Theranos Whistleblower Shook the Company and His Family - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-whistleblower-shook-the-companyand-his-family-1479335963 <comment><USER2> Wow. It feels like a miracle whenever anyone takes a principled stand despite the hype and pressure of Silicon Valley and startup culture, never mind the usual corporate pressure. But this kid stood up to his own family, and lawyers hired by his family. Fairly or not, Stanford will always have some association with the legend of Elizabeth Holmes, but the engineering school can feel proud that they produced a graduate who showed real ethical backbone. It's fairly easy to imagine oneself bravely standing up to Theranos after reading the WSJ investigation last year. It's another thing to be the guy who launched it despite legal and familial pressure.

<comment><USER3> If an ordinary employee tried to take such a stand, he would be ignored, shut up, fired, sued, or perhaps jailed, depending on how firmly he was willing and able to take it.

FYI: "As _household staff_ served them dinner in the formal dining room, the elder Mr. Shultz said Ms. Holmes had told him Theranos's blood-testing devices worked so well that they were being used in medevac helicopters and hospital operating rooms, Tyler Shultz recalls. He and his colleague knew that wasn't true."

<comment><USER4> The whistleblower laws allow some degree of anonynimity precisely for the reasons above.

From the article:

" _Using an alias_ , Tyler Shultz contacted New York state's public-health lab ..."

"... Mr. Shultz began speaking to a Journal reporter as a _confidential_ source."

"... regulatory complaint Mr. Shultz had filed _under the alias_ Colin Ramirez"

The decision to confront the CEO personally was his own, he could've chosen the anonymous path all along.

<comment><USER3> An anonymous whistleblower is likely to be ignored however. I edited my reply to include this most likely option.

Schultz Jr was contacted in LinkedIn by a WSJ reporter, he did not hide his identity because he likely (empirically) realized that his anonymous complaint would be ignored.

<comment><USER4> Based on what data? The government has set up a bunch of venues specifically for anonymous whistleblowers, e.g. [https://www.whistleblower.gov/overview/submitatip/](https://www.whistleblower.gov/overview/submitatip/) [https://www.irs.gov/uac/whistleblower-informant- award](https://www.irs.gov/uac/whistleblower-informant-award) [https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3714.pdf](https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3714.pdf) so there's at least _some_ process behind the scenes rather than > /dev/null

He didn't have to hide his identity from a WSJ reporter because journalistic sources are protected by similar set of laws. To the readers of WSJ he was just a "confidential source".

<comment><USER3> In the article it says "In March 2014, he anonymously emailed his complaint to New York officials.."

Then the article says: "In March 2015, Tyler Shultz was contacted by a Journal reporter through the professional network LinkedIn."

Something doesn't match up here. I can only assume that his anonymous complaint did not reach the desired effect in a year, and he went via other channels, using his own renouned last name.

<comment><USER5> The reporter likely contacted a bunch of Theranos employees via LinkedIn (and probably sorted the list based on former/current).

Was Tyler the only confidential source to talk to the WSJ? Probably not. because of that whole two sources rule good journalists follow.

<comment><USER3> So your theory is that after Tyler's initial complaint, the regulators waited for a year, and then leaked the anonymous complaint to WSJ, which randomly contacted a bunch of employees, including the original anonymous tipper?

<comment><USER6> Alternatively, another employee tipped off the WSJ (Instead of, or in addition to a regulator,) and the WSJ started contacting current, and former employees, to see if their story had any legs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I just want to point out that Theranos is involved in lawsuits with nearly everyone now. Former employees, investors, its pivotal business partner Walgreens, the federal government, state governments and they've threatened legal actions against journalist and news outlets. Their product turned out to be sham. They covered up the evidence. They threatened everyone. They resorted to intimidation tactics. All while people's health were on the line.

Theranos is without a doubt among the worst companies to ever come out of the Bay Area. They're like a real life UNorth (Michael Clayton film). I hope their collapse is complete, utter and thorough. Everything and everyone in their leadership team painted with that brush for the rest of their career.

The WSJ and their journalist John Carreyrou ought to be commended and probably win a pulitzer for their coverage of Theranos.

<comment><USER8> > Theranos is involved in lawsuits with nearly everyone now.

Good. They were playing games with people's lives. It is one thing to play startup when it is Uber for Dogs and puppy ended up not seeing its friends at the park that day, it is another thing to mess up blood test results.

If someone who got hurt can come forward and wants to press criminal charges, they should get all the support needed. I can understand mistakes happening, but lying and going forward after they knew was abhorent.

<comment><USER9> Careful, some/most(?) of the lawsuits aren't because of risking patient's lives. They're for things like defrauding investors. They're not somehow more guilty because they also happened to do some other wrong thing at the same time.

<comment><USER8> I understand and saying maybe there should be some criminal investigations as well. Someone dying or getting injured is not out of the realm of possibility when they had known bad test results and continued anyway.

<comment><USER10> The feds are issuing subpoenas as well, though this [1] appears to make it sound like they're interested in the misleading investors angle.

[1] [http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/18/feds-target-theranos-with- cri...](http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/18/feds-target-theranos-with-criminal- investigation-reports-say.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "The only reason I have taken so much time away from work to address this personally is because you are Mr. Shultz's grandson."

\--Theranos President Sunny Balwani to [Theranos employee/whistlblower] Tyler Shultz in a 2014 email

Ouch.

(Tyler is the grandson of fmr Sec. of State/Treasury/Labor George Shultz, who was also a Theranos board member)

Edit: Another quote from the email:

"We saw your email to Elizabeth. Before I get into specifics, let me share with you that had this email come from anyone else in the company, I would have already held them accountable for the arrogant and patronizing tone and reckless comments."

<comment><USER12> _> "As household staff served them dinner in the formal dining room, the [95 year old] elder Mr. Shultz said Ms. Holmes had told him Theranos's blood- testing devices worked so well that they were being used in medevac helicopters and hospital operating rooms, Tyler Shultz recalls. He and his colleague knew that wasn't true."_

I'm absolutely against ageism, but when you're 95... maybe it's not the period in your life where you should be attempting to vouch for groundbreaking biology on the basis of someone else's claims.

<comment><USER13> Was he "vouching" or just relating what she'd told him? I doubt many investors, young or old, have the medical chops to spot falsified data.

<comment><USER12> If I'm trying to convince my grandson not to talk to federal regulators, I'd say that passes the bar of being complicit in the scheme.

And absolutely agreed, but at the same time I've heard biotech VC firms gave Theranos a pass. But I guess that speaks more to "If you don't have in house expertise, hire someone to perform your technical/scientific due dilligence."

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This kind of stuff makes my blood boil. I work at a medical device manufacturer that does it right, and when such shoddy products and process get passed off as viable, like they did at Theranos, it's never not on purpose. Everyone in charge there is a hack fraud and well aware of what they did. But I doubt they'll ever experience any negative consequences beyond temporary business setbacks.

Shultz seems alright. Too bad it takes someone fresh out of school with little to loose and not yet jaded to blow the whistle.

<comment><USER15> Theranos is a giant middle finger to everyone in the industry who acts honestly and really has the best interest of patients at heart.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I ask myself would I have had the balls to do this, to stand up to the lawsuit, which I clearly couldn't afford? In my 20s maybe. Now probably not. It seems wrong that you can threaten whistle-blowers with stealing trade secrets. There really needs to be a solution to this problem. Obviously a company has a right to trade secrets but an employee thinking they faked results is hardly a trade secret. Maybe we need a special court to examine such things. Do the whistle blower statutes have any solution for this like extra penalties for trying to intimidate whistle blowers with lawsuits?

<comment><USER17> I think there are laws covering intimidation/threats/etc of whistleblowers; I'm not sure what their status is, or whether they are federal only, and/or if states (etc on down the pyramid) have their own statutes...

...at least, that's what I understand currently - for all I know they've been so gutted to be completely useless.

<comment><USER6> There are plenty of laws that protect you, but using them to defend yourself can be incredibly expensive. It's never a good idea to piss off a vindictive person with money (Or a retired lawyer.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> It's incredible to think of all of the harm that Elizabeth Holmes has created through her desire to be the next Steve Jobs.

She has very probably killed people, ruined families, and caused at least one suicide [1].

And all for what? The company will probably be bankrupt. She'll suffer few consequences, as her connections will probably be enough for her to get a job as, at the very least, a VC or as an entrepreneur-in-residence at a VC firm.

It's incredible.

[1] [http://www.businessinsider.com/theranos-ceo-elizabeth- holmes...](http://www.businessinsider.com/theranos-ceo-elizabeth-holmes- employee-death-2016-9)

<comment><USER19> To whom exactly is Ms. Holmes connected? There's an awful lot of cheering over her demise, but I haven't kept abreast of this story.

<comment><USER6> [https://www.theranos.com/leadership/counselors](https://www.theranos.com/leadership/counselors)

Kissinger, Shultz, William Perry, two Senators, an admiral... Pretty much a who's-who of Department of Defense insiders.

