Google Achieves Quantum Supremacy. Is Encryption Safe? - <AUTHOR> https://www.tomshardware.com/news/google-quantum-supremacy-encryption-safe,40489.html <comment><USER2> The FT piece the article refers to is here: [http://archive.is/ZLiUp](http://archive.is/ZLiUp)

</comment><comment><USER3> "Researchers from Canadian company Krypterra believe that we'd need 2,953 logical qubits to break AES-128 and 6,681 logical qubits to break AES-256."

Grover's algorithm only gives a sqrt(n) speedup for breaking AES, so the number of bits is irrelevant; breaking 256-bit AES on a quantum computer would take as much time (or gates, rather) as breaking 128-bit AES on a classical computer.

<comment><USER4> QC is really only a risk to RSA, DH, and elliptic curve, and maybe to small hashes and key sizes. I'd say if your symmetric stuff is bigger than 128 bit you only have to worry about asymmetric crypto.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> [https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4317](https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=4317)

Scott's Quantum Supremacy FAQ

</comment><comment><USER6> Almost mandatory link for any informed quatuom computation discussion:

[https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/](https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/)

</comment><comment><USER7> That paper just threw a mind-blowing title and abstract but the task they were solving was too narrow. No general-purpose quantum computer for the moment.

<comment><USER8> What the heck is a general purpose quantum computer??

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Somewhat of a tangent but: a big driver for QC investment is breaking encryption for military purposes. We already have encryption that is not believed to be vulnerable to QC, and there is a ton of crypto R&D to make it faster and more practical (e.g. smaller keys and signatures).

I wonder if that won't kill some QC investment.

</comment><comment><USER9> Has Google officially announced QS yet, or is this all based off of leaks?

<comment><USER10> Leaks but it's probably true leaks

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> > Google Achieves Quantum Supremacy

Is it another careful crafted academic lie or is it real this time?

<comment><USER12> There are two subgoals towards the creation of quantum computers

* quantum supremacy: this is a scientific goal. This can be achieved by building a quantum device that can solve some, possibly useless, computational problem faster than a classical computer. The Google team claims to have done so. For scientists, wondering whether the extended Church-Turing thesis is true or not, the Google result is a significant result. It provides some evidence that the thesis is not true.

* quantum advantage: this is a technological goal (even though it also has scientific implications). This is about building a quantum device that actually solves useful computational problems (like breaking encryption) faster than a classical computer. We are not there yet.

<comment><USER13> > (extended) Church-Turing thesis

I'd take out that parenthesis, it's misleading. The Church-Turing thesis is about computability, whereas the "extended" one is about complexity. They're quite different beasts despite the similar name, and QS would really only be evidence against the extended version.

<comment><USER12> Agreed and fixed. Thanks.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Convert any link(mostly blog articles) to a discussion thread - <AUTHOR> I am working on a small service where you can convert any blog link to a discussion thread and share annotations and comments etc. any thoughts, comments ? <comment><USER2> If the service follows the link, fetches content, and redisplays that content then it will be easy for the rights holders for that content to make copyright infringement claims...notice how HN only hosts the location of the content not the content itself?

It's also simpler to just link. Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER3> Is there a current landing page?

-Twitter sign in

-Anonymous commenting

-Further sharing</comment>


What is a good substitute for Master/Slave? - <AUTHOR> I'm suffering from a temporary lack of imagination. There must a be better phrase for this. Thx <comment><USER2> somewhat depends on context what the best replacement is.

Primary/Replica is often used in databases.

Distributed databases where by nature that often can change had already often adopted the terminology used by consensus algorithms, which typically speak of a "leader" (that's choosen out of "nodes", "members", "servers" by "leader election" of some kind. Sometimes "follower" for the non-leader nodes)

Primary/Secondary is an option.

In electronics there is the suggestion of Controller/Peripheral

</comment><comment><USER3> Master slave has and always will be a lazy metaphor in databases. We can be more specific. Active / passive, primary / secondary, leader / follower are all very different and imply different actions and mechanisms.

</comment><comment><USER4> Databases: primary/replica Repository: main branch CI/CD: server/agent

These are all fairly common terms I see or use for these scenarios.

There are a other terms you could use though in different systems that make sense.

Master: main/primary/broker Slave: agent/worker/replica/node

Bust out a thesaurus. Ace is apparently close to master. I kinda like that word. Ace of database.

</comment><comment><USER5> There's a good list in this article...

[https://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-team-approves-new- termin...](https://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-team-approves-new-terminology- bans-terms-like-blacklist-and-slave/)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Ah detaro for the win!: "Controller/Peripheral" I'm a desktop/embedded guy (no DB's) so this makes the most sense for me. Thx detaro!

<comment><USER2> I found the link again, with proposals on how to label pins in SPI etc based on that: [https://www.oshwa.org/a-resolution-to-redefine-spi-signal- na...](https://www.oshwa.org/a-resolution-to-redefine-spi-signal-names)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Primary/Secondary...

</comment><comment><USER7> primary/replica</comment>


Beware your project's Schwarzschild radius - <AUTHOR> http://peternixey.com/post/54026285667/beware-your-projects-schwarzschild-radius

<comment><USER2>
       The Schwarzschild radius (sometimes historically referred
       to as the gravitational radius) is the radius of a sphere
       such that, if all the mass of an object is compressed
       within that sphere, the escape speed from the surface of
       the sphere would equal the speed of light.
       --Wikipedia

Personally, I think your project getting so big that not even light can escape is a far better image (your project would literally be a black hole) than the on the article implies where you cannot get a rocket of the surface.

<comment><USER3> A rather stretched poetic usage of Schwarzschild radius, and it seems the author simply stumbled away from the denotational meaning. Nonetheless the metaphor worked for me.

I am unaware of a specific name for the concept that a larger rocket has diminishing returns because of the disproportionate addition of fuel weight. Like the article suggests, one has to wrestle with the payload requirements to get out of this trap.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> If you have larger projects, agile project management methodologies have a good solution:

The Scrum method advocates keeping two backlogs - a product backlog and a sprint backlog; the sprint backlog is created by the team off the product backlog at the beginning of a fixed duration sprint (and adjusted by the team if needed), and the sprint backlog belongs to the team, and can't be changed by the business / users (instead, new issues go to the product owner, who can add them to the product backlog for them to get picked up at future sprints). The team is supposed to produce something that is 'complete' for some definition of complete at the end of each sprint.

