Why only 2% of Chinese pay any income tax - <AUTHOR> https://www.economist.com/china/2018/12/01/why-only-2-of-chinese-pay-any-income-tax <comment><USER2> Many here are wondering how the chinese government can finance itself when so few people pay income tax. There are many ways for a government to raise funds besides the income tax. People forget that we didn't have income tax in the US for much of our history and a few states still have no income tax.

We've become indoctrinated into thinking income tax is the norm. Nobody questions it but for much of US history, people viewed taxing work as an evil. And income taxes was a temporary tax instituted to fund wars ( civil war ). For most of american history, we didn't pay income tax.

<comment><USER3> Just to be clear here though, the Chinese do pay income tax. They just don't call it income tax.

The government concocted a scheme that is a bit involved, and complicated, and clever. There are actually a lot of different sorts of taxes VAT, sales, etc etc etc. Some optional, some not.

In terms we'd be familiar with, the "income tax" over there is charged on the business side. Imagine that you didn't have to pay income tax, but your employer cut your salary 30% because he had to pay a "social harmonization insurance fee" or some such nonsense for each of his employees. The employees, of course, would never see that, but it still, to my mind anyway, is effectively an "income tax".

It really is rare to find a developed nation where people get away from income taxes. Even when you do appear to find such a nation, if you examine the system closely enough, you can usually find how they're paying it.

<comment><USER4> > Imagine that you didn't have to pay income tax, but your employer cut your > salary 30% because he had to pay a "social harmonization insurance fee"

You mean payroll taxes?

<comment><USER3> If payroll taxes were 100% the responsibility of the employer, and included the employee's income tax obligation. So in the US the taxes are effectively split between the employer and the employee, but in China they're basically all on the employer with a trivial amount charged to the employee.

One of the gotchas if you plan on operating a business in China at all.

<comment><USER5> Economically speaking, payroll taxes are always a burden on the employee, not on the employer, even if the employer is the one writing the check.

<comment><USER6> Doesn't that depend on the relative price sensitivity of the employer vs. the employee - namely, the elasticity of labor demand / supply?

<comment><USER5> That is correct, its just that employees are a lot less inelastic than employers, for multiple practical reasons.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Disclosure: using a throwaway giving the sensitive nature of the topic

I've always found very curious to not hear more about taxes in China.

It is a mystery to probably no one who have spent a certain amount of time in China that a very few amount of people are actually paying taxes. There is a few regular patterns on how they achieve evasion, but in short it is a mix of large amount of cash/cash payments, and close to 0 actions on whatever personal bank transactions. The later has always amazed me. While some countries will start tracking each transfer > $1,000, Chinese banks will probably not even bother contacting you for a transaction of $10,000 (in RMB, foreign currencies being quite regulated) or even probably more. And yes, you can buy a car or a house with this money, in Cash. No question asked. There are also some easy ways to use some complex/criminal networks of money laundering in order to get the RMBs out of China through shell companies often in tax heavens.

We all know that China's CCP is gathering a very consequent amount of data about virtually everyone entering the territory (or more). But they seem to struggle at implementing actions.

This would explain the government's efforts to reduce the amount of cash circulating in the country, and encouraging (via strong investments) mobile payments (wechat/alipay). This would also explain the very short upcoming of the "social credit score" and I've found astonishing that no one every mentioned taxes on that matter.

Now, open list of [somewhat naive and genuine] questions: \- Where does the government's money comes from? [it appears to me to be mostly inflation, on an underlying crazy monster bubble] \- Can a government subsist with a population not paying taxes? [apparently not, i.e social credit score] \- How will the people react when they will realize they have to give away XX% of their pay when they never gave any $$? \- [last but not least] Is that somewhat comparable to, say, the US [or other western countries] few generations earlier? If yes, are we paying the bill for these generations? If yes, should we start worrying? [Are taxes going to keep raising indefinitely along with debt?]

I'm sorry for a not so organized answer but I wanted to express a few comments about things I've seen myself. The [] answers of the questions are personal guesses/notes and I would love to hear more accurate answers from people with better knowledge on the topic.

<comment><USER8> I'm living in China at the moment. Feel free to ask any questions.

Here are some points that you might find interesting:

1\. There is an income tax but there is no income tax return. If you pay too much you don't get anything back. You can pay a fine if you don't pay enough. This means you have to work with finance and do lots of paperwork to reduce your taxable income. Not always worth the effort.

2\. You can choose to pay sales tax or not. It is optional. Generally, individuals don't pay sales tax while companies do. Companies have to prove that they spent money and they do this by collecting "tax receipts". Some companies give everyone a tax receipt. Some companies only give it on request. The machine that makes the tax receipt takes money from the company in real time and transfers it to the government. This cannot be faked BUT they can be traded ... sometimes. VAT/Sales tax is also different for different industries (I think food is about 5% while electronics is more)

Basically, individuals have more freedom than many western countries BUT companies have a lot more restrictions. It is a very clever system that "mostly" works.

