Children poisoned by lead on U.S. Army bases - <AUTHOR> https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-military-housing/ <comment><USER2> Stuff like this is pretty common in the military. When I was stationed at Camp Lejeune NC, my wife worked as a reporter for a local paper. One of her assignments was interviewing people at a town hall style meeting regarding chemicals in the base water supply. Children of people that lived in base housing had an abnormally high cancer rate, but the military denied that any of the contaminated water was leaking into the drinking water.

I also remember the barracks I lived in had old asbestos floor tiles and the walls were covered in lead paint. They eventually renovated the barracks, and instead of getting rid of the lead paint, they just painted over it. The asbestos tiles weren't dealt with, and all they said was "just don't use a floor buffer and you'll be fine". There was also a cleaning station where we'd clean our rifles, no safety warnings or instructions were given, and we thought it was just a cleaning solution. Later we saw a warning sticker on it that said to use full eyes, face, and hand protection because the cleaning solution could cause neurological damage. Just waiting for health probelms to crop up once I'm older :/

<comment><USER3> > instead of getting rid of the lead paint, they just painted over it

This is actually one of the correct ways to deal with lead paint, assuming the "paint" is actually a proper encapsulant. See for example [https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/lead/renovation_repa...](https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/lead/renovation_repair_painting/encapsulants.htm)

<comment><USER4> Ditto for the asbestos --- if it's not in a state where fibers of it can easily flake off and float around to be inhaled (technical term is "friable"), it won't do any harm.

<comment><USER5> Where is the source for this claim? I've always had a conspiracy theory that this is not true and that the "do not disturb and you'll be fine" theory was put forth to save all the home owners who would otherwise be told their homes are worthless or extremely expensive to properly fix. Even if the suggested reasoning is true, who is there to gurantee that a pervious owner did not improperly disturb the asbestos. My real estate agent toward me in all his years of experience in only one case did another ever admit to knowing of a problem where signing off on the proper lead paint/radon/asbestos warnings.

<comment><USER4> _Where is the source for this claim?_

The EPA, for one.

[https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/protect-your-family- exposures-a...](https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/protect-your-family-exposures- asbestos)

The problem is inhalation of fibers, so if the fibers are not in the air and inhalable, they pose no risk.

<comment><USER6> OSHA also conveniently provides references[1] to various relevant publications by EPA, NIOSH, DHHS, NCI, et al.

[1] [https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/asbestos/hazards.html](https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/asbestos/hazards.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Former Navy officer here. The "privatized" housing was a complete farce. There's a natural monopoly on military base housing and turning that over to a for-profit private company nearly guarantees they're going to cut costs at every opportunity.

We lived on base for a number of years but after a while it seemed like a scam to siphon the service members' entire housing allowance. Maintenance was horrible, conditions were horrible, there were waiting lists just to get into the housing, and heavy penalties if you broke your lease early with no opportunity to negotiate out, even if the wait list was a mile long.

We ended up renting houses near the base out in town that were much cheaper and not infested with mice and cockroaches. Most people I knew who thought living in base housing was convenient and cheaper came to the same conclusion.

<comment><USER8> This was my experience as well. Not to mention, when you do move out, they are extremely anal with inspections and make you pay for "damage" even if you can prove that it was there before you (pictures, etc).

And not to mention the weekly inspections. There was a sergeant that used to come around the neighborhood with a ruler, measuring people's grass to ensure it was within regulated length. A friend of mine got in trouble with the first sergeant for not cutting his lawn often enough.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Military bases are some of the most polluted sites in America. Lots of soil/groundwater contamination from BTEX and other poorly handled chemicals. However, Military bases provide a lot of research for remediation engineering.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_Superfund_si...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_Superfund_sites)

[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016770120...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167701207002539)

<comment><USER10> Yes, sadly this is not an anomaly: [https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/camp- lejeune/](https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/camp-lejeune/)

<comment><USER11> Fuck me! The top comment as of now in this comments page is someone's personal experience of Camp Lejeune!

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18197954](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18197954)

<comment><USER10> Well, it is a huge base! Hey, at least the VA can cover my out-of-pocket cancer expenses?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> >The 80-year-old white stucco home...

Well there's your problem. Old houses have lead. It should be assumed to be that way unless there's reason to believe otherwise.

It'll be another 50+yr before most lead paint is gone. The fact of the matter is that labor is expensive in this country so lead paint is rarely dealt with unless it's conveniently within the scope of other work.

I don't think this article very meaningful unless we have more data points. Is base housing more or less likely to contain lead than similiar quality housing in other cities?

<comment><USER13> Sure, but when you're talking about a military house inside a military base owned and maintained by the military you have to assume that the military bears some responsibility for it.

Just waving your hands and walking away because it's old is a bit short sighted.

<comment><USER14> I'm non sure why you are being downvoted, and in typical HN fashion no one wants to take the time to explain why.

I don't think anyone would excuse an apartment building owner for renting apartments to tenants with lead painted walls, so I'm not sure why folks here think the US Army should get a free pass...

<comment><USER15> No one is getting a free pass. The article discusses private landlords.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I see a few outdated comments here about the water at Camp Lejeune. In 2012, a law (Camp Lejeune Families Act) was passed to pay for medical care for servicemembers and their families who were affected by the water quality. Additionally, veterans who were stationed at Lejeune during that time now receive "presumptive service connection" for many ailments. This means they automatically receive disability pensions and medical care if they develop one of the ailments; they don't have to prove that they developed it as a result of the water exposure.

[0][https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/camp- lejeune/index...](https://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/camp- lejeune/index.asp)

</comment><comment><USER17> ProPublica has a whole series about military bases and pollution, open burns, etc:

[https://www.propublica.org/article/military-pollution- open-b...](https://www.propublica.org/article/military-pollution-open-burns- radford-virginia)

</comment><comment><USER18> Where exactly in the link does it say the army discourages lead testing?

Reuters says "Yet it also "discourages" this type of lead-paint inspection" at the link [https://phc.amedd.army.mil/topics/workplacehealth/ih/Pages/L...](https://phc.amedd.army.mil/topics/workplacehealth/ih/Pages/Lead.aspx)

<comment><USER15> It doesn't force remediation for lead paint, it indicates only deteriorating paint is addressed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Former Army Vet here.

I've lived in buildings that were condemned a year before I was living in them. I was then moved out of it because they were reclassified as condemned. Less than a year later I was moved back into it because we ran short of living space. All of this while there were huge patches of black mold on walls, in vents, and on the bed mattress themselves.

The guidance we received was to bleach everything. I'm not sure if this was done because of ignorance or more nefarious reasons. We ultimately took note of the worse rooms and avoided using them when possible.

It almost always takes the local news agency breaking a story about these condemned barracks before anything is actually done. Usually they just condemn the building again and the cycle repeats.

This was located in GA where humidity is a problem and almost entirely impossible to combat.

If I was hard pressed, I do have pictures of rooms I've lived in with patches of mold on the walls.

</comment><comment><USER20> I keep seeing reclaimed wood with pretty peeling white paint in high end places. Every time, I wonder if it's lead paint placed by a niave interior decorator.

<comment><USER21> Most reclaimed wood doesn't have any character so much of it is enhanced with faux aging treatments so they can charge more and have better uniformity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Stupid question, but how is the danger from lead paint? Do you have to eat paint chips? I see you can breathe in the dust- how much dust does it take?

<comment><USER23> I don't know how much dust it takes, one can google 'lead oxide MSDS' though. Occupational limits are 0.05mg/m3.

What I've read is lead is really bad for neurological development. Isn't as bad for adult men. Acute toxicity isn't that bad. LD50 > 10000 mg/kg ( Rat ).

Two problems with lead paint is, lead is an insidious poison. The body doesn't clear lead that well and it has a long half life. So small repeated exposures cause harm.

And small children will happily eat lead paint chips. Which is an issue since lead is a neurotoxin and impairs brain development at very low levels.

<comment><USER24> > _Occupational limits are 0.05mg /m3._

A note on those limits: The _medical_ limit is zero, and that is not fear mongering but the result of ever more results over decades of research. In a little course I took from Tuft University about drinking water one of the four weeks was dedicated to the topic "lead". Two professors, one an engineer and one a medical professor taught the course. The medical professor made that point over several lectures.

