own experience.
I think there is some 'metafeeling tone' everywhere, and that the intensity of
it is somehow associated to our concept of complex dynamic order. Although it
is a continuum, in parts of the universe that sport a dramatically greater
amount of complex order than their surroundings, the feeling of such
surroundings is lost as imperceptible line noise. Thus, isolated selves.
I think stars feel, although I can't see how their feelings could be much more
interesting that those of a pot of boiling water.
The universe is more interesting. Since it is 'everything', it holds all the
complexity, all the order, all the chaos, all the information flow, everything
that you could relate to consciousness, or to interesting consciousness.
Yet, at a macro level, and at any timescale that can be humanly grasped, I
suspect the universe is a rather dumb thing. AFAIK, there is not a terribly
complex interplay going on between the top level parts, and I imagine
interesting subparts have independent consciousnesses of their own, that the
universe is essentially blind to: I don't think the universe is more aware of
us than we are of the neutrons in our bloodcells.
------
zaidf
I took one philosophy elective first semester of my undergrad and boy did it
screw me.
For the longest time I kept asking my friends "how can you prove to me THAT
tree is in fact a tree?" It was all part of realizing that current philosophy
is just a play on words. I do believe that once you understand that, you can
think beyond the frivolous debates.
------
mikhailfranco
Anyone for a philosophy start-up !
------
ww
The main purpose of philosophy is to find truth without exceptions. There are
people, like descarte, that spend their lives trying to find something that is
true, and then measure everything else within that truth
Metaphysics: What is true, without exceptions, about things that are not
physical or on the boundary of being physical. Ontology: What is true, without
exceptions, about existence (being) Epistemology: What is true, without
exceptions, about how you know what you know Ethics: What is true about the
way things ought to be, without exceptions.
Epistemology/Ontology/Metaphysics have provided lots of value for those that
love truth without exceptions.
If you read philosophers and try to see the problems they want to solve within
those branches of philosophy, ask yourself what are the exceptions. When you
try to battle with them, you will have the feeling of thinking you are the
first one to climb a large mountain, only to find a whole city at the top with
a lot of people saying, 'What took you so long to get here? PS here are the
_real_ mountains for you to climb!'
Is there anything that is true (epistemology)? If false, why have an essay? If
true, what is it?
A simple start, can a self refuting statement be true? Well the vast majority
of philosophers would tell you no. That is to say they would believe the
following statement to be true:
1) Self refuting statements are false or inscrutable.
So you have plenty of people in the world that deny (1). Philosophy allows the
Descarte types to relax when dealing with these people.
So lets take a Descarte truth based on (1). That would be:
2) I cannot doubt doubting.
Or in other words I do not have the ability to doubt my ability to doubt. Then
when someone says something like this:
4) If I am multiple pieces, I do not exist (?!) 5) Empirical data has shown
that I am multiple pieces (cells) 6) Therefore I do not exist
a descarte type doesn't waste brain energy on either (4) or (5) (or both).
To sum this up, philosophy is the domain of what is _necessarily_ the case.
Science (positivism) has nothing to say about this. That is what philosophy
brings to the table. But only a descarte type would enjoy this.
For programmers, an analogy could be said as lisp programmers laugh at the
'pattern circus' and the 'aspect oriented design' of other languages (which
basically fix what should not have been broken in the first place),
philosophers laught 10X as much at people that say things like 'I don't exist'
and 'there are no true statements' and wish that they could help them, but
know that some people love their circus so they let them have their fun.
------
yters
Godel was a Platonist.
------
mxetch
While I sympathize with some of this essay's points, I think its criticisms of
philosophy are largely unjustified. (Fair warning: I was a philosophy major in
college as well.)
Philosophy, at its best, is basically a study of the history of ideas. (Let's
set aside modern philosophy, especially the Continental variety, for now.)
This seems no more or less practical than any other kind of history, be it
military history or art history.
Let me address a few of Paul Graham's points.
First: "Few [philosophers] were sufficiently correct that people have
forgotten who discovered what they discovered." This is demonstrably false.
How many scientists understand their debt to Aristotle for being the first to
attempt a systematic categorization of the natural world? How many people
apply Ockham's Razor without knowing anything about the guy who came up with
it (other than his name)? How many programmers understand their debt to G.W.
Leibniz? How many Americans understand their debt to the many political
philosophers (Locke comes to mind) for their system of government? I could go
on and on.
Second: "Did studying logic teach me the importance of thinking [logically],
or make me any better at it? I don't know." Nevermind logic specifically, but
philosophy is widely regarded as an excellent pre-law major, and I know of at
least one SCOTUS justice (Breyer) who studied it. Now, maybe it's possible to
get the same training on one's own, but there doesn't seem to be a whole lot
of evidence that philosophy is failing to train rigorously critical thinkers.
Third: "Most philosophical debates are not merely afflicted by but driven by
confusions over words." Well, most philosophical debates that take place in a
freshman dorm under a haze of bong smoke are. Just kidding -- sort of. So the
"free will" debate has been beaten to death, and is basically a matter of
semantics. Who cares? Are Nietzsche's critiques of ethics just a matter of
confusion over words? I don't think so. Ditto the guys I mentioned above.
Fourth: Let's talk about Aristotle. So, Aristotle basically defined the
pursuit of science for two thousand years, and it didn't go as well as it has
since people decided to move beyond his paradigm. So should we treat Aristotle
like a bonehead? I don't think so. I could just as easily say that all
military history prior to the invention of gunpower is nothing but a catalogue
of hilarious errors rendered irrelevant by the first guy who was smart enough
to mix up a few simple chemicals and instantly consign all prior weapon
systems to the scrap heap. How could all those hundreds of previous
generations be so miserably dumb that they couldn't come up with this simple
formula? They actually wasted millennia doing nothing but hitting each other
with variations of the sharpened stick/rock/hunk of metal. Why should we waste
our time studying them, or worse yet, appreciating them? This is nothing but
"presentism."
Fifth: "And so instead of denouncing philosophy, most people who suspected it
was a waste of time just studied other things. That alone is fairly damning
evidence, considering philosophy's claims." So, it's damning evidence that
people who suspect a subject is useless just studied something else? Isn't
this true of almost all subjects that students aren't coercively forced to
study? Most people who suspect astronomy is a waste of time don't study it.
And indeed, I'm sure that describes most people. Is that evidence that all of
astronomy is b.s.?
Furthermore, this is supposed to be damning "considering philosophy's claims
[i.e., that it's] supposed to be about the ultimate truths." Who exactly made
this claim? Mr. Graham attributes this claim to philosophy itself, which is a
rather strange thing to do. As far as I know, this is the first time an
academic discipline has literally spoken for itself, something I thought
academic disciplines were not capable of doing. Does he mean that Aristotle
made this claim? If so, I should point out that until long, long after
Aristotle, the word "philosophy" was essentially synonymous with all study in
the pursuit of knowledge, and thus would include basically every discipline
taught in modern universities (except maybe some of the fine arts).
This is a straw man. Damning philosophy because it doesn't reveal the ultimate
truths of the universe is like damning capitalism because it doesn't make
everybody happy.
Now, it is true that "modern philosophy" finds itself with fewer and fewer
useful things to talk about. Most interesting fields of study have split off
into their own departments and disciplines. But most of what undergraduate
philosophy departments teach their students is really the history of ideas,
and that strikes me as a perfectly good and useful thing to study.
All best,
Max Menlo Park, CA.
------
flandry19
The comments below are intended to amplify and to ever so slightly change the
direction of some aspects of the presented essay.
Fundamental and central to the dissatisfaction that many people feel with
philosophy is the realization that it is not formal or concrete -- that it is
ultimately abstract and seems to be nothing more than 'word play' (semantics).
They study "process" since that seems to be all that can be done.
The author writes: "that the concepts we use in everyday life are fuzzy, and
break down if pushed too hard."
The trouble with this idea is that it hides incomplete assumptions. Concepts
are defined _as_much_ in terms of continuity as in symmetry. Saying that a
concept 'breaks down' in analysis is simply saying that the concept of
symmetry (a logical sameness while under conditions and contexts of the
applied analytic force) is not sufficient to fully contain the meaning of a
concept. That is true, but not a problem. The logic of continuity is as
complete in its own way as any formalisms based on symmetry. There is no
paradox in this; nothing is lost, and it is right that concepts be understood
in this more complete way. The /process/ of philosophy needs to be changed in
a certain way, a very different kind of discipline, equally as hard, than that
a mathematician would use.
For example, the "Ship of Theseus" paradox is a direct exploration of how the
notion of continuity must be included in the very basis of a notion of a
notion. If that were not enough evidence in this post, may I point out that it
is also possible to directly construct "barber" type paradoxes that show that
the notion of a concept of a particular type (ie, non-fuzzy) cannot somehow be
more basic than the notion of a concept itself.
Philosophy does have a strong and irreducible core of definite knowledge -- it
just does not happen to be widely known or taught in USA universities at this
time. Mostly I suspect that this is because philosophy _as_a_practice_ does
not have an obvious direct connection to bottom line profitability (ie, ideas
like "education is about business" -- "right intelligence/information is
success", etc). It is therefore treated as a 'has been' -- something for
people to do in their spare time, for reasons of interest and/or hobby.
Yet the connection of philosophy to practicality is (astonishingly) far more
real, powerful, and potent than 99.9% of the worlds people will _ever_
realize, because it /also/ happens to be so completely subtle and everywhere
pervasive. This means only that it will also be the most neglected,
particularly in younger civilizations (as ours is).
It has been observed that when a technology is truly powerful, it also tends
to be unobtrusive. In fact, some have proposed that the proper measure of the
power of a technology is in its unobtrusiveness. An advanced technolgy appears
as "magic" to an unknowing and primative people (A. C. Clark). Similarly,
philosophy is, if anything, much more subtle than the much more basic and
simpler forms of religion and contemporary politics. A Master of the Art can
move entire nations with the stroke of a pen, but such people are very rare
and unobtrusive themselves.
For an example of the forgoing, Consider the effect of the -- at that time
very novel -- ideas of "life, liberty, and the presuit of happness" (as
suggested by John Locke) on the historical development of the USA. These ideas
are so central to the way that we think and define our self identity now,
individially and nationally, that they are totally taken for granted. Yet
indirectly, one mans philosophy shaped the course and outcome of wars, and
indeed everything 300 million people do, in every practical business decision,
the world over. Go just a little farther and you find that the "love
philosophy" of one (presumed) man has affected billions more for far longer
(2000 years).
Although stated informally, _something_ about their ideas must somehow /feel/
true to /most/ people, regardless of context -- a definite indication that
'something is up' and should be considered carefully. Although an examination
of the logical form of their philosophical assertions does not hold up using
ordinary mathematical logic, something about them makes them very pervasive
and influential -- a power that like any other in nature, must be somewhere
connected to a real truth. A different kind of discipline is needed to
discover these connections, not just a different type of domain knowledge.
Q: How is it that a handful of gurus/buddahs in ancient history can have
effects so far out of proportion to the scope of their lives? A: In one form
or another, they all taught philosophy that had at least some, possibly
unknown, connection to a real truth of nature and life.
Q: Is philosophy practical? A: Yes. It is at once very subtle and very
powerful -- nearly invisible and yet when 'right', nearly invincible. These
are all notions based inherently in foundations of continuity.
Asking for philosophy to be "practical" and to "have effects" is like asking
all the worlds oceans to be "wet". Why should 'wetness' be a more defining
characteristic of a "good ocean" than any other? Even the question itself is
connected to deeper assumed truths in philosophy.
For the record, I would like it to be known that I do also definitely agree
that Sturgeon's law applies to the nearly total current state of Western
philosophy. For my own part, to get anywhere with it I have had to start from
scratch -- examining the root ideas and assumptions behind science and
spirituality to get anywhere at all. At this point, I am glad I did because I
can assert with the absolute confidence of owned rigorous proofs that 1) Kant
(and others) were wrong about metaphysics, 2) that is possible (and
necessary!) to positively and exactly define things like a non-relativistic
ethics, and 3) that the fully self describing "auto bootstraping" system of
concepts is known and does currently exist explicitly (as would be inherent in
any true 'system of metaphysics'). There is nothing 'fuzzy' about a root
analysis of the inherent assumptions behind all the 'fuzzy' usages of meaning
in everyday languages. But do _not_ expect the sort of concepts that provide a
the very basis for everyday logic to look like ordinary logic either --
different protocols of thinking are required. Continuity is as fundamental a
notion as symmetry. Again for the record, I note that the basis of these ideas
have absolutely no connection to religion or faith, although the net effect of
them tends to validate a lot of things most world religions tend to take on
faith.
Those who have the eyes to see will see; all others will be blinded or live in
darkness.
Regards, Forrest Landry, Apr 19, 2008, San Deigo, CA.
------
brianfrank
This is great! I just wrote a similar essay on
<http://blog.openconceptual.com/> proposing a 'philosophy of enterprise,'
which also served as an introduction to the work of Alfred North Whitehead --
a philosopher with a mathematical background who wasn't fooled by the supposed
certainty of abstractions:
"Philosophy has been misled by the example of mathematics; and even in
mathematics the statement of the ultimate logical principles is beset by
difficulties, as yet insuperable. The verification of a rationalistic scheme
is to be sought in its general success, and not in the peculiar certainty, or
initial clarity, of its first principles." "The position of metaphysics in the
development of culture cannot be understood without remembering that no verbal
statement is the adequate expression of a proposition."
Whitehead (who was an early collaborator of Russell's) made these statements
while Wittgenstein was a schoolteacher and Russell was still enthralled with
his early work, which W. himself later rejected in favour of the ideas he is
now (justly) celebrated for.
Whitehead's lack of a legacy in professional philosophy is partly due to the
fact that he felt it was nevertheless necessary to articulate a sort of
heuristic metaphysical framework -- which few professional philosophers have
been interested in tangling with [actually, it's been pretty roundly
criticized; I meant that philosophers aren't interested in countering or
improving it] (for reasons PG points out in the essay).
By making such an attempt, he has much in common with Heidegger, who has
remained more widely read and cited than Whitehead perhaps (for another reason
pointed out by PG) because of his esoteric and unclear style. It's as if James
Joyce and Kurt Godel both composed universal cosmologies: whose do you think
would be more popular among later generations of young philosophers?
Whitehead also agreed with PG's attitude towards Aristotle's impractical
metaphysics: "Metaphysics is nothing but the description of the generalities
which apply to all the details of practice."
I think PG's "test of utility" has potential, but I think we should be careful
not to let it stray too far into an authoritative stance. (... while I try not
to stray into "word soup.") What I mean is that, above all, we should be doing
philosophy for ourselves but with others, in conversation. We may not get them
to "do something differently," but if we can get them to do something with us
(like discuss philosophy, as PG's essay has so effectily done here...), then
we've done enough (for the moment). I think if we start believing our ideas
are for other people's benefit -- that we somehow appreciate their needs and
wants better than they do -- we get into hazardous situations of resentment
and (ironically) competition.
My favourite "test of the value of any philosophy" (quoting John Dewey) is
Dewey's question, "Does it end in conclusions which, when they are referred
back to ordinary life-experiences and their predicaments, render them more
significant, more luminous to us, and make our dealings with them more
fruitful?"
That is roughly a more general formulation of PG's test -- only without the
requirement of having someone else read it -- which (correct me if I'm wrong)
sort of demonstrates PG's proposal: it was useful in getting me to act
differently (or at least getting me to act), which I did by "cranking up the
generality" -- to apply not just to written philosophies but any kind of idea
or insight. (Now we wait and see how useful my [I mean Dewey's] philosophy
is...)
And I fully agree with the last comment: we're just beginning to learn.
------
francoisp
First, to Paul: I have really enjoyed a lot of your essays; most are very
insightful and/or motivational, keep up the good work. I have to ask, what's
up with the word wrap? On one hand the articles are formatted for a 80 lines
terminal, and the comments do not render OK on my 1920*1280?
I have been reflecting along the same lines for a while, here are few
thoughts, if anyone is interested.
Philosophy is constructed from two words and could be translated literarily
from Greek as: love of knowledge. This implies a "lover", and from this
individuality in the act I see flowing a lot of the problems you describe.
From my understanding, Wittgenstein main point is: "meaning is usage". This is
a generalization that is a centrality of philosophy itself; Russell alludes to
it in "the problems with philosophy" as he sets the reader on a quest to right
something that can't be.
Here's my reasoning: since no two person can use a word in exactly the same
way, the inherent imprecision of language and of philosophy as a construction
is a feature not a bug, a v.useful one still; ever had this epiphany moment of
having a great idea because you misunderstood someone?
If you set off to generalize enough on practical philosophy, I guess you get
to the wisdom expressed in sayings and in illustrations; they convey by high
bandwidth a particular pattern of analysis from one individual to another one
that seeks wisdom, but one would be hard pressed to call receiving (as in
"idee recues") sayings as a philosophical endeavor.
The way I now see philosophy is it's a quest to a personal worldview acquired
through a personal love for knowledge. It cannot be exact nor absolutely true
unless you're a dictator or a cult leader. This is why the idea and "ideators"
are so closely associated; people talk about A.Rand because through her
constructed world view she gives an ethic that have seducing finalities;
however as you point out, objectivism as she conceived it cannot be perceived
again by a human being let alone brought to new heights.
I find that reading inherently imprecise philosophical material can give very
strong insights exactly because of the words are soft, and impact each unique
individual in a different way. The ones that are not purposefully unreadable
that is (Foucault?), in this I agree with you. "I", as my existing uniquely
individual self, personally agree with you; another unique entity that defines
itself as an ensemble of cells and electric currents. Seriously, I find it
rather unconvincing that because you cannot pinpoint self, or soul, you negate
something as evident as individuality, from which "I" choses to defines
itself. I guess this fits "l'air du temps", ref Dawkins, Pinker and co. It has
the smell of groupthink tho.
(BTW, evilmonkey your comment got me ROTFL)
Best regards, Francois Payette
~~~
rms
He thinks that 80 character widths are inherently more readable on a screen.