<comment><USER9> If you can choose whether or not to pay sales tax, why would anyone ever choose to?

<comment><USER10> No sales tax => no receipt

I went to a restaurant and they offered us a drink at the end of the meal in exchange for no asking of receipts

<comment><USER11> That goes a lot further: no receipt: no taxes at all, not just no sales tax.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> It is a similar case in India with only 1.7% of households paying the income tax. [https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india- business/...](https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/toi- budget-2018-special-income-tax-payers-in-india-are- minuscule/articleshow/62538779.cms)

<comment><USER13> NPR article on the topic: [https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/03/22/517965630/...](https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/03/22/517965630/why- do-so-few-people-pay-income-tax-in-india)

Summary: Large portions of people are involved in small mom & pop shops. Most of these shops do business in cash. Most even don't register with tax department. They use bribes to avoid getting fines.

<comment><USER14> > They use bribes to avoid getting fines.

Yup. That's where corruption actually starts in India.

<comment><USER15> Sure, it starts at the pop'n'mom shops. /s

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> EZ-E Back when I worked in China, avoiding taxes was super common. I even received SMS spam advertising consultancy to companies about how to avoid them. The company I worked in wired my salary in multiples bank transfers from different accounts. The after taxes salary ended up only 1-2% less than the one before taxes because the declared&taxed income was just around 1000$. The bank never asked questions.

In China, companies are in charge of paying the income taxes for you but they usually have the means to dodge it, and the workers are complacent since they benefit from it too.

If China starts cracking down on it, lots of Chinese with high leveraged mortgages (up to 70% of their income sometimes) will be in trouble.

<comment> dis-sys Individuals are required to declare annual income on their own once they earn anything above 120K CNY (~15K USD).

<comment><USER16> The Constitution of the People's Republic of China also guarantees freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Actually, the gov is taking actions and it's quite strict. One example is, my friend's bank account was AUTOMATICALLY withdrawn a couple hundred RMB from last month, to pay the tax AUTOMATICALLY.

Lived in the US for a couple of years, I can't imagine IRS doing that to my bank account

Also, to the @awsedr58479 's question: Chinese consumption tax is crazily high. Most people don't know they are paying it since it's structured into the price tag. Also the companies are paying quite a lot of taxes

<comment><USER7> 16% VAT isn't that high to my knowledge.

As seen in other comments, middle classes are the one who will likely pay the most. Lots of "legit" companies/workers are paying income taxes; they represent the 2%.

<comment><USER18> The left often argue that VAT is a regressive tax, with "poor" (by which they mean low income, not low wealth) people paying more as a percentage of their income than "rich" people.

I'm not entirely sure why, given the number of basic items that don't attract vat (rent, train fares, food).

Buy a new car though and you're paying tons.

<comment><USER19> Because the % of income spent on goods decreases as earnings increate.

Many high-earners aren't 'spending' their money, they're investing it to make more money

Whereas low-earners are spending their pay cheque before the next one arrives.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> From the article :

 _The threshold at which tax becomes payable was raised from 3,500 yuan ($503) to 5,000 yuan a month on October 1st. The finance ministry says the number of people liable for income tax should fall to 64m as a result._

Is the article correct that only 64M out of 1.1B people will pay income tax or did they miss an order of magnitude? Just trying to calibrate since only 64M people making ~>$750/month seems like a low number for China.

<comment><USER21> > 64M people making ~>$750/month

I read it as 64M people making enough to pay ~>$750/month in taxes

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> So then how does the gov have any money to do these giant infrastructure projects?

<comment><USER23> They tax/own companies.

I mean, it's obviously much more complicated, but that's the gist of it.

</comment></comment><comment> dis-sys I bought a German made car last year, its drive away price is about $60k USD in the US, I paid $120k for that in Shanghai - 25% tariff, 17% VAT, 25% sales tax, 10% vehicle tax, that is 77% combined. Trump choose to focus on the 25% tariff part and complains that it is difficult to sale American cars in China. What Trump didn't want to tell is the other 52% that apply to all cars including domestic brands.

On top of those taxes, to get the new car registered you need a number plate right? the number plate is auctioned monthly, every month you have about 5% chance to secure the number plate even if you are willing to pay the current market price of $16k. They don't call it a tax, but it is obviously a tax collected on every car owner in Shanghai. statistically, you can keep bidding every month for 2 years and still couldn't get your car registered. and no there is no way to buy such number plate at $16K USD from other owners/the black market, the only alternative option is to pay $60K USD to the gov to get a motobike number plate and convert that to a regular car number plate. Again, it is a tax.