Also, from personal experience of having been diagnosed with chronic heavy metal poisoning by lab data (university clinic, researcher specialist doctor) as well as by unexpectedly amazing success of chelation treatment using DMPS and DMSA, and continuing far beyond when excretion went way below "thresholds" I too can tell you from my own experience that effects are there for extremely small quantities, just as the often population-level and statistics based research shows. My "on/off" experience for years of using chelators let me have extremely uncommon experiences. First of all, this kind of stuff is almost never diagnosed (only pretty high doses of acute poisoning are easy to test for, what is stored in the body is inaccessible to tests unless you cut a piece off of organs to send to the lab - forget blood tests, they only show what's on the move outside cells _right now_ ). Second, when people get chelators they stop when only little is excreted. From my experience that is an error, treatment should continue until the patient says there are no effects (of the treatment) any more. What remains stored in the body comes out very very slowly. Chelators only have access to extracelluar space to begin with. Something that happens to (heavy metal) chronic poisoning patients quite often is that excretion levels at first remain pretty low, or they go down quickly - but after a few months of chelation the suddenly go up, and the body starts acting funny (it starts excreting on its own). Happened to me too, after half a year of linear decrease of after-chelation measurements it suddenly went up by a factor of three, and my body became very active, lots and lots of stuff happening. For example - and I felt that because the surrounding tissue was "active" for a few weeks - a nodule I had in an enlarged thyroid as well as the enlargement itself completely disappeared. The endocrinologist who just two years before had recommended surgery was left stumbling "I'm amazed" again and again - after checking the thyroid _twice_ with ultrasound because he could not believe it. This phenomenon shows that the body may not excrete on its own when the burden is too high.

So for me the whole discussion is quite personal, but ten years ago I would have been like everybody else, I would not have taken this whole very abstract issue seriously at all.

That there is a limit is because it is not technically possible to get to zero when there are heavy metals, or for everybody to avoid it, so the government sets a limit as a compromise between cost and what is achievable.

By the way, I had my two Italian espresso portafilter machines tested for lead. The expensive one which had everything made of copper had no lead but elevated copper (which is no big deal, copper is essential and the body has pretty good transport mechanisms, see "ceruloplasmin"). The cheaper one with brass though exceeded the drinking water limit many times! I had tested it because I wanted to sell it. It was a Rancilio Sylvia, by the way.

What is also notable that several heavy metals at once may be far more (orders of magnitude) toxic than just one. There was a lethal dose study decades ago that tested lead and mercury individually. When they combined the two lethal dose dropped to a thousandth, meaning it was a thousand times more toxic. Mercury is in our environment, especially large predator fish, and in amalgam fillings for teeth. So if somebody who is exposed to "a little bit" of mercury is also exposed to lead you can forget those official thresholds even more.

<comment><USER25> Very interesting story. Thanks for this. I've had good success with DMSA myself, it was almost immediate relief when I started, but never got to this dumping stage as you describe, and now it feels like the progress has plateaued. Perhaps this is a similar situation.

I think I actually inhaled lead paint, which caused my particular problems. Sanding old furniture without a mask, not a good idea at all. Many many years ago. Young, and had no clue what I was doing :-/

I was wondering if you wouldn't mind helping with more details about your protocol? If so can you e-mail me at email@example.com. Thanks a lot.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> We are our own worst enemies</comment>


Error and Fraud at Issue as Absentee Voting Rises  - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/us/politics/as-more-vote-by-mail-faulty-ballots-could-impact-elections.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

<comment><AUTHOR> Related to "New Jersey to allow voting by email" <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4738126></comment>


Quantum Walks with Gremlin - <AUTHOR> http://arxiv.org/abs/1511.06278 <comment><USER2> Note that Gremlin is the graph language of the Apache TinkerPop project: [http://tinkerpop.apache.org](http://tinkerpop.apache.org).</comment>


Experiments with a Hydrogen Thyratron - <AUTHOR> http://www.kerrywong.com/2019/03/03/experiments-with-a-hydrogen-thyratron/ <comment><USER2> My first thought was - won't the hydrogen escape?! Hydrogen molecules are tiny and will leak out from just about anything. Then I read that there is a reservoir where the hydrogen is stored, chemically I think. But still, as the tube is operated, won't it be slowly depleted of hydrogen?! Very interesting.

<comment><USER3> "Hydrogen thyratron typically utilizes titanium hydride in it's reservoir and the hydrogen gas is released when the reservoir is heated and recombined into titanium hydride when the temperature cools down."

I'm guessing there's an excess of H in the titanium hydride, so even if some of it leaks out, it'll be able to maintain operating pressure.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thyratron](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thyratron) in case anyone was wondering.

</comment><comment><USER5> Hmm, any risk of excessive x-ray production?

<comment><USER6> Not at the voltages he's running at. Any X-rays generated at voltages below about 20 kV will have a difficult time escaping from the tube's own envelope. 3.5 kV is right out.

<comment><USER5> Ah, okay. I thought the danger zone was slightly lower. Thanks!</comment></comment></comment>


Hiroshima and Nagasaki: The Long Term Health Effects (2012) - <AUTHOR> https://k1project.columbia.edu/news/hiroshima-and-nagasaki <comment><USER2> My grandpa was there for this. He was a Dutch Soldier captured by the Japanese held as a prisoner of war. They had him doing hard labor underground in a coal mine in Hiroshima. When the bomb dropped, everyone in the mine evacuated, believing there was an earthquake happening. Even though he fought gruesome battles, even though he faced tortures / brutalities under the Japanese, it was the melting faces at Hiroshima that consistently haunted him during in his dreams.

Later they moved the POW labor to Nagasaki. They were kept on the outskirts of the city so were safe but still witnessed the second blast. When it happened, the house they were in collaped on him.

He had fought the Boer War for the Dutch. Even captured the regiment that Churchil was with, but luckily released them.

Later in WW2, he fought to protect the Dutch colony in Indonesia from the Japanese - but lost, e.g. the nuclear experiences in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

As far as health effects go, he seem to have suffered effects of radiation and also black lung from all of the coal mining. He died in the late 80s and the story in my family goes like this:

Some government scientists showed up at the house to ask his wife if they could autopsy him for research. Later, when the results were given to my family, we found out that all of his bones were slightly blue-tinted and curved. It is not suspected that this strange effect on his skeleton was caused by the radiation exposure, and that the mysterious pain he constantly experienced was a result of this odd deformation.

<comment><USER3> _He died in the late 80s_

A lot of people don't live that long even _without_ exposure to radiation or coal dust.

<comment><USER4> If he was 20 in the war, he could have been 65 in the late 80s. (Yes, it's true that not everyone lives that long, but it's on the short side.)

"late 80s" there would be more likely to refer to "in the years 1987-1989 or so" than to "at an age of 87-89".

<comment><USER5> I think "his late 80's" seems more likely. The GP post mentions his grandfather fighting in the Boer War (~1900) which would make him almost 110 years old in the late 80's

<comment><USER4> Perhaps. It would seem equally unusual for a 65+ year old soldier to be in a position to be captured as a PoW in Japan.

<comment><USER6> The Japanese had all the Dutch imprisoned in Indonesia, not just soldiers. A number of male prisoners had been shipped off to Japan to work in labor camps.

<comment><USER4> Yes, but ancestor post says "He was a Dutch Soldier captured by the Japanese held as a prisoner of war."

<comment><USER7> If he was still in the military at that point, then wouldn't that be an accurate description?

<comment><USER4> Of course. At that point though, it would be unusual enough [for a soldier to serve actively in 1902 and in 1945] that when interpreting conflicting points in a story, that you have to consider if perhaps the author hasn't gotten something mixed up in the memory or in the telling.

If I told a story about my own grandfather's service in World War II in the Seabees (by happenstance he was also a coal miner as a civilian), I'd be likely to get something wrong, not out of intention to mislead, but just that I pieced together the story in my own memories in a certain way when I was told the stories as a young boy. I may mix in details from my other grandfather's service or a great-grandfather's time.

Then, weigh that against a non-native speaker's chance to use a common English idiom "in the late 80s" in a non-standard way and against the chance that someone would express some negative interpretation of someone passing in _their_ late 80s as being perhaps related to radiation exposure and black lung.

It's all speculation for all of us except one. ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But hydrogen bombs, developed years later, are far worse. Check out the size of the radioactive fallout cloud in the graphic halfway through this article ( [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/known-unknowns- th...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/known-unknowns-the-dangers- of-north-korea-rsquo-s-h-bomb-threat/) ). People would be dying from acute exposure as far as 100 miles away from the radioactive fallout

<comment><USER9> Unfortunately, military use of radioactive elements doesn't stop at bombs. Today's use of depleted uranium - because of its elusiveness - is in some sense worse than the use of atomic/hydrogen bombs. (BTW, only USA uses DU!)

People of Iraq, Libya, Serbia (including Kosovo and Metohija), Bosnia, Afghanistan, Syria (and neighboring countries) but also soldiers that were/are part of the occupational force there are sick and dying of cancer and leukemia.

<comment><USER10> What? Depleted Uranium is less radioactive than unprocessed Uranium. It's used because it's really, really dense. I'd be comfortable using flatware made out of the stuff.

<comment><USER11> _I 'd be comfortable using flatware made out of the stuff._

The main health concerns aren't due to the fact that DU is highly radioactive in itself, but that tiny DU 'dust' particles break of from the munitions on impact and inhaling these particles can be very dangerous.

There is also some evidence that long term exposure to DU can lead birth defects and potentially other health problems, but the causality is very difficult to tease out.

So while I agree that DU isn't used because it is radioactive, that doesn't change the fact that it does potentially cause serious health issues.