Now, it's entirely likely that these people would be more then happy to push her under the bus.

<comment><USER20> More accurate: Republican insiders. Shouldn't leave out the most important adjective.

<comment><USER13> Theranos was tied in to higher-ups in both parties. Holmes was doing fundraisers with Chelsea Clinton for Hillary's presidential bid.

So no, it's not the most important adjective.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> A note to anyone who ever works for a CLIA or FDA regulated company: disclosing that a company is falsifying test data is NOT violation of a trade secret and in most cases a company that takes action against you for doing so is in violation of the False Claims Act.

</comment><comment><USER21> Tim Draper must've really been taken with her - he's still defending her as a "victim":

[http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/15/theranos-ceo-elizabeth- holmes...](http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/15/theranos-ceo-elizabeth-holmes-is-a- victim-venture-capitalist-tim-draper-says.html)

Either that or some ego issues.

<comment><USER22> Tim Draper is on some kind of media crusade lately to completely destroy his own credibility: [http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/draper-on-trump- great-o...](http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/draper-on-trump-great- opportunity-to-get-behind-our-government/vi-AAklfvO)

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> It's time now for all the VCs and entrepreneurs who supported Holmes to now come out and say that this behavior is abhorrent and should not be tolerated.

But they won't.

<comment><USER24> She also gave speeches at Stanford..

<comment><USER25> And was a member of the Harvard Medical School Board of Fellows as late as August[0], although she seems to have been removed from it since[1].

0: [http://web.archive.org/web/20160821214900/https://hms.harvar...](http://web.archive.org/web/20160821214900/https://hms.harvard.edu/about- hms/board-fellows)

1: [https://hms.harvard.edu/about-hms/board- fellows](https://hms.harvard.edu/about-hms/board-fellows)

<comment><USER26> My understanding is that the board of fellows for Harvard Medical School is more relate to fundraising than an endorsement of the members' life achievements

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> For everyone who hasn't read it yet, a long article on how Theranos began to collapse: [http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/09/elizabeth-holmes- ther...](http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/09/elizabeth-holmes-theranos- exclusive)

</comment><comment><USER28> So has Theranos fully collapsed yet? Is it still a thing? I keep hearing how it's this big house of cards that has collapsed but then... it's still going on?

<comment><USER29> It still has a ton of cash, and the share structure is such that (as I understand it) Holmes still has voting majority. It can survive in "zombie mode" for a long time depending on how long the lawsuits take.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Terrible to see a family relationship ruined by corporate positioning. I hope all involved find peace.

<comment><USER31> It seems to me his family was ultimately incredibly supportive (granted, they were initially skeptical) and are doing their best to balance their interests. His parents were willing to sell their house to cover legal fees. His grandfather referred him to a lawyer and supported his grandson in the meeting with company lawyers. Also their statements regarding him were very heart felt and positive. They mention the relationship with the grandfather being strained but that could very well be a result of PI surveillance and impending litigation making discussions risky, so it's not necessarily anything personal.

<comment> joatmon-snoo Seriously, props to his parents. None to grandpops, though - seriously, if your kid is an undergrad at Stanford and dreamed of working at a company, and then comes and tells you that the entire thing might be a sham? It would take a _lot_ of evidence to sway someone's mind like that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> It's trivial by comparison but I can't help but imagine all of the people who are pressured to do unethical or questionable things by their managers who can do little but quit. This probably happens across corporate America on a daily basis where the stakes are much smaller.

<comment><USER33> It is certainly not limited to America.

<comment><USER32> I have no doubt it's not, just commenting on what I have experience with. It's the only country I've worked professionally in.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense > William Perry, and former Sen. Sam Nunn, all fellows with Mr. Shultz at the > Hoover Institution, joined the Theranos board around the same time

Quick heuristic: if a startup all of the sudden needs secretary of defense and secretary of state on the board, there is probably shady stuff going on and they need some powerful people with connection to cover it up.

</comment><comment><USER34> You have to admire him for standing up to them and not folding under pressure. Sending that initial email just painted a target on his back. I wonder if things would have played out differently if he quit first, then leaked the information in secrecy.

</comment><comment><USER35> Pretty brave man. 400k legal fees...yikes. I can't wait for Theranos to be over.

As an aside:

"""One validation report about an Edison test to detect a sexually-transmitted infectious disease said the test was sensitive enough to detect the disease 95% of the time"""

I'm assuming this is reported wrong and it was actually 5% alpha/95% confidence and they were basically p-hacking?

</comment><comment> bra-ket John Carreyrou is surely a man on a mission

</comment><comment><USER36> John Carreyrou at WSJ did a masterful job of making sure it wasn't a mystery that the risk to the family was how profoundly connected and wealthy they are. Holmes eating thanksgiving, etc.

I feel the email from the president was enough to justify the title by saying 'you're connected, which is the only reason I'm responding' but the other comments like 'staff served dinner' and 'lawyers hiding upstairs'.

It would never be a mystery in majority of homes if there was someone waiting in the wings to present papers.

</comment><comment><USER37> What's missing from all this discussion is how everyone (including this forum) was full of nothing but lavish praises for Theranos when it was the darling of Silicon Valley. It took an employee who was related to a senior official of the company whistleblowing it and then investigative journalism by WSJ for this company to be exposed.

How many other Theranos-like companies is the "Change the world" culture of the valley who refuses to bow down to scrutiny still praising I wonder?

</comment><comment><USER38> Theranos should be sued to the ground

</comment><comment><USER39> This is one of those times when I wish HN comments sections allowed to embed images... [1]

Let this be a lesson, when a company goes mainstream due the eccentricity of its CEO instead than the quality or proved innovation of its services/products that's a red flag, even more so when respected professionals on the area claim the progress such company claims to have made is not feasible...

I have a hunch that Magic Leap will end up being some kind of epic disappointment along the lines of Theranos.

[1] [https://blondeempire1.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/simpsonsal...](https://blondeempire1.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/simpsonsalreadydead.jpeg)

<comment><USER40> I don't think the comparison is apt. Magic leap is attempting something that many think is impossible, but if they don't succeed, they're not faking blood tests and putting people's health diagnoses on the line. Yes, if they don't succeed, some investors will lose a lot of money, but the risk isn't falling on users.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> This should be a movie

<comment><USER42> "Director Adam McKay, fresh off his Oscar for The Big Short, has even signed on to make a movie based on Holmes, tentatively titled Bad Blood. (On the bright side for Holmes, Jennifer Lawrence is attached as the lead.)" [1]

[1] [http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/09/elizabeth-holmes- ther...](http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/09/elizabeth-holmes-theranos- exclusive)

<comment><USER43> I thought the same thing reading this passage:

"The elder Mr. Shultz joined Theranos's board of directors in 2011. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, and former Sen. Sam Nunn, all fellows with Mr. Shultz at the Hoover Institution, joined the Theranos board around the same time. They couldn't be reached for comment.

The unusually high-profile board gave Theranos an aura of power, connections and gravitas as it raised money from investors and developed the blood-testing devices Ms. Holmes touted as revolutionary."

Why would such an array of smart people come on board against their best judgment? Then it hit me, they must be a cabal of vampires that use the blood in furthering their immortality experiments.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> God, these people are such pieces of shit. I hope at least this young man's parents have apologized to him.

</comment><comment><USER45> Link to text?

<comment><USER46> open the web link in incognito mode, and then click on the article.

<comment><USER47> No good. It seems that some genious at the WSJ decided to make accounts mandatory.

<comment><USER48> "web link" != the link with the title of the article. It's literally the link with the text 'web' on the line below. That goes to a Google search for the article. Clicking the first hit takes you to the article, no paywall.

<comment><USER49> That doesn't work for everyone. For me it's random, some days it works, some days it doesn't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> Please do not past articles which require you to make an account in order to be able to read them.</comment>


World's oldest human remains claimed in Israel - <AUTHOR> http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-world-oldest-human-israel.html <comment><USER2> I was hoping for human remains that were around ~6,000 years old. (Abrahamic humor.)

It seems reasonable that over 200,000 years our ancestors could have moved back and forth between Africa & Asia Minor. Definitely interesting.

</comment><comment><USER3> I was somehow expecting an article about a supercentenarian.

</comment><comment><USER4> All this from a single tooth?</comment>


Dimetrodon - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimetrodon <comment><USER2> My favorite dinosaur, not a dinosaur.

<comment><USER3> [https://www.fieldmuseum.org/blog/dimetrodon-not- dinosaur](https://www.fieldmuseum.org/blog/dimetrodon-not-dinosaur)

They have a wonderful section in the museum about dimetrodon; you have to pass through Mass Extinction #4 to get to the dinosaurs.

PS - somewhat controversial perhaps, but you have to pass into Mass Extinction #6 to exit the entire exhibit: the museum contends it is happening now.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've had to kill lots of these in Un'Goro

</comment><comment><USER5> The more fossils I see the less I believe in evolution. This creature is preposterous.