~~~
euccastro
That doesn't explain the ridiculous width of this page. This is a problem
specific to this thread, caused by a comment which contains a very long line
without whitespace.
------
lst
...loving wisdom!
------
lst
Do you know that Darwinism is becoming more and more obsolete? It's not me
saying this, but many major scientiscts.
The only reason for Darwinism still to exist is because of the atheists. But
atheists are extreme - an intelligent human should leave the question open,
and not stupidly deny something nobody can really know by reasoning (since God
is transcendent by definition).
~~~
rms
You mean that evolutionary theory is becoming more refined over time. This
makes the case for science, not the theistic God of the Hebrews.
~~~
lst
I mean that there are two different things which can be confused easily:
evolution and adaption/assimilation/conformation.
Many things that seem to confirm evolution could in fact be of the second
group cited above.
~~~
twinings
I have heard this evolution versus adaption/assimilation/conformation argument
before, from a very religious person. Their idea is that evolution may be
happening on a small and limited scale, but no further than that. They don't
want to think about the more long-term and general implications of the theory.
That is - if small adaptations can occur over a few years, what might happen
over millions of years?
Assuming the earth is only 6,000 years old there isn't enough time for animals
to evolve. All that can be seen are some minor "adaptations".
~~~
lst
Religion apart, only a fundamentalistic person would say that the earth is
only 6,000 years old.
The problem is not earth, but animals. The real problem is that 'millions of
years' period. Anybody can make up a nice theory involving 'millions of
years'. But how do you prove it? You can't. That's the real question and real
problem with the evolution theory. It's only a theory which nobody can prove.
(But a time machine would certainly help :)
~~~
twinings
What problem do you have with 'millions of years'?
Forget about proof. Just consider this: Imagine small changes, occurring
continuously over millions of years. Would they still be 'small' changes after
a while? Of course not. They would be small_changes * millions_of_years =
big_changes
Or do you disagree that millions of years passed?
~~~
lst
I don't have personally any problem with 'millions of years', and I don't say
that the evolution theory is wrong, but for me it simply stays a nice theory,
which can't be proven, and which isn't able to explain everything.
I do believe that the universe is millions of millions of years old, but I
also believe that the humans arrived last (much later than any animal). And
that humans have many attributes which can't be explained by an evolution
theory.
Please offer me something more intelligent, I simply refute to think that some
monkey thought by himself: "And now let's develop/incubate/whatever self
consciousness, to be finally real humans!". Sorry, but that's too stupid.
~~~
rabagley
Evolution is an observed fact and even religious leaders 150 years ago did not
argue this. Natural Selection is a theory which explains, without reference to
any supernatural agent, how evolution might have happened. Darwin didn't posit
evolution as it wasn't a subject that was very exciting. It happened, everyone
agrees.
Natural Selection, on the other hand, is more than just a hypothesis (you're
using the word "theory" incorrectly). It (with refinements) is one of the most
widely established explanations for all of the observed phenomena of lineages,
species differences. It also made a number of testable predictions that have
since been borne out (it predicted DNA, among other things). More recently,
natural selection has led to the development of new sciences, like
evolutionary biology, evolutionary psychology, evolutionary linguistics, etc.
which are taking our understanding of biology and behavior further than ever.
Evolution is a fact. Natural Selection is a theory (and not a hypothesis). No
scientists are "moving away" from natural selection. Anyone who told you that
is uninformed or lying.
~~~
lst
> Evolution is an observed fact [...]
Has it been 'observed' for a few years or for millions of years ;)
Again, it can't be observed for a period that would be sufficiently long to
really prove for evidence.
Hence it's still a theory, sorry.
(Most 'scientists' need to learn philosophy, especially the greek one. It
would help very much to understand logic, and to understand terms like
'theory'.)
------
prakash
I couldn't read beyond the first section...let me know when the cliff's notes
version is available and if its worth reading?
~~~
icey
How is it possible you had enough energy to type such a pointless complaint,
but you couldn't be bothered to read a couple of pages?
Would pictures help? Maybe some cartoon animals sounding out the words for
you?
~~~
prakash
lol.
I am big PG fan, but the non-startup articles don't appeal to me, this in
particular.
~~~
davidw
Fair enough, but please, no 'lol'ing here. Remember:
loll: To hang extended from the mouth, as the tongue of an ox or a dog when
heated with labor or exertion.
~~~
gwenhwyfaer
Plus it makes you sound like qwe1234. We don't do that here, either.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Court to Grandma: You Shouldn't Lose Your House Just Because Your Son Sold Weed - DiabloD3
http://reason.com/blog/2017/05/30/court-to-grandma-you-shouldnt-lose-your
======
Tyrannosaur
Glad the courts are doing something. Civil forfeiture is one of the most
horrifying abuses of police power and very directly contrary to the
Constitution; one of the reasons the American Revolution happened in the first
place!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
White riot - RileyKyeden
http://www.vox.com/2016/9/19/12933072/far-right-white-riot-trump-brexit
======
RileyKyeden
The title doesn't do the article justice. It's an attempt to figure out how
modern politics happened, and it's convincing.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Metaprogramming with ECMAScript 6 proxies - riccardoforina
http://www.2ality.com/2014/12/es6-proxies.html
======
AnkhMorporkian
This is huge.
var proto = new Proxy({}, {
get(target, propertyKey, receiver) {
console.log('GET '+propertyKey);
return target[propertyKey];
}});
I've been following ES6 pretty closely, but somehow I missed this huge
feature. Don't get me wrong, I love generators and destructuring, but this is
soooo cool.
~~~
Offler
Getters have been in JS since ES5 and can do what you just wrote. Obv Proxy is
more powerful/has more traps.
~~~
rauschma
Not completely: with getters, you have to decide on a specific set of
properties, the proxy GET trap intercepts all get operations. But I agree that
you don’t always need proxies.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
How Justin Kan fundraises - lukasschwab
https://blog.atrium.co/behind-the-scenes-how-justin-kan-fundraises-6bae1003aabe
======
birken
Story time: In early 2012, the startup I was working for, Thumbtack, had
struggled for 6-8 months to raise a Series A but finally got to the finish
line. Around the same time, Justin Kan co-founded a company called Exec, and
within a few months raised a "party round" that was nearly as much as our
Series A, with a valuation twice as high. Our company was years old and had
serious traction, Kan's company had done essentially nothing. At the time it
was a quite upsetting turn of events.
But there was a valuable lesson... How Justin Kan fundraises is irrelevant for
you and me, because we aren't Justin Kan. There was no rational basis for Exec
to have been worth so much at that time, but when you are Justin Kan that
isn't relevant. And look, good for the Justin Kans of the world who can take
advantage of that, but that doesn't mean it is helpful advice for the rest of
us.
I can say from experience that going into VC meetings with a bunch of false
bravado, hoping to "hold the tension" and out-negotiate the VCs is mostly
irrelevant advice. By far the most important thing for the average founder is
getting the VCs to look up from their phones and care or be interested in your
pitch, which isn't going to happen unless you've created the right fundraising
dynamic for your company.
One of my favorite Paul Graham essays of all time, "How To Raise Money" [1],
fully captures what my experience was in the fundraising realm, both when it
went well and when it went poorly. I'd point you there for more practical
advice.
1: [http://paulgraham.com/fr.html](http://paulgraham.com/fr.html)
~~~
jacquesm
Exactly. It's FOMO rather than anything tangible, which can work quite well as
long as you don't mess up completely.
Anybody remember color.com?
[https://www.fastcompany.com/3002341/color-failed-what-
happen...](https://www.fastcompany.com/3002341/color-failed-what-happens-
its-41-million)
I don't think Bill Nguyen would be able to repeat that sort of raise.
~~~
pwaai
I find that a lot of articles shared on HN along the lines of "This is how you
do X" conveniently cherry picks anecdotes from the perspective of an
individual blind to their own intrinsic edge and attempts to generalize which
poses many problems for the average reader.
For example, charging people before you make a software product. Very rarely
can you convince someone you never met over the phone or email to give you
money for something that doesn't exist yet but this is apparently what you
need to do as an average joe.
~~~
tebugst
I never understand one point. I am using bunch of paid services and many free
services. For paid services, I am paying from first day but in case of free
services when they start charging I find alternatives.
------
sethbannon
Dangerous advice. From the article: "if a VC sends a follow-up email asking
factual questions, they’re already emotionally uninterested. Many
entrepreneurs get caught up in this process: they send the VC a fact and
citation, which the VC nitpicks, etc., but it’s already too late. The
entrepreneur has failed by not creating the type of confidence necessary to
de-risk the investment."
If you want investors that actually understand what you do generally, or even
better yet understand what you do on a technical level, this is terrible
advice to follow. Investors literally become co-owners of your company, and
there is no easy way to get rid of them. Raising from the right people slowly
is better than raising from just anyone fast. It's a positive sign when
investors actually dig in with real substantive questions after thinking
things over, and an indication of how thoughtful they'll be as co-owners.
~~~
lpolovets
As an investor, I agree with you and disagree with the article. I dig in with
factual questions _because_ I'm excited, not because I'm not. If I'm not
interested, that's when I pass instead of asking questions.
FWIW the real truth is somewhere in the middle: some investors invest based on
their gut, and if they _are_ asking factual questions then that means they are
not emotionally interested enough. Other investors invest based on their
brain, and if they _are not_ asking factual questions then that means they are
not intellectually interested enough. (Or your presentation answered all of
their questions, which is very rare.) Interpreting the actions of both
investors in the same way is a mistake.
~~~
keithwhor
Hey Leo,
There's probably no objective truth, but let me offer a perspective: a founder
sees 1 founder (themselves) and 100 VCs and a VC sees 100 founders and 1 VC.
In the same way you look for patterns in founders, teams, products and markets
to determine who to invest in, founders look for patterns in VCs to see who's
likely to invest. A useful and common pattern founders pick up on is VC tire
kicking: the ones who are interested enough to dig in but not excited enough
to invest immediately. Asking questions in a meeting is one thing, but
following up in an e-mail with an itemized list of; "how do you think about
[x], what about [y] competitor, have you thought about [z]" is a surefire
indicator that an investor's not willing to move _right now_ (not enough
confidence in founder, team, product or market) and, as a founder, you need to
move on.
So you may sit here and proclaim, "hey, this advice isn't accurate, because I
ask questions when I'm interested!" Well... yeah, sure. There's (1) selection
bias involved, you're a well-known VC and you're likely meeting with, on
average, more experienced founders (by the time a first-time founder gets to
you they may have been through an accelerator, faced tens of rejections or
more, etc.) and this can lead to more mature relationship building, and (2)
for every 1 in 100 founders you invest in this way, you passed on the other
99, making _you_ one of _their_ 99 they need to pattern match and learn from.
Viewed through this lens, founders should _absolutely_ take this advice to
heart. If you, as an investor, _really wanted_ to invest in a founder and they
snubbed you a bit after a follow up question (not rudely, they just have to
choose where to focus), would you suddenly lose interest, or would you pursue
a great deal / great opportunity? I have a hard time believing you'd let
somebody you thought was the next Zuck walk out of the room without a term
sheet. Founders should try to find the investor who thinks they're the next
"Zuck", or some reasonable facsimile of such given the product and market.
Hope that helps clarify. I've seen friends put through the ringer by getting
too caught up in the weeds with VCs that clearly weren't interested, or were
tire-kicking. Can happen to amazing founders and it's wildly distracting.
~~~
lpolovets
First, thanks for the thoughtful reply. Second, I agree that sometimes VCs
aren't that interested but still waste a founder's time. That really sucks. I
also agree with you that I have much more data on founder behavior vs.
investor behavior because I rarely work with other investors directly.
Inversely, founders often have a better view of investor behavior.
Where my opinions differ:
> Asking questions in a meeting is one thing, but following up in an e-mail
> with an itemized list of; "how do you think about [x], what about [y]
> competitor, have you thought about [z]" is a surefire indicator that an
> investor's not willing to move right now
That's not true in my case, and also not true for many funds I sometimes share
notes with (w/the founder's permission). I often see Q&A email exchanges that
either the founder or an investor in a startup forwards to me. So I can see
firsthand that other investors are asking email questions (and then making
investments), too.
Furthermore, how much follow-up there is depends on check size. If someone is
investing $15k or $50k as an angel, they might make a decision after a single
meeting because that meeting is often their sole shot to meaningfully interact
with a founder. But if a fund is writing a $400k or $1m check, more diligence
will be required. My fund can't write a $1m check just because I really hit it
off with someone. That would be extremely irresponsible financially.
Similarly, a founder shouldn't take a $1m check from me (or any other
investor) without doing some of their own due diligence.
> For every 1 in 100 founders you invest in this way, you passed on the other
> 99
Yes, but if most investors (esp. funds) want to do more diligence, and you
have to go through more diligence to be the 1 in a 100, then avoiding
investors who want to do more diligence means you might not end up _anyone 's_
1 in a 100. A crude dating analogy: a typical person might need to go on a
date with 100 people to find their life partner. But if you set a filter like
"if you want a second date before deciding whether we should get married then
you obviously don't like me that much," then you might end up filtering out
most or all of your suitable partners.
> If you, as an investor, really wanted to invest in a founder and they
> snubbed you a bit after a follow up question (not rudely, they just have to
> choose where to focus), would you suddenly lose interest, or would you
> pursue a great deal / great opportunity?
It depends. If I already want to invest, then being snubbed would give me
pause, but I would probably continue trying to make the investment work. If I
wasn't sure I wanted to invest, then being snubbed would make it much less
likely that I'd try to invest. Whether you're a founder or an investor, how
someone treats you during the diligence/courtship process is a decent
indicator of what working with them will be like after the investment. Working
together might be worse than the preview, but in my experience it's very
unlikely to be better.
> I have a hard time believing you'd let somebody you thought was the next
> Zuck walk out of the room without a term sheet.
FWIW, my fund has made ~65 investments in the last 5+ years. Exactly one of
those investment offers was made during the first meeting while the founder
was in the room. The majority of investments took 2-4 meetings, a few email
questions between meetings, and several reference calls. From what I know,
most funds that write $250k+ checks work in a similar manner.
> I've seen friends put through the ringer by getting too caught up in the
> weeds with VCs that clearly weren't interested, or were tire-kicking. Can
> happen to amazing founders and it's wildly distracting.
100% agree here. This behavior really upsets me.
~~~
keithwhor
> FWIW, my fund has made ~65 investments in the last 5+ years. Exactly one of
> those investment offers was made during the first meeting while the founder
> was in the room. The majority of investments took 2-4 meetings, a few email
> questions between meetings, and several reference calls. From what I know,
> most funds that write $250k+ checks work in a similar manner.
Sure: but let's dig in. I'm interested. Out of those 65 investments, how many
did you explicitly lead? Sure: the majority took 2-4 meetings. But...
(1) What's a meeting to you? Keep in mind that your Principals and / or
Associates conducting meetings and diligence should not qualify as meetings.
If it's not with a GP it's not really a fundraising meeting and no founder
should reasonably consider it such. Yes, I'm adding a semantic layer here, but
this semantic layer is _extremely_ important to founder psychology and how we
classify meetings, fundraising success and more.
(2) How many of these investments had a term sheet _after only one_ meeting?
Not necessarily with the founder in the room, but this is, for all intents and
purposes, functionally equivalent to an investment offer made in the room?
On top of that, is the a correlation between _leading_ an investment round and
a fewer number of meetings with a founding team before investing? My intuition
based on my own experience and anecdotes of other founders would be that there
_should be_ a correlation - happy to be wrong, though.
Also, out of the investments that took "2-4 meetings", did the founders ever
roadblock you from investing (i.e. it's a meeting but the founder "isn't
fundraising"?) - because this is pretty common (some use it as a tactic but
often it's just flat out true), in which case "2-4 meetings" isn't actually
"2-4 _fundraising_ meetings." If a founder is at this stage, they don't need
this Medium Article's advice: they've already developed the maturity to
execute upon a fundraising strategy, you just might not see it due to
selection and / or survivorship bias (seems natural, and just how things are
done). In fact, they're executing the latter part of the strategy outlined
here (have found a lead via "focus", or relatively confident in their ability
to receive a term sheet when they pull the fundraising trigger).
We're really pulling apart the fabric at the seams here: there's a reason this
article isn't a hundred pages or more, which is realistically the volume of
information a founder has to internalize while they're developing their own
understanding of the fundraising and investment landscape. They'll also find
their experience to be very personal. This advice is meant as a launchpad, and
I think it's a good starting point for novice founders.
If I were to give advice to new founders (and I do get asked occasionally, but
I'm literally _nowhere close_ to a celebrity fundraiser and still a fledgling
entrepreneur) it's, "I still don't understand fundraising. Just be yourself
and build something you're passionate about, have confidence, be persistent,
be kind, and the right people will come along. You'll probably trick yourself
into thinking you understand something about the process, but realistically,
fundraising is just about people and relationships, and shit is messy. Be
humble and thankful, and try not to waste too much time discussing fundraising
strategy with investors on Hacker News."
Disclaimer: I often don't follow my own advice.
~~~
confiscate
Better example. Imagine, as an investor:
\- an Early Stage, pre-traction startup gave a pitch to you at a meeting
\- you came out feeling "default not invest" (i.e. if nothing new happens you
won't invest)
\- you later emailed them a Factual question
\- they replied with an elaborate Graph/Pie/Chart with lots of numbers to
clarify some detail, that the founders decided were not important enough to be
in the original pitch
\- that Graph/Pie/Chart turned you from "no" to "yes"
when was the last time that happend?
~~~
lpolovets
Good question. Speaking just for me: if I leave feeling "default not invest"
then I will just write a pass email. If I leave feeling interested but wanting
to know more, that's when I will ask more questions. If it's 2-5 questions,
it'll probably be over email. If it's >5, I'll probably suggest a quick call
instead.
Factual answers have sometimes swayed me in a positive direction when I'm
skeptical about some number or claim and the founder's answer is strong and
changes my mind. They've also swayed me in a negative direction when I'm
skeptical or confused about something and a so-so answer takes me from a
"maybe" to a "no".