<comment><USER10> I mean, sure, in the long term. But there is a long, long list of stuff that the military uses that I'm more worried about than DU. It's essentially like Tungsten, Lead, or Mercury.

<comment><USER11> The problem more or less unique to DU munitions is that it gives off tiny aerosol particles when it hits its target which can contaminate a large area and are very easy to breathe in for a long time afterwards. And breathing in these particles are linked to an increasing number of health issues.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This article seems like an attempt to minimize the effects of radiation from atomic bombings. Given the release of the latest NPS (nuclear posture review) advocating for use of strategic low yield nuclear weapons and the 'escalate to deescalate' strategy being advanced by the current leadership of the U.S. [1], this seems timed to create political allies on the right. This is interesting because other literature from the K=1 institute seems to be anti-nuclear in tone. [2]

I question the way in which the author glosses over the pain and suffering of the cancer victims of these bombings. People were dying in agonizing pain for years and decades after the war had ended [3]. By comparison, outlawed chemical weapons seem relatively humane.

As a society, I believe we need to be vigilant towards attempts to normalize use of these weapons. They may have a role in deterrence, but the relatively low-level wars the USA has taken on over the past 40 years must not make us callous towards choices that will quickly escalate to hundreds of thousands to millions of deaths. With the survivors of the last world war rapidly dwindling, I fear we are quickly losing our global memory of the horror of large-scale conflict and through media, preparing our society to accept a nuclear exchange for which we hav a very limited and untested defense. [4,5] In fact, creating this defense system has spurred our global rivals to develop more horrific weapons [6].

[1] [https://www.defense.gov/News/SpecialReports/2018NuclearPostu...](https://www.defense.gov/News/SpecialReports/2018NuclearPostureReview.aspx) [https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1204755/escalating-t...](https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1204755/escalating- to-de-escalate/)

[2] [https://k1project.columbia.edu/a11](https://k1project.columbia.edu/a11)

[3] [https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-to-be-dying-from- leuke...](https://www.quora.com/What-is-it-like-to-be-dying-from-leukemia)

[4] [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/us/politics/military- exer...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/14/us/politics/military-exercises- north-korea-pentagon.html)

[5] [https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/the-limits-of-u-s- missile...](https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/the-limits-of-u-s-missile- defense/)

[6] [https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1204814/putins- nuke-...](https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1204814/putins-nuke-a- palooza/)

<comment><USER13> The author points out that the damage was extensive, giving numbers of deaths, rates of cancer among survivors, etc. but the goal of the article wasn't to talk about how much people suffer from nuclear weapons. The point of the article was to discuss the long term effects of a nuclear weapon, so the author focused on the growth of plant life in the area, and the health effects on children born from survivors.

We can discuss nuclear results without having to point out with every breath that we shouldn't blow up cities with nuclear weapons. The individual pain experienced by someone who was in the nuclear bomb has little to do with the possible propagation of side effects through generations.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I think the upbeat conclusion trying to downplay the dangers of Fukushima is misleading. The long term escape of large amounts of radioactive materials at Fukushima is a very different situation to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

In fact, it is a logical fallacy to argue that Hiroshima and Nagasaki recovered well because of next to no radioactive materials being left there and therefore that Fukushima is no problem.

Though it is easy to see where the funding and motivation for these kinds of "arguments" is coming from.</comment>


Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain explored - <AUTHOR> https://techtake.info/2017/12/22/regulating-public-blockchains/ <comment><USER3> If this is the financial world you want, you just need a government database (ledger) of who has what currency and an API. Would be a lot simpler than blockchain which is designed to be de-centralized. Using blockchain for this is putting a square peg in a round hole.

<comment><USER4> There is an arguement to be made for starting with a secure system and adding in regulatory features. For instance, if we adopt the articles proposed regulatory node idea, where the only role of the trusted nodes is to approve transactions, then a complete compromise of the trusted systems would only allow an attacker to perform a DOS attack or bypass the regulatory checks. In contrast, in a traditional system, compromising the central party gives you the keys to the kingdom.

<comment><USER5> > _compromising the central party gives you the keys to the kingdom_

What does this look like in practice? The Federal Reserve being hacked? Why would an immutable blockchain make that more pleasant than our current, reversible system where something like the 1933 eight-day bank holiday [1] is possible?

Practically speaking, central banks get compromised by political factors much more frequently than by hackers.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Banking_Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Banking_Act)

<comment><USER6> Slightly off-topic but something doesn't have to be hacked to be compromised. In my book, manipulation by government for political or plain self-interest reasons counts as compromising.

<comment><USER5> > _manipulation by government for political or plain self-interest reasons > counts as compromising_

Some countries, _e.g._ the Cayman Islands or Zimbabwe, peg (or have pegged) their currency to a foreign currency [1]. There has also been discussion of rule-based monetary policy [2], where central bankers' discretion is limited. A blockchain would be a stricter form of both, amplifying their benefits as well as downsides.

TL; DR We don't understand monetary policy well enough, broadly enough, to have a set of rules everyone agrees are good. Such strictures are better than an economy being left to incompetent central bankers, or in certain limited cases ( _e.g._ Hong Kong or Bermuda's financial proximity to much-larger economies). For general cases, or in a permanent structure such as a blockchain, however, much more work needs to be done.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_board](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_board)

[2] [http://www.frbsf.org/education/publications/doctor- econ/2001...](http://www.frbsf.org/education/publications/doctor- econ/2001/april/monetary-policy-fixed-money-supply-taylor-rule/)

<comment><USER7> The Federal Reserve acts algorithmically. New money is only created when new loans are requested by big commercial banks, and those loans are demanded on behalf of retail loans, which are initiated in proportion with economic activity by economic actors. The only discretion involved is the interest rates on those loans, which indirectly controls people's willingness to take out loans.

<comment><USER8> > The Federal Reserve acts algorithmically .. only discretion involved is the > interest rates

I built a self driving car. The only human discretion is the steering wheel.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> In my opinion, this article conflates two separate phenomena: technology and politics.

Bitcoin is technology. It's assembling different parts into a tool that people can choose to use. Much like a car is assembled from different parts.

Regulation is politics. It's a social phenomenon that concerns _how_ we use the tools offered to us by technology.

The issue is that most, if not all, tools can be used both ethically and unethically. This reveals the fact that regulation has nothing to do with the tool itself, which means trying to modify the tool itself — as a form of regulation — doesn't make sense, since it ends up hurting the people who use the tool for doing good.

By all means, prosecute people who break the law, but do we really need to regulate the shape and size of vases, such that they can't be used to hit a spouse over the head during an argument?

<comment><USER6> Unfortunately with governments it's no longer about what makes sense but about what they can get away with. Much like you can expect a giant for-profit business to do anything to maximize its profit, one can expect a government to do what it can to maximise its control. That's just an observation.

Regulating cryptocurrencies can have the same effectiveness that regulating information exchange through the internet had. Yeah sure it can be a bit impractical or scary for most to go around artificial limitations imposed by their state but it is practically impossible to keep the really motivated from doing what they want.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> The technical feasibility isn't really explored here - and the 'regulatory node' aspect is essentially a 'trusted 3rd party' that power over the mutability of the blockchain.

It would seem like this layer would be fighting the very nature of systems like Bitcoin, or Ethereum.

</comment><comment><USER11> I am not sure how this could possibly work. To govern and regulate a public block-chain is fundamentally against what they stand for. A public block- chain-based cryptocurrency is meant to be resistant to government forces. They shouldn't be allowed to enforce rules on who or what you trade.

A better approach would be to regulate the exchanges, which is probably not too far off. However, even in this case decentralised exchanges like BISQ could most likely completely avoid any regulation.

<comment><USER12> > To govern and regulate a public block-chain is fundamentally against what > they stand for.

A block-chain has no stance for or against anything. Saying that a block-chain could be for or against governance is similar to saying that b*trees are pro- life.

<comment><USER13> Decentralisation and censorship resistance are fundamental properties of Bitcoin.

<comment><USER14> A blockchain is just a data structure. Bitcoin is more than just a data structure.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> By all means, write that software, add KYC tokens, and release it on Github as a more trusted, regulated Bitcoin. See how many miners and users adopt your nonsense.

This article shows a deep misunderstanding of why crypto currencies took off.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Most of the debate seems to be around "corruptible" politicians and how they want to control the financial system. Some purists in Blockchains are afraid of regulation it seems.

What does a world without regulation look like? In my opinion it is like playing with fire. It may cause forest fires or it may cook delicious meals.

In the interim, it is better to deal with a "known enemy" (personally I dont view regulation as an enemy). Decentralize regulation. If someone wants to create his own regulation, sure go ahead. Its just that your country's regulation may agree to trade with your regulation or may be not, based on what you have created. Negotiate well with your country's regulator, and get coins flowing across "your borders".

</comment><comment><USER16> I believe there is an elegant way for regulation. Regulation authorities just have to "taint" the coins according to some rules and publish the result.

For example they say which coins are clean and which are dirty and define a rule that upon a transaction you must first spend away your clean coins (the clean and dirty coins sets are updated by watching the blockchain).