<comment><USER6> You should write a paper and publish your insights.</comment></comment>


Daydreaming means you're smart and creative - <AUTHOR> http://www.kurzweilai.net/daydreaming-means-youre-smart-and-creative <comment><USER2> "It also enables you to switch to "autopilot" for routine tasks like driving"

Stay smart, and don't do that!

<comment><USER3> I've done this before when I was a younger driver. It's terrifying to get to your garage and realise you don't remember the last 10 mins of driving. Since then I've used tricks to keep my active focus on driving. They usually involve counting cars and talking to myself about the current state of the drive.

<comment><USER4> People are taught about this in Driver's Ed now. It's called Highway Hypnosis. I've experienced it a few times now and it is a bit scary when you try to figure out how you drove somewhere without really realizing it.

<comment><USER5> Wow, I thought this was normal. Didn't consider it disturbing until now that you and the other comments mentioned it, and reflecting on how little I think about driving.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is just about a mismatch of the rate of perception and the input rate.

Good movies avoid it by having depth to let your mind wander in to. I personally have to listen to podcasts at higher speeds not to drift off.</comment>


2.5M men 'have no close friends' - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/active/mens-health/11996473/2.5-million-men-have-no-close-friends.html <comment><USER2> I'm in this boat right now as a 22 year old junior in college. I honestly don't have anyone I can call to just chill. I go to movies alone, I eat at restaurants alone, I go to concerts alone, most things I do I do alone. It makes me sad to think that this point in my life is supposed to be a high water mark for having a social life, and I shudder to imagine how much lonelier things are going to be after college graduation.

For the most part I've made peace with loneliness and being by myself to the point that it's not crushing, but the emptiness of not having anyone close is always there. I think the problem - or at least my problem - isn't necessarily a lack of basic social or people skills, but an inability to escalate from casual acquaintance to close friend.

Sorry for the stream of consciousness post. I guess I just wanted to say that I relate to this article, and I don't know how to fix myself.

<comment><USER3> I've had multiple phases of my life where I've done most things alone. Months where I've gone eating almost every meal alone. Multi-day periods where I didn't have a conversation with another person. Honestly, there were times I felt bad about it, but most of the time I was alone - but not lonely.

Currently I have a pretty active social life - I rarely eat alone, I have a wide circle of friends and date fairly actively (I am still single though :/). I think the best way to break out is to make a habit of trying to do things you haven't done before. Whether it's some athletic pursuit (tennis, rock climbing, etc.) or maybe getting involved in your community (volunteering, religious groups), modern society offers plenty of venues for meeting people. You say you're in college so for you it might be as simple as joining a club.

Now even though I have ample opportunity to be around other people, I still choose to be alone some times. After a day spent with a group I usually need an hour or so alone to "recharge" \- I guess I'm just naturally introverted.

Finally, allow me quote the following poem by Walt Whitman.

      To You.

      STRANGER! if you, passing, meet me, and desire to speak to me,
      why should you not speak to me?

      And why should I not speak to you?

<comment><USER2> That poem is beautiful. Thanks for sharing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> My wife and I have this conversation a lot. I have a bazillion acquaintances and only a few people I consider close friends. She has a much broader group of friends.

I've identified that one of the characteristic of women interacting is a asking questions in an unprompted sort of way. Something I consider to be "prying", and yet it opens up other conversations which deepen the relationship.

My current position is that I was never exposed to good role models for building relationships with other men, and childhood homophobic sorts of taunts actually sensitized me to a notion of being "too close" to someone. While my wife has no trouble at all saying "love you" to her friends, my early programming makes that really hard for me with my male friends.

The process of building friendships is a process of developing trust and vulnerability, something which is hard to do outside of shared life threatening experiences. At some level in my younger days I always felt I was in competition with the other men around me. How do you make yourself vulnerable to your competitor? You don't of course. To get past that I've had to reassess a really large chunk of the structure in my brain about evaluating my own success and understanding whether or not I was under or over performing on my internal metrics of success.

Bottom line for me is that unpacking all the threads that were hindering my ability to make close friendships walked me back to kindergarten. That is a lot of unpacking to do :-)

</comment><comment><USER5> Note: that headline number seems absurdly low, because it is only counting British men.

</comment><comment><USER6> I'm 50 and have no close friends. I haven't for at least a decade. I am married so I'm not a recluse but I don't have a buddy.

</comment><comment><USER7> I strongly encourage others to read "How to Win Friends and Influence People."</comment>


Find foreclosures using Google Maps - <AUTHOR> https://consumerist.com/2010/12/13/find-foreclosures-using-google-maps/ <comment><USER2> Google removed this functionality years ago. The article you posted is from 2010. If I remember it wasn't long after that though.</comment>


Pinboard Creator Maciej Ceglowski Talks About Why Boring Architecture is Good - <AUTHOR> http://www.readwriteweb.com/hack/2011/02/pinboard-creator-maciej-ceglow.php <comment><USER2> _One interesting quirk of Pinboard is a complete absence of unit tests. I used to be a die-hard believer in testing, but in Pinboard tried a different approach, as an experiment. Instead of writng tests I try to be extremely careful in coding, and keep the code size small so I continue to understand it._

 _I've found my defect rate to be pretty comparable to earlier projects that included extensive test suites and fixtures, but I am much more productive on Pinboard_

Its great that this approach is working for him, but this may not work in a decent sized project with multiple people working on it. I prefer a safety net of test cases in such cases.

EDIT : Formatting

<comment><USER3> The problem is that unit tests aren't for today. Unit tests are for 3 years from now when you've forgotten how a system behaves and you need to make a major change to it (nb: I'm not talking TDD here). When you get done with that change (and every company I've worked at with no unit tests has), you'll look back and realize you had three choices:

1\. Write the unit tests while the code was fresh. Ideally, you wrote well designed unit tests so you didn't have to constantly deal with maintaining crappy test code. Unfortunately, most test code doesn't seem to be well- written, DRY code, so you spend a lot of time in the interum maintaining it.

2\. Figure the code out again when you need to change it (likely somebody else is doing the figuring out by then) and write unit tests that show current behavior. The "figuring out" step is always nastier than you expect.

3\. Start digging and hope you come out the other side with something reasonably similar to what you started with.

The trick is figuring out which one optimizes best for your business. Pinboard might be able to get away with #3. Air traffic control may have no choice but to be #2 (did people write unit tests way back then? I know I didn't write any unit tests on my Atari 600 in '83 :).

<comment><USER4> On point 2 - I tend to find that if I write unit tests at the same time as I write code then the code is structured to be easier to unit test. Writing unit tests for code that has been developed without any concerns for unit testing can be a complete nightmare.

<comment><USER5> It is true that unit testing code that was not designed for testing can be difficult, but it is certainly possible. Java reflection can set data values in private fields for times when the original class did not include a setter method for testing. Commerical solutions, like <http://tinyurl.com/4rabnef>, provide stubbing frameworks to replace method calls at runtime and inject test data without rewriting the original code.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's funny how now most people seem to know Maciej Cegłowski as "the creator of Pinboard." His blog, Idle Words [1] is one of the best I know of. I would even say that the piece about Scott and scurvy [2] was _the_ most interesting thing I read on the Internet in the last few years.

So, I am very happy about Pinboard.in being successful, but I think it's a bit of a shame that such frivolous endeavors take Maciej's time from writing his blog :P

(A bit more seriously, it's really nice to find a compatriot doing something cool in more than one domain.)

[1] <http://www.idlewords.com/>

[2] <http://www.idlewords.com/2010/03/scott_and_scurvy.htm>

</comment><comment><USER7> Anyone who writes an article like this should be required to disclose up front the current scale of the project they are talking about. (Users, data, number of developers, etc.)

In his case, it sounds like a fairly small website developed by just himself. Sorry if I'm not going to take this advice too seriously until this is disproven.

<comment><USER8> It is a fairly small website developed just by myself. I don't think I've ever characterized it otherwise.

<comment><USER9> Is this thing profitable? It appears you've only got the one-time fee.

<comment><USER8> Yes, it's profitable. Recurring revenue comes from the archiving feature, which costs $25/year. The signup fee is mostly there to serve as a brake on growth.

<comment><USER10> I would love it if you added something between full archiving and the basic account.

I want the freetext search, but don't need to be able to access the archived page (except for the equivalent of Google's text cache if the remote page is down).

So yes I want archiving, but I don't need asset archiving for things like the images, css, javascript on the pages. And yes I realise for a lot of hashbang sites this would break, but that's just dandy with me.

I could sign up to the archiving, but with over 1,700 bookmarks I hesitate... will it go and download all of them? I think that's creating a burden on your service so I am not upgrading. I'd even pay the same price, or damn near it, as the full archiving, but I really want to get the fulltext search in a guilt-free way.

<comment><USER8> If you upgrade, we do go fetch all the link content. We have users with 70k+ archived bookmarks, so you'd really be just a drop in the bucket.