~~~
confiscate
Interesting, thanks for the clarification
------
mfringel
How much of this is relevant to other people who are not Justin Kan?
~~~
tw1010
Just learn to emulate his mannerisms. Fake it till you make it.
~~~
teej
Hard to fake a billion dollar exit.
~~~
pedalpete
Isn't it multiple billion dollar exits?
~~~
pkaye
What were the other major exits other than twitch.tv?
~~~
syassami
cruise.
~~~
irq11
He had nothing to do with Cruise.
~~~
TaylorGood
He was in Cruise seed round.
(Cruise was funded entirely by Vogt and a small circle of investors, including
Kan and other Twitch veterans.)
~~~
irq11
There were lots of people in Cruise’s seed round.
Justin founded Justin.tv and Exec. Justin.tv became Socialcam and Twitch.
------
kyleschiller
It's worth noting that Atrium's Series A had a mind-boggling 92 investors [0].
Read the article out of curiosity, but understand that this was in no way a
normal process.
[0] [https://www.crunchbase.com/funding_round/atrium-lts-
series-a...](https://www.crunchbase.com/funding_round/atrium-lts-series-a--
8f3868a1#section-overview)
~~~
tedmiston
> It's worth noting that Atrium's Series A had a mind-boggling 92 investors
> [0].
In the article somewhere it suggested that Justin was more or less testing the
waters and getting investors interested as future customers in their product.
It sounds like a weird mix between sales and fundraising, but a smart
interesting one none the less.
If 100 investors write $50k checks, it's a small amount of money to them
compared to the value the legal automation software could potentially deliver.
100 * $50k = $5M let's say for 20% of the company --> $25M round for them.
Numbers are hypothetical but that'd be a pretty big A round. I bet he didn't
just raise $10M off that many checks.
------
fatjokes
Still an interesting read, but should be framed less as advice and more as a
day-in-the-life piece on a rockstar founder with a lot of cred.
------
philfrasty
Klaus raised the money, Justin is just the mascot
------
keithwhor
> Consistently, if a VC sends a follow-up email asking factual questions,
> they’re already emotionally uninterested. Many entrepreneurs get caught up
> in this process: they send the VC a fact and citation, which the VC
> nitpicks, etc., but it’s already too late.
One million times this. Especially for entrepreneurs (like myself) with an
engineering background, this is something that’s hard to grasp intuitively at
first. If you’re asked for financial projections, for example, it’s already
over. You can win that investor over more reliably by following up a month
later with, “[famous Angel investor] joined our round,” than responding with a
spreadsheet.
I’m nowhere near Justin Kan’s level of experience and expertise, but another
favorite piece of advice it can take some time to internalize is: “if you
didn’t get a term sheet, it wasn’t a good meeting.”
This doesn’t mean investors dislike you or won’t invest if you don’t get a
term sheet right away. It’s that when you find an investor highly aligned and
/ or motivated to invest, they will move quickly, like sub-24h quickly. The
easiest way to burn yourself out as an entrepreneur is getting too attached to
“not good meetings”, with “but I really like that firm!” Or “and they were so
nice and understood our business!” You’ll drive yourself nuts wondering why
everybody says nice things and yet nobody wants to invest.
The saying is not that it’s a _BAD_ meeting if there’s no term sheet, just
that it wasn’t a _good_ meeting. Stay grounded. It can be a long journey.
Remember: actions speak louder than words, always, and the fundamental action
an investor can take to show support is to invest.
[Edit] I will add that, in my own experience, investors can be all over the
map and there’s actually no such thing as “one size fits all” fundraising
advice. Fundraising is a hyperpersonal activity that’s just as much about
relationship building as anything else, if not moreso. You’ll want your first
checks from investors that don’t fuck around (see above advice) and who are
willing to bet on you. As you grow as an entrepreneur and become more
confident in your ability to build relationships and “bullshit detect”, you’ll
become more comfortable with long term relationships. In my admittedly limited
experience, the people who spend time with you and learn to appreciate you and
your business before they invest are _the most valuable_ to both your bottom
line and personal psychology.
But, hey, the above one size fits all advice is still a good launchpad :). If
you’re starting your fundraising journey, good luck, it’s a hell of a ride but
if you’re deeply passionate about your business it is more than worth it!
~~~
jacquesm
I work with quite a few (European, not SV) investors and while with some
investors follow on questions might indicate dis-interest I have never seen a
case of that. Asking for follow on questions is usually done after an internal
discussion between partners has taken place and whoever is champion of the
deal has been asked questions to which they did not yet have the answers.
Almost all deals that I've seen that eventually were closed had quite a bit of
back-and-forth over details like that prior to agreeing on terms.
------
maxcan
Hi everyone, I'm Max and I run AI at Atrium. @birken's point is absolutely
correct that having sold a previous startup for nearly 1B really is a big part
of what makes this strategy viable.
But, on a completely unrelated note, if you're an experienced ML engineer and
you want to help distrupt one of the most needing-to-be-disrupted-stodgy-old-
industries there is as part of a very fast growing team, drop me a note: max
<AT> atrium.co.
------
beambot
Justin's previous article was much more helpful on SeriesA strategy & tactics:
[https://blog.atrium.co/the-founders-guide-to-raising-a-
serie...](https://blog.atrium.co/the-founders-guide-to-raising-a-series-a-
venture-financing-1de4f5aff312)
------
lisabethhan
Hey, I'm Lisa @ Atrium - here to answer any questions.
I run our fundraising bootcamp Atrium Academy w/Justin to help founders meet
the right investors and raise a great Series A.
Check it out/Apply here for our next one in March: www.atrium.co/academy
~~~
jacquesm
Maybe it would be good to apply some 'star power' discounts here and there,
what works for Justin most likely will not work in the same way or even at all
for others. Justin has the pick of the litter when it comes to raising funding
and some of the advice given really does not translate to 'the real world' of
founders doing their first raise.
~~~
lisabethhan
Hey Jacques, you're absolutely right given Justin's background.
We started Atrium Academy to help democratize the fundraising process for
founders (ie. speaking with first time founders who just raised their Series
A, reviewing pitch decks and narratives with mentors, being matched with
recommended investors based on industry and expertise)
~~~
scotthtaylor
So you're introducers, taking a 5% fee?
~~~
lisabethhan
Hey Scott,
Atrium Academy doesn't take any fees, or charge any money. Our mission is to
help founders by offering free, educational workshops for the startup
community.
Check it out here: atrium.co/academy
------
rdlecler1
As someone who has been on both sides of the table, this article is basically
irrelevant for 99.9% of founders. There is an HOV lane for successful
entrepreneurs that the rest of us don’t get to take.
------
sharemywin
what if startups got appraisals like real estate. As well as "subject to"
appraisals like property that needs repairs.
So, I'd value the company at X but, I'd value the company at X+Y if you added
a new phd in XYZ or a CTO from a fortune 1000 company or if you add this many
new accounts in this time frame.
~~~
rstephenson2
You can do that, and often times debt providers will attach those sorts of
provisions: "we'll lend you X and you can keep it as long as you achieve Y or
maintain Z". One of the challenges with that is that you can set up domino
effects where you miss one goal, and then as a result you don't get the money
you need to hit the next and it spirals downwards.
~~~
tedmiston
I've been in a company like this and know of others — it's a real pain point
when those metrics that funding is tied to turned out to be less relevant than
you initially thought or distraction more than true traction indicators. For
example, measuring the number of sessions a user has in your app vs the amount
of engaged time per user.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
U.S. students score below international averages in math, reading and science - tokenadult
http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_24640781/u-s-students-score-below-international-averages-math
======
tokenadult
Reporting on the same study findings by the _Washington Post:_
[http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/us-students-
la...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/us-students-lag-around-
average-on-international-science-math-and-reading-
test/2013/12/02/2e510f26-5b92-11e3-a49b-90a0e156254b_story.html)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Facebook to Exempt Opinion and Satire from Fact-Checking - tareqak
https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-to-create-fact-checking-exemptions-for-opinion-and-satire-11569875314?mod=rsswn
======
ratsmack
It would be difficult for me to trust fact-checking by a profit driven company
where the facts may be biased to fit their business model. On top of that, you
have the political and religious biases of people directly involved in
establishing these "facts". I think people would be foolish to blindly accept
this without verifying for themselves, from multiple sources, what is being
conveyed.
------
not_a_cop75
The best way to know about how good Facebook fact checking is will be to see
what terrible facts about Facebook they are willing to admit are actually
true. Since I doubt Facebook has the stomach to be honest, judging from their
congressional hearings, we can treat their official fact checking as
officially worthless.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
"We Gained Hope" The Story of Lilly Grossmans Genome - tuxguy
http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/11/we-gained-hope-the-story-of-lilly-grossmans-genome/
======
tuxguy
Another account : [http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/mar/09/genome-
genetics-D...](http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/mar/09/genome-genetics-DNA-
topol-sequence/)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Show HN: Digital Carburetor Synchronizer (C, Swift) - zilvinassebeika
https://github.com/zilberas/CarbSync
======
joncrane
Just wanted to say the real interesting content is in the writing here:
[https://treatwell.engineering/how-i-made-a-digital-
carburett...](https://treatwell.engineering/how-i-made-a-digital-carburettor-
synchroniser-9ece7fa571fb)
I see you mentioned the Honda CB750 which also had 4 independent carbs.
I once had a CB750C and while grateful that the throttles all open with one
shaft, the carbs still had to be synced. I actually never got around to it and
ended up selling the bike without tuning it up properly.
I love your commitment to getting your bike working properly. A very fun read.
Thank you and congratulations.
~~~
zilvinassebeika
As far as I understand, the only thing you can adjust on CB750 carbs is idle
mixture on each carb. Yes, they have to be tuned, but that has nothing to do
with syncing. If you had problems with your cabs - you had clothed jets or
passages most probably.
I’m glad you found my post helpful, tho. Let’s keep wrenching!
~~~
dwater
They made the CB750 for 35 years with many different types of carbs. I had a
1971 or 72 for a while and you could perform a standard sync of the carbs.
There were screws on the shaft or something like that.
------
taborj
Syncing carbs is an art. This is pretty interest to see how to inject a bit of
science into it.
When syncing the dual SU carbs on my MG, the "traditional" way is to take a
length of tube, remove the air cleaners, fire up the engine, then stick the
tube inside the end of the carb. Take the other end and put it near your ear;
you'll hear the airflow. Now stick the tube into the other carb. If it sounds
the same, you're pretty close. Turns out the ear is pretty sensitive to
detecting the changes.
I also have a "bubble-type" or "SU type" tool[0] that you put over the ends,
and the vacuum moves a little ball in a tube.
[0] Similar to this:
[https://www.jbugs.com/product/5746.html](https://www.jbugs.com/product/5746.html)
~~~
kjs3
I did the same on my MG. Buddy of mine used to so it on his Jaguar V-12 XKE
with Zenith-Stromberg carbs...took a couple of hours to get it right. :-)
~~~
taborj
Those Jag V12s are so cool, though. Carbs as far as the eye can see....
------
biggieshellz
Question on your RPM: You should see one pulse for every 2 crank revolutions,
right? So if you measure 600 pulses per minute, that's really 1200 RPM, right?
~~~
zilvinassebeika
Yes, I thought that this might be the case. But actually, one revolution of
the crankshaft should make one pulse - piston going down and up creates one
sin wave. And I’m counting only peaks at the top.
~~~
biggieshellz
But the piston going down and up doesn't make a pulse. On a four-stroke
engine, the pulse is generated when the intake valve opens, which happens once
per two crank revolutions. When the piston goes down and up for the power and
exhaust strokes, no pulse is generated, since the intake valve is closed. (On
a two-stroke engine, you would have one pulse per crank revolution.)
~~~
zilvinassebeika
Ahh, you’re right! Well, that’s an easy fix. Thank you.
------
halbritt
I was just about to write, "where the hell was this when I had my GL1000?" and
then I read the story about how the author developed it for a GL1000.
Great bike.
~~~
zilvinassebeika
Great bike indeed.
~~~
halbritt
Now you'll need to track down one of those superchargers.
Have you ever seen the Lars Nielsen build?
------
wolrah
Insert old-school mechanics grumbling about how now there's a computer
involved in tuning carburetors.
Seriously though, neat project. Personally I'm a "carbs are for weed whackers"
guy and would have just seen having to sync four of them as a good reason to
swap to EFI, but for those who insist on using vacuum-powered voodoo to fuel
their engines this is pretty cool and seems like it'd drastically simplify a
very tedious process.
~~~
olyjohn
Fuel injected cars with ITBs still need to be sync'd up too!
~~~
wolrah
Originally I had something about it possibly being useful for that in my post,
but I'm only loosely familiar with ITBs through the E46 BMW community so I
wasn't sure enough. I think those ones use a single shaft straight through so
they don't need synchronization.
------
ehnto
This reminds me of my recent quest for an affordable after-market ECU. I
really expected to find a bustling open source community of DIY ECU units with
the advent of affordable micro-boards. But I think the work required and real
risk of damage to expensive property might keep the barrier to entry high
enough that it's yet to happen.
~~~
schwap
Have you come across MegaSquirt[1]? The most recent iterations are neither
inexpensive nor DIY but the earlier versions are still made as well.
[1] [http://www.msextra.com/product-range/traditional-
megasquirt/](http://www.msextra.com/product-range/traditional-megasquirt/)
~~~
ehnto
Those look pretty good, I'll have to dig in a bit deeper! At first glance, it
looks like it might be a bit of a run around getting one to work with MAF and
CAS sensors, but pretty much every other ECU wants a MAP sensor anyway so it
wouldn't be a bad time to switch.
I had heard of them but I thought they were a Miata specific ECU replacement
not a general purpose one.
------
varikin
That is amazing. I have '80 CX500 myself which I have neglected to sync the
carbs on. I just bench sync the two when I need to pull the carbs off.
~~~
zilvinassebeika
Oh yeah, I miss CX500. I never had a problem with the carbs on it tho.
------
mgarfias
Nifty. But i do wonder why goto the trouble when megasquirt is viable?
~~~
zilvinassebeika
:) for fun only!
------
creeble
Need it for my 4-cyl Yamaha outboard.
Now I need to find those sensors...
~~~
zilvinassebeika
The software works on any bike. Buy the hardware parts (super cheap) and
you’re ready to go!
~~~
olyjohn
Cool project! Might have to try this when I get ready to tune my dual Weber
DCOEs in a few months!
~~~
zilvinassebeika
Nice to hear that. What engine you have?
~~~
olyjohn
It's a 1987 Honda Prelude engine, 1.8 liter, 12-valve engine. It came from the
factory with dual Keihin CV carburetors, very similar to the GL1000 carbs
(except only 2 of them). I had a very hard time finding parts to rebuild them,
so I found a conversion manifold and purchased some new DCOEs to bolt onto it.
~~~
zilvinassebeika
Cool! I heard about Weber conversion kits for GL1000 also. But since I’m
pretty happy with the original Keihen setup, and currently found spare carbs
(with original Keihen jets inside!) - I’ll try to stick to those.
------
XnoiVeX
Finally some real HN content! Has anyone else noticed a drop in the quality of
submissions recently?
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Show HN: All YouTube Videos Mentioned on Hacker News and Stack Overflow - guohuang
http://dev-videos.com
======
guohuang
While we are analyzing data for
[http://toptalkedbooks.com](http://toptalkedbooks.com), we realized there are
a lot of youtube links mentioned in the comments, therefore we put together
this website to show all of the videos. HN videos are updated daily, SO videos
are updated weekly. We are also working on tutorials for developers, stay
tunned! Thank You!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Alice Goffman’s Heralded Book on Crime Is Disputed - lermontov
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/06/books/alice-goffmans-heralded-book-on-crime-disputed.html
======
erikpukinskis
Glad to see people doing fact checking. But none of this looks like a smoking
gun to me. Some people are skeptical of her, is all I can really take from
this.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Research shows: walking through doorways causes forgetting - ankeshk
http://newsinfo.nd.edu/news/27476-walking-through-doorways-causes-forgetting-new-research-shows/
======
bradleyland
When I was younger, I worked a summer at a small engine repair shop (really
fun job, btw). Between the shop and the parts room, there was a small corridor
with doors on either end. We called it the "Hall of Dumb", because as soon as
you walked through there, you'd inevitably forget what you were going to get.
------
gojomo
This is why all the rooms of my Memory Palace are connected by windows. Or
slides.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_palace>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Visual Analytics of Instagram’s #gopro Hashtag with AI - shanky238
http://blog.paralleldots.com/product/visual-analytics-instagrams-gopro-hashtag-ai/?utm_source=forum&utm_medium=group_post&utm_campaign=Hacker%20News%20
======
pretzelboo
Cool stuff!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Pure Profit, a look at swoopo.com - olefoo
http://theecakescraps.wordpress.com/2008/09/25/pure-profit-a-look-at-swoop/
======
rw
"Paraphrased Swoopo business plan in short: find 10 people to give us $10 each
and one of them will get this $20 gift card. Repeat."
Please refer to: insurance policies, lotteries.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: What happened to Steve Yegge after 'quitting' - topherjaynes
The recent "I'm coding 180 websites' post inspired me to get a group of friends to commit to set aside some time for study hall to work on things once a week--hopefully more often. I used Steve's OsConn talk (google Steve Yegge Quits)to help show the value of study hall hours. Curious to know if anyone has heard an update on his goal of study hall hours everyday for an hour to learn math. Surprised there isn't a follow up talk, post or rant to that talk. Or have you had any success setting aside set time to work on side projects or just to learn something?
======
losvedir
He didn't quit. See his post:
[http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2011/07/hacker-news-fires-
st...](http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2011/07/hacker-news-fires-steve-
yegge.html)
"Hacker News Fires Steve Yegge" which is about how everyone misinterpreted
what he said.
~~~
topherjaynes
yea that's why I threw the '' around quit. I don't think there was a
misinterpretation at all. He did quit. He just wasn't specific to say that he
was only quitting the so called cat projects and I'm just interested in how
that's going. Did the study hall pay off and such.