By creating such an overlay currency over an exiting one they can provide incentive for actors to self regulate (i.e. you won't be willing to accept coins which you know are dirty if it means you won't be able to cash them out).

Anyone can create such an overlay coin (I call them rainbow coins). For example you can define a rule which will add a stamp to coins which go through a specific address (The idea being that people then send coins to this address, you send them back a fraction but this fraction is now "stamped").

What is great about this solution is that it can be applied to all public ledgers.

It doesn't work for the crypto currencies which don't have a public ledger (like Monero, Zcash, ...) but those are more risky per nature, as any implementation bug could mean that all the money can be diluted away and nobody would know.

<comment><USER12> Other than people not being able to use all coins in their possession, how does tainting coins achieve "an elegant way for regulation"?

<comment><USER16> It is elegant because you don't need to force people to switch to another complex crypto-blockchain that no-one will adopt. But there is more depth to it :

As an authority, you express your policy goals via a set of rules which grants you a fine policy-making abilities, and then either the market takes you into account and self-regulate to respect your policy or they give you ground for a global ban (but most likely some people will endorse it through fear and the others will have no other choice than to follow or be the one with the "hot potato" (divide&conquer) ).

But as every good tool/technology there are always multiple facets, and it can also be used to create value :

The beauty of decorating the ledger is that it allows to tie ethic to money. For example you can define some decoration rules, which can help promote environmental practices. For example you receive green coins when you donate to wwf, or when you interact with an eco-friendly business. (green token aren't new but the fact of it being public info is)

The great strength of this is that you are no longer bounded to be a summing to zero ledger for your decorated coins.

It can also helps people to cluster and transact only with people which shares some common values. For example if you want to avoid touching drug related money, then you can choose not to.

You can also reward with some coins certain behavior, like transactions between different communities which create out of thin-air coins received by both parties. It gives you fine knobs to adjust your economy.

You can build an e-reputation system upon these.

It probably can be exploited but it's not so easy as because all the books are public it removes incentives to cheat as you risk being marked.

You can create "coins that can't be bought". It is kind of fingerprinting your economic behavior to tell society what you want it to become.

If you can convince some people to share some set of values these rainbow coins can help you smoothly go from "ignored by society" values to values which can bring you new customers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The regulatory nodes seem to have created quite a stir! I believe this stir is partly because it is being viewed as a central authority to control the blockchain. This is an incorrect understanding of the proposal.

The top node of the hierarchy of regulation can be created by anyone.

However, those who want to legitimately (within their jurisdictions) use blockchains to improve the experience of transfer of coins (not just money, could be equity as well) can use it with the regulatory framework of the country.

Also, we must not forget that unregulated blockchains are being used as a bridge to transfer money between the legal and the illegal businesses.

By adopting the regulatory nodes framework, the transfer of coins will happen only between (or within) "well intended" regulations.

<comment><USER9> If adopting this technology is voluntary, it has nothing to do with regulation. It would simply be a superior protocol, that people choose to use.

"Voluntary regulation" is an oxymoron.

> Also, we must not forget that unregulated blockchains are being used as a > bridge to transfer money between the legal and the illegal businesses.

Nor must we forget that many countries, like Argentina, make it illegal for people to save up for retirement in currencies that are less inflationary than the national currency.

In these countries, this makes saving up in bitcoins illegal activity. But it should be clear who's committing a crime against whom (the government against the people).

Bitcoin was built for exactly this purpose: to fight against government regulation whose purpose is only the survival of government at the expense of the people, as opposed to being a service to the people.

<comment><AUTHOR> If one voluntarily chooses to trade coins of "out of jurisdictional regulation part of the blockchain", the person will not be able to get those coins into the "regulated part of the blockchain". This is how the bridge between legal and illegal businesses would be broken.

I do not know about the cases you are referring to, as I am not a lawyer, nor an economist and not a statesman.

Within the reasonable countries (most part of the world) one should be able to trade legally, transfer the coins without violating laws of the involved jurisdictions. This would be possible even between different countries.

If you see through it, you will notice that you can create your own "Regulation" within / between a group of your counterparts. Its not taking away your freedom, its just breaking the bridge between legal and illegal businesses.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Eventually software people will work out what fiat money is - a way for a state to obtain service.

Since you need the states money to pay taxes and you need to obtain it or be jailed then there will always be exchanges. So you just regulate on the state money side of the fence and ban all exchange transactions into the states money that cannot prove their source.

Once enough people have been burned in the Wild West the fad will fade to an eclectic elite. Just like buying fine art.

And the stuff that's useful - like decoupling your account from the transaction provider - will be adopted by state currencies.

</comment><comment> Salami-banker I have been denied a bank account in Canada due to my ethnic background. Articles like this terrify me.

<comment><USER18> As a Canadian I'm curious for details.

<comment> Salami-banker I went to HSBC Canada to open a Euro denominated account. The bank representative noted my named, and asked, smiling, what my background is.

I told her I'm from Vancouver. She said that's not what she meant, so I assumed she was asking whether my background was Iranian to make conversation (this was the branch in North Vancouver, which has a large Iranian-Canadian population, so I thought she was going to make a remark about Iranian-Canadian clients that she knows).

I told her my background is Iranian. She said that anyone of Iranian background would need to get special approval to open a Euro denominated account with HSBC Canada due to US sanctions.

I explained to her that I'm a Canadian citizen, that I moved to Canada when I was three years old, and that I don't have Iranian citizenship or any connections to Iran.

She said it doesn't matter, and that even if only my parents were born in Iran, or I had extended family living in Iran, I was considered to be a person with "connections to Iran", and thus needing special approval to get an account.

A week later the bank representative called me and told me that my request to open an account was rejected.

<comment><USER19> This is outrageous. As a fellow Canadian whose parents immigrated here, I am fed up with Canada's reputation as friendly and welcoming to foreigners. While it is to a degree, the racism here is much stronger than people seem to be willing to acknowledge.

<comment> Salami-banker Thanks for your words of support. The experience has been surreal for me.

What saddens me most is that in a sense, I'm one of the lucky ones: I genuinely don't have any connections to Iran. I might be able to complain and have the policy reversed on people like me.

But what if I _did_ have connections to Iran? What if I had immigrated at 22, and still had Iranian citizenship? Or what if I never got a chance to immigrate, and still lived in Iran? In that case, I would be totally rejected by a world that justifies official discrimination against me, in the name of enforcing sanctions that are deemed necessary to achieve geopolitical objectives.

The worst part of it all would be knowing that the world at large considers me expendable, and would accept policies that lead to my discrimination as a lesser of two evils.

There would be no way out if I were in that position, because the quality of mine that is discriminated against is one I was born with, and complaining wouldn't help, because most people would just say "tough luck". When the crowd thinks you deserve to suffer because of what you _are_ , rather than what you've _done_ , it's a crushing feeling. I have a taste of that now and it's terrifying.

Regarding racism and discrimination in Canada: I agree that there is much more of it here than people generally perceive. I do think Canada is less racist/discriminatory than most countries, but the difference is not as big as commonly believed.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Regulation has to be part of the blockchain itself. Trusting a third party (regulatory nodes) is exactly the system cryptocurrencies were invented to avoid....

</comment><comment><USER21> Oh, there are countless ways governments can regulate crypto currencies without such regulation being built into the currencies themselves. Right now, crypto currencies are entirely useless for 99 percent of real world purchases. You cannot buy a cup of coffee with your satoshis. All you can do is to buy a few digital assets and a tiny fraction of the world's real assets. You might as well try to buy dinner with your facebook stock or to pay your rent with cacao or tulips.

Let's say that government decides the only legal tender for purchasing real estate is the government's fiat currency of choice, for example euros or dollars, and that the only way to obtain a deed or to legally borrow money is to show through a government run website that you paid for the real estate with that fiat currency. That's it. Now government indirectly controls crypto currencies. You can develop all the crypto currencies you want, but if you can't use it for purchasing real estate, the ramifications of that constraint will trickle down through almost anything else. Then receiving rent in crypto is less interesting. then being paid in crypto is useless.

And about that: Want to pay or receive a salary? What if government says that can only happen with fiat and that any attempt of paying or receiving salary in crypto currencies is a felony that will land you in a fiat funded correctional facility for years? You would think twice. How will government know? The same way they know that you bought drugs: Through witnesses, agents, ISPs telling on you etc. It doesn't have to be 100 percent efficient. If they have the ability to catch 0.01 percent of transactions and the punishment is severe, most people will not do it. Don't tell me that crypto is encrypted and anonymous. As soon as you use it for a real world thing, you leave traces. You buy a car; someone sold it. Someone heard. Someone saw. You can't show a fiat transaction; that will be the proof that legislator says is enough to convict you. If government decides to make crypto illegal, or to make certain transactions illegal when paid with crypto, crypto will only be good for the grey economy.

Or what if government said that no matter in what currency you make your money, taxes have to be settled in fiat.