Because sprints are fixed in time (maximum of one month) and have finite scope (whatever items on the product backlog the team are able to take to completion), each sprint delivers iterative forward progress towards the long term full set of requirements, and even if the project runs out of money after a few sprints, the most important requirements will have been met. The product owner still gets to prioritise a backlog (the product backlog) according to business and user requirements.

<comment><USER5> > even if the project runs out of money after a few sprints, the most > important requirements will have been met. The product owner still gets to > prioritise a backlog (the product backlog) according to business and user > requirements.

Interesting, but if the team are choosing items from the product backlog there seems no guarantee that the product owner will get the stuff that _they_ consider important done?

If the team assemble their sprint backlog, they'll do their own prioritisation which may not sync with the product owner's.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> _Like a bird flying into a strong wind you will slow down and may even start to move backwards._

In a way, this reminds me more of something I read from a computing book as a child, about early time-shared mainframes, where when overloaded a mainframe would spend more time loading programs from disk to memory and saving them back than it would work on any program. At one point, called a "beached whale", the system is constantly loading and saving because there is no time for any processing, as too many processes are fighting for CPU cycles.

</comment><comment><USER7> Ironic that GNU/HURD is also on the front page of HN

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5953737](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5953737)

</comment><comment><USER8> Are those graphs coming from real data or anecdotal evidence?

<comment><USER3> I rather liked the graphs, made up as they were. It clarified something observable in real life projects gone wrong: in order to partially cover up for a badly slipped schedule, new business requirements get added on. "We were late, but we did so to release an even better product to our customers." Unfortunately the inability to scope a project correlates with an inability to manage ad hoc requirements and the ensuing arbitrarily raised expectation.</comment></comment>


A few thoughts about static "IOC-less" malware detection - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@x0rz/threat-hunting-on-simple-tricks-27e64e39f2f0#.1bd3b2mb1 <comment><USER2> I imagine there are managed service IT companies out there sitting on gold mines worth of data that could be used this way.</comment>


Passwords for 5M Google Accounts Leaked - <AUTHOR> http://www.fastcompany.com/3035558/fast-feed/passwords-for-5-million-google-accounts-leaked

<comment><USER2> My password is on the list (email@example.com). I used a unique password for my Google account that I have never ever used for anything else. So I don't see how this leak could be anything but a leak from Google's servers.

I have 2FA and its been enabled for years. So I guess I am safe.

Link to full dump of emails (without passwords): [https://mega.co.nz/#!rgFDDRSD!QyyLxZNnR8i9fF_aNkKI- wUIUV3fjX...](https://mega.co.nz/#!rgFDDRSD!QyyLxZNnR8i9fF_aNkKI- wUIUV3fjX5o0dxdl-bE3zQ)

<comment><USER3> one of mine was too, however the password was an old one from quit a long time ago.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Mine is on there but the password is a simple one I use on sites I don't care about and never used it for my gmail account. Can only assume it's been scraped from another site.</comment>


USA removes Wakanda as trade partner after initially listing it as one - <AUTHOR> https://www.iafrikan.com/2019/12/22/wakanda-black-panther-america-usa-agriculture-trade-relations/ <comment><USER2> Where does it end? If we're discriminating against countries whose only fault is that they lack physical and historical existence, what next? For the vast majority of people who will never visit any African country there is practically no difference: Both Wakanda and those "real" countries are merely mental abstractions with no other practical infringement into the person's empirical experience. If this stands, it will be a slippery slope. Next we'll be told that Unicorns, similarly lacking in physical extension, should be deprive of basic animal rights.

<comment><USER2> ::sigh:: downvoted. I know, humour is generally discouraged on HN, but I thought the subtle hints of the metaphysics of imaginary creatures might attract some appreciation. Oh well, I regret nothing!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Most likely a developer on the website using test data and forgot to remove it.

We've become so biased, the last time I saw this posted on HN, people were commenting on the administration somehow actually doing this intentionally.

<comment><USER2> I could imagine a developer doing it deliberately as an Easter egg of sorts.</comment></comment>


Drug resistant malaria takes new ground, raising fears of global spread - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/#!/science/news/2012/03/drug-resistant-malaria-takes-new-ground-raising-fears-of-global-spread.ars <comment><USER2> Sensationalist headline.

One drug in a multi-drug treatment is taking longer to be effective. The malaria is not resistant to the partner drug, nor even to the primary drug - it's just more tolerant in that the primary drug _alone_ may not clear the parasite in under 72 hours.

Cause for concern? Yes. Cause for alarm? No.

<comment><USER3> I think you're missing the point. It's about "The loss of ACTs as an effective therapy". ACT has been the goto treatment for long now and what is at risk is an effective goto treatment which would leave each clinic with no easy and effective solution to cure people. Procedures are standardized and applied as per the WHO recommendations (which largely originate from the work in the Mae Sot area).

Mae Sot (really, it's the Thai-Burmese border as there is virtually no Malaria cases in Mae Sot as the mosquitos hate cities) is an area that has been leading the research and study of Malaria treatments for years now and is generally regarded and the trend-maker of Malaria as a whole.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm just getting a redirect to local host for that article. Other articles on arstechnica.com work fine. Broken link?

Edit: Going directly to the comments works (no RST or redirect): [http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/03/drug- resistant-m...](http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/03/drug-resistant- malaria-takes-new-ground-raising-fears-of-global- spread.ars?comments=1#comments-bar)

</comment><comment><USER5> NSF Weak Stomach warning, the images are not pretty.

I would like to see a solution of the 'mosquito genocide' variety.

<comment><USER6> We're already working on a mosquito genocide solution. Ever since the Nature article ( <http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html> ) about how the ecosystem would be fine without mosquitoes I've seen a number of mosquito genocide solutions that just yell "mad scientist".

We're using lasers <http://www.physorg.com/news185463943.html>

We're using smelly socks [http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2011-07/sock- science-f...](http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2011-07/sock-science- fighting-malaria-bearing-mosquitoes-stinky-socks)

We're tricking them into drinking poison <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/27/health/27mosquito.html>

We're even genetically engineering them to self destruct [http://gizmodo.com/5852703/mosquitoes- genetically+engineered...](http://gizmodo.com/5852703/mosquitoes- genetically+engineered-to-self-destruct-could-wipe-out-dengue-fever)

It's a bad time to be a mosquito.