------
incision
_> "Or have you had any success setting aside set time to work on side
projects or just to learn something?"_
Yes.
Several months ago I decided to get serious about re-aligning my career and
the pursuit of a degree.
Creating a structured plan with a schedule and specific goals has been the
most important part. Setting aside time is part of that.
I think treating my development more formally has been a huge help.
~~~
dominotw
I recently enrolled in a local Uni as a freshman. You are right about treating
development more formally, you just have to switch 'development' brain off. I
was curious what kind of structured plan you have, is it just you daily
schedule or something more long term?
~~~
incision
_> "I recently enrolled in a local Uni as a freshman."_
Same here.
_> "I was curious what kind of structured plan you have, is it just you daily
schedule or something more long term?"_
It's mostly longer term on a scale of months to one year or several in the
case of the degree.
For example, one goal is working through the entirety of Introduction to
Algorithms [0]. I've set out dates by section for reading, completing problem
sets and reviews. I've written these dates out along with my reasons for
pursuing the goal and how I believe I will benefit from achieving it.
That might sound simple, but taking the time think these things through, and
articulate them into something concrete was certainly useful to me.
This isn't the kind of thing I'd have done historically, but I've been trying
to stay very open-minded to _anything_ that might help me reach the goals I've
set. I follow the same process for any significant new goal.
I make a point to take (hand written) notes on everything I work on. At least
once a week, I whiteboard what I've been reading or working on. There are
going to gaps or things I completely blank on which become items for further
review in the coming week.
I have yet to settle with a calendar or to-do app which I really like, for the
moment, all these dates and tasks are either in a notebook I use daily or on
my whiteboard for emphasis.
As much as possible, I try to create "artifacts" from the way I'm spending
time. This can be notes, a quick summary of what I got from reading a chapter
or article or an attempt at implementing something I read about.
I have a solid routine for my days made pretty necessary between my job and
small child, but each day isn't entirely planned. I keep a shortlist of things
that I work on in the same set of windows (early morning, commute, at work in
the gaps, before bed) each day. I've cut out most anything that isn't family,
work or study.
One thing I aim to stay strictly consistent about is waking (5:00). This gives
me a little "extra" time before I wake my child up.
0:
[http://www.amazon.com/dp/0262033844/](http://www.amazon.com/dp/0262033844/)
~~~
dominotw
>> I make a point to take (hand written) notes on everything I work on.
I was not doing this intially thinking I dont have write down stuff if I
understand it, Only to be completely lost and having to read and understand it
all over again. Now I write everything down too.
I wish you all the best.
------
topherjaynes
[video]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKmQW_Nkfk8](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKmQW_Nkfk8)
(13:50 is the Study Hall)
------
has207
The next blog post he posted a few months later was all about how he spent the
last few months playing this video game. Well, not entirely, there was a dig
at google+ in there as well. But I'm guessing the study hall didn't happen...
Too bad too, because I also felt very inspired by his "I quit" speech and was
looking forward to a follow up.
------
ngd
He did a talk about Project Grok, a piece of internal Google infrastructure he
created, back in April at an Emacs conference:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRO3dNJx5Dw](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRO3dNJx5Dw)
------
damontal
So he actually quit his job at Google in that speech, and not just some cat-
picture project?
~~~
riggins
He didn't quit his job. He even wrote a follow up about how HN had
misinterpreted what he said.
[http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2011/07/hacker-news-fires-
st...](http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2011/07/hacker-news-fires-steve-
yegge.html)
Separately, he also wrote a post that was critical of Google+ (he accidentally
published publically what was supposed to be an internal post). He wrote a
follow-up to that too saying nothing bad happened to him at Google.
------
_pmf_
As soon as his leaked piece on Google+ appeared, it was pretty much to be
expected that he will be terminated (use whatever softer sounding euphemism
you like). You can't just throw feces at your coworkers in public view and
expect to be kept in the company.
~~~
jsolson
That may have been some people's expectation, but as his public G+ page
says[0], he still works at Google. Sergey called his piece a 'night-time
aid'[1]. Also Steve's take on it [2].
That said, the OP was talking about his OSCON talk (check out from ~minute 13
onward):
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKmQW_Nkfk8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKmQW_Nkfk8)
[0]:
[https://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts](https://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts)
[1]: [http://www.nbcsandiego.com/blogs/press-here/Sergey-Brin-
Stev...](http://www.nbcsandiego.com/blogs/press-here/Sergey-Brin-Steve-Yegge-
Not-Fired-But-Hes-a-Windbag-132256573.html)
[2]:
[https://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts/AaygmbzV...](https://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts/AaygmbzVeRq)
------
varelse
Steve Yegge is 100% talk and no action. He wants to go cure cancer? Well then
dive right in and join the fight! I'm sure he has Google lucky megabucks so
what he does with his remaining time on Earth is entirely up to his whims.
Those whims seem to be telling him to stay in his Google glass menagerie and
enjoy what his keepers feed him and taking time to play and extensively
critique _Borderlands_. And that's a fine and understandable hacker hedonist
strategy, but please, STFU about "curing cancer" etc. (unless he's going to
get in the ring(tm), which I seriously doubt he ever will).
But to be fair, I've seen this happen to a few of my friends who hit it big,
and I think it explains why there are so few Elon Musks and James Camerons
among us. Once Maslov's hierarchy has been topped off, it's like the
insatiable drive to achieve that made that possible just evaporates.
~~~
michaelwww
Having just watched the video (YouTube: vKmQW_Nkfk8) I feel nothing you say
takes anything away from what he said. Most of us, including Steve, get caught
up in short term goals and many of us indulge in some sort of entertaining
distraction from thinking about hard problems. That's why we're not the next
Elon Musk or Steve Jobs. Even if I take your word for it, that you know Steve
Yegge and have many friends who hit it big, how do their failings (which are
also most of ours) detract from the ideal?
~~~
varelse
I'm not attacking his words, he's an eloquent guy.
But I'm personally not into motivational speeches, I'm a hard-core believer in
follow-through and results (and little else). And while that has problems of
its own, they're not the same ones as all talk and no action.
~~~
michaelwww
He actually has been working on a big data analysis problem for the last four
years, which is presumably why he was asked to speak, so your characterization
of him as all talk and no action is incorrect
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTJs-0EInW8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTJs-0EInW8)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Discrete Arctan in 6502 - dustmop
http://www.dustmop.io/blog/2015/07/22/discrete-arctan-in-6502/
======
Udo
This is very clever. I remember first coming across this problem a long time
ago when improvising my first "vector"-based program on the 286, which I
programmed in Pascal at the time. My "solution" was to pre-calculate the
values and throw them into a lookup table - which in hindsight was pretty
clumsy compared to this.
~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
If you have the memory, a lookup table is a perfectly reasonable solution.
------
GFK_of_xmaspast
Isn't this exactly the kind of situation you'd use a CORDIC for?
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Introducing U-SQL, a language for big data processing - mrry
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/visualstudio/archive/2015/09/28/introducing-u-sql.aspx
======
hacker_9
Product looks good.. apart from the most important point from a dev point of
view - the syntax!
They created a new query language but didn't change the syntax at all from
SQL?? Why does every database product seem to think SELECT FROM is the be all
end all? Ok they bolted on C# Linq, and you can reference other assemblies,
but these are OLD ideas, and the combination/love-child of these ideas looks
horrible.
For example writing SELECT before FROM is a massive productivity problem -
mainly because the computer doesn't know what you are doing _until_ you write
the _FROM table_ part, before it can finally auto-suggest column names for
you.
Don't write _SELECT col1, col2 FROM {table}_ , but how about _FROM {table}
Select col1, col2, etc_.
Second problem with the syntax is it isn't modular: combine 4 tables together
and get data from each and you have something like this:
SELECT a.col1, a.col2, b.col5, b.col1, a.col3, c.col5
FROM a
JOIN b on etc
JOIN c on etc
What if I want to remove the join to table B, I have to modify the syntax
quite extensively. (First comment out parts of the select, then get rid of the
from - but this breaks the 'join c', so I need to repeat this process
again..).
What if each from-select was it's _own piece of code_ \- revolutionary I know.
FROM a
SELECT col1, col2, col3
JOIN
(FROM b
SELECT [3]col5, col1)
ON etc
JOIN
(FROM c
SELECT col5)
ON etc
Indenting is used to quickly show which table joined to which. If I want to
just run table A, then I highlight the top 2 lines of code and run. Or for
table B the 4th and 5th etc, you get the idea. The _[3]_ syntax is used to
tell SQL not to append the columns to table A, but insert starting from column
3.
This is what I thought of in 10 minutes, I'm sure there's some holes but
already I like it better than the crappy SQL syntax I have to read every day
at work :(
~~~
cwyers
I think your chained, tab-indented from-select structure is the worst idea
ever conceived of by mankind, and the only purpose I can think of for it is
you want to encourage my carpel-tunnel to flare up again. So much extra
verbosity added to the standard SQL of writing that query for no additional
clarity. (And you still need the from! Just comment out one line and two
columns, it's no harder than commenting out the weird syntax you've come up
with.)
Which is not to say that SQL can't be improved upon, but the amount of
improvement you'd need to make to make it worth learning a different query
language is I think higher than the benefits you can get from improving SQL,
especially if you're not going to radically remake it, because being 80% SQL
is worse than being 0% SQL because you keep running up against the principle
of least surprise not working.
~~~
hacker_9
Hilarious that your argument is your carpel-tunnel - Look at the code again
and you'll see it's laid out so the computer can _fill in the information for
you_ = less typing. By typing the FROM first, the whole next SELECT statement
can be auto added with a single key (perhaps `). Or you can write the SELECT
yourself, but only have to type the first char of each column name before the
IDE auto completes it.
The tab structure shows you at a glance what tables join to what (not uncommon
to see this parent-child in XML for example, or you know, any other
programming language ever).
Your last point is void - just look at C#, Java, C++, Go and so on. All reuse
keywords for different purposes. It's not hard to switch context in your head
depending on the language.
------
guard-of-terra
So, it's a glorified awk over .csv files?
I think that we as Open Source community can do better than that. We just have
to make a product out of sort, join, awk, grep - not meaning making a wrapper
over them but rather taking inspiration.
I did a great amount of medium-to-big data crunching in command line, and it's
usually okay. There are still some pain points:
\- Selecting by list of ids specified in one of columns.
\- Joining two files together by field (you want them to be sorted on it
obviously)
------
joshuaellinger
Interesting extensions.
The nice part of the syntax is that: 1\. it is clear when you are going
external. 2\. procedural code can be written in C# -- big win there.
But it misses the two big issues in ETL that I always run into:
1. You have a bunch files that are 95% the same but have 2-5 columns that are different.
2. Someone sticks the wrong type of data a field.
For those issues, you'd be better off mapping a file (or a group of files) to
a virtual table so you can specify the schema up front.
~~~
M_Rys_Msft
Actually U-SQL gives you the ability to map files to a virtual table (aka view
:)).
CREATE VIEW V AS EXTRACT <insert schema here> FROM "/a/b/{*}.csv" USING
Extractors.Csv();
If the data is more complex, you can write your own Extractors that for
example handle the divergence in columns. Although we are planning on some
features here in the future.
------
Olap84
Interesting to see ETL extensions to (T-)SQL. I wonder if we will see anybody
else offer some? (Come on Postgres!)
~~~
pella
for PostgreSQL check the "Foreign data wrappers" \+ "IMPORT FOREIGN SCHEMA"
...
* [http://blog.taadeem.net/english/2015/03/15/70_Shades_of_Post...](http://blog.taadeem.net/english/2015/03/15/70_Shades_of_Postgres/)
* [https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FDW?nocache=1](https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FDW?nocache=1)
------
cbsmith
Man, does this look a lot like Pig. Why not just use Pig?
~~~
M_Rys_Msft
Because Pig's overall adoption is low. 80% of Hadoop jobs last time I checked
were written in Hive.
Besides Pig's extensibility story is not that good.
But I am glad you like Pig, because Pig is supported in the system as well :).
~~~
cbsmith
> Because Pig's overall adoption is low. 80% of Hadoop jobs last time I
> checked were written in Hive.
Yeah, but putting another name on it doesn't seem likely to change that, does
it?
> Besides Pig's extensibility story is not that good.
Really? I consider it far more extensible than say Hive....
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
What Is Sub-Surface Laser Engraving or a 'Bubblegram'? Technology Explained - peter_d_sherman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOrby692Uag
======
peter_d_sherman
Excerpt from Thom1218's comments on YouTube:
"The lasers in these machines HAVE to be pulsed, using a method called
Q-switching to obtain high peak-power pulses that can couple their energy into
otherwise transparent material. These pulses, incidentally, are in the
megawatt range and over a very short time span, usually a number of nano
seconds. These lasers use several IR diode lasers to "pump" a Nd:YAG laser
crystal, which is frequency doubled from 1024nm to 532nm (green) in order to
be able to pass into the glass target object. Interestingly, this laser
technique is used in tattoo removal machines to penetrate skin and oblate sub
dermal ink . CO2 lasers can do a continuous etch on glass because glass is
opaque to the near IR long wavelength of CO2 lasers, and therefore they can
only etch the surface. Also, because glass is opaque to CO2, more energy is
transferred directly to the glass, rather than passing through it, which
allows the CO2 laser to remain in CW operation (continuous wave, i.e. not
Q-switched). So, the operators of these bubblegram machines do not have the
option to do a "continuous blast". However, using fewer dots/bubblegram will
shorten processing time and wear on the laser components."
My thoughts: Absolutely fascinating!
Also, I wonder if it would be possible to condition glass in some way to act
as a transistor, whether optical, electrical, or for some other particle/wave
phenomena. Like maybe lead glass, or other glass which contains metal
particles in it -- would change its waveguide properties at points where a
laser etched it... thus, maybe it might be possible to etch some kind of
transistor (for a specific wavelength/wave phenomena) into it...
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
First Recall of Food Item in India – Nestle Maggi Noodles - srathi
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Centre-pulls-plug-on-Maggi-in-first-recall-of-food-item-in-India/articleshow/47560836.cms
======
chrisjohn93
Nestle know the value of Indian market and he doing what ever they can do to
stay in Indian Market. After few months all the packets again they sold in
Indian Market with help of Ministers.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Startup Depression - arcware
http://arcware.net/startup-depression/
======
thaumaturgy
Man, I hear you. I've been going through a lot of the same, although without
the additional (major) challenge of supporting a family. I find that sometimes
it's good to have someone tell me the stuff that I already sort of know, but
aren't willing to face:
\- If your wife and kids are the most important part of your life, then you
must do what's best for them. I grew up with a parent for whom that wasn't
quite true, and our relationship suffered later on. Your kids know when you're
stressed out or angry or depressed, and they won't understand why you're
making the decisions that you are. So, if you have an opportunity to bring
stability and happiness into your life by taking a regular job, _take it_ for
pete'ssake. Please. Really, you'll be happier, and if you still have an itch
to scratch, do it in your spare time.
\- With your skill set, it is entirely possible that you could take a regular
job, and then pay someone else to maintain your projects (bug fixes, basic
upgrades, etc.), _and still come out ahead_. I know I consider doing this all
the time: I could probably move, get a job paying significantly more than I'm
making now, and pay someone to manage my business in its current location, and
still have more money than I have now. I am an idiot for not doing this; the
world doesn't need two of us. :-)
\- Your customers will understand, or they aren't people that you need to be
prioritizing over your own family anyway. And again: just because you're
taking a regular job, doesn't mean that your products or services need to
disappear overnight.
\- There is nothing glamorous or heroic or glorious about what you're doing
now. It's a shit-show. If you have your ego tied up in "pulling through this
despite all the odds", _let go of that_.
And finally: on your site, I think you should showcase your products
immediately below the header, instead of "Latest Blog Posts" and "Get Our
Newsletter". I was a little confused about what it was you actually did when I
visited your site.
Best of luck to you. My email's in my profile.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
What is the best way to get notified of Hacker News follow up comments? - ececconi
I've tried looking online but there doesn't seem to be much discussion on this topic. How do most people keep up with responses to their comments? Do most people just scroll down the threads section or do they use an external application?
======
Mz
<http://hnnotify.com/>
~~~
ececconi
Thanks!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Google claims to have achieved “quantum supremacy” - blue_devil
https://futurism.com/the-byte/google-achieved-quantum-supremacy
======
blue_devil
Paper: [https://www.docdroid.net/h9oBikj/quantum-supremacy-using-
a-p...](https://www.docdroid.net/h9oBikj/quantum-supremacy-using-a-
programmable-superconducting-processor.pdf)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
How to Make a Documentary About Sampling- Legally - frossie
http://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2010/03/how-to-make-a-documentary-about-sampling-legally/38189/
======
ebun
How atrocious is this: George Clinton got sued for sampling his own music. If
that's not a sign that the licensing system needs to be changed, I don't know
what is.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
TornadoGists.org - collecting github gists related to TornadoWeb - peterbe
http://tornadogists.org
======
clofresh
Github project is here: <https://github.com/peterbe/tornado_gists>
------
peterbe
Just launched this.
------
felinxlee
Good job, cheers!
------
FSX
Looks neat.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Helios Burn – A REST Fault Injection Platform - jonasrosland
https://github.com/emccode/HeliosBurn
======
adrianmo
Most web services expose an API to facilitate access to their resources, and
there is a tendency to over-rely on these services that is extended to the
software. With HeliosBurn we aim to provide developers with a fault injection
platform that will enable them to identify and prevent failures before
deploying the software into a production environment
------
module0000
Helios Burn developer here if anyone has questions about this software. It's
new, nifty, and there isn't much like it that already exists.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Chinese hacked CNN (sportsillustrated.cnn.com) - zelcon
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/
======
lode
No one is hacked here.
sportsillustrated.cnn.com is a CNAME record to cnnsi.com
cnnsi.com used to be the website for CNN Sports Illustrated, the sports
channel that was a joint venture between CNN and Sports Illustrated
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_Sports_Illustrated](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CNN_Sports_Illustrated))
between 1996 and 2002. Sports Illustrated lives at www.si.com
At some point the domain cnnsi.com was not renewed, expired and was re-
registered on May 1, 2015. It seems CNN just forgot to remove an old alias.