Once you have everything above sorted out, congratulations! time to pay tax for petrol! For every $1 you spent on petrol, around 50% of that goes into taxes. Time to hit the roads right? Time to pay the toll roads then. In some provinces, we are talking about toll stations every few kilometers. Too expensive to even use the new car? Fine, just park it somewhere - $200k USD for a car park in my building, as expected, don't forget the $50k taxes/levies/agent fees/stamp duty on top of that as well.

Life in China is like playing video games in Expert mode and those numerous taxes is by far the most significant reason.

<comment><USER24> It seems couple of "k" characters are to be removed from some of those numbers.

<comment><USER25> While the numbers sound outrageous, they seem to be at least roughly the same as reported elsewhere.

"The average price for a Shanghai plate soared to 75,000 yuan ($12,000) at the city's license plate auction over the weekend, roughly equal to the retail price of a brand new, fully loaded Geely MK-II sedan." [0]

"Over at a new 1,700-household community in Xuhui district ostentatiously named East Manhattan, its 500 parking spaces cost 1 million yuan each." [1]

[0] [http://www.theurbancountry.com/2013/02/shanghai-license- plat...](http://www.theurbancountry.com/2013/02/shanghai-license-plates-cost- same-as-brand-new-fully-loaded-sedan.html)

[1] [http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/963391.shtml](http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/963391.shtml)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The article doesn't say how much of the budget is from income taxes, but it cannot be a lot if only 2% pay taxes.

In the US income taxes are almost half of budget revenues.

<comment><USER27> > The article doesn't say how much of the budget is from income taxes

It does. It is 8%.

<comment><USER28> That's interesting - because it begs the question, if income taxes are only contributing 8% to the coffer, where is the country's revenues mostly coming from?

<comment><USER29> Nationalized companies and tariffs

The party owns like 15% of every company

<comment><USER30> As well as ~100% of 3 of the 4 largest companies in the world:

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

(and most of the biggest companies in China as well)

<comment><USER31> Sweet lord look at that difference between the Chinese petroleum and Dutch Shell in terms of revenue / employees.

<comment><USER32> Shell most likely contracts out most of the workload to subsidiaries and external companies (ex. franchise gas stations).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> So...

" _Salaried professionals in big cities have long complained that they bear an unreasonable share of the tax burden. That is because firms are legally required to withhold a portion of salaries in taxes. The rich, whose income usually does not come in the form of a pay cheque, and those in the informal economy._ "

Economists and politicians justify tax setups in terms of efficiency or fairness. Ultimately though, practicalities are the main authors. ... whatever yields the highest tax in a given economy.

The reason tarrifs & trade taxes were such a big deal is that ports are centralized & taxable. Way back in the day, rivers, roads and bridges made good tax collection points. Land taxes were also practical.

In advanced economies, income taxes have been practical because enough income is earned as salary at firms large enough to be regulated. Firms are structured around avoiding corporate tax, not income tax.

China is at the point now where it's _practical_ to tax income.

The west is now at a point where the ultra-rich are an attractive tax target. But, trying to apply the income tax system to them is not practical for the same reason it is practical in China.

<comment><USER18> > Land taxes were also practical.

Why aren't they now?

<comment><USER34> Actually, in a previous article in the Economist on taxes, they claimed taxing land and real estate is a very good non-distorting way to levy tax, and urged western governments to do it more.

My country (the Netherlands) has an estate tax of sorts and at least one problem with it is that the legal system is getting clogged by hordes of people challenging the government over the valuation of their property (you pay a percentage of the property value).

<comment><USER33> Good point. Iirc correctly, they suggest taxing _land_ value, excluding the buildings on it. So, a parking lot is taxed like the skyscraper beside it.

This is "non-distorting" and efficient in an economst-ey sort of way. It will however, strongly affect land use and make certain uses immediately unviable. Golf courses, amusement parks...

The efficiency of moving to such a system is premised on encouraging underdeveloped land to be immediately developed. Say a skyscraper is 80% building, 20% land. That's tax efficient in that world.

It'd be a hard transition.

<comment><USER18> Not sure why a golf course or amusement park would be unviable. Alton Towers' 910 acres is worth at most 3.8 times that of this 240 acre £2.2m farm [1], or £8.4m.

Total UK land is worth £5394b [2], and total budget revenue is £800b, requiring a 15% land value tax to cover total spending.

At 15% LVT, Alton Towers would attract taxation of £1.2m a year, spread over 2 million visitors, or about 64p on the ticket price.

Currently tickets are in the £30-60 range, so already attract £5-10 of vat.

A land value tax will actually mean that Alton Towers tickets would be cheaper, and as they wouldn't be paying things like national insurance contributions, overheads would be cheaper.