The point is that all government has to do is to ensure that fiat is needed for certain key parts of the economic system. Then people will need fiat, and government can then focus on regulating the exchanges between fiat and crypto. There is a very limited number of banks, and a small number of payment providers and a small number of ISPs. They just need to ensure that these organisations enforce the rules (register who bought or sold what crypto currency etc.). Pretty soon, the only crypto currency that 99 percent would use would be the government backed one, the one that had backdoors or whatever government demanded built in.

<comment><USER22> Good arguments, but I think the most valid one is about land and property - <USER2> government, on the most fundamental level, is a force controlling an area.

However, the control can't really extend to remote work (I'm sure VR headsets will make it easy enough) - workers can live in N countries and it's not like the government will start controlling their every minute. Some countries will surely be on the crypto-economy side too.

And it's not like those countries will stay idle - people will be directly incentivised to immigrate to them. Some wars may be fought because of it, sanctions or dictators will try to prevent it.

But in the end there is nothing any government can do really: a tool now exists to send any kind of value any distance in a matter of a second, without a trace, using maybe even thoughts alone. It's as if a completely new law of physics suddenly appeared. Everyone will eventually have to adapt.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> The solution is for the world to adapt to the blockchain, not the blockchain adapt to the world.

</comment><comment><USER24> Funny how "regulate blockchain now!" is trending after BTC loses 1/5th of its value in less than a week.

Oh, how quickly the private market looks to the wider community to externalize its losses.</comment>


Tell HN: We've built a high-performance persistent cache engine - <AUTHOR>

Hello hners!
I'm pleased to inform you that we're releasing into the wild a high-performance cache engine.
It's called wrpme and it's got a nice logo!
http://www.wrpme.com/
We've been working on the beast for a while now and it's been used with success on very demanding applications (hint: it's high frequency and it's commonly regarded as the root of all evil).
Key features:
- fast
- scalable
- persistent
- low-maintenance
- multi-platforms (FreeBSD, Linux & Windows)
- low fat, low sugar!
We're keen on having your feedback, whether you think it's totally useless or the greatest software ever written. <comment><USER2> Could you compare with memcached etc, and describe some usecases where your solution would be much superior?

<comment><AUTHOR> Basically wrpme is currently like memcachedb. We don't have some features such as atomic increments and the like at the moment (and we may never have them).

We're much faster than memcached on a multi-processor machine but we're working on a meaningful benchmark. It would be easy to produce a benchmark where we're 10 x faster and that would demonstrate nothing.

We aim at being faster in all usecases. Show us when we are slower and we will fix it.

<comment><USER2> In what ways are you better than memcachedb? Since they're free and you're not?

<comment><AUTHOR> Objective reasons:

\- faster (especially on 64-bit multiprocessor machines)

\- works on Windows out of the box

\- scalable on multi-processor machines

\- support

Download a version and see for yourself!

<comment><USER2> How does it compare to membase?

<comment><AUTHOR> membase is based on memcache afaik

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Interesting.

What also would be interesting is what made you release this as a commercial solution when so many similar free and open source solutions exist?

<comment><AUTHOR> A genuine question!

\- We're faster than memcached and redis (benchmark coming soon). When I say faster I mean really faster not "10 % faster".

\- We work on Windows out of the box - a real plus in a commercial context

\- We offer support for our software (yeah, seriously!)

\- We scale well on multi-processor machines. AFAIK that's not the case of open source solutions (it's even by design in the case of redis).

There's still much to do to improve our offer and we're working on it.

<comment><USER4> It looks good, and solid. Ignoring the salesy-ness of your posts, it sounds like you've got a feature-set worth charging for.

That said, if you have trouble getting initial traction, you might consider giving it away and charging for support / services. This will allow customers to try it out freely, get used to it, and if they like it, become hooked. This tactic has worked for 10gen and crack dealers everywhere.

You can always charge for the software later, of course; but I think the general opinion of memcache is that it's "good enough", so supplanting it may prove non-trivial.

Oh, and your logo really is quite nice indeed.

<comment><USER5> > if you have trouble getting initial traction, you might consider giving it > away and charging for support / services.

This is a _very_ sound piece of advice. You should give it a _serious_ thought.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Can you tell us a bit more about what products wrpme is similar to and why it is better, and how it works?

<comment><AUTHOR> wrpme is similar to memcachedb.

We believe it's better because it's faster. It's also using a binary protocol for reduced bandwidth usage. Many caches uses text or xml to transmit data.

The design is highly asynchronous and designed to work on a 64-bit multiprocessor computer.

wrpme is actually a collection of mini daemons (we call them nanodaemons) that execute simple tasks and communicate via messages. It's been inspired by microkernel operating systems.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard_%28microkernel%29#V_me...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard_%28microkernel%29#V_messaging_semantics)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Is this technology being used anywhere commercially or with intent for commercial use? Can you also quantify how long/roughly how many thousands of hours of effort this has been in development?

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, it's currently used by two of our customers for grid computing applications.

Development started in late 2009 but there was a couple of "let's redo this part" and "ho, wait, it's never going to work!".

<comment><USER7> Have you had a chance to measure operational throughput vs hardware utilization yet? I'd be very interested in loose metrics and stats instead of a general "faster than" statement.

<comment><AUTHOR> We manage to saturate the memory bandwidth. We can do 3,000,000 get / sec on a Core i7 machine with entries of roughly 1 kib in size.

Having benchmarks is our #1 priority

<comment><USER7> Sorry for my slow response; how does the process handle scaling above 1kb? Traditionally there's a predictable curve of expected performance as the scale of request size increases.

Happy to take this conversation private; spent the last 10 years in performance and scalability as a indie consultant for Fortune companies. I know a lot of people looking for replacement mechanisms for high volume, variable sized transaction enterprise buses.

Also interested to understand the data access methods you've tested and what works best with your code. eengstrom >at< gmail.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> An URL on which you can click:

<http://www.wrpme.com/></comment>


TiDB in the Browser: Running a Golang Database on WebAssembly - <AUTHOR> https://pingcap.com/blog/tidb-in-the-browser-running-a-golang-database-on-webassembly/ <comment><AUTHOR> Thanks to Wasm ([https://webassembly.org/](https://webassembly.org/)) for making it possible to build desktop-quality applications in the web browser.

Thanks to the Golang for supporting Wasm, and making it possible to run performant Golang applications or even databases in the web browser.

Thanks to the Ti-Cool team in the TiDB community for contributing TiDB-Wasm in the 2019 TiDB Hackathon, making running TiDB in local model with by embedding GoLevelDB in the web browser possible. The team members are currently working on a technical blog to share how they made it. Stay tuned!</comment>


Ask HN: Comics/graphic novel for geeks? - <AUTHOR>

Apart from marvel and manga stuff, is there any cool comics? Techie, near future etc? <comment><USER2> Yes, plenty! Warren Ellis has some great stuff, particularly Transmetropolitan, Global Frequency, and now Trees¹. The Private Eye is an independent series, also ongoing, about a near future where privacy is much more important to society. The Fuse is a policial where all the events happen in a "floating city", orbiting around the Earth. Planetoid and Who is Jake Ellis are both good short series (4 and 5 issues, respectively), though the latter may not fit as sci-fi necessarily. Last but not least, there's Prophet, though that's a more fantasy mixed work.

I recommend looking into publishers such as Image Comics (lots of good creator-owned series with cheap DRM-free releases) and Vertigo, a DC imprint dedicated to different kinds of works, which includes both Transmet and V for Vendetta.

¹ My favorite work by him is actually Fell, but there's nothing futuristic or techy about it.

<comment><USER3> I don't know Warren Ellis's other stuff that well, but I thoroughly enjoyed Transmetropolitan, and would also recommend it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I second (or third) Warren Ellis's stuff. Orbiter and Ministry of Space are a couple of good sci-fi books. Planetary's also pretty awesome, but it's more superhero-y.

Others off the top of my head:

Wizzywig by Ed Piskor - fictional account of a Kevin Mitnick-type hacker.

We3 by Grant Morrison and Frank Quitely - 3 bionically enhanced animals escape their captors and talk funny.

Lazarus by Greg Rucka and Michael Lark - an immortal hitwoman with a conscience in a feudal society.

RASL by Jeff Smith - art thief is chased through parallel universes.

Casanova by Matt Fraction, Fabio Moon and Gabriel Ba - more parallel universe hijinks, this time with spies.

</comment><comment><USER5> I never could effectively read and process comics without a lot of effort -- something about transitioning the brain rapidly between text and image processing. I guess my left brain and right brain can't function in parallel (I'm sure there is a name for this "condition").

But back to the question, I've heard from people who enjoy comics that Girl Genius is fairly good -- there is a good write up on it on [http://www.quadibloc.com/other/anoint.htm](http://www.quadibloc.com/other/anoint.htm)

(BTW, this guys home page has a huge treasure trove of random knowledge -- worth exploring a bit more).

</comment><comment><USER6> The comic version of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep was great, it's the same text as the novel but an excellent experience. Sandman and Watchmen are general must-reads if you haven't gotten to those yet.