------
ominous
It has been like that for a while it seems:
[https://web.archive.org/web/*/sportsillustrated.cnn.com](https://web.archive.org/web/*/sportsillustrated.cnn.com)
June 2014 was the last time it had CNN content.
~~~
zelcon
Yeah, noticed this as well. How can CNN be so oblivious this long? I think the
hacker used it to advertise their little web host firm.
------
zelcon
[http://archive.is/uWx6c](http://archive.is/uWx6c)
[http://archive.is/Wyucp](http://archive.is/Wyucp)
[http://archive.is/sSZxU](http://archive.is/sSZxU)
------
csandreasen
This is an installation banner, as in: "You've successfully installed LNMP"
From the LNMP GitHub page:
This script is written using the shell, in order to quickly
deployLEMP/LAMP/LNMP/LNMPA(Linux, Nginx/Tengine/OpenResty, MySQL in a
production environment/MariaDB/Percona, PHP), applicable to CentOS
5~7(including redhat), Debian 6~8, Ubuntu 12~15 of 32 and 64.
[https://github.com/lj2007331/lnmp](https://github.com/lj2007331/lnmp)
------
breakingcups
Could this just be a DNS issue, pointing at the wrong server or something?
~~~
robinduckett
This is definitely a DNS issue.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Once upon a time, memory allocators made sense - dchest
https://github.com/Tarsnap/libcperciva/commit/cabe5fca76f6c38f872ea4a5967458e6f3bfe054
======
david-given
Plus, of course, a lot of modern systems use memory overcommit --- if you ask
the OS for memory, it gives you uninitialised address space, and it only
allocates pages of physical RAM the first time you touch each page of address
space.
This has two effects:
(a) malloc() never returns NULL. It always returns a valid address, even
though your system may have out of memory.
(b) by the time the kernel finds out that it's run out of physical pages, your
process is already trying to use that memory... which means there's no way for
your process to cope gracefully. You have to trust the kernel to do the right
thing (either to scavenge a page from elsewhere, or to kill a process to make
space). If you're _very_ lucky, it'll send you a SIGSEGV...
~~~
joosters
As other people are commenting, malloc can still return NULL, but the critical
point here is that even if you handle the NULL cases, you will still miss the
other situations where your process runs out of memory. In short, if the OS
over-commits RAM, it is impossible for a program to safely handle out of
memory situations.
One reason why overcommit is popular is because of fork(). Imagine a process
that does malloc(lots of memory), then forks and execs a tiny program
(/bin/true or something like it). If the fork() call succeeds, this means the
OS has guaranteed that all the memory in the child process is available to be
written over. i.e. it has had to allocate 'lots of memory' x 2 in total, even
if only 'lots of memory' x 1 will actually be used.
Without overcommit, fork() can fail even if the system won't ever use anywhere
close to the limit of RAM+swap space.
~~~
JoeAltmaier
I with you on the no-point-checking-for-malloc-fail issue. It has to be done
in every place, or it rarely is effective. My old colleage Mike Rowe used to
call it "Putting an altimeter on your car. So if you drive over a cliff, you
can see how far it is to the ground."
~~~
joosters
Definitely. In practice, it's impossible to do correctly. Even _if_ your own
code gets every malloc() correct (and also properly checks the return code of
every syscall and library call that might fail due to lack of memory), you
still have to trust that every library you use is also perfectly written and
handles its memory failures just as perfectly. It'll never happen.
~~~
JoeAltmaier
There's just one place that it makes sense: for _very_ large buffers. If they
fail, it doesn't mean the system is doomed. So it doesn't hurt to check that
video-frame buffer alloc, or that file-decompression buffer. But for any of
the small change (anything within orders of magnitude of the mean allocation
size) its pointless.
------
jheriko
erm... allocating zero was never a good idea. it had varying behaviours on
varying platforms for as long as i could remember and was one of those special
cases to avoid.
the allocators didn't necessary even meet the alignment specification
either... even if the documents said they did. i remember reading that malloc
on windows would return things on 8-byte boundaries only to find pointers
ending in 4 (rather than 0 or 8) coming out of it...
and as many have pointed out returning null may or may not happen in a number
of situations. i've seen it happen enough times when i ask for too much memory
to believe that it is a useful fail case to check for...
~~~
cperciva
_erm... allocating zero was never a good idea. it had varying behaviours on
varying platforms for as long as i could remember and was one of those special
cases to avoid._
No, allocating zero bytes is a perfectly reasonable thing to do, as long as
you remember that NULL is not necessarily an allocation failure.
if (((buf = malloc(buflen)) == NULL) && (buflen > 0))
goto OUTOFMEMORY;
is perfectly good code.
~~~
jheriko
thats not even close to reasoning imo, its just an assertion.
... but i agree that the code is safer if you check for bad cases.
i can't see why allocating zero ever is more sensible than not doing it at all
(and therefore avoiding even having to know about this problem, much less deal
with it).
------
kazinator
The fix is to wrap malloc and friends with your own routines.
You can have it so that "my_malloc" always returns NULL on a zero length
object. Or, if you prefer, so that it always returns a unique pointer:
void *my_malloc(size_t size)
{
return size ? malloc(size) : 0; /* option A */
}
void *my_malloc(size_t size)
{
return malloc(size ? size : 1); /* option B */
}
And you can make my_realloc have the nice freeing behavior:
void *my_realloc(void *ptr, size_t size)
{
return (ptr && size)
? realloc(ptr, size)
: !ptr
? my_malloc(size)
: (free(ptr), 0);
}
Note how we still carefully implement a parallel requirement to the one in ISO
C. Namely that my_realloc(NULL, size) calls my_malloc(size), regardless of
size, just like realloc(NULL, size) is required to be equivalent to
malloc(size). We want all the routines in this allocator to be drop-in
replacements such that any code which is written to the ISO C allocator spec
can be blindly retargetted to use them.
Pretty much any serious C program, if indeed it doesn't have an entire
allocator of its own, at least wraps the standard one, for the sake of more
uniform behaviors, as well as easy retargettability to embedded scenarios.
(Not only embedded machines, but say, embedding in a larger application, where
you are told "you must use this table of funtion pointers as your allocator"
and it doesn't quite look like malloc: zero allocations are not allowed,
realloc is missing, ...)
In this particular program, realloc is wrapped under a function called resize;
resize had to be patched not to rely on realloc(nonnull, 0), but users of
resize don't have to change. The programmer doesn't have to look for fifty
uses of resize to fix them. However, it's worth it to wrap the functions at a
lower level anyway, with an identical API.
The C library is far from perfect. Do not expect consistency, completeness,
beauty, symmetry and so on.
There are worse things in it than realloc(ptr, 0) not behaving in the neat way
that you would like. Oh such as:
isalpha(str[42]); // str is char array
being undefined behavior if char happens to be signed, and str[42] is
negative, because isalpha takes an int argument which is expected to hold a
positive byte value [0, UCHAR_MAX), and not char value. Whoooops!
~~~
klodolph
You can make my_realloc() simpler:
void *my_realloc(void *ptr, size_t size)
{
return size ? realloc(ptr, size) : (free(ptr), 0);
}
According to the C standard, realloc(NULL, size) is guaranteed to be
equivalent to malloc(size). From n1548 7.22.3.5 para 3:
> If ptr is a null pointer, the realloc function behaves like the malloc
> function for the specified size.
Also, free(0) is well-defined. From n1548 7.22.3.3 para 2:
> If ptr is a null pointer, no action occurs.
------
antirez
The fact when you reallocate you mean to trow the data away does not make
sense... In general the article seems honestly a bit confused in what it
states.
~~~
cperciva
realloc can change the size of a memory allocation and return the same
pointer.
~~~
antirez
What I mean is that, when you say:
> Unfortunately, some people are not sane, and have decided that it's equally
> valid for realloc(p, 0) to return NULL meaning-failure and _not free p_.
What you want is the following semantics:
char *my_old_vector = ... ; /* We created / allocated in some way. */
add_important_stuff_to(my_old_vector);
char *new_vector = realloc(my_old_vector,size+100);
if (new_vector == NULL) {
/* I still have the old vector and can recover. */
}
------
acqq
What I don't understand is why some programmers invest so much energy in using
realloc. When you know that for most cases realloc actually does a new alloc
and copy of the existing content, but has the corners of undefined or unwanted
behavior, why not doing it in your own function in a way that you fully (for
your needs) control?
~~~
acconsta
For large allocations, realloc can remap virtual memory instead of doing a
naive copy:
[http://blog.httrack.com/blog/2014/04/05/a-story-of-
realloc-a...](http://blog.httrack.com/blog/2014/04/05/a-story-of-realloc-and-
laziness/)
~~~
cperciva
And for small allocations, realloc can expand or shrink an allocation in-
place, because it knows where it is placing other memory allocations.
~~~
acqq
Yes. If the allocation block is 16 bytes for example, the string growing from
10 to 11, 12, 13 etc could still be on the same place.
But in which use cases are frequent reallocs actually needed, so much that you
can recognize the performance impact? I'd really like to know, as I personally
never had such problems. When the single allocations were too expensive I've
just used some kind of memory pool. For small stuff realloc is still more
expensive than just a few instructions on average when some pool is used.
~~~
cperciva
The classic example of frequent reallocs is this perl code:
$x .= $_ while (<>);
I believe this has been fixed now, but perl used to realloc for each append
operation, which resulted in O(N^2) time complexity if realloc didn't operate
in-place.
~~~
acqq
But I wouldn't expect of you to assume that a "every time realloc" should be
an optimal and at the same time a portable solution in such a case?
~~~
cperciva
No, I don't. If you look at the code in question, every time I expand an
allocation I at least double it.
~~~
acqq
I'd expect that such growth seldom allows the realloc to remain in-place
(unless it's the last thing allocated before and already in a big preallocated
chunk of the allocator)? Have you observed what you then get in your program?
Which allocator is used underneath?
~~~
cperciva
I haven't looked. I use whatever allocator is in libc anyway, so it will
depend on what platform you're running on.
At worst, using realloc produces the same results as malloc/memcpy/free. At
best, it might save a memcpy. No harm in giving it that flexibility.
------
bjornsing
To me it seems more reasonable to draw the insanity line at returning NULL for
a successful zero byte allocation.
(While it's true that dereferencing a pointer to a zero byte allocation should
probably trigger undefined behavior that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be
possible to do the != NULL test to see if the allocation was successful.)
~~~
akeruu
To me, the insanity is trying to allocate zero byte
~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
That's because you think of it as a special case, which it isn't. If you want
to store a string that's n bytes long, you need to allocate n bytes, so a
natural thing to write is, for example
dst.len=strlen(src);dst.buf=malloc(dst.len); --it's insanity if you need to
add a special case for strings of a specific length.
~~~
tbirdz
A standard C string will never be 0 bytes. There is the zero terminator at the
end of the string, so all strings will be at least 1 byte large.
~~~
carussell
The example is clearly forgoing the use of standard C strings for a char array
tagged with the length.
------
asveikau
This is way too hyperbolic. I don't know what specific "once upon a time"
period is being described. However malloc(0), realloc(NULL, x), and realloc(y,
0) has been a portability headache for as long as I have been writing C. None
of this is all that surprising.
~~~
klodolph
The behavior of realloc(NULL, x) is always equivalent to malloc(x) according
to the C standard. But yes, I never remember a time when malloc(0) or
realloc(y, 0) played nice.
~~~
asveikau
> The behavior of realloc(NULL, x) is always equivalent to malloc(x) according
> to the C standard.
AFAIK if you try to do this with even a fairly recent Microsoft libc it won't
work. I haven't checked the standards and history on this one, but keep in
mind it's been only a recent development that MS gives a crap about C99.
The idea that C89 did not mandate this makes sense to me because I remember
now-obsolete Unixes not liking this either.
[Edit: The MS documentation claims that it supports realloc(NULL, x) going
back quite a while. I know I've been bitten by it not doing that in the
current century, however...]
~~~
masklinn
> The idea that C89 did not mandate this makes sense to me because I remember
> now-obsolete Unixes not liking this either.
C89 did mandate this:
> If ptr is a null pointer, the realloc function behaves like the malloc
> function for the specified size.
C89 also mandated that realloc(ptr, 0) be equivalent to free(ptr), which was
removed in C99:
> If size is zero and ptr is not a null pointer, the object it points to is
> freed.
------
carussell
> So what happens if realloc(p, 0) fails? It's going to return NULL, since
> that's what realloc does if it fails; but should it also free the allocation
> p? The sane answer is yes
If realloc(p, 0) is a synonym for free(p), what does it mean for it to "also
free the allocation p" in the event of failure? Unpacking it, the statement
seems to be saying the same thing as, "if it fails, then what it should do is
to not fail".
~~~
cperciva
Freeing a memory allocation is guaranteed to never fail. Allocating zero bytes
can fail (with dumb C libraries). The question is "if realloc fails to
allocate zero bytes, should it still free the original allocation".
~~~
pcwalton
> Allocating zero bytes can fail (with dumb C libraries).
They might not be dumb; they might be forced into it to maintain compatibility
with buggy programs and/or configure scripts (e.g. [1]).
[1]:
[http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2013/01/15/1](http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2013/01/15/1)
~~~
cperciva
Unfortunately, as I wrote in the commit message which spawned this thread,
this just encourages people to write more buggy programs.
~~~
pcwalton
Or, more likely, it just encourages customers to abandon your alternative C
library in favor of glibc to avoid breaking configure scripts (which is what
forced musl's hand). I definitely think you're right in principle, but I can't
blame musl's author for bowing to market pressure any more than I can blame
Intel for sticking to x86 backwards compatibility.
------
kbart
I don't get it. For me it's always a simple logic: if you didn't have anything
(0 bytes) to allocate/reallocate you simply don't do that. Period. It's like
division by zero -- you always have to check if divisor is not equal to zero;
if it was -- skip division altogether.
~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
Except the semantics of a zero-length buffer are perfectly well-defined, while
the semantics of division by zero are not defined at all in the types commonly
used in computing. A proper comparison therefore would be addition, maybe,
which is also perfectly well-defined for zero operands. Do you special-case
"zero addition" in your code?
if(a==0){if(b==0){x=0;}else{x=b;}}else{if(b==0){x=a;}else{x=a+b;}} ?
~~~
kbart
I'd argue that zero-length buffer is far from "perfectly well-defined".
Quoting C99:
_" If the size of the space requested is zero, the behavior is
implementation- defined: either a null pointer is returned, or the behavior is
as if the size were some nonzero value, except that the returned pointer shall
not be used to access an object."_
To maintain my sanity as a C programmer, I steer away from "implementation
specific behavior" as much as possible, thus I prefer checking if buffer size
is non-zero before allocating.
~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
I am not talking about C, but about the abstract concept. C's implementation
is obviously kindof broken. Just as C would be broken if the behaviour of
"zero additions" was somehow "implementation defined". That doesn't mean that
something is fundamentally wrong with adding zero, it just means that you have
to work around a broken language.
~~~
kbart
The topic _is_ about C and I never said that such behavior is normal or
anticipated. It's one of many cases where C standard lacks concreteness and we
can only workaround such issues. In a perfect world, many things would be
different.
~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
Well, then I might have misread your comment. I thought you meant that "it's
just illogical to allocate 0 bytes anyway, just as it doesn't make sense to
divide by 0".
------
theseoafs
I don't know if the distinction between which behaviors are "sane" and
"insane" is a good one here. Evidently the only insane choice is to rebuff the
standard in your implementation of the core C memory management functions.
------
coldpie
The REAL problem here is C's garbage way of dealing with errors. NULL is
overloaded both to be a valid pointer and an error signal. In the author's
ideal world, how would a malloc failure be communicated?
~~~
scott_s
Null is not a valid pointer, though. It's a valid pointer _value_ , but it's
undefined to dereference such a pointer. If the purpose of malloc is to return
an address to usable memory, then null it outside of that range. Values
outside of the legal range of a function are fine for error conditions.
Because of that, null seems like a reasonable return value for error on
malloc: I could not allocate memory for you, which I indicate by returning an
address that you are not supposed to dereference.
However, I do agree it would be better if there was some other kind of error
condition, preferably something like the option type from various other
languages, or just an easy way to return multiple values like in Go. But C is
not that language.
~~~
dragontamer
> Null is not a valid pointer, though.
There are embedded systems out there (that have C compilers) that have
addresses at 0 actually. 8051 C programmers know what I'm talking about.
IIRC, 0 is totally an address when inside the Linux kernel as well. What else
do you call the first block of memory on a system?
Just because in userland the Linux Kernel pages memory to a very high-numbered
region does not mean that under all circumstances "0" is an invalid address.
The entire concept of "null == 0 == invalid" is an innate falsehood, an
abstraction brought about by the malloc function (that a lot of other
libraries have decided to copy).
But really, what do YOU call the first physical byte of RAM? Most systems I
know of... from 8051 all the way to even Linux Kernel... calls it 0.
~~~
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC
Nobody says that NULL has to be 0. C's NULL is just a pointer value that can
be compared for equality but can not be used for pointer arithmetic or be
dereferenced. Implementations commonly reserve some address (often 0) to
represent that pointer value, as that is just the most efficient way to do it
(rather than making pointers larger than the normal word size to be able to
represent the sentinel value)--also, object sizes are limited to one less than
the number of possible addresses anyway, simply because you can have objects
that are 0-sized.
~~~
avian
From the point of view of C, it seems that NULL is indeed always defined as 0.
At least according to the C FAQ:
[http://c-faq.com/null/machnon0.html](http://c-faq.com/null/machnon0.html)
It might be that the internal representation used by the compiler is
different, but from C a NULL pointer will always be equal to 0. See also:
[http://c-faq.com/null/ptrtest.html](http://c-faq.com/null/ptrtest.html)
~~~
masklinn
You're confusing a "null constant" and a null pointer. An integral 0 being
converted to a pointer at runtime is not required to be a null pointer, only
an integral 0 converted at compile time is.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Why Your Code's UX Matters - helloburin
http://blog.helloburin.com/post/48854595584/why-your-codes-ux-matters
======
ethicalsean
I always stress about readability, but I've never thought about the end-to-end
"experience" of using a class or API I've written before. I think framing it
in this way is helpful.