[1] [https://www.rightmove.co.uk/commercial-property-for- sale/pro...](https://www.rightmove.co.uk/commercial-property-for- sale/property-68170718.html) [2] [https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoracco...](https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoraccounts/bulletins/nationalbalancesheet/2018)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Guys, you have a huge misunderstanding there. While income tax may be paid by few, China, just like many ex-bloc countries, collects significant social security and pension contributions that are often bigger than ones income tax. This is a de-facto because Chinese never see the benefit of their social security and pension contributions.

</comment><comment><USER36> A lot of people in the U.S. don't pay net income taxes either, about 44% accoeding to [1].

[1] [https://nypost.com/2017/04/18/almost-half-of-americans- wont-...](https://nypost.com/2017/04/18/almost-half-of-americans-wont-pay- federal-income-tax/)

<comment><USER37> But that's because they don't owe anything, not because of evasion

<comment><USER38> That obnoxious statistic always excludes payroll tax as well. Not to mention that the "Lucky duckies" is one of the most rightly ridiculed tropes in recent memory, arguing that poor people in the US have it _too good_ :

[https://web.archive.org/web/20030626024327/http://www.tnr.co...](https://web.archive.org/web/20030626024327/http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml?pid=475)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Runaway thought: Could all taxes be removed and replaced with the government simply printing money for its initiatives? Income tax is such that the rich are supposed to pay more than the poor but that does not happen in practice. The rich hire smart people to find loopholes and avoid taxes. Sales taxes are such that the government can dissuade people from harmful activities like smoking by levying heavy taxes on it. An alternative could be to print money for initiatives that the government wants to support like nicotine patches for example. The US government has already done something similar before with quantitive easing without much impact to the economy. So there is a possibility that this might work.

</comment><comment><USER40> > _... workers skimp on taxes because they do not trust the government will > spend their money wisely. Mr Liu cites the Belt and Road Initiative, a > global infrastructure-building project, as an indefensible giveaway to poor > countries ..._

interesting. sounds kinda like what some US red-state voters think.

also: US media tend to portray the Belt and Road Initiative more like a plan to dominate the world than a giveaway to poor countries. quite a difference in perspective here.

<comment><USER41> Us media is from the strategic view. for the Chinese who are barely make a living. It is hard for them to be happy when their country are pouring money to other nations.

<comment><USER42> does it really matter what chinese citizens think? they are under their govt's thumb

<comment><USER43> Why bother with propaganda if you don't care what your citizens think?

<comment><USER44> Thinking about the history of the world, brain washing people since they are born and having no opposition is much a safer approach than crushing occasional revolts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Not as bad as all that. Only 180+M people earn enough to pay. At 28M paying, that's closer to 16% of those who _should_ pay that are paying (not 2%)

</comment><comment><USER46> [https://www.economist.com/china/2018/12/01/why-only-2-of- chi...](https://www.economist.com/china/2018/12/01/why-only-2-of-chinese-pay- any-income-tax)

</comment><comment><USER47> Modern Monetary Theory argues that income tax (and alll other direct taxes) are unnecessary because the government can riase fund via fist money and its indirect taxation via inflation.

This is effectively a tax on the entire economy and challenges every sector or segment to grow price (including labor wages!) or lose value.

<comment><USER48> That's not what MMT argue precisely.

The idea is that (for sovereign governments with its own currency) the government is the issuer of money and logically doesn't need to get money from the population or to borrow it in any market.

Taxes have three possible purposes: create demand for the currency in the population, discourage some kind of spending or managing inflation.

MMT stress that almost the only limit for government spending is inflation and that the concept of 'public debt' is irrelevant. What makes a country rich or poor it's not how much money have but what resources (natural resources, population, knowledge, infrastructure..) it has. The obvious corollary is that the way of improving the life of the future generations is not 'saving' or reducing the 'public debt' but investing in the country now.

See a short overview here: [https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is- modern-monetar...](https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-modern- monetary-theory-72095)

For example, related to the subject at hand, if the Chinese government wanted to start a big infrastructure project, being the issuer of the currency, it doesn't need any kind of external financing or taxes. What could happen is that if the new project represent a big drag in the total economy, inflation would appear. A possible way of controlling this inflation is by retiring money from the economy by taxation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> in china, a big part is house buying tax in disguise of bubbled land price.

well, if everyone pay tax as they should in theory, the housing bubble would not be that crazy. people ducked taxes believing they save the money and then give them back when buy house. who are the cleverest?

<comment><USER49> Even if you don't duck taxes, you still face the high house prices, unless everyone else magically agrees to not duck taxes too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> potentially because 98% of the society is getting wages deemed as "below the taxable" level ?

<comment><USER51> Possibly, but without the Western subtext of being too poor

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> Income tax is stupid ... we want people to work. Why discourage it?