It comes down to this - storage is cheap and development time is expensive. It would take considerable work to retrofit the crawler to only fetch dependencies for certain users, manage the case where they upgraded/downgraded between levels, and so on.

<comment><USER10> Cool, that makes me feel guilt-free... one upgrade coming.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> _Use frameworks for prototyping, but build from the ground up once you know what you're building._

Isn't this contradictory to the idea of using boring well-tested infrastructure?

<comment><USER12> Nah, given that he's using PHP it makes sense. Your basic PHP installation supplies so much bullet-proof infrastructure right out of the box, that a framework on top of that provides more uncertainty than functionality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Excellent advice. Reminds me of Greenspun's tale of two servers:

[http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2009/05/18/ruby-on- rails-...](http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2009/05/18/ruby-on-rails-and- the-importance-of-being-stupid/)

</comment><comment><USER14> This is a good counterpoint to the steady stream of articles touting the benefits of new technologies developed to serve massive-scale sites spanning thousands of servers. Very few startups will ever need to deal with that kind of scale, although it is nice to imagine having those kind of problems.

</comment><comment><USER15> Did you notice the price? It is based on the current number of users (multiplied by 0.001). With the price rising like that is should be pretty easy to figure out an upper limit of how much users would be willing to pay for it.

</comment><comment><USER16> _Use caching as a last resort, not as a fundamental design strategy_

 _Resist excessive abstraction_

 _Set performance targets for yourself_

Excellent points for making any software perform well. I am working on performance in a non-web app that suffers greatly from over-abstraction, and over-caching to hide the overhead. Since design is subjective, railing against this got me nowhere -- but setting performance targets truly shifted the focus of the team. Now instead of debating how many internal layers we need and how to name them, we focus more on our runtime budget, and how to make the hardware solve the problem in that time.

</comment><comment><USER17> Using a common design for architecture is kinda like using a well known design pattern or framework. It allows a new developer to easily understand your project.

</comment><comment><USER18> This is great for building your own app. For hosting a mildly popular phpBB forum, though, I've been stuck with its built-in clumsiness and 1sec+ load times.

</comment><comment><USER19> I/O isn't awful on virtualized infrastructure, I/O is awful on EC2.

<comment><USER8> Try using a Xen instance when a RAID drive has to be rebuilt. I did!</comment></comment>


Algorithmic Complexity Attacks and the Linux Networking Code - <AUTHOR> http://devrajtiwary.blogspot.com/2011/12/algorithmic-complexity-attacks-and.html

<comment><USER2> A bit old (2003) but nice to have another example of exploiting hash table weaknesses.</comment>


Narf: A Ruby Micro Test Framework - <AUTHOR> http://ariejan.net/2011/02/11/narf-a-ruby-micro-test-framework/?sms_ss=hackernews&at_xt=4d958cfc7b29802c%2C0 <comment><USER2> What's with calling any code container, even one line long, a framework? Facepalm...

</comment><comment><USER3> Eventually, every possible functionality in Ruby gets pared down to a "micro" or "lightweight" library or three.</comment>


Usage statistics of HTTP/2 for websites - <AUTHOR> https://w3techs.com/technologies/details/ce-http2/all/all <comment><USER2> I would be particularly interested to see how many sites use HTTP push.

You serve HTTP2 to the user by default when using ALB, but there's no support for push</comment>


Play offline/Save .flv video files from Web browser cache - <AUTHOR> http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/video_cache_view.html <comment><USER2> I use FlashGot ( <http://flashgot.net/> ) to do this in Firefox.</comment>


Elasticsearch as a Framework - <AUTHOR> https://zignar.net//2016/03/18/abusing-elasticsearch-as-a-framework/ <comment><USER2> I've asked this to the Crate people before, and not received much in the way of a satisfactory answer. Elasticsearch fundamentally does not provide ACID- style durability guarantees, and Jepsen testing has revealed near-as-makes-no- difference insurmountable problems in replication during partitions. As such I can't wrap my head around why Crate thinks it's safe or even coherent to build a database product on top of it. Even ES core devs make it very clear when you ask (and I have) -- ES should be used as a secondary index, and not as primary data storage.

What gives? What am I not seeing here?

<comment><USER3> The Jepsen test is of a very old version. Since then ES has had work done to the clustering, as well as adding an fsynced transaction log.

<comment><USER2> I agree it's an old version, and I agree they've made incremental improvements since them. But ES is fundamentally clustered Lucene indexes. You can't bolt on partition safety like a feature; it kinda has to be part of the design from the beginning.

<comment><USER4> Consistency issues aside, I wonder if the translog work in recent versions has improved anything with regard to durability/crash-proofness.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Nothing here is really being "abused." You're actually just re-purposing a piece of software to perform another job outside of its intended design - that's fine! Just keep it stable and fast, and you're all good :-)

As a side note: I love Elastic. I would make it my daily, general purpose database if I could, but that truly is abusive (to everyone involved.)</comment>


Java DecimalFormat implemented in JavaScript - <AUTHOR> http://gergerconsulting.blogspot.com/2010/07/javascript-decimalformat.html

<comment><USER2> Here's a much more robust number formatter for JavaScript, written as a jQuery plugin.

<http://code.google.com/p/jquery-numberformatter/>

</comment><comment><USER3> Why not just use Javascript sprintf?

[http://www.diveintojavascript.com/projects/javascript- sprint...](http://www.diveintojavascript.com/projects/javascript-sprintf)

<comment><USER4> In the case of currency, it is better to use decimal arithmetic because if you use float numbers the rounding behaves different than doing the same operations by hand or in a calculator. Another option is to use integers (to represent number of cents) and just print the decimal point when displaying the number.

<comment><USER3> I'm not sure if you're answering my question or not. I've inspected the source of both libraries, and they both use the JS method toFixed().

<comment><USER4> Never mind, you are right it is just to format decimals.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Recreating Google's Bouncing Balls Logo In HTML5 Canvas - <AUTHOR> http://rawkes.com/blog/2010/09/07/recreating-googles-bouncing-balls-logo-in-html5-canvas

<comment><USER2> I was shocked to see that effect on Google's homepage; I have had that effect on my website for months! I wrote it in HTML5 as well. You can see my original effect here:

<http://jlongster.com/>

They did the whole 3d thing which is cool. All I would have to do is increase the ball size as it's moving around.

I'm laughing because I submitted my effect to several websites, but nobody seemed to care... and then google comes along... :)

<comment><USER3> There are more differences than just the 3d thing. One other example is that the cursor only repels the balls when they are moving in their version. This allows the logo to return regardless of where you leave the mouse cursor.

More importantly, theirs works great in IE. I loaded your page up in IE and only got the "Think this is cool? Hire me!" message, which made me think, nope it's pretty lame since it doesn't work in the most popular web browser, I'm not going to hire him.

<comment><USER2> There are many minor differences, of course. But the idea is the same.

But yes, IE support is the big one. I don't worry about it because I don't really market the page or anything. The point is to be experimental and innovative.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> >> "Pretty impressive, but for some reason they decided against using HTML5 canvas."

I'm not quite sure why the 'div' hate and canvas love here...

With the div approach, you can just modify the position of a div, and leave the rest to the browser to update the display. The browser will only redraw what is absolutely necessary. It's pretty well optimized in dealing with that stuff.

With the canvas version, you're redrawing _everything_ each time.

This version redraws the entire set of balls once every 30ms. From scratch. Even if nothing has moved. Expect some CPU usage, and potentially on slower machines, some flicker/lack of smoothness or other issues.

That said, good fun :)

<comment><USER5> The DIV version is still pretty intensive on Firefox and IE. So much so that I really question whether the inmates are in charge of the asylum over at Google: They have been taking some big risks putting these tech demos on a homepage heralded for its simplicity.

If they're trying to use this as a way of saying "Oh really? Resource intensive? We didn't realize because we're using Chrome and there's no problem there", that's a very dangerous way of promoting a browser.

Having said that, agree with your core point overwhelmingly: There is an irrational love of Canvas that simply isn't merited.

SVG is absolutely _made_ for this sort of task (a number of elements that you are transforming in size and place, etc). Again, as you mentioned, it leaves the primitives up to the browser where they might be hardware rendered and optimized as the client sees fit, instead of treating it as a dumb raster canvas.

<comment><USER4> I love the fact that Google is using it's biggest property/asset to show off fun browser features. Pushing the boundaries of browsers, and the expectations people have of what they should be able to do on the web.

FWIW, I really don't think it's a case of Google trying to get everyone to use Chrome, it's about getting people to do more on the web - which will benefit them.

It also shows that they're still at heart a 'hacker' company where they try hacky stuff out which is fun/irritating/cool. It's done it's job - gets people talking about Google.

Plus, if you just show someone a static google holiday image, that's had its day now. It's a bit dull. People want interactivity. They want awesome, not a static picture.