Here's a related article that floats the idea of "code usability":
<http://www.crossbrowser.net/97/code-usability/>
------
danso
The most profound adage I've learned about programming recently is: "You will
spend far more time reading your own code than writing it"...and this always
kicks in everytime I decide whether I should properly indent, name variables
according to their scope, and add properly formatted comments when needed.
With code-completion and relatively fast typing skills, you never regret or
remember the extra few seconds it takes to properly type something out...but
you'll always feel a slight blood pressure rise everytime you return to poorly
written code.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
What Teens Think of Email [infographic] - jameshicks
http://www.thetechscoop.net/2011/09/20/what-teens-think-of-email-infographic/
======
pacomerh
Yeah, understandable. Teens like to have conversations and email is not for
that. They don't want to set appointments or receive weekly emails from
something-weekly.com. Teens I know have tons of emails because every time they
want to join a new service/social network they don't remember their password
and create a new account :D.
------
Aron
Is there like an infografikster.com or something
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Bunnyhopping from the Programmer's Perspective - Artemis2
https://flafla2.github.io/2015/02/14/bunnyhop.html
======
jsprogrammer
Cross-posting my comment from reddit (had the article first):
Asheron's Call had a similar bug, although it took a while to be discovered.
There was a buried feature that allowed you to turn/rotate, your character by
clicking your mouse on the screen in certain locations. Your rotation speed
was controlled by how far from the origin the mouse was located and ramped up
to a capped rotation speed after a certain distance. The closer you were to
the origin, the slower your rotation speed. The game came out around 1998 when
most people were playing on 800x600 or maybe 1024x768 screens and since the
possible rotation speeds you could achieve were directly related to the pixel
width of the viewport, there was effectively a limit to the slowness of your
rotation. Fast forward half a decade and people are playing on dual 1600x1200
screens and you can now turn reeeally slow if you get your cursor in the right
position (and enabled the rarely used feature). Well, you could combine this
slow rotation with strafe-running to make your velocity vector scale out many
multiples of your normal run speed. In-game, other people viewed you as
essentially teleporting (game had slow updates and basic client-side
prediction) huge distances at a time. Not too long after this exploit was
found, they introduced a new game client (for other reasons) that didn't have
the mouse turn feature (I don't think anyone ever really used it in the
previous ~7 years), so it was no longer possible to use. My friend and I had
some fun nights on the PK server being able to just 'disappear' from a fight
at will.
~~~
jsprogrammer
Hmm, looks like something ate my line breaks and editing/deleting isn't
working...
~~~
louhike
You have to double them.
~~~
jsprogrammer
I tried that...about 10 times...
------
JoachimSchipper
Isn't this... just a bug? Good on the players for finding it, of course; and I
can even see the community agreeing to let everyone exploit bunnyhopping - but
_intentionally_ programming in this behaviour seems really odd to me.
~~~
clarry
It is now considered a feature, and there are entire maps & games built with a
focus on trick jumping. It's a fun thing to learn and it really opens up new
possibilities, even in maps that weren't specifically designed with trick
jumping in mind. For most games, it increases the skill cap, thus adding
depth...
I am so used to bunny hopping that I feel handicapped in any FPS that doesn't
let me do it. If I ever get my FPS project going, it'll sure as heck have this
feature.
~~~
vehementi
I really wish people perceived the bar to be higher than "well, it doesn't
totally break the game, and it adds to the skill cap, so ship it!" for keeping
any bug/feature in.
Literally anything that can impair you adds to the skill cap because it's
another thing you have to learn to use/avoid.
We must also answer questions like "Is it credibility-destroyingly stupid to
have players flying around at high speed in a semi-realistic military shooter"
and "is this even fun" and "what effect does this have on the intended balance
& map design". I don't know the answers for CS but in general I often see
criticism of the status quo in games met with with knee-jerk "this increases
the skill cap, learn to play" responses.
~~~
reubenmorais
Realistic military shooters are niche. The average player wants fun, not
believable. I personally attribute most of Counter-Strike's success to its
completely unrealistic movement/weapon handling, creating a game that is
arcade-y: you can replicate movements with almost 100% accuracy which means
with enough practice you can master the game in incredible ways. This means
the replay value is almost infinite: see for example, how the 1.6 competitive
scene has used the same 15 original bomb defuse maps for more than a decade
without it getting stale.
~~~
clarry
I would assume however that mainstream gamers (who would be "average" by
definition, in terms of skill level) have no appreciation for non-obvious game
mechanics that give highly skilled players an "unfair" advantage. In fact
anything that increases the skill cap works against the "merely average"
players on public servers. So there is an incentive for the companies behind
big online shooters to strip their games of such features. It follows that
modern shooters do not come with bunny hopping, and the players who've been
primarily exposed to this new generation of games would find such tricks game-
breaking and unfair.
So I guess bunny hopping and such will remain a thing for old timers who stick
to the old classics. And boy do they have a ton of fun :) Although it would be
nice to see some new players. Old players get old and tired...
To vehementi: bunny hopping and all the other stuff you can master to become
better at a game really is a _ton of fun_. I don't think breaking balance is
as big of an issue as some here make it out to be, though it obviously depends
on the map and mode. But in general, if your foe can bunny hop, so can you.
Sometimes they start in a position where it's way more advantageous to them.
But in my experience it's just not very common. And thankfully, with the good
games, we are not tied to the stock maps put out by the company behind the
game.. instead there's a community of gamers and mappers, and the community
will adapt.
Many stock maps suck anyway, whether you have bunny hopping or not. For
example, many of the stock Q3A maps are regarded as crap, and aren't really
played at all in competitive matches. Bunny hopping however is a core mechanic
in these games and iD was well aware of it.
------
yelnatz
Source video for the gif:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYEyIGLRqW0&t=47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYEyIGLRqW0&t=47)
It really shows how much of an advantage it was if you knew how to bunny hop.
~~~
bko
Here is another video showing a fuller explanation of bunny hopping and going
into the history a bit
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1HowpVX-
hU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1HowpVX-hU)
------
TwoBit
So games intentionally program support for bunnyhopping, or us it a math logic
bug.
~~~
scarlson
Both. It was originally a bug, has since turned into a feature.
~~~
sirclueless
Talking of other CS "bugs" that have turned into features, anyone who's never
seen "surfing" should check that out.
Basically, you take the same air-strafing principles from this article, add a
little bunny-hopping, and another "feature" of counterstrike where if you land
on a steep enough slope you won't take falling damage or apply friction. Give
this to some insane map makers and the end result is an incredibly skill-
intensive obstacle course of sorts at tremendously high speeds.
Here's a good example of what I'm talking about:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0Xv00yJhjs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0Xv00yJhjs)
There's a really dedicated community behind this stuff, you can find 64-man
servers full of people playing this type of map in CS:GO and CS:Source.
~~~
nawitus
Here's an interesting bug/technique in HL2 called 'Accelerated Back Hopping'
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NV-
AWxqYAgc&t=41m43s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NV-AWxqYAgc&t=41m43s)
It's used in speedruns, but I believe is fixed these days. Apprently if you're
bunnyhopping backwards, the game tries to limit the speed, but since you're
going backwards the player ends up accelerating essentially indefinitely.
------
Morphling
Not bunnyhopping, but similar idea a game called Gunz: The Duel had many
animation glitches where you could cancel animation lock with higher priority
move. The action would execute, but the animation would be cut in short with a
shorter animation which allowed you to perform a new longer animation move.
Commonly it was called kStyle or "korean style" in west since the game was
korean and koreans came up with the bug. It made the game everyone was doing
it flying through the map with swords swinging wildly it was a lot of fun and
definitely raised the skill ceiling and someone how it didn't seem nearly as
cheaty as the bunnyhopper in articles video.
~~~
simonlc
That sounds like how certain types of combos work in games like Street
Fighter.
------
neckro23
The good old-fashioned rocket jump is another example of this.
Quake 1 had a feature where if a player took damage, they'd get pushed in the
direction the damage came from. This was originally intended to serve as a
visual indicator.
Of course, this meant that if you aimed the rocket launcher at your feet, and
jumped and fired simultaneously, the damage kick + the jump would launch you a
good distance upward. This became a popular enough technique that it was
retained in the Quake sequels, and even imitated in games like Half-Life (the
Gauss Gun would push you backwards, allowing a "rocket jump" of sorts)...
~~~
_neil
This was also a common tactic in Tribes, which also had jet packs and 'skiing'
(basically bunny hopping downhill while building up momentum). The game had
vehicles, but after people figured out skiing, the vehicles were basically
abandoned.
In the later years of the game, people even figured out disc jumping in midair
off of their own grenade.
Edit: here's a quick Tribes 1 video where a guy skis around the enemy base,
team kills his own flag carrier, catches the flag in midair, and disc jumps
home to cap it.
[http://youtu.be/HF_htZRhbiQ](http://youtu.be/HF_htZRhbiQ)
------
krat0sprakhar
Haha! This is awesome! Reminds me of the good days of CS 1.6 when newbs would
to be totally flabbergasted on seeing others bunnyhopping. The best times were
when a sniper would get knifed by some bunnyhopper! :D
Thanks for sharing :)
~~~
hedwall
If I remember correctly so was bunnyjumping fixed in version 1.5, which also
started a mod of CS called classic 1.3 or something like that.
~~~
benihana
It was 'fixed' in 1.3 but was still possible in 1.5 and 1.6, just much harder
------
Paul_S
I think it's extremely telling how people react to it. Some will get annoyed
and demand for this to be disabled because others have the advantage on them.
Others will try and learn to do it to get that advantage on other people. I
wonder if you could use this to perform a similar test to the marshmallow
experiment
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experiment](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_marshmallow_experiment)).
------
agumonkey
Ha, I thought it was a `Skater Bunnyhop from the Physicist Perspective`
article. Interesting nonetheless.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
The First Rule of Prioritization: NO Snacking - dc17
https://blog.intercom.io/first-rule-prioritization-no-snacking/
======
dc17
The simple and accurate blog post from Intercom team. Comments are useful as
well.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Show HN: ChopChop, yet another project management app - softwareman
<a href="http://85.159.214.33/" rel="nofollow">http://85.159.214.33/</a><p>Its more of a work in progress.<p>Not looking at this project as a business at this point. I hate drag-N-Drop project management apps...so built this.<p>If you find the courage to check it out:<p>User Manual:<p>Few things to try after signing up:<p>- Press Double Shift after signing up.<p>- Try clicking on one (or many tasks, holding shift) and then press up/down arrow<p>- Try clicking on one (or many tasks, holding shift) and then press enter.
======
softwareman
clickable link:
[http://85.159.214.33/](http://85.159.214.33/)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Building and Shipping Functional CSS - cjcenizal
https://blog.colepeters.com/building-and-shipping-functional-css/
======
cjcenizal
From the article, markup that once looked like this:
<div class='questionCard'> <!-- Contents of the card --> </div>
Now looks like this after their refactor:
<div class='u-relative u-mt1 u-p2 v-bg-white v-bs2'> <!-- The contents of the
card --> </div>
For a filesize improvement of 19kb to 9kb.
Personally, I feel like the new class names they're using are extremely
difficult to read and scan. I imagine the mental parsing time from reading the
classes to forming a mental image of the result goes up with the addition of
each class and variation. I wonder how difficult it is to discuss design
decisions using these terms?
I've found that semantic, component-specific class names make it really easy
to reason about markup and discuss UI changes with designers and product
people. This increases maintainability and makes it easier to prune classes
used by deprecated components, and also decreases iteration time when
developing a UI.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
How prices changed at a Walmart in a year - ilamont
https://www.npr.org/2019/09/16/753712449/npr-shopping-cart-economics-how-prices-changed-at-a-walmart-in-1-year
======
defertoreptar
> At the same time, higher prices of garlic — they soared 53% — actually
> illustrate tariffs working as intended.
> China had been the biggest exporter of garlic to the U.S. and domestic
> garlic growers have long argued they were being undercut by cheaper Chinese
> competition. Now that Chinese garlic faces higher tariffs, domestic
> companies can charge higher prices.
Domestic companies being able to charge higher prices was not the goal of
tariffs. Labor is cheaper in other Asian countries, and that also results in
their being able to undercut America producers. However, the trade war is
against China and not low labor cost countries like Vietnam and Malaysia.
~~~
blisterpeanuts
Why would garlic prices rise 53% if the tariffs are only 30%?
Are there really no other factors at play?
~~~
rubber_duck
>Why would garlic prices rise 53% if the tariffs are only 30%?
One purely theoretical explanation is demand elasticity - if you can sell 20
items at 3$ now your costs increase to 5$ - you can sell 10 items at 5$ but 8
at 10$ it makes sense to sell at 10$ - not saying that's the case with garlic
- but it explains how a 30% cost increase could cause higher price increase.
~~~
logfromblammo
Percentage-based taxes stretch the supply curve upward along the price axis.
Adding a 30% tax means that if you draw a line down from the new equilibrium
point to zero price, that line will cross the original supply curve at 30% of
the way down. But the new equilibrium point may also be at a different (likely
lower) quantity, where the demand curve could have a different slope.
For a perfect commodity, where the supply curve is nearly flat, the percentage
tax has the effect of raising that flat line higher. A 30% tax raises prices
30% higher. The shape of the demand curve only determines the reduction in
trade volume.
For a fixed-supply good, where the supply curve is completely vertical, the
price remains exactly the same, and the tax is paid entirely by the supplier.
The shape of the demand curve isn't very relevant.
If the demand curve is perfectly vertical, consumers pay all the tax, and
quantity remains the same.
In order for an x% tax to produce an x+y% increase in price, there has to be
some other effect in play. The demand curve has a positive slope, as with a
Veblen good. The demand curve shifts upward or rightward, as though the tax
serves as advertising. A 30% tariff on similar goods or general inflation
produced a substitution effect that drove more people to demand garlic.
Pure demand elasticity can't account for it all.
------
mywittyname
Here's a more comprehensive list: [https://www.bls.gov/regions/mid-
atlantic/data/averageretailf...](https://www.bls.gov/regions/mid-
atlantic/data/averageretailfoodandenergyprices_usandmidwest_table.htm)
------
oftenwrong
Here is the text-only version:
[https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=753712449](https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=753712449)
------
thekevan
As someone who has done buying and selling of used furniture, I wonder how
much of the variance had to do with increasing or waning popularity of an
item.
When I heard this on the radio, one of the first items they listed was a
Better Homes and Gardens lamp. My impression of their research on that one was
immediately to discount what they found because they are particularly subject
to fad and fashion, especially with the proliferation of " XX stylish lamps
that make you look like you have an interior designer for under $YY!!" type of
blog posts.
------
gzu
Yet somehow our consumer price index shows inflation rising at only 2%
~~~
tom_mellior
As the article notes, some things like consumer electronics are still getting
cheaper.
~~~
cco
File those under "basically irrelevant" in my opinion. Once you have a
relatively cheap phone, you're basically satisfied your Maslow hierarchy for
technology, i.e. you can accomplish most of the requirements of existing as a
digital citizen albeit you may not be as efficient as those with more devices.
The real labor saving devices, dishwasher, clothes washer, refrigerator etc.
were/are very meaningful but haven't moved much in the last 20 years.
Education, housing, food, clothing, etc. are far more important and relevant
to what it means to live a decent life in the 21st century.
~~~
tom_mellior
I agree that you don't _need_ a TV and I don't have one either. But other
people keep buying them anyway, so it makes sense to include them in a
statistical measure of average households.
------
d--b
the cart doesn't make sense, it's too small and has too specific things in it.
cod filet are pricier, shrimps are way cheaper. Great.
~~~
zaroth
> _To create NPR 's basket, we consulted the lists from 2018 of tariffs the
> White House imposed on imports from China, but also Mexico and Canada — as
> well as China's retaliatory tariffs on U.S.-made products._
The products were picked not to represent an average shopping cart at Walmart
(because we already do that and it’s called the CPI), but to specifically
target items which they thought would be hardest hit by tariffs.
It’s an entirely unscientific report showing price changes at a single store
with an artificial basket of goods with no attempt whatsoever to control for
independent variables. In short, it tells us nothing at best, and is
misinformation at worst. It’s hard to tell if the effort was even done in good
faith.
Then again, TFA’s first sentence is “Shoppers beware.” Maybe that tells us all
we need to know. I am actually a bit surprised that first sentence made it to
print.
~~~
droithomme
> but to specifically target items which they thought would be hardest hit by
> tariffs
In that case we can draw some conclusions. Even trying to game the basket,
most of the items either stayed the same price or went down. So the effect of
tariffs on prices appears to be negligible.
------
hsnewman
When the recession comes, it will be interesting how it will be spun.
~~~
vibrio
It will be, but it not that hard to guess the major themes, depending on who
is in the driver seat when it hits.
------
festivehealer
Kruschev in the 1950s wondered how capitalism worked without a price
committee. Looks like NPR forgot about this with this rather pointless article
extrapolating prices in one Walmart to the trade war between China and the US.
------
chrischen
The goal of the tariffs is to improve the bargaining position of America in
getting better trade deals with China... not to move manufacturing back to the
US.
That might be what’s fed to the average Joe the plumber Trump supporter but
common sense easily precludes that motivation. To actually move manufacturing
back you’d have to tariff every country with a lower cost of living than the
US, and that’s most of the world. You’d have to massively reduce consumption
in the US since such a policy will greatly redistribute wealth to domestic the
physical laborer. And in the long term, because of the unsustainable labor
costs here eventually automation and robotics R&D will catch up to destroy
those jobs anyways.
~~~
klingonopera
It's even more likely that China will switch to a higher level of automation
and robotics before the West does. They already have the production, and can
incrementally adapt and upgrade, whereas in the West, it would have to be
(re-)built from the ground-up with intent to directly compete against low-
labor markets (though arguably, in some industries this would probably be an
advantage), and that would require far more investments up front, which
carries a higher risk.