<comment><USER19> Progressive income tax retains the property that the higher your salary is, the more you take home

<comment><USER53> But there are diminishing returns which is not exactly motivating. The way to think about it is, imagine you would work 20% harder, but instead of 20% extra take home money you only get 10%. And it gets more skewed progressively which discourages trying hard at some point. People just stop trying as they don't see the reward as good enough for working harder.

<comment><USER54> Evidence doesn't seem to suggest that higher earners "stop trying", but above a surprisingly low threshold it's cheaper to pay someone to organise your tax affairs for you and move your money through various loopholes to (legally) avoid paying taxes.

Any government plans to "tax the rich" end up hitting the people just below this threshold the hardest (usually small business owners) while multimillionaire corporate CEOs with various offshore holding companies continue to not pay their fair share.

<comment><USER53> Ok but that kind of proves my point. They are avoiding taxes and using loopholes and tax havens precisely because it is unfair that their tax rate is increasing the more they earn. At least they feel it's unfair to them. Why not solve the problem by having a simple flat tax? Everybody pays the same amount, let's say 20%. Then it becomes much easier to come after tax dodgers on moral grounds. They no longer have an excuse of them being unfairly treated as their tax is identical to everybody else.

<comment><USER55> > At least they feel it's unfair to them.

and yet you have people like Buffett and Gates who say the exact opposite that they should be taxed more. So who is right the other rich people complaining about taxes or Buffett/Gates saying they want more taxes?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> US had no income tax until 1913- that's what made the Golden Age of America possible, and created the foundation for its 20th century wealth. In a similar fashion, China is benefiting from the low tax burden, getting ahead of the rest of the world.

<comment><USER57> Why was pre-1913 the "Golden Age of America"? The US did very well for itself post-WWII, and we're in a pretty good place today.

<comment><USER56> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilded_Age)

<comment><USER58> That's not a golden age, that's a bad era of American history where industries were corrupt and dominated by monopolies, our best times were post WWII when our incomes taxes were the highest ever, that's what created the middle class and the American dream.

<comment><USER59> Your argument fails to the same issue as the one you're responding to. There are countless countries with both extremely high and extremely low tax rates, but here seems to be little connection in general to economic/social development based on tax levels.

I think it all has to do with something very simple: opportunity + nationalism. Post WW2 US was basically a land of endless opportunity spurred on by great nationalism. The reason nationalism is important is because it helps align motivations beyond just profit. Now a days most large corporations wouldn't think twice about firing all their domestic workers if they could profitably replace them with cheaper workers in another country. This is ostensibly good for the corporation, but not so great for the country, and worst of all for the workers left behind. Aside from that social bond there is also a practical commercial one. When individuals in a nation strongly bias towards domestic products, this incentivizes domestic production. E.g. - 'Made in the USA' was a major selling point.

But most importantly, I think you'll find this pattern of opportunity + nationalism is something that maps pretty well to national success in general. The US in its boom times, China today, the rebuilding of South Korea, Japan, etc.. What triggers the eventual decline there though is something far more difficult to answer. E.g. the US and South Korea continue to grow, while Japan ended up facing (and continuing to face) decades of stagnation.

<comment><USER60> "There are countless countries with both extremely high and extremely low tax rates, but here seems to be little connection in general to economic/social development based on tax levels."

This is not true.

If you draw a map of low-tax v high-tax countries there's a strong correlation between high taxes and higher GDP.

A few countries have high taxes and low prosperity.

But the one's with low taxes and high prosperity are universally 'oil rich' or 'gambling rich'.

There are no countries with almost zero taxes that are very prosperous at all. Switzerland has lower taxes, but not that low. Same with Monaco, they have very high taxes outside of income.

As far as 'nationalism' \- it was more the fact that American industry was intact, and everywhere else was burned to the ground. And yes - 'the spirit' of workers and managers was very important, I would say Nationalism was part of it, but it was not the foundation. Yes, everyone was a 'leave it to Beaver' believer until rock and roll and cynicism came along.

South Korea and Japan 'boomed' just like Europe did because they were recovering from a war where investment opportunities abound, and are obvious.

China in much the same way. If there are still zillions without homes, you can easily build more homes to create value. No highways? Build them. Easy, no brainer investments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> I find it obscene people in west are fine with idea of having their income taxed and then with this taxed money they go and pay for products/services taxed again with VAT, why people consider this normal?

</comment><comment><USER41> china is so different from west countries.

for example, in china, when you sell stock, there is no tax on profit gain. however, there is a stamp tax.

<comment><USER62> Dude, you really need to learn how western countries work.

Majority of policies in China, especially economic policies, China learns from either HK or Taiwan, then they are learning from either US or UK.