</comment><comment><USER7> Saga, Y: The last man, Ex Machina, Alex + Ada, The Sword.

Not really techie but a really good comic & gorgeous art (imo): Sex criminals

</comment><comment><USER8> Manhattan Projects has a fantastic cast you'll recognise.</comment>


A new back end and optimizer for Scalac - <AUTHOR> http://magarciaepfl.github.io/scala/

<comment><USER2> Sounds great. It's good to know that this is planned to become the default in Scala 2.12.[1]

[1] [http://scala-lang.org/news/2.12-roadmap](http://scala- lang.org/news/2.12-roadmap)

</comment><comment><USER3> Does it produce Android-friendly classes?

<comment><USER4> It requires Java8. Android doesn't Java8. So no, no help for you there.

<comment><USER5> It's simply incorrect. Where you found that information?

In section 2.3 android is mentioned explicitly: "These features are more useful on Android (besides micro-benchmarks) where a vast RAM doesn't masquerade redundant allocations."

In section 5.2 you can read: "This prototype requires -target:jvm-1.7. Right now scalac doesn't produce the newest class file format of JDK8. In the meantime, -target:jvm-1.7 can be used on that platform. A discussion about performance at: [https://groups.google.com/d/msg/scala- internals/uBxprJixpwk/...](https://groups.google.com/d/msg/scala- internals/uBxprJixpwk/jG78X1k_92IJ")

If you will check that link first sentence in the thread is: "To recap, the new backend supports Java 6 and 7. In an experimental branch (based itself on the experimental backend) there's now support for MethodHandles, building upon "Late Closure Classes", ie the ability of the new backend to materialize anonymous closure classes as it emits bytecode."

So yes, it supports java 1.7. And yes, it can help on android.</comment></comment></comment>


Supercell first investors invest in developer container startup in Finland - <AUTHOR> http://arcticstartup.com/article/container-kontena-launch/ <comment><USER2> The name of said startup is Kontena :) www.kontena.io</comment>


Show HN: Am I Being Underpaid – Find the average salary of your team anonymously - <AUTHOR> https://are-we-being-underpaid.herokuapp.com/

<comment><USER2> Participant emails should be optional. I want to post this on Facebook group instead, I don't have others email address.

<comment><AUTHOR> I thought about that and had the following two concerns.

1\. Prevent a malicious user from setting up a survey with only one other person's email address. 2\. Ensure that everyone knows the full group that is being surveyed by including the list in the email (so that they can not worry about #1)

I can definitely see the value in being able to post a link somewhere and have people be able to just follow it to report.

Got any suggestions on how to deal with or mitigate the exploitation of the system in that manner?

I also can now see the downside in having everyone's email on the list. It makes it feel less anonymous. Seems like you have to trade one for the other. True anonymity and ensuring salary data doesn't leak.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Source code: [https://github.com/pipermerriam/am-i- underpaid](https://github.com/pipermerriam/am-i-underpaid)</comment>


Philosopher Bryan Magee remains wonder-struck by the ultimate questions - <AUTHOR> https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/04/even-old-age-philosopher-bryan-magee-remains-wonder-struck-ultimate-questions <comment><USER2> I read Magee's book Confessions of a Philosopher some years ago and it was agonizing. Magee's personal bitterness was so pungent and so awkwardly colored his thoughts on philosophical topics that I found myself struggling to finish the book.

Of all the books on philosophy I have read, that book by Magee was easily the most off-putting.

<comment><USER3> I thought it was a fantastic introduction to Western Philosophy.

One of the top 5 books I recommend to people who have an interest in philosophy but no academic background in the area.

<comment><USER4> What are the other 4?

<comment><USER3> This is an extremely personal question. I have _extreme_ biases, I personally favour:

Bryan Magee's book on Schopenhauer.

German Idealism/The Fate of reason by Fredrick Beiser.

Hegel and the Hermetic Tradition by Glenn Magee

Kant's Transcendental Idealism: An Interpretation and Defense by Allison

Plato: Complete Works by John Cooper is good

The Paidea series by Jaeger is amazing as is the four volume collection by Giovanni Reale if you're interested in ancient philosophies (like me)

\</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment>-----

The 'phenomenological' school is considered important.

Making Sense of Heidegger by Sheehan

Merleau-Ponty's Philosophy by Hass

However I think most true Western thought is to be found in the great works of literature. Ovid/Dante etc. try reading Howard Blooms work "The Western Canon".

Personally I find most western philosophy quite turgid.

<comment><USER5> At the Existentialist Cafe by Bakewell I think is the best catch-all for phenomenology in many ways despite being part historical rather than full philosophy. Would highly recommend even if one is familiar with the usual suspects featured in it.

<comment><USER6> Agreed, it's a wonderful book.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> His book /Men of Ideas/ is a set of conversations with leading philosophers (among them Searle, Chomsky, Quine), accessible to non experts. I read it as a kid and whenever I happen to revisit it I find just as inspiring. It seems to be out of print, though the videos from the BBC show are ironically on youtube,

/The Great Philosophers/ in which prominent philosophers discuss the major figures in the canon of Western philosophy (Plato, Aristotle, Hume, Kant, etc.) is also enticing, though less than /Men of Ideas/.

</comment><comment><USER7> I think he would find the philosophy on eternal reoccurrence and determinism helpful. I'm somewhat an atheist and find the two calming around existence & death. I wonder how so by his imagination of Einstein was rooted on his work or the ideology that god doesn't roll dice.

<comment><USER8> You think a person who steeped himself in philosophy his entire life is unfamiliar with eternal recurrence (not "reoccurrence") and determinism?

No. Such people are bound to die restless and unfulfilled. There's a class of people who _need_ to know the answers to _all_ questions. It strikes me as a sort of ADD (I mean it in the non-technical "I am not a shrink" way). I agree with the article that the answers to many questions are unattainable or unknowable.

The trick as an atheist is to find peace with that. Some even satisfy their natural drive toward spiritualism with it.

<comment><USER9> Indeed - philosophy is similar to theology in that both have unattainable goals: _Philosophers look for answers to questions for which there are no answers; theology studies that which does not exist_.

<comment><USER10> I'm often left a bit baffled and frustrated when atheists start off their arguments with coherent and interesting thoughts only to end, what could've been the start of a productive discussion, with snarky and childish remarks.

I, for one, dabble in these questions out of genuine and innate curiosity and I believe others do too. Isn't it then counterproductive to deal in absolutes when the only thing we can be certain of is that we are still quite too ignorant to answer those ultimate questions?

Maybe I am reading too much into your "theology studies that which does not exist", but, again, remarks like these are really off-putting. It is already almost impossible to find discussions in this area that take an exploratory and open-minded approach, and I'd hope that at least forums like these could be free of that.

<comment><USER8> Sounds like you're expecting everyone to see eye to eye with you. The person you're responding to expressed how he or she sees things. The only person who seems to be trying to cut off certain lines of conversation is you.

<comment><USER10> I don't think you're being fair here. Although it is possible that the person did not write the comment in the disingenuous way in which I perceived it, I am not willing to regard him as so naive.

Importantly, it is not the opinion itself which I find off-putting - it's the way in which it is conveyed. It was neither insightful nor did it encourage any meaningful discussion... No, I'd go further: consciously or unconsciously its only purpose was to reaffirm the author's pre-existing convictions and to put down those of others.

I also understand why my comment could come off as trying to cut off certain lines of conversation as well, but the only reason why I am even getting frustrated about this is because I want to have MORE of those honest conversations about these seemingly controversial topics; it doesn't matter to me which way they lead me.

I believe that the "ultimate" questions have value in them that is not necessarily tied to them being answered, at the very least in the same way the exercise is good for one's body - I hope you would agree here as well. Unfortunately, most of the time, it is quite hard to find balanced online discussions which would bring an exploratory and open mindset to these questions; instead, they're usually quickly bombarded with dogmatic responses - an example of which I'm now ranting about.

<comment><USER11> Theology is generally the study of the dogma of your chosen religion. Assuming any of the field is based on truth requires you to already believe what the religion says, as "a long time ago this guy said this" is not a convincing argument. Almost everyone will find this true, as even if they believe it for their chosen religious theology they generally don't for all the others.

The "ultimate questions" are the realm of philosophy.

<comment><USER10> Although there is no question that a large part of the religious dogma is straight out false, it seems to me that, knowing how many things we still have no understanding of, it would be just as unproductive to outright dismiss _all of it_ as false.

But, again, my issue is not with the dismissal - I'm completely fine with the idea that people might come to that conclusion and I'm open to the idea myself. My issue is with the cheap jabs that are not even honest expressions of one's feelings.

My criticisms might seem strange and uncalled-for if one only considers this instance in isolation, but it keeps happening, again and again, and throughout many different types of media. Just recently I was reading Sam Harris' book; it's quite small and a fun read at times, yet it quickly became a chore to get through, as it is full of those irrelevant cheap-shots. The thing is, in the right place, in the right context, those remarks could be interesting, however, when misplaced like that, they end up coming off as someone simply having a chip on their shoulder.