(Also, I think this is how a Starship Troopers / Ender's Game scenario starts.)

<comment><USER3> A quick search on the Internet for the downside of such a genocide has yielded no results. Would you care to give some pointers or explanations if you have any?

I'm a firm believer that all actions have consequences and even if presented with "proves" that a mosquito genocide is without risks for the environment as a whole, I still wouldn't believe it totally.

For instance, mosquitos are traditionally eaten by Geckos (Mourning Gecko) in SEA which can be found in very large quantities. People mostly don't pay attention to them (although some people are scared of them) and couldn't care less when they emit their "weird sounds".

Such a large quantity of Geckos is abundant food for all sort of animals such as snakes, birds, and whatnot.

I'm not even a scientist so I really don't know why I'm following this obvious path unless an outreach of creationism has blind-folded actual the scientists?

<comment><USER5> Species die out every day, and they will continue to do so with our without our help. That's natural selection. Deliberate genocide is an irrevocable step in theory, but with something as ubiquitous as the mosquito it's unlikely to ever be completely successful.

That said, it's doubtful their extinction would cause any other species immediate trouble. What it will do is save hundreds of millions of human lives.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Let's bring back DDT. I'm serious. human life is more important than some shitty apex predators.

<comment><USER8> DDT is already back in use in many places. In fact, it's been in use so much (mostly to protect crops) that there is significant DDT resistance in some parts of the world. Now, it's not as simple as DDT doesn't work anymore, but it's also definitely not the same as 'if we just used it, it would fix everything'.

In fact, most 'bans' on DDT are actually primarily bans on agricultural use of DDT. Use of DDT as malaria vector control (for example in the United States) is allowed (as well as controlling other disease vectors). The problem is primarily the countries who haven't banned DDT for agricultural use, as it is that usage that has most greatly contributed to DDT resistance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Not too many mosquitoes here in California.

<comment><USER9> Sorry for writing this, I didn't mean to be insensitive. What I meant to say was that a malaria epidemic seems unlikely to pose an existential threat to humanity because mosquitoes aren't everywhere. I was hoping someone would correct me if I was wrong and there was some other way for malaria to spread...</comment></comment>


Minimum unit pricing may have helped reduce alcohol-related deaths in Glasgow - <AUTHOR> https://www.scotsman.com/health/scotland-s-minimum-unit-pricing-thought-to-be-a-factor-in-the-decline-of-glasgow-drinking-deaths-1-5007185 <comment><USER2> Japan is sitting at .25 deaths per 100k without any such law. [1]

Sounds like this is a case of "law of small numbers." The deaths dropped by 40 in a single year in a single city? 40 people? Does that not see drastically small to use to back something like this up?

I only thought of Japan because they sell alcohol (beer and sake) in vending machines there. Doesn't really get much easier to buy than that. And alcohol is popular there, it's not as if it's a country with prohibition.

[1] [https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of- death/alcohol/b...](https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of- death/alcohol/by-country/)

<comment><USER3> I haven't seen alcohol vending machines here in Tokyo in many years, however you are correct that alcohol is cheap and easily available. You can buy a 330ml can of 9% alcohol drink called Strong Zero at the supermarket for close to ¥100. Many restaurants offer 'all you can drink' specials for as little as ¥1200 for two hours.

I'm actually surprised that alcohol related deaths are so low.

<comment><USER4> Just travelled to Osaka and I can confirm They have vending machine with alcohol here although I literally only found one so far in my trip.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Is it not a bit soon to be drawing conclusions? Also there are so many other factors involved. I'm a scotsman and I'm personally not a fan of this law, nor the 10am-10pm licensing laws. They're blunt instruments that fail to tackle the root causes. I'm not saying they don't work or that they're not relatively easy to implement but I wouldn't be surprised if we soon see an increase in deaths from other drugs.

<comment><USER6> How should they tackle the "root cause?" It is fine to criticize the existing solutions, but this isn't offering a counter proposal that could be used when they're scrapped (and until this proposal exists and comes on-tap, they're better than nothing).

<comment><USER5> The root causes vary, but include mental health issues and poverty in general. We should instead focus on those issues more.

The main alcohol related root cause is the culture of binge drinking. The way to tackle that is to create and encourage a culture of moderate drinking. Change licensing laws to make it easy for families to go to pubs for example.

<comment><USER7> > binge drinking. The way to tackle that is to create and encourage a culture > of moderate drinking

In _scotland_?? Drinking culture is tied in to masculinity at least in the UK midlands ('beer or queer' \- that kind of shit though thankfully fadin) and I'll bet it's the same in scotland. And you've got an entire drug industry, the drinks industry, working hard to get people to abuse, NOT use, to ABUSE to excess, their product.

It's a deep problem with very difficult solutions. Externalised costs of capitalism, shitty lives, poverty, people who can't see a way out and if offered won't take it...

<comment><USER5> From what I've seen the beer is manly culture is going away. There's also a lot more awareness of drinking levels and sobriety. It's far easier and more socially acceptable to drink moderately now. These changes are mostly driven by healthy living concerns.

Educating people about lifestyle is proving effective.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> On the other hand, maybe some are moving on to harder stuff? [https://www.economist.com/britain/2019/07/18/scotland- overta...](https://www.economist.com/britain/2019/07/18/scotland-overtakes- america-as-the-worlds-drug-overdose-capital)

<comment><USER9> That's been the experience among my circle of friends (cash strapped students). Why spend a fortune on beer when you can get a strong pill for a fiver?

<comment><USER10> Minimum unit pricing doesn't really affect beer - certainly not in a way that makes it cost a "fortune". It makes cans cost a few pence more than ones that you could get on a special offer in England. And people have been taking pills forever - it's not something people have started resorting to now they have to pay fifty pence more to get pissed on lager.