<comment><USER5> _"I love the fact that Google is using it's biggest property/asset to show off fun browser features."_

99.9% of users of google.com simply _do not care_. In fact, not only do they not care, they've seen this stuff in Flash going back to the 90s.

"Oh some animated balls...that's nice. DIVs [or canvas or SVG], you say? Who cares!"

I think it's neat because this is my field. Yet, for the sake of Google, I also think it should remain on a "cool browser features" page, and should be kept from destroying Google's goodwill.

And it _is_ destroying Google's goodwill. The buckyball completely clogged a core of a modern PC on the dominant browsers. Fine (aside from the measurable power consumption) if you're on a multi-core, but a lot of people aren't, and it left a sour taste in their mouth. Suddenly being on Google.com starts to represent a risk that it never did.

"Hrmmm...PC is clogging up...did I keep the browser open on Google.com?"

Google got big precisely because they represented utilitarian, trustworthy simplicity. Excite@Home showed us what was capable in a browser, and that's why they died an ignoble death.

 _"It also shows that they're still at heart a 'hacker' company where they try hacky stuff out which is fun/irritating/cool. It's done it's job - gets people talking about Google."_

I've seen this rationalization quite a few times and I find it pretty extraordinary.

 _Everyone_ is aware of Google. They know about the search engine. They aren't hearing "Oh some upstart Google has a core-clogging buckyball...I better check that new search engine out".

It is Google's position to lose, and they gain little by such stunts.

Google has let the hacker's run free, and it is poised to destroy the company. From Chrome using a single shared profile on a multi-user PC to Wave auto- following to Earth-destroying buckyballs (irony), Google plows ahead with things that I would not expect a micro-startup to do, much less a hundred billion dollar company. They need some adult supervision.

<comment><USER4> You sound like you have a case of the 'mondays'.

<comment><USER5> How very redditesque.

 _"You sound like you have a case of the 'mondays'."_

Because I have a rational business sense, and an ability to empathize with users (the ones who really _don't care_ that you're duplicating basic functionality of Flash from 15 years ago, only less efficiently)?

I appreciate that this site is Hacker News, and that we all love cool tech demos, but I would hope at least some of the readers here have some ability to see things rationally, and to have some degree of business sense.

Instead it seems to be veering towards the typical insulated-from-the-world, to borrow from Redditesque, circle-jerk.

<comment><USER6> Based on informal anecdotes, non-techie users seemed to have liked it. They don't care what the technology can do, or what technology is used. They just found it fun.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I like the way the Google one using divs uses less than 10% cpu whereas the HTML5 one uses nearly 20%.

<comment><USER8> The canvas code could be optimized to make it just as efficient.

<comment><USER9> Oh definitely. I put it together in a couple of hours, without any major performance testing. It's just a bit of fun really, nothing hardcore.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "Pretty impressive, but for some reason they decided against using HTML5 canvas."

IIRC, it was because of browser incompatibilities. IE8 removed the VRML necessary for excanvas.js to work and yet doesn't have full canvas support, so they were in the odd situation where it worked on IE6, IE7, and standards- compliant browsers, but not on IE8. Googling, I've found that excanvas.js has since been updated to work on IE8, but maybe it didn't support the specific functionality they needed.

There're also pretty strict latency constraints on the homepage, so including excanvas.js and its canvas emulation is quite a few bytes that just aren't necessary if you use divs.

</comment><comment><USER11> This one is sub-pixel accurate, and the Google one _snaps to pixels_ , which looks bad when particles are moving slowly. Canvas version looks a TON better to me.</comment>


Office noise generator - <AUTHOR> https://imisstheoffice.eu/ <comment><USER2> It needs an option to amplify the typing noises to "I work with developers who insist mechanical keyboards are better" levels.

<comment><USER3> There are now quiet Cherry MX switches, dampened in both directions of travel: [https://www.cherrymx.de/en/mx-original/mx-silent- red.html](https://www.cherrymx.de/en/mx-original/mx-silent-red.html)

They're no louder than a regular membrane keyboard, and much quieter than just using O-rings.

<comment><USER4> But the sound is part of the better experience.

// sent from MX blue

<comment><USER5> car engine noise model: get an app that plays clicky sounds and headphones?

<comment><USER6> Emacs got selectric mode :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> For realism, it should integrate people making their calls in the open space, the guy right next to you chewing loudly with an open mouth, the heated design debate occuring 3 desks from you and the salespeople celebrating their bonus with a lot of volume.

I do not miss the office.

<comment><USER8> Add the HVAC units making weird noises, smartphone notification sounds, and ringtones, fucking ringtones.

<comment><USER9> Someone that I used to work with had a ringtone of a dog barking, he would leave the phone on his desk when doing stuff elsewhere in the building and his wife would call him several times a day.

<comment><USER10> We had a friendly deal in our office for those kind of disturbances.

If you leave your phone ringing at your desk, you pay a round of drinks for the team.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> It's a neat idea, but I can't stand the ~12 kHz noise in the background, it makes my head hurt.

For reference, here's a spectrograph: [https://i.imgur.com/AmgaxPy.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/AmgaxPy.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER12> The presentation of this one is definitely more beautiful thant this one[0], that a friend of mine shared a days ago. The latter has more options and is more customizable tho.

[0] [https://mynoise.net/NoiseMachines/openOfficeNoiseGenerator.p...](https://mynoise.net/NoiseMachines/openOfficeNoiseGenerator.php)

<comment><USER13> I came in here to mention myNoise too. I use it all the time for noise masking. The office noise generator isn't my thing, but there are _numerous_ other sounds to choose from--white/brown/grey noise, rain, ocean waves, a purring cat, space(ship) sounds, and all kinds of other stuff.

[https://mynoise.net/](https://mynoise.net/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> This is really beautiful.

I created something similar a while ago:

[https://officenoise.cloud/](https://officenoise.cloud/)

Same idea, less visually pleasing - but with the twist that all the sounds you hear are triggered by other visitors of that webpage.

</comment><comment><USER15> Neat and nice but nope.

If you want good background noise, try this 10 hour clip of an icebreaker ship idling in the arctic.

[https://youtu.be/Q_WKl5AkXFM](https://youtu.be/Q_WKl5AkXFM)

</comment><comment><USER16> I work on the Starship Enterprise, but the pandemic is forcing me to work from home.

This helps a lot: [https://youtu.be/UKBvaOLDem0](https://youtu.be/UKBvaOLDem0)

<comment><USER17> This one really sets me at ease. Very calming, to pretend to live on board a starship in a utopian future.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> We need a facebook version of this where there's a guy practicing a guitar while another is trying not to fall off his unicycle [1].

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMWJGs3CQ_Q&feature=youtu.be...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMWJGs3CQ_Q&feature=youtu.be&t=148)

</comment><comment><USER19> I did the same thing, a week-ago. The interface may be more spartan; all the efforts have been put in the sounds themselves. These sounds have been carefully designed to put the listener in the focus zone, for those who associate the noise of their office with focus (everyone is different; most people actually want to block open office sounds... but a minority is actually missing them, when their environment is too quiet).

Here is how it sounds like on myNoise : [https://mynoise.net/NoiseMachines/openOfficeNoiseGenerator.p...](https://mynoise.net/NoiseMachines/openOfficeNoiseGenerator.php)

</comment><comment><USER20> This is awesome and weirdly makes it easier for me to work. I need that constant stimulation. Total silence makes it difficult to focus (sometimes).

</comment><comment><USER21> I don't miss the office noises. I do miss the random conversations that took place.

I've had to replace that with IRC (which isn't too bad!)

<comment><USER22> At my current workplace (we're 100% remote these days), we've instituted daily non-compulsory coffee meetings on Zoom, for the purpose of talking about something _other_ than work and fostering random conversations.

It's not perfect, but it's something.

<comment><USER23> Maybe give this a try [https://voice.tenxeng.com/](https://voice.tenxeng.com/), still early and we'd love feedback.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> It's the low murmur of the office and clickity-clack of the keys that is missing. Also that loud woman and that dude with the cough.

<comment><USER25> Dude with the cough? Oh, my!

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> I always work with noise cancelling headphones and got so used to them that I now have to wear them at home as well as they help me to concentrate. Even though it's silent in here.

<comment><USER27> Nice you are now a Cyborg. I wonder how many others are dependant on similar ear augmentation devices.

<comment><USER28> Cyborg here. I can't stand being outside without my headphones. Too much noise.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> What I really need to complete the experience is olfactory.

<comment><USER30> Yeah - guy eating sardines at the next desk.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> So cool website and interface LOL, really like it!

Someone posted [https://mynoise.net/NoiseMachines/openOfficeNoiseGenerator.p...](https://mynoise.net/NoiseMachines/openOfficeNoiseGenerator.php)

days ago, I found its very funny when open both on different tabs hahaha.

Btw, this website lack repetitive settings? Why noise stop after seconds?

</comment><comment><USER32> That's honestly what I miss the least from the office. I don't use it at all actually. The noise is the absolute worst part.