~~~
chrischen
The west is an information and trchnology economy. If it has specialties in
anything it’s in high tech. As fast rising and impressive as Chinese tech is,
it’s still generally inferior. We’re not _not_ scrambling for Chinese devices
because of tariffs, they’re just usually coming in on the low end.
Manufacturing is also the low-value end of the supply chain. Building up
expertise at the top (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Intel, AMD, Nvidia—level tech)
is exponentially harder than building up the bottom end.
~~~
klingonopera
The first iPhone rattled the headlines, but I'd argue the third or fourth
generation is what really settled it into the mainstream.
In other words, the West may the first to have fully automated factories and
warehouses, but China is likely to be the first to deploy them on a large-
scale.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
D-Day For Facebook App Developers - alexandros
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/28/d-day-for-facebook-app-developers/
======
kevinherron
This is really great news for regular ol' Facebook users. I'm glad they
realise how spammy all the apps have gotten and are doing something about it.
~~~
icey
It should also be educational for application developers who build their
entire livelihood on the back of someone else's web application.
~~~
Timothee
That's a good point, but you can't deny that there are a lot of opportunities
around social apps and games. And the whole pitch behind Facebook Connect
makes complete sense: you don't want to duplicate a whole social network for
your little app.
At Startup School, I talked to somebody who was building something on top of
Twitter and Facebook, but his philosophy was "it won't last forever, but let's
take advantage of it while it works".
I don't have a solution for this and it doesn't look like something is really
emerging to solve it.
~~~
icey
You're absolutely right, and there is certainly a lot of money to be made. I
don't know what the answer is; but I know I personally would have to think
twice before putting all my eggs in the Facebook or Twitter basket.
------
chaosmachine
I'm late to the Facebook dev game. Just started experimenting with app
building this month. My initial impression wasn't great. Their documentation
is hard to follow, and very few of the examples actually worked.
Many of the API features have been removed or changed, but the documentation
hasn't been updated to reflect this. Looks like it's only going to get worse.
Compared to developing apps with Amazon's APIs, it's really a mess.
------
cmelbye
Forbidden Error?
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
How Facebook Hacked The NASDAQ Button - richoakley
http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/18/how-facebook-hacked-the-nasdaq-button/
======
chubbard
+1 for the hack, but the other solution was to tell your lacky, ...err...I
mean personal assistant, to push a button on Mark's phone at the same time as
Mark rang the bell. We live in a age where we can execute all amazing
technical solutions to non-problems. Now was that truly epic? Waiting for the
pop to see...
~~~
mtgentry
It's cool because in a small but poignant way it represents how Zuck was able
to build his company w/o kissing Wall street's ass. So many CEO's tactics are
driven by quarterly earnings. By keeping his hoodie on and not flying out to
New York to ring the bell, Zuck kinda saying fu __off to all that.
If that blue Nasdaq button embodies short term, profit driven thinking, it's
neat that the engineers were able to hack it and bend it toward their will.
It's a poetic hack.
~~~
hafabnew
I really think you're reading too much into it.
It's not a 'poetic hack', it's just neat.
~~~
Dylanlacey
Poetry can be an emergent property.
------
megakwood
IMO the beauty of a hack comes from two places:
1) Doing something that can't be done by hand, OR 2) Replacing repetitive
manual work, this saving time in the long run
IMO there's nothing "cool" about a hack that will only be used once and could
be replaced by Mark (or anyone standing nearby) pre-typing the message and
then posting the status to Facebook seconds after he pushes the Nasdaq button.
You could also argue that it might have been an opportunity for the engineers
to learn something, but IMO you could think of more worthwhile hacks to learn
from.
~~~
wickedchicken
> IMO the beauty of a hack comes from two places:
"In fact, hack has only one meaning, an extremely subtle and profound one
which defies articulation."
"Hacking might be characterized as `an appropriate application of ingenuity'.
Whether the result is a quick-and-dirty patchwork job or a carefully crafted
work of art, you have to admire the cleverness that went into it."
So it has nothing to do with automation, perfecting your craft, saving time,
making money, impressing Paul Graham, "hacking education" (?), putting in
tremendous amounts of work, being irreverent, growing a neckbeard, or linking
up a button to a cell phone.
It boils down to somebody else saying "are you fucking kidding me?" and you
get to say: "no."
~~~
megakwood
> It boils down to somebody else saying "are you fucking kidding me?" and you
> get to say: "no."
Yeah, the "are you fucking kidding me?" comes from the fact that you did
something awesome, i.e. something can't be done trivially by some far simpler
means. So I'm not sure if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me :)
The only "are you fucking kidding me?" that this hack evokes is "you spent all
that time and talent to do /that/?".
~~~
nknight
My image of you is now a cranky old man who never learned how to have fun.
I assume you're similarly annoyed by any Rube Goldberg machine?
------
csmeder
A question for some one who knows trading laws:
Would it be legal for facebook to spam everyone's time line with ads that
essentially say: "Get an e-trade account today and buy a piece of facebook!
For the first time ever you can own part of facebook! Click here"
I am not saying this would be a good thing (a bunch of uniformed investors
speculating and boosting the price), however I am curious would it be legal?
~~~
JumpCrisscross
No - Facebook is not a broker-dealer and do cannot market securities. Further,
there are other disclosures that must be fulfilled before retail investors can
be marketed to. This is only taking US residents into account.
------
adambyrtek
I don't understand why most comments here are so jaded. This is just a fun
simple hack pulled off by a creative engineer, nobody claims that it was
groundbreaking or even necessary. Personally, I think it's good that they have
a culture that encourages things like that.
~~~
no_more_death
Definitely agree. Some of the comments are positively ludicrous. This post
would have hundreds of points if it were Kickstarter or a company that
"hackers" like.
------
83457
I would have found the reverse creative as well--something similar to the
release of portal 2. Have some actions on facebook by many people lower a
robotic arm to press the button.
------
neilk
The real story for me is that, when you go public, NASDAQ brings some kind of
button to your offices? Or there's a button at their offices?
Why? Just ceremony, like a ribbon-cutting?
~~~
comm_it
Traditionally, with an IPO that's become as popular as this one, you have a
representative from the company being listed ring the bell on the trading
floor of the exchange they're listing on.
However, NASDAQ lacks a proper trading floor, as they're all electronic, so
they have companies deliver a live feed of said representative ringing the
opening bell from the company HQ.
~~~
Duff
NASDAQ allows any D-list dignitary type to "ring the bell". It's a total sham.
See: <http://www.nasdaq.com/marketsite/bell-event.html>
I have to respect Zuckerberg for not wasting the flight to NYC to do this sort
of thing.
------
taylorbuley
It strikes me as incredibly post modern that a purely electronic trading
platform has an "opening bell."
------
nickm12
Personally, this seems like a waste of time. The problem has a number of
obvious non-technical solutions.
~~~
richoakley
I don't think any of them decided to do it for reasons of being practical. The
entire reasoning behind it was that it was 'cool'. A pretty good reason, if
you ask me...
------
xfax
Good to see the hacking culture alive and well!
------
mohsen
"A couple of hours later, we had built our hack. The finished product wasn’t
exactly the prettiest thing, but hacks aren’t supposed to be. They’re just
supposed to work."
I can't say I agree 100%. Sometimes when you have time left over at the end of
the hack, it doesn't hurt to go back and clean it up.
------
winkerVSbecks
Am I the only one with massively messed up layouts on Facebook today? What's
going on?
<http://cl.ly/0N3L34461V1z130f2W1e>
------
nextstep
Oh wow, Facebook is so cool! These are real hackers. A button that posts to
your Facebook timeline? I thought this technology was at least a decade out.
------
dariobarila
"So, like I said, it was just a normal day here at Facebook" -> I love this.
------
djbender
Hacking is such an overloaded term these days...
~~~
dredmorbius
In fairness, this is actually fairly close to the original MIT tech model
railroader's club sense:
[http://steel.lcc.gatech.edu/~mcordell/lcc6316/Hacker%20Group...](http://steel.lcc.gatech.edu/~mcordell/lcc6316/Hacker%20Group%20Project%20FINAL.pdf)
~~~
scott_s
I'll go further, and say that this is a better example of the original meaning
of _hacking_ than most.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask PG: Would Facebook have been invited for a YC interview? - 6thSigma
Assuming Facebook was just in the idea stage, would you have invited Mark Zuckerberg in for an interview?<p>His prior experience was pretty impressive (Harvard, Facemash, Synapse) but I assume he would've applied as a single founder. Without a demo, would a social network for college students in the days of Friendster and Myspace have been invited for an interview?<p>Are there any other big companies you can think of that you would have probably passed on assuming you didn't have a working demo to look at?
======
will_brown
As you noted Zuckerberg's experience would have been impressive, but I think
his answers for all questions likely would have been impressive.
For example, "What do you understand that your competitors do not?" or the
(chicken/egg question) "How will you get users at first?". Obviously
Zuckerberg would have acknowledged the competition and how FB would
distinguish itself as the college social network by limiting registered users
to users with .edu email accounts and scaling growth from campus to campus,
thereby generating untold interest among non-college email account holders
around the World setting the stage for a flood of non-college users.
I am not saying that Zuckerberg's "growth strategy" was by any means a
guarantee, but I think PG and team would have seen the wheels are turning with
this kid and despite taking on the social network establishment of the time
(myspace and Friendster)- who by no means had any intent of losing their
market share - he devised a strategy to take a monumental task and turn it
into "bite-size" pieces. Finally, as you mentioned he had experience/track-
record to back-up his ability to not just think big but execute as well.
------
aashaykumar92
Why would he have applied by himself? He was already working with his roommate
Dustin on the programming end and had Eduardo on the business end. 2 technical
founders + 1 non-technical founder seems like a solid base.
Given "theFacebook"'s traction was extremely high in the opening days/weeks of
launch, AND all three founders had impressive backgrounds and were friends, my
guess would be that they would have at least been invited for a YC interview.
~~~
6thSigma
This hypothetical scenario is in the idea stage. According to wiki, it appears
Mark Zuckerberg wrote Facebook himself and the other co-founders joined later.
~~~
aashaykumar92
Yes, he wrote Facebook himself but only after consulting with Eduardo; not to
mention, Eduardo funded the initial servers and such.
So I guess the most realistic hypothetical question would be whether or not
Mark and Eduardo would have both been invited for an interview. I'd still say
yes. Given their main competition was myspace, their concept of exclusivity
was an innovative and clear edge. In essence, at the time, I imagine their
goal was to essentially make Myspace irrelevant by making Facebook a friends-
only environment.
To address whether or not Mark would have been invited for interview if he had
applied by himself: I also think yes to this, purely because YC seems to care
about the people more than anything. Mark's track record before Facebook is
extremely impressive so I would say AS LONG AS Mark expressed a desire to add
members to the team (in the written application) before coming to YC, he would
have been accepted.
------
jfoster
Zuckerberg probably wouldn't have applied. Judging from his Startup School
responses last year, I don't think he considered facebook as being viable as a
company until it was already quite successful.
------
sampsonjs
As I recall, Zuckerberg did seek investment. And he went looking for terms a
little more generous. For 15 to 20 grand, some advice, and a friendly
introduction to other investors, Zuckerberg wouldn't be willing to trade them
a stick of gum. Much less 5% or more of his company. Ditto Bill Gates.
------
gamechangr
Is this a personal complaint related to "single cofounder"?
~~~
6thSigma
No
Edit: I think a single founder has a lot of disadvantages. I am simply curious
of PG's response to this hypothetical situation.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Show HN: Cppbase – A template for a simple CMake-based C++ project - kartikkumar
https://github.com/kartikkumar/cppbase
======
kartikkumar
Hi all,
I thought I'd kick off the new year by submitting an open-source project of
mine that I haven't been tracking on Github at all until recently. I happened
to check my Github account a few weeks ago and saw that it had quite a few
stars (at least for my standards). I figured maybe it's useful to more people.
Moreover, I'd be happy for any and all feedback. This project is the
culmination of fighting with CMake and C++ for a few years and I use it as the
basis for most new codebases that I build.
I have a few ideas on how to expand it further and would be grateful for
input, even if it means ripping the project to shreds.
Thanks!
~~~
_jordan
Awesome project - thanks for this
~~~
kartikkumar
Thanks!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Mimalloc: Free List Sharding in Action - matt_d
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/mimalloc-free-list-sharding-in-action/
======
derkha
Implementation on Github:
[https://github.com/microsoft/mimalloc](https://github.com/microsoft/mimalloc)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
5 Jobs I'd Prefer Over Web Design - ImpressiveWebs
http://www.impressivewebs.com/prefer-web-design/
======
celticjames
Three points for a link that advocates quack medicine? Not what I come to HN
for.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Any Port in a Storm - rfreytag
http://www.cringely.com/2010/11/any-port-in-a-storm/
======
shaddi
This comment on the article particularly struck me:
There was a time in the U.S. history could have launched
a dozen or so satellites in its sleep. “Need another GPS
communication satellite? It’s on order. We’ll build it by
Friday and launch it by Wednesday. We’d do it faster, but
it’s Presidents Day on Monday, and you know how those Unions
are with holidays” I read some NY Times articles about the
U.S. response to the Pearl Harbor attack. How in months, we
built giant cranes, uprighted ships, and rebuilt our fleet.
Now, we can’t even build another measly two track tunnel
under the Hudson river without political posturing.
[http://www.cringely.com/2010/11/any-port-in-a-
storm/comment-...](http://www.cringely.com/2010/11/any-port-in-a-
storm/comment-page-1/#comment-32670)
~~~
TomOfTTB
This isn't a fair comparison. The United States has always been able to muster
its resources with great efficiency in an emergency. That hasn't changed with
time. You'll remember about 9 years ago when we had a similar situation and we
managed to establish a military presence, mobilize and to a certain extent
complete a military operation half way around the world in just a few months.
But for a government to move that fast politicians have to act rashly and that
can lead to some nasty side effects like putting Japanese citizens in
internment camps. Preventing that rash behavior is why society becomes
litigious under normal circumstances.
I'd be the first to admit we've become too litigious but I can't see that
stopping us if we made the space program as much of a priority as Pearl Harbor
or 9/11 was.
Edit: Just to prove the point there were apparently 40,000 deaths by
industrial accident in the first year or WWII alone. So clearly there was a
cost to that speed of production.
[http://www.historykb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/world-war-
ii/3992/de...](http://www.historykb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/world-war-
ii/3992/deaths-due-to-accidents-in-factories)
~~~
anamax
> Just to prove the point there were apparently 40,000 deaths by industrial
> accident in the first year or WWII alone. So clearly there was a cost to
> that speed of production.
How many industrial accident deaths were there in 1936-39?
------
jdietrich
I feel obliged to point out the limitations of LORAN. Current-generation
systems are only accurate to within a few hundred metres and they are just as
vulnerable to geomagnetic storms as satellite-based systems. LORAN-C operates
on 90 to 110khz, so it is vulnerable to multipath interference caused by
skywave propagation. At present it also has relatively limited coverage, most
obviously in North America. LORAN is a wonderfully simple, rugged aid to
maritime navigation, but it is no substitute for GPS.
Modern radio systems are so slick and mature that it is easy for us to imagine
that they are a magical force akin to electronic telepathy, but they are
reliant on simple electromagnetic radiation and highly susceptible to
interference. Beyond the obvious issues of space weather, propagation and
accidental interference, most radio systems are trivially easy to deliberately
interfere with and we are now at a stage where intersatellite conflict could
cause massive destruction. We have no realistic means of either defending
satellites or of removing orbital debris. GPS is tremendously vulnerable,
particularly to malicious attack and we are best to assume that it will fail
completely at some time in the immediate future.
------
roadnottaken
" _It would fry satellites, overload power grids, destroy all our computers,
and possibly put the lights out for most of us for months..._ "
If this happens, I think losing GPS would be the least of our worries.
~~~
sudont
Would a faraday cage protect equipment? Obviously the power grid would be
down, but combine solar with low-power electronics and it wouldn't be too hard
to equip oneself with a running computer after the event.
~~~
stcredzero
What about simply having computers and other machinery powered down? If we
situated several probes closer to the sun, they could warn us like a canary in
a coal mine. The satellites would simply transmit a heartbeat and status
signal along with electromagnetic observations data. When one fo the
satellites fails, we'll have a couple of minutes to shut machinery down and
get the most sensitive equipment into Faraday cages.
~~~
sorbus
Do you have any idea how quickly the corona ejection would travel, and hence
how long it would take to hit earth? It would take a bit over 8 minutes for
any message from a probe near the sun to reach us, and if the ejection is
travelling at (random number) 0.5c, it would only give us a bit over 8 minutes
to react and get the word out. Obviously, if it was slower (0.1c), we would
have a lot more time. The worst case scenario would be it travelling at >0.9c,
giving us under two minutes to react and do everything.
It's perhaps a much, much better solution to keep a large (and I mean really
fucking large, since it might be all we had to bootstrap ourselves back up to
our current level of technology) store of equipment in a large Faraday cage.
Probably several, distributed for redundancy, really. This could be combined
with probes, of course.
------
ced
I've made this point on HN a few times, but "space weather forecasting" has
become an industry in itself. A lot of scientists have made predictions for
the next cycle. The big problem is that cycles last 11 years, and the
predictions are of the form "Very strong cycle", or "Abnormally weak cycle".
You can see why "This researcher has correctly predicted the last two cycles"
can easily be attributed to luck. Given that a research career spans at most 4
such cycles, it's hard to demonstrate one's ability.
There's a few respected solar scientists who have written papers to the effect
that such forecasting is way beyond our capabilities (there's hints of chaotic
behavior in the sun). But these papers don't get any citations, because if
they're right, most of the money in this field will dry up. No one wants that
to happen.
With that said, Cringely speaks of a two-year forecast, and I don't know if
that is short-term enough to be feasible. Still, I'm skeptical of the
impending doom predictions, because it takes only one known scientist willing
to beat the drum for the government to worry about its space-bound investment
(and quite reasonably so).