Like the stamp tax you mentioned, you know what it is if you trade stocks in HK or UK.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> I suppose this is the data for salary. If you check out the income distribution, most people simply don't make that much money to reach the tax line

<comment><USER64> That's not what the article or the Chinese finance ministry say. Didn't you read the article?

<comment><USER65> The article is paywalled. Any TL;DR?

<comment><USER66> [https://outline.com/vfgWnR](https://outline.com/vfgWnR)

should be able to see it now!!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Read the article. Could not believe The Economist would publish this amateur article.

Very naive on economics.

<comment><USER67> You must not be very familiar with The Economist.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> In China, there is no property tax either. HAHA.

A lot of differences between US and China.

2% pay the income tax is because the income is really low, that is why the jobs are moving to China. The US is losing jobs only because US labors are paid too high.

In my opinion, it is just due to economical stage and structure. China's salary is rising, so a lot of jobs are moving to other countries, like Vietnam. In the future, China government would more rely on income tax like US. But it would take another 15-20 years in my opinion.

<comment><USER68> In my little country in Western Europe starting in World War 2 all those with income from labor have paid wage taxes. The first income tax was introduced in 1915. Before that in the 16th century: the first value added tax. Most revenue up until 1915 came from value added taxes and levies. That goes to show that (comparatively) low taxes is not a function of low income.

<comment><USER62> So there is so many tax genius: [https://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/how- to-pay-no-federal...](https://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/how-to-pay-no- federal-income-tax.aspx)</comment></comment></comment>


Amazon Knows What You Buy. And It's Building a Big Ad Business from It - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/20/technology/amazon-ads-advertising.html <comment><USER2> Is this news or is it merely the daily "lets have the hive mind attack ${fill_in_tech_company_here}"?

We get these posts just about every day about why some tech company is horrible. It's not why I personally come to hacker news to get indoctrinated with the political biases of these organizations. The quality of this site is decreasing because of this garbage.

<comment><USER3> The NYT editorial board seems to have a personal vendetta against FB/Amazon in particular. Twitter and Google get passes in mainstream media, for whatever reason.

I wish they would give the same scrutiny they gave to FB for the past year to Equifax or cellphone carriers that sell our location data.

<comment><USER4> Well, the NYT editorial board has been carrying a lot of water for Trump. Given his childish Jeff Bozo and Amazon Washington Post attacks, this would align nicely. So not a surprise, just more disappointment from the NYT.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This might be a blessing in disguise, given how horrendous Amazon's product search is. If they target me correctly, I might not have to go through ten pages of useless results to find something...

<comment><USER6> I routinely get emails from them advertising selections of products which suggest they have almost zero idea of what I might be interested in.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Amazon selling ads seems a natural progression after it started selling 3rd Party products alongside it's own identical products nearly 20 years ago.

None of us are totally immune to Marketing/Advertising/Propaganda.

I would agree that Amazon's product recommendations for me are terrible, with the exception of Kindle books.

I'm currently purchasing Kindle books at a rate 3-5x faster than I can read them!

I actually support a 3rd online advertising option as Google AdWords and FB advertising costs can be quite steep with declining bang for buck.

Disclosure: used to work for Amazon in the prehistoric age.

</comment><comment><USER8> Is this news?

<comment> j-c-hewitt It was news in 2012! Now it's more olds than news.</comment></comment>


HUI.js JavaScript Re-Usable UI Library - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Horlahcoded/HUI.js <comment><USER2> I don't really understand what problem this solves, but it's impressive that this was created by a 17 year old boy from Nigeria.

Keep up the development kid!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. it is a layout library to create re-usable web components.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Just an fyi, the name of this library is the most common swear word in Russian.

<comment><USER4> It means dick.

<comment><USER5> To be fair almost any sequence of letters means dick in some language.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Клевое название :)</comment>


CO2 shortage: Why it really matters for the UK's food and drink supply - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44613652 <comment><AUTHOR> tl;dr: UK CO2 production is a by product of fertiliser, farmers don't need much fertiliser in summer so they've taken the opportunity to close plants for maintenance. Which means the drinks industry, and slaughter houses are having to reduce output. Emergent failure</comment>


Comb, a suite of monospaced fonts ideal for designing forms - <AUTHOR> https://www.typotheque.com/blog/comb_a_suite_of_monospaced_fonts_ideal_for_designing_forms <comment><USER2> Something which I don't understand about paid fonts is: If they are shown in the browser as webfont, I can download (potentially convert to OTF/TTF) and use them on the desktop _without_ paying for 280€ for the desktop license.

I appreciate that font designers don't want to work for free and that licensing is a model. My argument is: If you want to charge people for downloading a file, don't offer this file without charging. Exactly that happens when it is used as a CSS font.