<comment><USER11> To put some numbers on this, Stella Artois is 4.8%, so a 568 ml can contains 27.264 ml of alcohol, or 2.7264 units. A minimum price of 50p a unit establishes a minimum price of £1.3632 per can, or £5.4528 per four-pack. Tesco currently sells four-packs in England for £5.50:

[https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en- GB/products/250317180](https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en- GB/products/250317180)

<comment><USER12> Nearly all grocers in England (Asda, Tesco, Sainsburys, Morrions) will have a weekly offer on crates, you can nearly always find 20 crates of stella for 20 quid (20x400mlx2). I guess these aren't available in Scotland? You only really pay over a fiver a four pack when you're in a rush at the co-op or tesco express, if you're in the big store you'll change 4 stella to four kroneberg for 3.29 or whatever similar, on mainstream lagers anyway

<comment><USER11> True. I suppose pound-a-tin Polish beers from the corner shop would go away too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> "Minimum unit pricing" Just means making alcohol more expensive. Headline from 6-19-2019 "Alcohol sales in Scotland hit 25 year low after minimum unit pricing introduced." Here's their governments website: [https://www2.gov.scot/Topics/Health/Services/Alcohol/minimum...](https://www2.gov.scot/Topics/Health/Services/Alcohol/minimum- pricing)

</comment><comment><USER14> Legalising safer drugs would also be an option.

<comment><USER15> You got that right. Alcohol is a straight up dirty drug that's only around because it was simple to make and a part of Roman culture.

<comment><USER16> I wonder if there's a startup (or multiple) here? If you take GABA supplements it has some minor version of the affect of alcohol, and if I remember correctly alcohol is a GABA inhibitor. Is there a way to engineer a better, safer, equally or more enjoyable alcohol, maybe with less judgement impairment?

<comment><USER17> This is what benzodiazepines are[0] and they are not safer than alcohol[1][2]. Alcohol and benzodiazepines are cross-tolerant with each other[3].

[0] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6147796](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6147796)

[1] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19465812](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19465812)

[2] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4816010/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4816010/)

[3] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2712270/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2712270/)

<comment><USER15> You could also just make something fun that doesn't work like alcohol or benzos.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> > Glasgow has had a 21.5 per cent reduction in alcohol-related deaths from > 2017 to 2018 - down from 186 to 146.

They really should be tracking all alcohol and drug-related deaths instead of pretending that we live in a world free of negative externalities.

<comment><AUTHOR> Why do you think they're not tracking drug related deaths?

[https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and- data/statistics...](https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and- data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/vital-events/deaths/drug-related-deaths- in-scotland)

<comment><USER19> Then they should note that drug related deaths went up by 27% from 2017-18

[https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/drug- related...](https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files//statistics/drug-related- deaths/2018/drug-related-deaths-18-pub.pdf)

<comment><USER20> Whatever figures you want shown, aso show what they are doing in areas that have not had a comparable policy change.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Eli5 how does minimum unit pricing work exactly?

<comment><USER22> Presumably you can't go below a certain price per liter

<comment><USER23> Basically. There is a minimum price set of 0.50 per unit. This means a bottle of whisky, 70cl at 37.5% ABV cannot retail for less than £14 whereas previously these would be on promotion sometimes at £11/£12/£13.

By setting it per unit instead of quantity of drink the government targets super strength cheap cider etc that were linked to lots of anti-social behaviour and crime.

<comment><USER24> How about an offer of 15 with a 3 pound non-transferable (therefore worthless) store credit?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Apologies for some domestic political comment on HN - but surely the Scotsman isn't about to give the terrible SNP credit for something?!

Was there not a more negative spin they could've used, e.g. "deaths fall by smaller percent than promised/hoped"?

I note this policy is being mooted UK wide - good. Overuse - and outright abuse - of alcohol is so prevalent and "normal" in the UK it's shocking.

Impact to prices in bars and supermarkets has been totally negligible to anyone enjoying e.g. a pretty cheap £6 bottle of wine or four-beers-for-£5 bundles. It's the supercheap £3 for 2L of strong cider this policy's targeted at and it looks like it might be helping.

<comment><USER26> > I note this policy is being mooted UK wide - good.

To moot is to argue, but then your next statement seems to suggest you want the policy to be rolled out across the UK? Are you for or against rolling this policy out across the UK?

I currently live in New Zealand where alcohol is relatively expensive and it has a massive drinking problem for young persons. When I go back to the UK, the problem is about the same, but the young people aren't going broke buying alcohol. I don't think it works. Increasing the price of Tobacco didn't do much to stop smoking, but vaping and preventing smoking in public areas did. Changing social attitudes to smoking is fundamentally what reduced it.

Personally, I think it's better to use the carrot and not the stick. It shouldn't be the responsibility of the state to raise people's children correctly.

I think this works in my experience. As a child, my parents would let me have a small drink with a meal. As I grew up I never felt the need to drink to excess, I knew how alcohol worked. My sibling had the same experience and doesn't drink. My younger sibling still, was prevented from drinking anything and then went crazy when they legally could.

<comment><USER27> > Increasing the price of Tobacco didn't do much to stop smoking

This is factually false.

<comment><USER28> IIRC, it depends on your study period. Increasing the price of tobacco has been found to have diminishing effects. It was very effective when they first started doing it, but now the price is so high in some countries that price- sensitive smokers have already stopped and further increases do little.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> "may have" so it really hasn't ?

How do you read the title ?

 _Glasgow has had a 21.5 per cent reduction in alcohol-related deaths from 2017 to 2018 - down from 186 to 146_

Yep.

<comment><USER16> One year with numbers that small doesn't prove it yet though. Maybe they're just exited about the possibility of another referendum on Scottish independence. Who knows, with this data.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> "May have"

</comment><comment><USER31> England doesn't have this policy. The rate of alcohol-related deaths is half of that in Scotland. And alcohol is only one issue among many. Increasing the cost of alcohol may reduce the number of alcohol-related deaths but what is actually doing for people who need help? Either they have less money or they go somewhere else.

The meta of this policy is kind of interesting too. This kind of price tinkering, control freakery is very New Labour (and probably Conservatives now too, although to a lesser extent). It feels sophisticated, and it is usually accompanied by research from very serious civil servants who model the impact down to the decimal point.

The problem is that these policies always has unintended consequences, you use your blunt instrument to achieve your primary aim...but then other stuff happens. I get that we need to give economists jobs...but can't they just do it somewhere else?