<comment><USER32> s/use/miss

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Is there also a repository associated with this website? I'm a bit curious how the rendering on canvas code works.

</comment><comment><USER34> I miss the sound of people muttering to themselves and breathing loudly while wearing noise cancelling headphones.

No, not really.

</comment><comment><USER35> [https://www.ambient-mixer.com/](https://www.ambient-mixer.com/) has a ton of these types of background noises. All the sounds can be individually leveled and you can easily create your own from their audio library.

</comment><comment><USER36> Apart from the loud fan noise on this simulation, I would be happy if my office was as quiet as this one...

</comment><comment><USER37> I'll be happy if my office sounds like that! Find that one actually quite peaceful and relaxing.

</comment><comment><USER38> Does not work on Firefox

<comment><USER33> Works here on Firefox 74.

<comment><USER38> 74 here too. I thought it might be an adblocker issue, but does not seem so.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> And for those who miss meetings, no more: [http://conferencecall.biz/](http://conferencecall.biz/)

</comment><comment> yoz-y Why does increasing the number of people increase the fan noises? Does everybody have their own AC or are they using PC towers from the 90's?

<comment><USER40> I think it's just volume - I couldn't notice anything else changing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Ehhhh that hum/droning sound that's constant doesn't sound like any office I've ever worked in. Other than that, neat!

<comment><USER42> Maybe it's a white noise generator? Several (maybe all?) of my past offices have had white noise generators. One never notices them, but when they are off then suddenly one notices their absence.

I wonder if I should get one for home …

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> "Alexa, enable star trek bridge sounds."

</comment><comment><USER44> one of the chair noises is clearly a fart covered up by the person readjusting as a cover up, 10/10 most realistic simulation

</comment><comment><USER45> Very accurate simulation as in two minutes of trying it I'm already getting crazy with the whistling and typing.

</comment><comment><USER46> Tried it and decided that the generated noise just isn't worth the trackers on this site. Your mileage may vary.

</comment><comment><USER47> This has to be irony right? Not more than 10 seconds in I had the pleasure to hear loud, wet, chewing.

</comment><comment><USER48> I seriously hate open plan. Which turkey came up with that idea?

I became one of the ahole's at one small office when I opened a brie and ate it at my desk. The guy next to me said that cheese made him vomit. Did he want me throw my brie away? I kept on eating but never brought in cheese again. That guy never said a word to me again :-(

<comment><USER49> > Did he want me throw my brie away?

No, he wanted you to fuck off and eat it somewhere that he didn't have to smell it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> Ah, I can subtract all the way to 0 colleagues, I guess it works for me to. Thanks!

</comment><comment><USER51> The 'colleague' scanning its butt on the photocopier is a nice touch.

</comment><comment> n-i-m-a Made my day! A nespresso machine would make it almost identical to our office.

</comment><comment><USER52> I am so happy I always worked remotely and never heard that noise.

</comment><comment><USER53> Red circle is having an episode in the copier room again.

</comment><comment><USER54> ...but who whistles inside the office?

<comment><USER55> Maybe Karl Pilkington works here [0]

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RvReL_4Zg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4RvReL_4Zg)

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> Silence is bliss.

Except for the music I pick of course.

</comment><comment><USER57> wow, this made me appreciate working from home in an instant.

</comment><comment><USER58> Not loud enough</comment>


Killing the Crunch Mode Antipattern - <AUTHOR> http://chadfowler.com/blog/2014/01/22/the-crunch-mode-antipattern <comment><USER2> See extensive discussion from about a year ago:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7107173](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7107173)</comment>


Show HN: StoreDirectory. It's what it sounds like - <AUTHOR> http://storedirectory.info/

<comment><AUTHOR> Haven't posted anything here in a while. Here goes nothing.

I recently discovered a new businesses in a mall near my house that I never used to go to because I thought nothing was there, which immediately made me wonder what else I was missing at the place. I googled the name of the mall, but of course nothing came up.

It occurred to me that most shopping centers and malls (especially ones of the strip variety) probably don't have the money to build themselves a website, despite the benefit. Huge, well-known malls of course have their own custom sites with built in directories, but that leaves out the little guys.

I also figured if people are listing their businesses, they could also benefit from listing the empty space they're looking to rent out. StoreDirectory lets them do that, and then lets people looking for space search for it by location and square footage. Assuming people take to it, there's obviously many more search params to be added.

Anyhow, that's my pitch. It's pretty simple, but I have an inkling that people might find it useful. Thoughts?</comment>


Viewer.js – JavaScript image viewer - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/fengyuanchen/viewerjs <comment><USER2> There are usages for this kind of image viewer but frankly I find them very annoying most of the time. A good example to follow is the Boston Globe's Big Picture (click in any image at [https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/bigpicture](https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/bigpicture) to see a gallery). Just having all images in a good resolution, vertically stacked in a page has an awesome user experience. I can just scroll which fells very natural, and images will just load in background. If you want to go fancy you can have some JS to control in which order the images should load, and limit the bandwidth.

<comment><USER3> I also dislike "gallery" type of presentations. I also prefer an example similar to the "bostonglobe.com", perhaps with some blazy effects [http://dinbror.dk/blazy/](http://dinbror.dk/blazy/).

<comment><USER4> I prefer this too.

But I guess that people who know stuff about photography will say the photos won't get the needed exposure...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Here's my lightbox implementation:

Works in all browsers, native, lightweight, public domain.

<comment><USER6> =)

I prefer it without the target attribute, generally because I prefer navigating back than closing a window. This is especially true on phones. Power users on desktop computers usually know how to open in a tab using the third mouse button or Ctrl-clicking.

<comment><USER7> If a link opens in a new tab on Android, the back button closes the tab.

<comment><USER6> I didn't know that. Neat. Then maybe iOS will get this one day.

I would like some kind of reverse Ctrl-click, that would force links to open in the same window as the one I'm currently in. I just don't know how this should work, if I click a link while I'm filling in a form. :-/

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Might be cool, but I closed my tab immediately. I work on an open team with quite a few women and other folks who would immediately react negatively to the sexy Emma Watson example photos. Bring on the downvotes, but even if this is an irrational negative reaction, it's a real one. If you want this to be a useful and universal library consider your example images. If you want it to be used only by people who aren't bothered by this, then plow straight ahead.

It's 2016, let's not propagate the mess that was Lenna: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenna)

<comment><USER9> Why?

Its just an example gallery that happens to be of a photo shoot of Emma Watson. The photo's aren't even remotely suggestive... Are your female co- workers that sensitive and/or unable to rationalize? Would you have kept looking at the demo if it was filled with similar pictures of Brat Pitt?

Not trying to be mean or anything I genuinely don't understand and would like to know.

EDIT:

I do see and agree that a more varied subject matter would probably do better to showcase the usage of the plugin but I still think that your reaction is slightly extreme as it seems like you look down on your female co-workers by removing their agency in the matter :S (although that might be taking it to the extreme from my side...)

<comment> Jean-Philipe Yes, I for one would have kept looking at the demo if it was Brad Pitt.

But that's not the point. Sexism, in reality, favours men and hurts women. That's why an image of Brad Pitt is okay, whereas an image of Emma Watson is not okay! (and by the way, they _are_ suggestive)

Any argument that goes "But if we switched genders, then it would be fine!" is completely missing the point that we are still living in a de-facto patriarchy, where objectification of men is not even an issue.

In any case, I found the choice of images immature and closed the website right away.

<comment> mycroft-holmes > Yes, I for one would have kept looking at the demo if it was Brad Pitt.

That makes you the sexist in this instance.

<comment> Jean-Philipe Because I try to be sensitive to sexism and react accordingly, that makes me sexist?

<comment> mycroft-holmes No, because you're treating each sex differently based on their sex.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I don't want to be negative put performance is really not that great (specially when pinching), there is simply no comparison to native (massive lag/unresponsive) It's certainly possible to build web native par photo viewers (I've done it) I'll try to open source my implementation soon. However props to the author it seems to have good documentation and well thought out features.

</comment><comment><USER11> Works great! (btw, here's mine [https://github.com/starikovs/stupidbox](https://github.com/starikovs/stupidbox) %-)

</comment><comment><USER12> I occassionally use PhotoSwipe when I need an image viewer ([http://photoswipe.com/documentation/getting- started.html](http://photoswipe.com/documentation/getting-started.html)). Bit of a pain to implement, but I really like the way it works both on desktop and mobile and the fact that it has linkable URLs.

For all the over the top options that ViewerJS seems to have, I find it strange that a simple 'click background to close' option is missing.

</comment><comment><USER13> Tested it for about 30 seconds & found numerous bugs. Scrolling with my Apple Magic touchpad is very buggy. As I scroll up it zooms in 90% of the time, but randomly 10% of the time it reverses the zoom direction so scrolling up zooms out. When I click on the "zoom out" button on the bottom of the screen, the image zooms out but starts moving off the page, as if the width/height are changed but the left/top aren't updated. This does not appear to be production ready.