</comment><comment><USER3> A Paid monospace font? Whats wrong with free mono solutions?</comment>


Email Account Security: Hacking a phisher - <AUTHOR> http://tomforb.es/email-account-security:-hacking-the-hackers

<comment><AUTHOR> Claiming that the authorities in Brazil would not act is a massive understatement. Granted.

But the OP hacked someone's account. And that's also a crime.

From victim, the OP could very well end up in the other side of the system, being accused of hacking into someone else's accounts. And to make matters worse, because those services are hosted in the US, then Tom could be prosecuted there and very likely being convicted.

Never take the law into your own hands. It's not worth the risk of an eventual table turning.</comment>


The technology behind load testing in the cloud: Loadzen.com - <AUTHOR> http://www.lonelycode.com/2012/01/10/one-year-and-a-lot-of-swearing-later-loadzen-finally-launches/

<comment><AUTHOR> For those interested, there's $5 free credit for the first 50 sign-ups :-)

[http://loadzen.com/blog/2012/jan/9/5-free-credit- first-50-us...](http://loadzen.com/blog/2012/jan/9/5-free-credit- first-50-users/)

</comment><comment><USER2> Its great to see how much stuff there is going on behind such a useful tool like this</comment>


Complete iOS7 Course – Learn by Building 14 Apps Free - <AUTHOR> http://producthunt.com/posts/the-complete-ios7-course

<comment><AUTHOR> Here's a direct link to people that just want access to the course and to skip Product Hunt: [https://bitfountain.io/course/the-complete-ios-7-course- lear...](https://bitfountain.io/course/the-complete-ios-7-course-learn-by- building-14-apps/?couponCode=phunt&src=hn)

I'm trying to get Eliot the course creator in the thread to answer questions as well.

</comment><comment><USER2> I've been thinking of learning how to make iOS apps, it's on the to-do list. I was thinking that I should learn Swift seeing as it's the new shiny. Should I? Would I be better served learning Obj-C first?

</comment><comment><USER3> If you have any questions please post them!</comment>


Europe approves use of in-flight electronics during take-off and landing - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/14/europe-approves-electronic-devices-take-off-landing-easa-caa <comment><USER2> How many flights take off or land with all passengers and crew members in full compliance with the current rules? Close to none.

Say commercial planes have 60 passengers/crew member in average. 5 don't have any devices (small kids). Of the 55 passengers that have one or more devices, maybe 30 turn off their devices as they are told, 15 put them on airplane mode and 10 don't give a shit or just forget it.

If there are 20 million flights per year there have been some 400 million flights in the 20 years where cell phones have been common. 400 million flights of which 99 percent have flown with some passengers' phones turned on. Has there ever been a single flight accident due to cell phones? Just one?

<comment><USER3> My understanding was that it hasn't to do with phones being turned on per se, but rather one's attention at the moment the flight is the riskiest: at take off and landing.

The rationale was that when you're playing on your device, you're paying less attention to the crew and what's around you, which can be problematic in case something bad happens and you need to react.

EDIT: I'm just the messenger, guys ;)

<comment><USER4> My understanding is that's the common ex post rationalization that arose to try to come up with a plausible-sounding reason for this idiotic rule.

<comment><USER5> My favourite theory was that cellphones above the clouds could connect to too many cell towers at once, making triangulating your location impossible.

Conveniently forgetting that they have a live update of your exact position from NORAD/FAA/etc...

<comment><USER6> The "too many handovers too fast" thing might have been a problem in the '80s, and I have never heard of a documented case of that.

<comment><USER7> My understanding is that the problem isn't with the speed of the handovers, but rather with the fact that the horizon is a major block to radio signals, and the horizon is much farther away when you're at altitude.

Older networks were designed around the fairly reasonable assumption that a cell phone would only ever be able to talk to adjacent cells, because anything farther away would be over the horizon. So you might be able to talk to both A and B at the same time, but you couldn't talk to C without first losing contact with A.

Raise the phone a few thousand feet in the air and this assumption goes out the window, confusing the network. There's an amusing story of a pilot who called up his family to let them know he was almost home and ended up getting billed for the call (at expensive 80s rates) a bunch of times because several different towers all thought they were running the call.

There's certainly no problem today, anyway.

<comment><USER6> > _Older networks were designed around the fairly reasonable assumption that a > cell phone would only ever be able to talk to adjacent cells, because > anything farther away would be over the horizon_

That can't possibly be true. Spectrum re-use in distant sites could in theory have some effect on the call but differences in signal strength would make significant effects unlikely.

Also, that story about the pilot must also be apocryphal. A handover is a handover, and there is only one "winning" decision. Not to mention that CDRs don't work that way.

Lots of civil aviation pilots use mobile devices in the air without problems for the user or network.