Rather than tinkering with prices, why not focus on exactly why these people are making these choices? The govt has had long enough. And, from what I have read, NHS Scotland just whine about poverty (and now austerity the bogeyman de jour). We have known for years (over a decade iirc) that these effects still exist after income (rich people in Scotland die faster than in England too). Maybe that is a link worth examining: doctors playing politics and patients with poor life expectancy? Ineffective policy-makers (there is little evidence that the govt are particularly competent in anything other than railing against "Westminster")? Ineffective managers in the NHS?

<comment><USER32> Serious question: what if the answer to "why these people are making these choices" turns out to be "culture"? As in, this is the way lots of big Scottish people have behaved in front of lots of little Scottish people for generations, and absent any opprobrium from the rest of society (which is something this law provides, in addition to its purely economic effect), it will continue that way for the foreseeable?

At that point would it be reasonable for Scotland, as a society, to decide to put its thumb in the scale through a measure like the one discussed in the article to try to reduce the harm?

Note: I've never been to Scotland, don't know any Scottish people, and certainly don't have my finger on the beating pulse of Scottish culture, so the above is purely a hypothetical! I'm just always curious to see how people who emphasize the economic causes of problems think about possible non- economic factors.

<comment><USER33> Culture, and also despair. Perhaps similar to the US opiate crisis.

There are a lot of people in the UK who drink "too much", and a general distribution of people genetically predisposed to addiction. To drink yourself to death requires something more, usually falling off the edge of society. People who feel economically and socially unwanted, growing up in a "hard" culture.

Glasgow and Dundee in particular were cities of the Empire. When that came to an end in 1950 onwards there was a huge spike in unemployment, and a lot of the traditional heavy industries gradually left. This left a huge scar across both the physical infrastructure of Scotland (run down housing) and its culture. _Trainspotting_ isn't exactly a documentary but it's a culturally appropriate portrait of how things were.

This is gradually changing as the country acquires 21st century industries (satellites, biosciences, video games, banking), but that on its own doesn't do a lot for the old drunks.

<comment><USER34> Just a note... Trainspotting was set mostly in Edinburgh, not Glasgow. Glasgow is worse off - it's a larger city that historically had a larger reliance on industry.

Rough stats... Glawgow's life expectancy is one of the lowest in the UK and lower than Edinburgh by 2+ years for both men and women. Its employment rate is nearly 10% lower than Edinburgh.

For Americans: comparing Glasgow to Edinburgh is a bit like Baltimore vs Washington DC. Not a perfect comparison, but close enough to get the general idea.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


I read the 100 "best" fantasy or sci-fi novels--they were shockingly offensive - <AUTHOR> http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2015/08/i-read-100-best-fantasy-and-sci-fi-novels-and-they-were-shockingly-offensive

<comment><USER2> Wow, not well done.

Author glosses over _Watchmen_ , _Stranger in a Strange Land_ , _Neuromancer_ , _The Stand_ , _Snowcrash_ , _The Moon is a Harsh Mistress_ , _The Left Hand of Darkness_ , and several others that actually had some very interesting things to say on gender roles and treatment of minorities.

Author also ignores entirely the actual depiction of homosexuality and gender roles in _The Forever War_ , and the various ways the protagonist treats (and is treated by!) them.

Author was clearly looking to be offended, and in their zeal ignored both things that countered their position (not surprising) _and things that would 've substantiated it!_

 _Lucifer 's Hammer_, for example, can be read to literally depict African Americans and urban youths as savage cannibals. It's a good story otherwise, but there is certainly some facepalming in there.

<comment><USER3> She's a very sad individual. I feel sorry for her more than any sort of ire.

She cherry-picked right past Cordelia Naismith (later Vorkosigan) and her mother, both from "Beta Colony" where genders swap like day and night ("Shards of Honor," Vorkosigan Saga, Book One). You won't find any simpering females in any of Lois McMaster Bujold's novels unless they are a plot device there to serve as a victim and you won't run into gender discrimination from any primary characters (except for the old people ;-)).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Shockingly offensive to pussies, perhaps...</comment>


Briar Project - <AUTHOR> https://briarproject.org/how-it-works.html <comment><USER2> In an authoritarian regime with large masses of human and technological resources determined to have control over its population, nothing is really secure. Sending a message that can't be read by a third party? You're suspect. Have an illegal app installed on your registered "report to big brother" phone? Expect an unfriendly visit by big brother police. Don't have a "big brother" phone? There are various ways of sniffing you out. The bottom line is that while technology can help in the process, technology can't bring freedom from oppressing regimes. That is only achieved when a synchronised, large enough collection of people feel that they are willing to change things even at great personal risk. Authoritarian regimes know this, and thus put a lot of effort into using fear of consequences to suppress any hint of such development.

<comment><USER3> If only Google and Apple would make a fully end to end encrypted chatting platform to take place of SMS that is fully federated and not controlled by a single entity, something the likes of Signal could support / join in on and other chat apps. When you turn crypto into something the masses use seamlessly it gets a little more complicated to figure out who the suspects are. Also default to not synching to the cloud, and explain why syncing to the cloud could be compromised.

<comment><USER4> If spying on you is their business model, why would they build an app to prevent you from being spied?

<comment><USER5> Spying on you is not Apple's business model.

<comment><USER6> Oh indeed it is. I spent years reading apple reports and my conclusion was that they want the data for themselves so they can sell it. Devices don't make much profit when you factor in how much is spent buying up almost all old devices that hit the market.

<comment><USER7> Do you have any evidence of Apple selling user data?

<comment><USER8> It's right in Apple's privacy policy, see Disclosure to Third Parties section: [https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en- ww/](https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/)

They obviously sell user data in aggregate - not at a personal level, but which of the big tech companies sell personal data (maybe FB / Cambridge Analytica?)

Also, Apple has Google as the default search engine which Google pays billions for. Is that selling your personal data?

<comment><USER7> You mean the disclosure to third parties section that explicitly says "Apple does not sell personal information"?

I can't see anything in that section that says that they sell information to third parties, personally identifiable _or_ aggregate (I would consider the latter to be "personal" data as well fwiw). Is there a specific sentence you're thinking of?