I consider it really unfortunate that it seems that the atheist side, whose thoughts I'm most interested in hearing, fallbacks to this strategy quite too often. And thus, instead of a philosophical debate, we end up with a two- person monologue where the beliefs of the atheist are presented no more rationally the those of the religious.

<comment><USER11> >Although there is no question that a large part of the religious dogma is straight out false, it seems to me that, knowing how many things we still have no understanding of, it would be just as unproductive to outright dismiss all of it as false.

You either dismiss it all as false, accept it all as true, or you are a hypocrite. The evidence is the same for all theologies. It's unproductive to consider ideas that either have no evidence or have no logical basis, and that describes theology.

> The thing is, in the right place, in the right context, those remarks could > be interesting, however, when misplaced like that, they end up coming off as > someone simply having a chip on their shoulder

For most of the past several thousand years, politely wording these sentiments could end in your death. Even now, a failure to at least pay lip service to Christian theology leaves you largely ineligible for public office, and may limit other opportunities. So yes, there is a chip on their shoulder, many people have a negative opinion about them no matter how tactful they are.

>And thus, instead of a philosophical debate, we end up with a two-person monologue where the beliefs of the atheist are presented no more rationally the those of the religious.

There is no debate with "the religious," there belief is based on things that are not debatable. They often pride themselves on how their belief comes from faith. The philosophical debate is another thing altogether.

<comment><USER10> Organized religion is a human endeavor and it should be taken as such. However, if we put aside the politics and consider it strictly from the view of someone who is trying to figure out the world, I don't see why it is necessary to throw out the baby with its bathwater.

The fact that many different religions try to tackle the same questions makes the possibility that a particular one has THE answers seem unlikely. However, the fact they all gravitate towards the same kinds of answers is something that should not be easily dismissed if we want to move the discussion forward. To me, it seems that some sort of spiritual element is always gonna have to be in play; that is, if we want to have any chance of answering those questions in a manner that is not only true in the scientific sense but also in a way that satisfies the restlessness which had inspired the search of the answers in the first place. I must add, that the need to satisfy the restlessness, of course, should not be taken as an excuse for accepting sub-par resolutions.

>For most of the past several thousand years, politely wording these sentiments could end in your death. Even now, a failure to at least pay lip service to Christian theology leaves you largely ineligible for public office, and may limit other opportunities. So yes, there is a chip on their shoulder, many people have a negative opinion about them no matter how tactful they are.

This has genuinely changed my view on this matter, thank you for bringing it up. Reading or listening to eloquent people discuss the topics, it's been easy for me to get hypnotized by their elegant arguments (even the ones I don't agree with) and to forget the human that has crafted them. Growing up in a country where militant religious attitudes (or strong religious attitudes at all, really) are basically non-existent, I didn't really think about the point that those people might have actually been slighted by religion in some way.

<comment><USER11> >However, the fact they all gravitate towards the same kinds of answers is something that should not be easily dismissed if we want to move the discussion forward.

If you analyze their answers, you realize that the same questions remain after answered. Answering "why are we here" with "god made us" just changes the question to "why is god here?" Their answers are similar as they generally were not developed independently.

And again, all of their answers have no logical or scientific foundation. I could not develop Christian theology without already having a bible, while the philosophical debates presumably could be reproduced independently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> > _He's an agnostic troubled continuously by the unknowability, indeed the > incomprehensibility, of total reality; of what lies beyond the world of > appearances and can never be breached._

The article gave me the impression that Bryan Magee is troubled by boredom mostly.

These 'meaning of life' questions can trick people into believing that it's not knowing the answers to some questions, that is the cause of their unrest.

It's never that, it's always so much more simple :) I don't know that philosophy students realize they're playing mind games with themselves, for self-amusement. They have a tendency to take ideas seriously, life seriously, and then oh my, you have 1001 problems to deal with!

<comment><USER13> If someone finds some feature of human existence troubling, what does it mean to say that it's 'not really' that feature that's causing them trouble? Sure, he might be happier if he was more stimulated, but that doesn't mean that he wouldn't still be a bit troubled when he took a little time to remember what troubled him before.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> As someone with a background in both philosophy and psychology, I can't help thinking that both Magee's sense of terror and his ambition to make an immortal contribution to philosophy both come at least in part from his mother's failure to love him as a child.

</comment><comment><USER14> His questions are easy. He just never learned from someone who knows the answers. If I were in his shoes I would have asked a master about them.

> Why is the universe so incredibly complicated?

It's not. What exactly is the range of the term universe? It's broad so he ought to point out what he wants to know exactly and where it is. Things of the world are simple when you know, but they are complicated to find out .

> does it [(time)] have a beginning?

Yes, it begins with activities. Not a very deep question; it needs improvement to see a meaningful answer. If you have the wrong question in your mind then even a master's answers will not match.

> the riddle of why we sleep

This is more of a biology question but if you want to know from a theory standpoint why it happens, the answer is that what exists does so by repeating what has been in itself and it only changes based on what happens to it. Living beings repeat the bonds of birth and death repeatedly. Death is a time of rest for human beings because their life is a time of work.

> What the hell is it all about?

Imprecise question. Clear why he obtained no concrete answer.

> What are we doing here?

Trying to improve your truths through the precious opportunity of life

> What's going on?

You will know that after you can open your eye to the fundamental principle of the world. But he didn't have enough virtue to reach that level yet.

<comment><USER15> We're missing out on what you have to share because you're addressing questions asked not by Magee but by a journalist constructing a narrative for the readers of this article, and so we get this dismissive comment. We don't need such dramatized attacks on "wrongness"—we need thoughtful discussion where we stand to learn something substantive. Hacker News readers can handle it.

<comment><USER14> It seems you're getting a little caught up in an assumption that I posited who "he" is. It's not important... what's important are the questions themselves. For example, if you truly intended to gain what I have then you should either (a) prove that there is no such dire wrongness or (b) provisionally retract your claim that the result of such wrong thought is not actually huge. I'm not commenting to be treated well by humans. If you can't show something which you need to know which we can exchange in real conversation, then I'm going to remain wary of the actual meaning of your reply.</comment></comment></comment>


[SF or Anywhere] Venture Hacks is looking for a One (Wo)man Developer Army - <AUTHOR> http://www.venturehacks.com/articles/hiring-developer <comment><AUTHOR> Hiya,

I hope you don't mind if I put this job posting up here. I have seen other non-YC companies doing it so I thought I would tag along. Please let me know if it is inappropriate.

\--

ONE (WO)MAN DEVELOPER ARMY

We're looking for a one (wo)man developer army who wants to work with Venture Hacks to build our next product. It's in a $25 billion market filled with lame products and unsatisfied customers.

We're also offering a $1000 referral bounty if we hire someone you refer.

ABOUT US

Naval and I have started companies like Epinions and Songbird where we've raised $100M+ from investors like Sequoia. Read our full bios for the whole story.

Now, we've gone crazy for helping entrepreneurs build their businesses. You already know about our first product: Term Sheet Hacks. The hacks will keep coming--unsolicited reviews from the founders of Flixster and "Hot or Not" call the hacks "much needed" and "fantastic".

The next Venture Hacks product is going to serve a $25 billion market and make it even easier for entrepreneurs to raise money. It's going to be a lot of fun to build it and take over the universe (or something smaller like a galaxy).

ABOUT YOU

Contribution: Build a great user experience and back-end. Social software experience is a plus. Full-time or consulting works for us. Develop with whatever tools and language you think are best for the project.

Compensation: Salary is above market and stock is way above market.

Contact: Send links to your best work to firstname.lastname@example.com. Please include one or two sentences that describe why you have a high level of ability.

Gracias!

<comment><AUTHOR> P.S. This is a founder-level role for the right person.

<comment><USER2> Hi nivi, this sounds interesting, but can you elaborate a bit on your development structure? A single-developer place triggers some alarm bells in my head: <http://eddiesguy.blogspot.com/2007/06/creating-my-own-personal- hell.html>

I am in the market, but I've spent the last seven years working alone on my dissertation, and I really want to be part of a 2-3 man team this time around. I think that is the ideal structure.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Kartik,

The ideal person will build the first version of the product. Front-end and back-end.

I would collaborate with him/her to define what the product looks like but I won't write any code. I'm strong technically (MIT EECS Ph.D. dropout) but I am not a developer.

I can do copy writing of course. And work through any admin panels we set up.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


YouTube Red and Google Play Music to Merge - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2017/7/26/16048084/youtube-red-google-play-music-merging?utm_campaign=micahsingleton&utm_content=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter <comment><USER2> Was there historically a way to subscribe to either one of them without also getting the other? The article says you already get Google Play Music for free if you subscribe to YouTube Red...

I did the opposite (and getting rid of commercials in YouTube was a big selling point for my Google Play Music family plan sub.)