</comment><comment><USER14> Nice.

What seems to be missing is the forward/backward links within each 50% of the image width.

</comment><comment><USER15> The open animation is way too slow. Not great UX.

</comment><comment><USER16> since github is down atm [http://fengyuanchen.github.io/viewerjs/](http://fengyuanchen.github.io/viewerjs/)

</comment><comment><USER17> There should be X to close the image

<comment><USER18> Clicking outside the image should close it. That's pretty standard nowadays.

<comment><USER19> It doesn't for me I had to use ESC.

<comment><USER11> I've just found out that some users (not hackers) click or tap somewhere if they want to close or do something with it even if they don't know how to interact with it in the next step.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Bah, I think my solution looks better, and it's mostly all CSS transitions (simpler) -> [http://cache.getlazarus.org/videos/flip- photos.mp4](http://cache.getlazarus.org/videos/flip-photos.mp4)

</comment><comment><USER21> works great. lots of features. easy to use. I like it.

</comment><comment><USER22> Ha! I was looking exactly for something like this (Zoom/rotate)

Sweet, I lucked out.

</comment><comment><USER23> lots of +1 for using emma watson, she is also pretty sideways.

However, i did experience a blocking wait for > 5 seconds "Waiting for [http://.."](http://..") some fusion ads or something. In UX terms, it is quite important that image loading ( -> fullscreen on click) is not blocked.

</comment><comment><USER20> Bah, I think mine which is pure css transitions is better -> [http://cache.getlazarus.org/videos/flip- photos.mp4](http://cache.getlazarus.org/videos/flip-photos.mp4)

And simpler too.</comment>


Facebook Guesses Your Political Views and Serves Ads Accordingly - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/24/us/politics/facebook-ads-politics.html <comment><AUTHOR> In my case, FB's political guess was way off. FB Interests also indicated that my primary browser is Safari, even though I use Chrome exclusively.

The first mistake is understandable given the politics of many of my friends. The second mistake is a bit harder to understand. I guess they've got some work to do over at 1 Hacker Way...</comment>


How The FCC Plans To Destroy GPS – A Simple Explanation - <AUTHOR> http://freegeographytools.com/2011/how-the-fcc-plans-to-destroy-gps-a-simple-explanation <comment><USER2> Ugh, c'mon, people. The FCC isn't planning to destroy GPS. I hate the FCC as much as the next guy on the Internet, but that's too ridiculous for consideration.

What they're trying to do is balance the legitimate right that one user has to a piece of spectrum, with the legitimate right that a lot of users have to some that's adjacent. They'd be looking at nothing but an endless series of lawsuits if they told LightSquared that they couldn't use their spectrum (which they have a license to), particularly since LightSquared has a proposal which -- yes, on paper, but what's on paper matters -- says they'll not interfere with GPS.

It looks much more like the FCC is giving LightSquared an opportunity, either to show that they can make the system workable, or to come up with enough rope to hang themselves, one way or the other. If LightSquared can't resolve the interference issues, then the FCC will have a much better case for an enforcement action than they currently do. (Although an enforcement action might require a rule change, because it's not clear that they would actually be in violation of the rules; front-end overload is typically the receiver's problem, not the transmitter's.)

I'm all for spectrum users being vigilant, and perhaps GPS users need an organization analogous to the ARRL (which protects the Amateur Radio spectrum, and successfully defeated the shitty BPL implementations that were kicking around a few years ago) to nip these things in the bud. But the conspiracy- theorizing is a bit rich.

<comment><USER3> Has the FCC ever bothered to actually go after people that abuse bits of the spectrum? Wardrobe malfunctions they are right on top of - but anything that requires technical knowledge seems to escape them.

GPS does have a group that protects it's users - I believe it's called the USAF.

<comment><USER4> Funny enough, if GPS does get jammed, the USAF has a whole lot of equipment that would be almost useless... Like every modern airplane they own.

<comment> mkr-hn We need someone with air force experience in here. It doesn't seem like they'd let them fly without knowing alternate ways of navigating.

<comment><USER4> Yeah, I was joking a little. Most aircraft would still work pretty well off of inertial data. However there are quite a few weapons systems that just plain won't work without GPS.

BTW, I'm not a pilot, but I work for a government aerospace contractor, so I have some experience in this.

<comment><USER5> I thought the most common ones (JDAMs) still had an inertial navigation system cause GPS/INS is used nearly everywhere. It'll probably have horrible accuracy (I guess that depends on how the coordinates sent to the bomb are handled... if it can be calculated as an offset of what the INS thinks it is, then it wouldn't be that bad). But still better then unguided bombs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> While an interesting article which does a good job of breaking down the technical details AND citing industry, it doesn't seem to me the FCC is "Planning to destroy GPS".

This sounds a lot more like the FCC not entirely understanding the ramifications of what they approved and/or a company trying to take advantage of licensing loopholes which have unforeseen consequences.

Yes, the FCC fucked up here but it isn't time to bring out the tin foil hats yet.

<comment><USER7> This isn't just a clerical error, this is the very reason the FCC exists at all.

This would be like the FDA accidentally approving a new drug that gave everyone in a 1 block radius cancer.

<comment><USER8> Not at all. It's like the FDA approving a drug with a 100 mg /day dose, and a company rolling out a plan for 200 mg /day dose, and trying to convince the FDA that 200 mg is safe. Unless they actually get approval for 200 mg, they're not going to be able to ship.

<comment><USER9> And continuing the metaphor: having the FDA say "If your self-funded trials say it's Ok, then we're satisfied".

The funny part is, some times, that's how the FDA _does_ work. That's how we wound up with all those depression drugs that were only as effective as a placebo.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm a licensed (technically "certificated") private pilot and this is article is bullocks.

Aviation, both general and commercial, relies increasingly on GPS integrated avionics to navigate the rigidly defined airspace that instrument rated pilots refer to as "the system."

GPS has become so prevalent that the decades old method of navigation using VOR (VHF omnidirectional frequency) radials is going the way of that which came before it, ADF ("Automatic" Direction Finder).

Even the smelly old 1965 Piper Cherokee I fly sometimes has a Garmin GPS unit in it. The guy that taught me to fly has a 1947 Cessna 140 with a GPS unit. It's become ubiquitous in general aviation and is a de-facto requirement in commercial aviation.

GPS isn't going anywhere because it's too crucial to one of the major facets of the national transportation system.

<comment><USER11> Perhaps you can explain why the FCC is granting this license/waiver even in the face of vehement opposition from a broad collection of GPS manufacturers and aviation groups?

[http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi- bin/ws.exe/prod/ib/forms/report...](http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi- bin/ws.exe/prod/ib/forms/reports/related_filing.hts?f_key=-216679&f_number=SATMOD2010111800239)

<comment><USER10> The opposition was vehement, yes, but limited to strongly worded letters from (mostly) small general aviation companies. No Boeings, no American Airlines, no 'big guns' with be-suited lawyers to make the FCC wake up and smell the jet fuel.

Wait until a couple airliners go missed on RNAV GPS approaches in low IFR conditions (visibility < 1 mile or cloud ceilings at less than 500 feet). The airlines will raise hell, the FAA will get involved and that'll be all she wrote.

<comment><USER11> I think this company is a customer of Boeing's. Boeing builds their satellites.

As for the airlines, they are so heavily regulated that they might think twice about filing official comments on stuff like this without permission. No doubt FAA and FCC are talking about this even if it's not official. Their offices are only a few blocks away.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Meanwhile, the FCC's enforcement chief just put out a press release decrying cell/GPS jammers saying they "create safety risks".

[http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db0209...](http://www.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2011/db0209/DOC-304575A1.pdf)

<comment><USER13> Well, they do: Doctors and other medical professionals have come to rely on cell phones to be notified of emergencies quickly enough to save lives. If they are blocked, there's a realistic chance lives will be lost for no good reason.

(I've never heard of a good reason to block cell phone transmissions. It always seems to come down to trying to enforce some vision of politeness via technical means, which doesn't take considerate cell phone usage into account at all.)

<comment> X-Istence This is why it should be possible for theatres and the like to set up alternate base stations that cell phones connect to, this way 911 calls and text messages incoming may still be delivered but no incoming/outgoing calls may be connected.

<comment><USER13> In the scenario I'm describing, the doctor is going to the theater when they get a call from the hospital saying there's someone there who needs their skill. (It's actually in their contract that, while they're on-call, they have to remain within a certain amount of travel time from the hospital so they can get there in time. This does affect home purchases.) If their cell phone is blocked, the call is missed and someone may very well die.

You could (presumably) attempt to fix this with technology. It might even work for a while, but when it breaks, someone could very easily die. And they'd have died of someone else's dislike for cell phones, which is not a good reason.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> (sigh) The article was written by an alarmist moron trying to push his own agenda, and most likely, pushing it for his own profit.

The only real problem is GPS equipment manufacturers intentionally cut corners and costs by _FAILING_ to implement proper bandpass filters.