It seems to be talking about the necessary sharing of data that happens when Apple contracts with third party services to run their own business. E.g. when they ship you a product they need to provide your address to the courier company. Or when they pay an advertising company to run ads for Apple products targeting certain markets/their own existing customers (not the same thing as selling personal data to an advertiser so that they can run ads for other products using said data - that _would_ be selling personal data)

As far as I can tell you're either using a definition of "sell" that is different to mine, or you're claiming Apple is using weaselly language to make it sound like they don't when they do (which is not unheard of of course). But you haven't provided enough information for me to really know what you're talking about - which is it, and why?

Also no, making the default search engine google is not selling personal data.

<comment><USER8> They target ads to your interests, default on:

"Ads that are delivered by Apple's advertising platform may appear in Apple News and in the App Store. If you do not wish to receive ads _targeted to your interests_ from Apple's advertising platform, you can choose to enable Limit Ad Tracking, which will opt your Apple ID out of receiving such ads regardless of what device you are using. If you enable Limit Ad Tracking on your mobile device, third-party apps cannot use the Advertising Identifier, a non-personal device identifier, to serve you targeted ads. You may still see ads in the App Store or News based on context like your search query or the channel you are reading. In third-party apps, you may see ads based on other information."

<comment><USER7> A third party being able to list ads on _apples_ ad platform that target some collection of desired user data is _not_ the same thing as said third party obtaining user data.

Third parties are buying ad listings, not user data. They have no way to extract user data from the ad platform, unless there's some kind of data leak.

If you think Apple is harvesting data off of bought back phones to improve their ad targeting that would also be a scandal (that I would expect some evidence of - otherwise it's just baseless speculation), but referring to it as "selling user data" is just obscuring what you're actually trying to communicate.

<comment><USER9> Unless those ads contain anything, that is loaded from the ad creating company, whichis then loaded in the user browser. Of course, no platform would allow requests to a third party …

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I've been looking for secure messengers during the last few weeks. I use WhatsApp, Signal, and Telegram. Telegram isn't very secure, WhatsApp is owned by Facebook and even Signal - while very secure - requires a cell phone number... Briar seems great in this regard but isn't available on iPhone and has no support for images, calls, voice messages, etc. Apparently they're going to support images and a desktop client, though.

In short, I just don't know what to use.

Edit: Session looks great but is not fully released yet: [https://getsession.org/](https://getsession.org/) This might be what I'm looking for in the future.

<comment><USER11> Have you looked at 'threema'? I recently installed it and I'm actually pleasantly surprised.

However, all of these bloody messengers mean that my contacts list is spread across a multitude of programs: we need the iOS/Android equivalent of pidgin.

<comment><USER10> Threema is closed source which is something I don't really like when it comes to security as there are no independent audits.

Edit: Generally, Threema seems interesting feature-wise, but I think the price (4€) will prevent my contacts from using it...

<comment><USER11> Interesting thought experiment though; if you're not paying for the development and hosting- who is?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Briar Project (and other projects like Signal and Tor) are funded by Open Technology Fund.

OTF is being killed by the current US government and this will affect all projects!

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

[https://saveinternetfreedom.tech/](https://saveinternetfreedom.tech/)

[https://saveinternetfreedom.tech/updates/](https://saveinternetfreedom.tech/updates/)

</comment><comment><USER13> Now that I think about it, why aren't most messaging apps peer to peer? Shouldn't that be the standard? I mean it's literally the point of messages: sending from one person to another.

<comment><USER14> Because:

a) Often the intended recipient isn't online when the message is sent, and it may happen that there is never a time when both sender and recipient are online simultaneously (e.g. sender's device only turns on to send the occasional message, receiver's device is usually off but turns on occasionally to check if there are messages)

b) Often one or both devices can only _connect_ to, but can't be _connected_ to (because behind a NAT, a mobile device, firewall, etc.)

c) Communication is often desired between accounts rather than devices -- I may want to send/receive on my work computer, home computer, phone, and watch

<comment><USER15> Is IPv6 likely to be a practical solution to the router/NAT issue? Are routers assigning globally-routable IPs to their clients, is that already a thing?

<comment><USER16> IPv6 solves _one_ of the reasons to use NAT. One more intractable reason is that many players (cellphone network operators, corporate networks) consider it a positive thing that individual devices are not globally accessible.

<comment><USER17> For cellphone networks it's not just a provider-side incentive, as inbound traffic will drain battery and you'd have no good way to stop it. But this only requires some sort of spam filter to be in front of the cellular link, like with a friends-based system where you keep connections to some friend's online nodes when you lock your phone, and just exchange IP+port info on both sides to just send a UDP packet to each other's IP+port from your own IP+port, punching your firewall. Theoretically you might even actively control your firewall to allow closing it off and also maintaining some permanent open entries for your friends to reach you with no indirection from their usual network(s). A provider could make money by selling (quota for) provider-side user-controlled firewall entries, and you could have your OS give out quota to apps.

It's feasible once you reach the point where it's worth the effort of implementing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I don't have an answer, but a slightly different perspective. Many different segments have a deep interest in using highly secure encrypted communications: politicians working on deals within/between governments (that should be auditable, but many try to avoid that), whistleblowers, organizers operating in adverse governments, dissidents, terrorists, pedophiles with a lot to lose (similar to Epstein's network), healthcare professionals trying to talk to patients or other doctors in a hippa world, illegal transaction networks, attorneys with clients, VCs trying to debate the future of the world, companies trying to preserve trade secrets, you name it. It takes one of the egregious bad actors using the system to commit a crime worthy of public attention before the entire system is justifiably unpacked, banned, or considered a signal of bad intentions.

How can a system be made decentralized, but able to self-police against legitimately, publicly agreed upon bad behavior? If the system is able agree upon and exclude legitimately bad behavior automatically, the governments would not have a claim upon needing to police it and regular users would probably find it beneficial as well.

How could the self policing possibly happen?

Maybe you have a blockchain of anonymized encrypted messages that is read by open source scanning bots - if enough independent bots flag a message, then a group of anonymous judges can adjudicate to ban those user accounts?

Encryption is one challenge, but if you want true ubiquitous privacy, you need to deliver internal safety to prevent the need for external policing of activity. Social creatures of any species from dolphins to macaques have evolved some kind of internal behavior policing mechanism or trust is lost, and as such the system of value exchange grinds to a halt.

<comment><USER9> This is the same way of thinking many politicians subscribe to: "There has been one terrorist attack, which killed 20 people, quickly now, surveilance everyone and everything! Think of the dangers!"