Sounds like nothing more than a rebranding (and personnel merge, OK so it's a big deal for the developers, but seems like no significant change for the users at this time anyway.) If a result of this change is that one day, I will be able to listen to music videos on YouTube with my Google Home then I will be happy about it.

(Doesn't work now, because YouTube cast button assumes you also care about the video in the stream. So when casting from YouTube, you only get the option to cast to devices that support video. Even though there is plenty of content on YouTube that has one still frame fixed in place for the entire song! You can still cast the audio from your entire device, but then "next track" voice command is surely not going to work.)</comment>


Google (possibly) rolling out updated UI - <AUTHOR> http://imgur.com/a/adg00 Today, I found out that Google looked a little bit different than usual. Could it be I'm looking at Google's future UI? <comment><USER2> Considering that these look very like the design of www.wdyl.com AND we're only seeing this after wdyl.com is unveiled I'm led to believe that this is the product of someone who has too much time on their hands.

The design is also very not-google-style, look at the buttons. There's a blue one for the image search and then some crap looking grey ones for text search.

<comment><USER3> Um... no. Read my comment.

<comment><USER2> I commented on it before you wrote this!

<comment><USER3> Obviously. I can't preempt your comment. I'm not a mind reader. But now that you've read it, you can see it verified.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Explanation: This morning, Google suddenly looked different on my laptop. I believe that I was lucky enough to see the new UI as it was being A/B-tested.

<comment><USER2> oh ok, maybe it is real then! That would be awesome. Looks _far_ nicer than the current design (if you could call it design)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I've had that interface for a while now (probably regional split testing).</comment>


Maintainability Through Colocation - <AUTHOR> https://kentcdodds.com/blog/colocation <comment><USER2> Very much agree with this, and I tend to make similar decisions, including strongly preferring CSS in JS frameworks.

The one item I'd caveat though is colocation of state. The author is right that often it is best to colocate state with the component that needs it. On the other hand though, often the state cannot be decoupled in this way and you have interactions between states of different components; in these cases, it is often better to colocate all the state together in one place. That is the essence behind e.g. stores like redux in web programming.

</comment><comment><USER3> Why not colocate your database queries and business logic inside of your view/template/stylesheet? Just put it all in one file.

<comment><AUTHOR> I do it in React using hooks. For example with GraphQL queries.</comment></comment>


Save the planet by eating a dog? The eco-paw prints of dogs - <AUTHOR> http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/national/2987821/Save-the-planet-eat-a-dog

<comment><USER2> Interesting.

However:

> The eco-pawprint of a pet dog is twice that of a 4.6-litre Land Cruiser > driven 10,000 kilometres a year, researchers have found.

"Normal" yearly driving in the U.S. is generally considered to be 12,000 miles, or a bit under 20,000 km. And that's a lot more than 10,000.

</comment><comment><USER3> The next logical step would be ... kids?</comment>


Using Modernizr to detect HTML5 features and provide fallbacks - <AUTHOR> http://html5doctor.com/using-modernizr-to-detect-html5-features-and-provide-fallbacks/ <comment><USER2> Dive into html5 also talks a bit about modernizr. That's how I found out about this library.

<http://diveintohtml5.info/detect.html></comment>


A Brooklyn Artist Trademarked The 'Pi' Symbol, And People Are Furious - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/someone-managed-to-copyright-pi-2014-6#ixzz33cigyCrG

<comment><USER3> Unlike patents, trademarks are not subject to tests for obviousness or prior art, and unlike copyright there is no concept of a public domain, although generic marks cannot be trademarked eg 'food' or 'clothing' are not trademarkeable terms because they refer to a class of goods. Nor can you trademark for functionality, eg you can't trademark handles on cups or wheels on a bicycle. And there are some specific exceptions like national flags, identities of individuals other than the claimant, or making false claim to a geographical region for agricultural products.

Otherwise, almost anything goes - you can trademark colors, logos, fragrances, and what-all else. The basic requirements are that a mark be distinctive - <USER2> easily identifiable - and that it be used in commerce (at least in the US, because trademark registration authority derives from the Commerce Clause in the Constitution).

This trademark seems to have been properly filed, brought to public notice, and issued. It has no effect on the use of Pi in math books, computer code, discussions like this one, or most other categories, but it does apply to the use of the symbol on athletic/casual clothing. Sucks, but it's legit. Y Combinator could equally trademark the 'Y' logo that appears in the top left corner of HN for use in the context of business development, and someone would write a story along the lines of 'Investor Paul Graham trademarks the letter Y.'</comment>


Grigori Perelman - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman

<comment><USER2> Biography is incomplete, he recently moved to Sweden: [http://www.themoscowtimes.com/article/504076.html](http://www.themoscowtimes.com/article/504076.html) .</comment>


If Your Products Sucks, Your Startup is DOA  - <AUTHOR> http://www.markevanstech.com/2013/05/28/startup-doa/ <comment><USER2> This seems to assume 'whether it sucks or not' is a fact. It's not.</comment>


A day without X (server) - <AUTHOR> http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/2007/05/21/a-day-without-x <comment><USER2> I recently went for a couple of weeks without X, after my laptop was stolen and I was forced to use my formerly-headless home server as my primary machine.

Some useful tools the blog post misses include:

Links2 is a hack of the original links that adds framebuffer image support, so you can view webpages with graphics directly. It's pretty limited in every other respect, though.

libcaca, the Colour AsCii Art library, comes with "cacaview" for viewing images on the console. Not terribly useful on 80x25, but if you can boost your console resolution it's pretty good.

vlc include a libcaca output mode, so you can watch movies.

gpm is a must, so you can still select text and middle-click-paste it (also, for mouse support in other console apps).

Of course, if you're going to be using any console tools with any regularity, especially on a remote machine, you probably want to be running them inside a multiplexer like screen or tmux (preferably tmux, since it's (a) actively maintained and (b) actually supports Unicode properly).

<comment><USER3> I've been able to display UTF-8 in screen without problems. It's stable, feature rich, bug-free (in my personal experience), and standard.

I'm not sure what tmux could offer that would make me switch. But I might check it out some time.

<comment><USER2> screen only supports 16-bit Unicode, the Basic Multilingual Plane. Unicode is actually a 21-bit character set and although there's not many characters in the higher ("astral") planes yet, there's more added with each new revision.

I believe the major feature of tmux over screen is that it allows arbitrary layout of panes per window, rather than just horizontal divisions, although personally I switched because I'm just that nerdy about Unicode.

tmux was written by a guy who was very familiar with screen (in fact, it was written inside screen) and while there's no incredibly major differences, I think there's a number of small annoyances that have been filed off.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I lived without X for 4 years, between 2005 and 2009, my main box was a 500Mhz Coppermine Pentium 3 with 128mb of ram and an integrated SiS 630 video card, a crappy setup that taught me much about computers and unixes. The applications that I used included vim for text and coding, midnight commander and some ol' school unix tools to manage my files, mutt for e-mail, links2 for browsing, mplayer with frame buffer or vesa output for video, mocp for audio, a combination of pdftohtml and fbgs (included in fbida) to see pdfs, fbida for images and irssi to hang around in freenode. I also learned to play angband (a roguelike that's far better than nethack) and began to use zsh. gpm was a must to some copy and paste. I now have a Macbook, but still use some of these applications everyday.

</comment><comment><USER5> I don't think the author has actually spent real time without X. Some of his choices aren't very good compared to the alternatives.

Mutt is great, Alpine is also good for those that don't want to spend time tweaking mutt.

As well as elinks there's also w3m. I've used both interchangeably.

Centerim is probably the best general console chat client (although finch - Pidgin's console brother is also good). IRSSI is a good IRC client, but BitchX is undoubtably more popular.

Raggle is ok but has been slow for some time (at least for me) compared to Snownews.

For Music use MOC (Music-On-Console) or MPD. I'd go with MPD if you want to remotely control the music.

FWIW my main personal laptop is a P3-850 with 256mb of RAM. I do use X, but mainly as a placeholder for terminal sessions in Awesome.

<comment><USER6> If you have strong opinions, the web is calling out for a topic-website focussed on people who want to live entirely in the console: it could compare console utils, give tips to people on how to set it up just right, that sort of thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I would live like this by choice, but it has become difficult to get the combination of the screen sized for the monitor and a nice font. I've got a widescreen monitor and I've been unable to get recent ubuntu installs to size right for it. Thinking of trying out BSD to see if their resources are better.

</comment><comment><USER7> I like how his screenshots plainly include an X-server window, because you can't easily take screenshots without X. (unless you're in a VM I suppose)

<comment><USER8> I don't understand why he didn't take proper console screenshots.

IIRC mplayer is capable of taking snapshots of console. fbgrab can do this, too.

<comment><USER9> I would think that there's a utility to screenshot a terminal window straight to HTML, colors and all.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've been using Finch (<http://developer.pidgin.im/wiki/Using%20Finch>) - libpurple client instead of Freetalk that the author mentions. Finch has really good keyboard shortcuts.

<comment><USER11> If it supports OTR I'm sold.</comment></comment>