When the LightSquared towers get turned on, and customers who bought incorrectly designed garbage from the likes of Garmin, the result will be simple: The equipment makers will get sued in massive class action law suits for selling broken equipment. And yes, the manufacturers deserved to be sued for cutting corners on bandpass filters and selling junk since THEY HAVE ALWAYS KNOWN the adjacent spectrum frequencies could be used at any time.

</comment><comment><USER11> It's possible the LightSquared transmitters will be far more directional than the Garmin test gives them credit for. They may not run full power all the time anyway.

Regardless, it's generally the responsibility of the receiver to ignore signals in another part of the same band, and this is a different band entirely. Perhaps some receivers are built as cheaply as possible and don't have the best filters. If they all break, well, their customers should know not to trust that brand again. Any other policy amounts to no one ever being able to establish new radio service on its own part of the spectrum, on the theory that some other defective other equipment might fall over.

Personally, I think it's far more interesting the prospect of having a network of 20,000 steerable-beam transmitters approved for 15KW ERP each at 1.5GHz. 300MW is about half the output of a typical electrical power plant. If those were networked that could make one hell of an antisatellite weapon, phased- array radar illuminator, or maybe even an SDI-type directed energy weapon.

If the military isn't behind this, well they should be. <conspiracy theory>Maybe that's why the FCC is fast tracking it so much.</conspiracy theory>

<comment><USER15> It's the responsibility of the receiver to ignore signals transmitted at appropriate power levels, yes.

The receiver is not required to be overengineered to cope with transmissions vastly more powerful than expected - _that's why limits on broadcast power exist in the first place_.

<comment><USER11> OK I see it now. It looks like everything in that adjacent band had previously been designated space-to-earth.

I suppose it would be reasonable for an engineer to assume a receiver is not going to end up within a few KM of a 15 KW transmitter at those frequencies.

<comment> X-Istence At high power you can overpower adjacent frequencies wether you have good band filtering on it or not. For example a 2 Watt FM transmitter at 100 Mhz can easily overpower radio's tuned to 95 Mhz just because of its power, even with the appropriate filtering.

<comment><USER11> The internationally-agreed upon plan for the adjacent band was to have all the transmitters in orbit and all the receivers on the ground. So I don't think a 2W transmitter in orbit is going to overpower receivers in a different band.

40,000 of 15KW transmitters on the ground may be another matter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Doesn't the military still rely heavily on GPS? I have a hard time believing they'd tolerate any kind of interference with such a crucial system.

<comment><USER3> Yes - without it's operation many senior members of staff would be forced to learn map reading to find their way around Washington (or at least their drivers would)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Google cache link: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:I2iCQGc...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:I2iCQGcQ3YUJ:freegeographytools.com/2011/how- the-fcc-plans-to-destroy-gps-a-simple- explanation+http://freegeographytools.com/2011/how-the-fcc-plans-to-destroy- gps-a-simple-explanation)

</comment><comment><USER18> Would this affect the upcoming Galileo platform too? Does it use similar frequencies?

<comment><USER3> Yes if you could actually get Galileo receivers !

Galileo changed the frequency to be slightly different to GPS to allow selectively blocking one or the other - but it's still close enough for this to interfere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> That site looks pretty spammy. You sure this isn't just an attempt to build links?

</comment><comment><USER20> I thought GPS was spread spectrum which would make it resistant to these kinds of interference? After all, GPS satellites broadcast at the same frequency _as each other,_ that's the genius of how GPS works.

<comment> X-Istence By the time the GPS signal reaches earth it is at a very low power, think milliwatts.

Lets think of it as you trying to eavesdrop on a meeting.

You have your ear pressed on a big thick wooden door that lets very little sound through, you are attempting to hear so you have everything around you very quiet and try your best to hear that very faint sound of your boss talking about the companies plan to fire everyone. Now your co-worker just a cubicle down is on the phone and instead of keeping it down is talking very loudly. It doesn't matter how hard you try to listen for the sound from inside the meeting all you can hear is your co-worker.

Now think of your boss in the meeting as the GPS satellites and your co-worker as this new company.

Unfortunately when it comes to transmitting power, the more you have of it the more likely you are to overpower other signals. This is the same issue that FM transmitters have as mentioned in the article.

Unless we put better band filters on GPS devices and attempt to filter out a very high power signal GPS is going to get lost in the signal that is being transmitted from the ground.

<comment><USER21> GPS signal strength at Earth's surface is -130dBmW, so that'd be attowatts... A GPS satellite capable of 0dBmW would be truly scary; it'd have about a petawatt of electrical supply.

See, e.g., <http://gpsinformation.net/main/gpspower.htm>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Has the FAA said anything about this? I would hope that they would be concerned about the impact on aviation GPS.

</comment><comment><USER23> I'm looking forward to a VOR/DME receiver in my phone to make up for the loss of GPS.</comment>


IEEE Lifts Huawei Restrictions on Editorial and Peer Review Activities - <AUTHOR> https://www.ieee.org/about/news/2019/statement-update-ieee-lifts-restrictions-on-editorial-and-peer-review-activities.html <comment><USER2> Even though the restrictions are lifted, the damage is already done. Now everyone knows that IEEE has to comply with US gov's demands, which can be made without any court ruling or due process.

<comment><USER3> err that applys to any company/organization in any country. You just can't break a countries laws and hope to get away with it.

If anything IEEE was too quick to move, but I am not their legal team.

<comment><USER4> My guess is that most of restrictions on Huawei will be rolled back within a relative short period. However the damage this has done to America's reputation will stand for a long time and will impact some major strategic decisions not only in China but also in Europe.

<comment><USER5> The extension given to Huawei is due in August 19. My bet is that Huawei will be given another 3 month extension, which will line up with November presidential elections. After the election they will reach an agreement.

<comment><USER5> Disregard my last speculation, elections are in 2020, not 2019.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> >Our initial, more restrictive approach was motivated solely by our desire to protect our volunteers and our members from legal risk

In other words: They overreacted, possibly biased by those in charge.

<comment><USER7> I was guessing that IEEE lawyers and/or gov't officials temporarily advised IEEE to do what they did, and, later, gov't officials notified IEEE it was OK.

That this affected the IEEE in this way is a matter of concern, for an international academic/professional organization. I'd say most of us want to do good work, in good faith, for all of humanity, and are happy to collaborate around the world.

Even when there are tensions and conflicts among nations, politicians, and businesses, the rest of us can keep doing our collaborative work. Also, our mutual engagement around the world promotes diplomacy and our better selves.

<comment><USER8> Unfortunately trade wars are as real as any other kind of war, where 'no holds barred' is the norm.

I'm still amazed how many people fell for the 'concerns of espionage' pretext. I guess most wars in history have started will equally dumb pretexts.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Good. That this at all happened should make them think about relocating to a country like Switzerland. They're supposed to be an international organisation.

<comment><USER10> Switzerland is neutral in arms only: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_neutrality](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_neutrality)

Switzerland has numerous policy/economic/security/etc agreements with the EU.

<comment><USER9> I don't think that's a major issue as the EU isn't very coercive when it comes to these types of institutions. Has Switzerland ever coerced an institution into behaving the way the IEEE just did?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> The damage is done. I think the lost of trust will have considerable impact.</comment>


Bug Bounty, two years in - <AUTHOR> https://blog.twitter.com/2016/bug-bounty-2-years-in <comment><USER2> my experience with bug bounties

Me: here is a bug

Them: it's a feature, not a bug [fixes feature]

<comment><USER3> Or in my case recently with trying to get HubSpot to support PRURLs:

Me: Here is a bug. Your implementation does X when the specification says that it should do Y. Here is the RFC and the relevant sections explaining how it should work [link].

Them: This isn't a bug. Reference to some other popular piece of unrelated software that also has a faulty URL implementation. Half-assed apology for creating an un-resolvable problem for you while implying that you're an idiot at the same time.

Side-note: Please, everyone stop writing your javascript URL validation with checks for "http(s)"

<comment><USER4> I never knew about PRURLS. I will do ask you suggest.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So they've paid out $300k in two years? That sounds appallingly low and surely unappealing for anyone bug hunting professionally.

<comment><USER6> Bug bounties are basically not designed to lure in security experts who live in a first-world country and who already have established a reputation.

<comment><USER7> It's crowdsourcing, and for-profit crowdsourcing is pretty much exploitative by definition.</comment></comment></comment>


Windows 10 printing breaks due to Microsoft June 2020 updates - <AUTHOR> https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/windows-10-printing-breaks-due-to-microsoft-june-2020-updates/ <comment><AUTHOR> > Windows 10 users are reporting that they are unable to print using devices > from multiple vendors after installing updates for Windows 10 versions 1903, > 1909, and 2004 devices released on June 9, 2020.

> KB4560960 and KB4557957, the updates causing these issues, are cumulative > updates that were released on Tuesday with security fixes for multiple > Windows 10 components, as well as improvements and fixes for various Windows > 10 features.</comment>