Throwing out the baby with the bathing water (does this proverb exist in English?) is not going to do society much good. Just because there some bad actors, one does not need to discard the whole idea of encryption.

Also the dehumanized way of checking for bad content will not help. Bad actors can pre-encrypt or disguise content, whatever you do. Furthermore when the bots have the key to decryption, then the backdoor is built into the system. Bad actors and politicians will try to make use of that.

<comment><USER19> The English idiom is precisely "throwing out the baby with the bath water." So, as they say, you "hit the nail on the head."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> What I don't understand about Briar is how it can _scale_. Surely it can't know ahead of time _which_ users are going to "travel to another part of town" and should therefore have messages pre-loaded onto their devices. Therefore to me this _seems_ like it must use some kind of broadcast delivery model and so would be vulnerable to flooding attacks.

Edit: seems there are _some_ thoughts about this already [https://code.briarproject.org/briar/briar/-/issues/511](https://code.briarproject.org/briar/briar/-/issues/511)

</comment><comment><USER21> Earlier this year, I finally took the time to revisit the state of instant messaging services. My requirements:

\- open source

\- cross-platform (linux, mac, windows, ios, android)

\- group chats

\- end-to-end encryption

\- well-understood crypto ciphers & protocols

\- mature enough for a reasonable expectation of security & privacy

\- easy enough for most computer users

\- some way to protect metadata (e.g. self-hosting)

\- signup without real-world ID

\- offline message delivery

I ended up choosing the Matrix network. The reference client is called Element[1] (formerly Riot). There are things I dislike about the client, but they're pretty minor compared to the benefits of the underlying protocol, and lots of alternative clients are in development[2][3].

On top of meeting my requirements, all signs indicate that development is both active and moving in the right directions. Reading the team's weekly reports and issue tracker convinced me that they are making very sound decisions.

[1]: [https://element.io/](https://element.io/)

[2]: [https://matrix.org/clients-matrix/](https://matrix.org/clients-matrix/)

[3]: [https://matrix.org/clients/](https://matrix.org/clients/)

Here's what I didn't like about the others:

Briar: Lacked cross-platform support and (iirc) offline messaging. Tor brings baggage that not everyone is ready to accept.

Cwtch: Not mature yet.

Jami: Very fragile code base in my experience, which was also true when was called Ring, and when it was called SFLphone. Only about 25% of the builds I've tried over the years actually worked. I was unable to determine whether it had offline messaging.

Keybase: Now owned by Zoom, which is a privacy nightmare.

Ricochet: Same problems as Briar.

RocketChat: Crypto is not mature yet.

Session: Not mature yet. Small limit on number of group chat participants.

Signal: Required phone number for signup. Required Google Play Services (aka spyware) for quite a long time. Weak cross-platform support. Some of that is finally changing, but Moxie will surely make more intolerable design decisions, and refuse to fix them for years, again.

Telegram: Homebrew crypto.

XMPP: Most clients are hard to use (or to teach others to use). Good servers are hard to find. Protocol standards are a mess. I couldn't find a real-world e2ee group chat implementation.

Everything else: Failed to meet my requirements even before I looked closely, mostly due to closed code and/or problematic corporate interests. (For example, I will not use an app from Facebook or any of its subsidiaries.)

<comment><USER22> Did you look into Status?

[https://status.im/](https://status.im/)

[https://github.com/status-im/status-react](https://github.com/status- im/status-react)

[https://github.com/status-im/nim-status-client](https://github.com/status- im/nim-status-client)

<comment><USER21> I didn't, but since you linked to it, I took a peek. I couldn't find any linux, macos, or windows support within a couple minutes of visiting the site, so it fails my "cross-platform" and "easy enough" requirements.

It seems to be married to Ethereum. That's mildly interesting. It raises questions about its relationship to cryptocurrency and blockchain tech, but until it meets my requirements, I'm not inclined to spend time investigating the answers.

<comment><USER22> The desktop client (linux, macos, windows) is a work in progress; alpha builds are available. See the third link in my comment to which you replied. I could have been more clear on that point — I replied on my phone just before going to bed.

The wallet functionality is tied to Ethereum, but the chat functionality works separately.

Originally Status used the Whisper protocol, which used to ship with some Ethereum clients but never gained real traction. Status has switched to a protocol named Waku that's in development but progressing nicely.

If at some point you're interested and have questions, let us know! (I'm on the team developing the desktop client)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Support for a TEMPEST mode of communication would be a killer feature. Perhaps vibrate mode on one phone being picked up by the accelerometer of another?

In our hypothetical dystopian future _The Regime_ will probably jam 2Ghz to 5Ghz in public spaces. TEMPEST mode would also force them to install vibrators into all coffee shop tables.

<comment><USER24> > Support for a TEMPEST mode of communication would be a killer feature.

You are misusing the term. TEMPEST is an attack.

> Perhaps vibrate mode on one phone being picked up by the accelerometer of > another?

At very close distance vibrating our vocal cords and eardrums would be much easier and works without battery.

<comment><USER25> I can't exactly modulate my vocal chords to send a file. But I think you're right, using some sort of high-frequency beacon tone like what they use for the creeping tracking identifiers might be an option.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Since they are on their phones via factory rootkit, good luck.

</comment><comment><USER27> Use of wifi during blackout? Wifi does not work during wifi. Only over the air comms are secure. Any wired connaction is tapped

<comment><USER28> >Any wired connaction is tapped

Thats what encryption[1] is for.

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Oh; wow. Not all heroes wear capes. Install _now_!

</comment><comment><USER30> What the fuck ever happened to communicating through plain old radios? Impractical for someone to track you, trivial to speak in codes.

<comment><USER31> Distance is an issue. And it's unlawful in the United States to encrypt ham radio traffic. No one's really monitoring CB much anymore though.

<comment><USER30> It's unlawful to protest violently as well, I don't see the point in obeying ham radio laws there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> many of my friends are activists, and i'm hesitant to disclose to them which technologies they could use. 95% chance they're going to use it for getting drugs, or avoid monitoring to organize gatherings, which, without law enforcement protection always have potential to turn violent. i just don't want to take responsibility for these actions.

then you have heavy stuff, people trafficking, bomb threats, suicide threats, organ trade, child abuse, and crypto seriously limits the options for a response. as long as we're talking about functioning democracies, it does more bad than good.