~~~
stcredzero
Someone could probably make money by launching 6 or so observation satellites
around Mercury and at Mercury Trojan points. Since mass ejections are
directional, we should be able to quickly confirm that as the cause of failure
for a satellite with the others, and send out a digitally signed warning via
the networks. This should give us a couple of minutes time to shut machinery
down.
~~~
Splines
According to Wikipedia, CMEs have a top speed of 3200km/s. The earth is 147Mm
from the sun (at its closest), so we'd have a minimum of 12 hours warning.
How vulnerable are electronic devices that are powered off to CMEs?
I imagine that while we have sufficient warning, there is also considerable
variation in CME speed (and size?). It might be difficult to coordinate "turn
stuff back on" day without functioning communication systems.
------
cromulent
NASA posted this today:
[http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-
nasa/2010/08...](http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-
nasa/2010/08nov_iswi/)
The Omega system was shut down years ago, to the joy of local BASE jumpers.
------
tomjen3
Assuming we have a corona ejection, how long a warning would we get?
~~~
iwr
Between 18 hours to a few days.
Flares can take as little as 15 minutes (with early warning from satellites in
L2).
For high energy x-rays there'd be no early warning through other means than
forecasting.
~~~
tomjen3
Okay that should be enough to put a faraday cage up and the gear the network
down.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: College Hack - kiba
Tomorrow, I will be a freshman at college. Unfortunately this mean lack of time for my personal programming projects.<p>I would like to maximize my free time so that I can develop my infant electronic engineering hobby and grow as a software developer/entrepreneur while also maintaining a decent GPA so that I could get into my 4 years university of my choice.<p>I also know that I will benefit by networking with people at college, as poor as my social skills are.<p>So I am asking older, much more experienced hackers for their collective wisdom on how to navigate and get the most out of my college education/transitional time.
======
michael_dorfman
My advice: treat college like a job. Treat the library like an office, and go
there for a fixed number of hours per day, and just heads-down work. You'd be
surprised how much you can accomplish in, say, 3-4 hours per day.
If you do this with discipline, you'll have plenty of time for hobbies,
programming projects, and just plain partying.
Undergrads are notoriously bad at time management; crack that nut, and you'll
rise easily to the top.
Also: choose your classes based on who the instructor is, not on the subject
matter. Find out who the best teachers are (ask students!) and take whatever
they are teaching. An excellent teacher can make even the most dull subject
come alive; a mediocre teacher can suck the life out of even the most
fascinating subject matter.
~~~
fapi1974
I'll take the exact opposite view - treat college as your very last vacation.
Have a fantastic time, don't sweat the details, focus more than anything on
your friends. Let's see how that goes over in this group. :-)
~~~
michael_dorfman
I'm not sure that's really the opposite view at all.
In my case, I found that just a few hours a day in the library made it
possible for me to have an extremely active social life, with great friends,
and no details to sweat.
~~~
fapi1974
Point taken!
------
mx12
Not sure what degree your going for, but I just graduated from college with an
EE degree, and I'll be starting grad school next week. Here's my advice:
-Have fun and enjoy classes (Go to them!) You'll learn a lot from your professors and other students even though you may initially feel like they are a waste of time. Also in smaller classes the professor notices.
-Also on classes, it's important to make a good grade, but it is also important what knowledge you take away. There are quite a few fundamental classes that I got an A in, but I retained very little that I am regretting now.
-If you are not being challenged in a class, esp. programming. Talk to the professor, and they will probably find a way to make it more exciting/interesting.
-Like you said, meet as many people as you can. This is esp. true the first semester. Everyone is excited about meeting new people.
-I would also recommend finding something outside of you subject area to balance your life out. For two years I was a cheerleading at my school. Met a lot of cool people/girls.
-Depending on what your major is, you may want to talk to a professor you like and see if you can get a job with them. This will cut down on your personally time for hacking and relaxing but makes up for it with great experience and recommendation letters.
-Once again, if you are doing C.S. or engineering look into REU's, Research Experience for Undergrads. I spend a summer at USC in their robotics lab for an REU, with housing, meals and a stipend paid for by the REU. Awesome time and I got a lot of letter of recommendations.
-Finally, be safe and have fun!
------
younata
College freshman myself.
As it was explained to me (in the format of getting you to join clubs), you
have 15 hours of class a week, plus 30 hours of studying for said classes, 20
hours for a job, 8 * 7 hours for sleeping, 10 hours for eating, comes out to
something like, 50 or 60 hours to do others things, probably more.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Push — Sparrow - falava
http://www.sprw.me/push.php
======
j0k3r
Quite an old page. <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3706993>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Google Phone app gaining direct-to-voicemail spam filtering, beta test program - bbrunner
https://9to5google.com/2018/04/10/google-phone-spam-filtering-new-beta-program/
======
reformedjuju
Spam calls have become so pervasive on my end (despite having changed my
number three times) that I average about eight a day. My only real solution
has been to just outright disallow call notifications and to periodically
check my voicemail for the occasional legitimate message.
~~~
xnaas
Yeah, spam calls have gotten out of hand in the last year or two...really not
sure what happened. I try and report as many as I can since I'm in the Do Not
Call Registry...I am but one man, though.
------
msie
"This will be amazing!" \- says anyone who ever answered a telephone.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Looking for security trouble spots in Go code - leef
http://0xdabbad00.com/2015/04/12/looking_for_security_trouble_spots_in_go_code/
======
steakejjs
I actually wrote a tool[0] to attack gorilla sessions that are mentioned at
the bottom of this, and gave a talk on some security functions in Go.
The big take-aways from my talk. Go doesn't have a lot of unsafe functions.
HTMLTemplates package and exec package are very resistant to common web
attacks, so much so that I had trouble writing vulnerable code to XSS and RCE
As for the tool that attacks Gorilla Sessions, I found a lot of people on
github who were not initializing their session securely. Most people in the
first 30 pages of github search were doing it wrong. This is most likely a
pretty widespread issue. It seems they didn't realize this was an AES
key...The blog post is not completely correct saying it will be used for an
HMAC. It will...but it is also used as an AES key.
[0] [https://github.com/steakejjs/G2B2](https://github.com/steakejjs/G2B2)
~~~
ekarulf
Is it used to derive separate HMAC and AES keys or is the same key used in
both contexts?
~~~
steakejjs
After reviewing the code it looks like I was wrong. The code from the tutorial
won't provide any encryption for your sessions, only integrity.
In order to encrypt the values in the session, rather than just encode you
have to do a NewCookieStore([]byte("HMACKey"), []byte("CipherKey")) instead of
a NewCookieStore([]byte("HMACKey")). I guess to answer your question, separate
keys.
[https://gist.github.com/steakejjs/6c17f07c4ca72115bfec](https://gist.github.com/steakejjs/6c17f07c4ca72115bfec)
Here's a gist that shows a regular session, created with
NewSessionStore([]byte("something-very-secret")) having the value's inside
recovered easily.
The strings "foo" and "bar" are pretty easy to spot in the base64 output
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Ask HN: Is my startup legal? MovieByHeart.com - GregShelton
I’m an immigrant and I have a fear of speaking in English.
This fear of performing in another language, also known as Foreign Language Anxiety, affects more than 50% of people.<p>I’ve searched everywhere for a solution to this problem and found nothing. That is why I’ve created MovieByHeart.com. This website will help people overcome the fear of speaking in English.<p>At MovieByHeart we transform movie into educational games, following the Fair Use copyright guidelines. However, I think that The Gatekeepers will consider it as copyright infringement.<p>I want to make this project legal, I’d love to pay license fees, but at this stage no one knows what to do, because we are in uncharted territory. Such companies as Amazon, iTunes, YouTube are not able to license movies they want. And I’m just a teacher, who can’t afford a lawyer.
What should I do?<p>Your opinion and advise will be greatly appreciated.
If you would like to test website, use email: moviebyheart at gmail, password: test1234
======
micks56
That is copyright infringement, and would not constitute fair use.
Around ycnews it is often said to not worry about that. No one will sue you
until you get big, and then you can negotiate. I have no opinion on that
advice.
Studios are unlikely to license you big name movies and TV shows.
Can you contact independent filmmakers instead? They may be giving their work
away for free already. You could create a market for it. Your customers pay to
use your service, and then you give a cut to the filmmaker. Filmmaker makes
money where he wouldn't have before, and also gets greater exposure for his
work.
~~~
GregShelton
I would not agree that it's copyright infringement. We've transformed the
content of copyrighted work and is using it for a transformative (educational)
purpose.
"since the defendant has engaged in both types of transformation, we would
expect a court generally to find that the defendant’s use is transformative
and that the transformativeness factor weighs in favor of the defendant’s fair
use claim (though how strongly it does so may vary depending on how
transformative the defendant’s use is)"
[http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/treese/fair_use_transforma...](http://www.utexas.edu/law/faculty/treese/fair_use_transformativeness.pdf)
~~~
micks56
Transformation and educational purpose do not mean what you think they mean.
1\. Transformation is more than adding your own translation on top of the
movie. You need to change the meaning or expression of the work. The meaning
of your version is exactly the same as the original by definition (you are
making a word for word translation).
2\. Your "educational purpose" argument is diminished when you affect the
market for the work. The movie studio will argue your students should rent/buy
the movie and watch with subtitles. Your website is taking away sales. Also,
if you try to earn money from this you are no longer seeking any educational
purpose.
3\. You are broadcasting the original movie without permission. That is
copyright infringement.
4\. Regarding your quote, you should read the Blanch v. Koons case and look at
Blanch's original work versus Koon's alleged infringing work to see what
transformation requires.
~~~
GregShelton
What I mean by transformation is that we transform movies into games (Voice
Over videos) by muting some dialog lines. That changes the meaning of the
work. It's not entertainment anymore. No one will watch movie with half dialog
lines muted.
The only thing students can do with DVD is to watch it (passive
entertainment).
In our case students learn dialog lines and than perform them with the help of
Voice Over videos (active learning).
I think that we create a new market for people with a specific need. When
people pay for access to Voice Over videos they will pay because they want to
overcome Anxiety, not because they want to see movie for entertainment.
Thats how I see it. May be I wrong
~~~
micks56
That changes nothing. Still copyright infringement. See above.
~~~
GregShelton
Thank you for your comments. It seems I have to follow your advice and contact
indie moviemakers or use public domain movies
~~~
micks56
I have an idea for you. This might work. You REALLY need to read up on
Copyright Law, though. To be honest, you might not be the best person for
this. You may want to speak with an experienced copyright person. Anyway...
This might work: Stop broadcasting the video. You make an audio only CD where
you and friends play the parts in the movies. The customer is instructed on
when to start the audio CD so that it syncs with the movie. You can also
distribute a book that tells the person when to start and stop the movie/audio
and then do your thing with your company.
So all you are selling is an audio CD, which you performed, and a companion
workbook.
This MAY work because what you are doing is making a "cover song" of the movie
audio. You will need a mechanical license, if it is even available.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_license>
I have never heard of this for movies, but it might work. A mechanical license
will be cheaper and easier than negotiating with a movie studio.
This is how it works in the music world:
<http://www.harryfox.com/public/FAQ.jsp>
No idea if you can do this in the movie world, but you should check it out.
~~~
prodigal_erik
Rifftrax.com (some of the MST3K stars) has been putting out very good
voiceover tracks for current movies. You might ask them what kind of licensing
they needed to go through.
~~~
micks56
They probably don't need any license. What rifftrax is doing is selling you an
mp3 with their own comedy on it. It is a completely new work. The customer
buys/rents the companion DVD and then syncs.
That is slightly different than OP because OP wants to broadcast the movie, or
at least the exact words. The exact words are what he needs to license, even
if he does perform them himself.
If OP can figure out a way to teach people language by making his own rifftrax
mp3 then he is in business. Good call prodigal_erik.
~~~
GregShelton
Rifftrax guys gave me an idea - what if I setup Amazon shop and will sell
legal DVDs. People who buy DVD get access to the same movie on my website
(invitation code). Will it work?
~~~
micks56
No, it wouldn't work.
The reason why is at the very heart of copyright law. You need to learn this
area.
Owning copyright to a work gives the owner EXCLUSIVE rights to distribution of
that work.
Therefore, just because you sold a legal copy to a user via Amazon you do not
have the right to broadcast the work on your website. Only the copyright owner
can do that, because he has exclusive distribution rights. Your broadcast
isn't authorized even though you selling DVDs is authorized.
Be careful with this stuff. In my opinion you are playing with fire here. The
RIAA has no problems with burying people who distribute songs illegally. MPAA
has done less of this, but you don't want to be the example.
~~~
GregShelton
I think I will start with public domain movies and than follow your advice re:
indie filmmakers and mechanical license
------
rick888
I've been learning mandarin as a second language for the past couple of years
and I came across subtitle translations of English movies to mandarin (so, you
could burn a DVD with these subtitle files and be able to see the Mandarin).
This has helped me in the learning process.
Many of the subtitle sites have been taken down by the MPAA. I love the idea
of your site, but I think if it gets big enough, they will eventually take you
to court.
~~~
GregShelton
Thank you for your reply. I think they can close this project down without
taking me to court
~~~
rick888
You might be able to get permission or license it. I think it would probably
be much cheaper than actually licensing the content. Have you tried contacting
anyone in the industry?
~~~
GregShelton
I wasn't be able to find any educational license that could be suitable for
this project. And I don't know who should I contact in the industry
------
GregShelton
Clicable <http://moviebyheart.com>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
A new antenna using single atoms could usher in the age of atomic radio - vezycash
https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/09/a-new-antenna-using-single-atoms-could-usher-in-the-age-of-atomic-radio/
======
deckar01
The phrase "single atoms" seems misleading. The article describes the primary
device as a cell containing a vapor that needs a laser to activate the gas and
a laser to measure the gas. As far as I can tell the only thing "single" here
is that the vapor consists of one type of element, which doesn't seem like an
important piece of information for the title.
Edit: "single atoms" -> "gas and lasers"
~~~
deckar01
Here is an alternate source with more concise details and a nice diagram of
the lasers and the cell.
[https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611977/get-ready-for-
atom...](https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611977/get-ready-for-atomic-
radio/)
~~~
yazan94
This is really interesting, but I am a bit confused on the practical
implementation. How could this be used to replace real-life systems? If I
understood it correctly, a potential system would be made up of lasers at the
transmitters, and a cloud of Rydberg atom gas at the receiving end plus a
specifically tuned laser to saturate the gas.
But this design runs into line-of-sight issues between the receiver and
transmitter. Also, the Rydhberg gas needs to be contained in some way that
will hold the gas in whatever place it needs to be but also be transparent
such that the transmitting laser can impact the gas as required without
interference from the containing medium.
I feel like this is conceptually cool, but not useful/practical outside of a
lab or unrealistically perfect outdoors environment. Does anyone know of any
uses for this new tech?
~~~
deckar01
The signals are not transmitted with lasers, they are transmitted with
traditional RF broadcasting equipment. This is just an AM/FM radio receiver
that detects RF with lasers. The breakthrough is that it doesn't require a
physical antenna proportional in size to the wavelength of the frequency it is
detecting.
------
princekolt
Interesting. But I had never before heard a description of RF ranges in
octaves. I suppose it makes sense, but that completely threw me off because I
thought they were talking about sound waves for a second.
~~~
bcaa7f3a8bbc
> never before heard a description of RF ranges in octaves
you can read something about filter designs...
> _It is usual to measure roll-off as a function of logarithmic frequency,
> consequently, the units of roll-off are either decibels per decade (dB
> /decade), where a decade is a 10-times increase in frequency, or decibels
> per octave (dB/8ve), where an octave is 2-times increase in frequency. _
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll-off](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll-
off)
------
aj7
The market price for a pair of tunable lasers to do this is more than $100k.
------
jtbayly
Very small, but needs a large “backup system”? So, not very small. And what
exactly is this backup system?
~~~
jtbayly
Ok, I've been downvoted. But I'm still curious what in the world could be
considered a "backup system" but also necessary for implementing the
technology. Anything necessary for it to work isn't a "backup" is it?
And I'm also still curious what this particular large "backup system" is.
------
rdlecler1
Does that mean we should have SETI looking into other channels?
------
madengr
Antenna engineer here. The metal antennas mentioned in the article are
resonant (standing wave) antennas. There is another class of antennas called
traveling waves, but still need to be about 1/2 wavelength to operate
efficiently.
That being said, antennas can be much smaller than 1/2 wavelength, but their
efficiency goes down. There is a theoretical limit trading off bandwidth and
efficiency for volume, called the Chu limit.
So it would be interesting how this technique compares. It says it’s narrow
band, so like a laser, which means it may still be limited.
There are other methods, such as bouncing a laser off a thin metal membrane,
which supposedly has very low noise. Wonder how noisy this method is?
Antenna noise temperature is related to efficiency, but this is an active
antenna. So it really boils down to bandwidth vs. noise temperature per
volume. That metric would give an indication of how it compares to classical
antennas.
~~~
dredmorbius
Any introductory reading you might recommend?
~~~
madengr
There are a couple of books on electrically small antennas, but those are not
introductory. Stutzman and Theile is a good antenna textbook, and there are
many others; John Krause for example.
You could start with the ARRL Antenna Compendium, for non-engineering books.
Steven Best has some good papers (i.e. the spherical folded dipole), if you
have access to IEEE Xplore. The APS magazine articles are very good.
~~~
dredmorbius
I meant basic, standard, antenna engineering.
Though the small stuff is also interesting.
Thanks.
~~~
escherplex
Might want to try
_Antenna Theory - Analysis and Design - Balanis (2016)_
But noticed a 2005 3rd edition is available in .pdf for download gratis at:
[https://archive.org/details/AntennaTheoryAnalysisAndDesign3r...](https://archive.org/details/AntennaTheoryAnalysisAndDesign3rdEd)
~~~
dredmorbius
Thanks, this and the above are a good start.
------
megamindbrian2
We can create life in a lab. And we also create new realities on a computer.
How long before we create a new reality in a lab and life on a computer?
|
{
"pile_set_name": "HackerNews"
}
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.