</comment><comment><USER33> Criminal conspiracy as a service. I don't think I'd invest my money.

Edit: to clarify their marketing is transparently targeting organizers of street violence. I have no problem with encryption and don't think government forbidding it is a good idea.

<comment><USER7> You're going to need to be more specific. People are downvoting you because it's not really clear what you're talking about, and I'm getting serious alt- right conspiracy vibes.

<comment><USER33> I can assure you that you cannot in fact read minds and any "vibes" you are experiencing are autogenerated.

Also, please remember "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading"[1].

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)</comment></comment></comment>


Wacky Craigslist ad shows what's legal in seeking household help - <AUTHOR> http://www.sfchronicle.com/business/networth/article/Wacky-Craigslist-ad-shows-what-s-legal-in-11821551.php <comment><AUTHOR> The ad:

[https://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/ofc/d/personal-assistant- mu...](https://sfbay.craigslist.org/sfc/ofc/d/personal-assistant-must- love/6256376954.html)</comment>


Ask HN: How can I professional without sounding like a "business type"? - <AUTHOR>

My question is a relatively simple one.
I am working on applications for internships at a few tech companies for this summer (business side, I can't code well enough yet to apply for technical stuff yet) and am having trouble reconciling the general advice I've received from people about how to write a cover letter/resume and the nontraditional nature of the tech industry.
Essentially I am having trouble making sure my cover letter sounds professional without sounding like a "business type"
Any advice? <comment><USER2> Don't over-edit the vocabulary in the letter or try to get too clever with phrasing. You want to communicate that you can write, so make sure the letter is grammatically correct and well written, but if you find yourself going to the thesaurus to find "the right word" you're taking it too far.

Keep it simple, be polite and use proper grammar and you'll be fine.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think the biggest advice I would lend to you, is get creative. I can't tell you the number of boring white and black resumes I've seen. The tech industry is littered with boring "business type" resumes and cover letters. If you truly want a job with a technology company, research some of the fun technologies out there and use them for your application.

Having a link to a youtube video, a twitter account, github (of what you do know), a cool presentation using sliderocket, etc..

These are the types of things that can set you apart from every other resume that the recruiter is going to find. Finding ways to get acquainted with tech professionals by showing up to meetups they go to. Use LinkedIn as your tool, it is amazing how much information you can find out using the internet!

It's about being proactive and not reactive! I hope this helps some.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've been thinking about putting something together on sliderocket and then getting a hold of emails of the founders of the companies and sending it to them or something like that.

<comment><USER3> I think that would be a good approach, it also might be wise to see if you can find development managers or something below the founders. Depending on the types and sizes of the companies the founders may not be the best person to reach out to. See if the company has any HR on their payroll, once again a simple LinkedIn search can dig that up for you.

The important thing to remember is to be persistent, but don't be annoying. It's a fine line, and you'll have to realize when you're crossing that threshold. ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Don't get excessively wordy, but otherwise ignore the fear of sounding like a "business type". You're applying for a business role; if you were applying for a tech role would you be asking how to not sound like a "technical type"?

The application process is just a filter, especially at the intern level. Do what you need to do (ethically) to pass the filter and then worry about performing well in the internship.</comment>


Ask HN: Recommend automatic grammar editors? - <AUTHOR>

I just started graduate school and have found that an enormous factor in my work is writing clearly. While I did decently in my writing classes in undergrad, I feel that I was able to hid behind obfuscated ideas and complicated sentences. Now I actually want others to read and understand my work.
Peers and advisors are good resources, but they are very busy and often don't have the time to pick apart awkward sentences and deep stylistic issues. I am signed up for writing workshops, but I also want a more instant feedback system. Hence, I have been looking into automatic grammar/style editing software.
Current solutions I have looked into are: * Grammarly (http://www.grammarly.com/)
* Whitesmoke (http://www.whitesmoke.com/)
Does anybody here have any familiarity with the above software or other recommendations? <comment><USER2> Clickables:

Grammarly : <http://www.grammarly.com/>

Whitesmoke : <http://www.whitesmoke.com/></comment>


Show HN: Analytics for Stripe, Chargify and Recurly - <AUTHOR> https://chartmogul.com/

<comment><USER2> I'm interested in this space but it seems to have a very low barrier to entry as there are now loads of these startups, all with very similar feature sets. Just look at Hookfeed, FirstOfficer, Baremetrics, Sassymetrics and so on, all of which popped up fairly recently except HookFeed.

I like that you've added Braintree, Chargify & Recurly but can you tell us what makes you better than the aforementioned products?

<comment><USER3> Yes several other systems out there - but competition is ultimately better for the consumer. We believe we have the best product in this space and an exciting roadmap.

I'm not familiar with all the pros/cons of all these systems and of course there will be good and bad things about all of them including ChartMogul. We're very strong in international support, e.g. geo-mapping, multi-currency, etc. Also in performance we've invested heavily in developing our platform to give an almost native/desktop performance experience.

We have features to allow you to really drill into the data rather than just look at graphs: [https://chartmogul.com/blog/2015/01/dig-into-your-metrics- wi...](https://chartmogul.com/blog/2015/01/dig-into-your-metrics-with-data- tables/)

Also heat-mapping: [https://chartmogul.com/blog/2014/12/heat-map-your- subscripti...](https://chartmogul.com/blog/2014/12/heat-map-your-subscription- revenue/)

We have many ways to slice the data up, e.g. you can create custom plan filters and slice all your metrics with them.

There are also some things we're currently lacking - e.g. net revenue graphs (coming very soon).

Hope this helps.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> What are people's thoughts on this service?

<comment><USER4> I use it (with Recurly). It's fantastic, especially since Recurly's built-in reports don't seem to jive with reality (for instance by ignoring coupons on subscriptions). The multi-user support and email alerts are also useful.

<comment><USER3> Hi benjaminfox,

Great to hear you're using and liking ChartMogul...that's great!</comment></comment></comment>


Pentagon may acquire your Startup (read comment) - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/07/technology/07venture.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin <comment><USER2> Article requires registration. Here's the text:

<http://www.scribd.com/doc/46293/Tech-Investors-Cull-StartUps-for-Pentagon- New-York-Times></comment>