<comment><USER7> You may be right about the story, but I don't really see the obstacle to it happening. If you initiate a call in the air, you could easily not be able to communicate with the cell directly below (since they don't radiate much signal upwards) while being able to talk to two that are adjacent to it. Since those two cells would never have a reason to communicate in normal operations, confusion ensues.

I know that lots of pilots use mobile devices _now_ , but we're talking ~30 years ago.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I was recently on a transatlantic flight during which our Boeing 767's right jet engine caught fire and blew out. It was a terrible experience and I can assure you that at least for the first 5-10 minutes nobody on the plane was buried in their books or personal electronics. Everyone was suppressing panic and desperately paying attention to whatever shreds of information we could get from the flight attendants. The whole excuse about wanting people to pay attention during an emergency is total crap. Once your body kicks into survival mode the last thing on your mind is your phone.

<comment><USER9> Holy crap. That's terrifying - where were you when it blew out? How did the staff (pilots and stewards/stewardesses) behave - I've always wondered how well anyone, no matter how much they were trained, would cope in a real [potential] emergency on an aircraft?

<comment><USER10> Many years ago, I was on a 747 when an engine blew out (by which I mean a column of flame came out of the engine--no exterior physical damage). As I recall, they didn't say anything about a problem at first but the plane diverted to the nearest airport which happened to be Kuwait; this was long before the Gulf War etc. 747's have four engines though so this was possibly a less serious problem than on a two engine plane.

<comment><USER11> I can't find the quote, but it was from a pilot of one of the first commercial 2 engined airliner jets, 737 or 777 I forget.

Basically the reporter said, are you more worried if you lose one engine of two versus one engine of four on the 747/707/etc. To which the pilot replied, losing an engine is always a serious problem. Maybe if we ever get to my copilot saying we've lost engine 43 will it be a non issue.

More engines just means more chances for failure. All I know is losing any engine isn't something you treat lightly.

<comment><USER12> Old ATC joke:

A military pilot called for a priority landing because his single-engine jet fighter was running "a bit peaked." Air Traffic Control told the fighter pilot that he was number two, behind a B-52 that had one engine shut down. "Ah," the fighter pilot remarked, "The dreaded seven-engine approach."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Seems clearly to have been done in reaction to, or in cooperation with the change in the US.

I wonder why no European or other country got out in front and made this change earlier?

<comment><USER14> We have a shared Aviation Authority in EU in the form of EASA, so this isn't something a particular European country could do on its own.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Not that someone was obeying those rules anyway. But better to make it official.

<comment><USER16> Yes they were. Flight attendants consistently ask people to put away their Kindles and iPads.

Of course they didn't and couldn't check if the devices are completely switched off (or even in flight safe mode), but they very much keep people from using them.

<comment><USER17> Flying mostly from/to the UK, that's not exactly what I saw. Most of the time people will put the device on their lap with the screen turned off and get back to using it as soon as the flight attendants are in their seats. Pretty much the same thing with "please leave your seatbelts fastened until the engines are off" (with click, click, click all around).

<comment><USER18> I observe the click-click-clickers too and believe they are monumental idiots that not only endanger themselves, but other passengers as well. And all this for no good reason at all.

Watch the video, taken by an amateur in JFK, of an AirFrance A380 touching a smaller plane and spinning it around and imagine you where sitting in the small plane not buckled up:

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us- canada-13054205](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13054205)

The reason why this behavior mystifies me so much is that by jumping out of your seat prematurely you will be leaving the plane exactly 0 seconds earlier as when you remain buckled up until the plane is safely parked at the gate.

<comment><USER19> Not to mention turbulence, which can pick you up, bang your stupid head on the luggage bin so that it cracks and then throw you back in a seat. This seat might not even be yours and you injure other people with your stupidity. See

[http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/05/travel/sg-airlines- turbule...](http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/05/travel/sg-airlines-turbulence/)

or

[http://avherald.com/h?article=45946d01](http://avherald.com/h?article=45946d01)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I have been doing this for years on my gameboy/sega/iphone/ipad/mac. I even turned my airplane mode off to see how long it would take to loose service last time I flew. (I dont fly very often)

<comment><USER21> How long does it take? On my last flight the man sitting next to me started receiving SMS many, many meters before landing

<comment><USER22> I was a passenger sitting in the co-pilot's seat on a small plane in Africa, the pilot was texting during the flight even at 10,000 feet ^_^.

<comment><USER23> I had a similar experience, small plane over a relatively hilly area in Zambia. It took me a bit to get past the assumption that the vibrating around my leg wasn't a structural problem with plane....

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I've always wondered why they had this rule in the first place. Each wireless device by FCC rules (or equivalent dept in each country) must operate withing a designated RF frequency range.

One would think that pilots would use a frequency range that would be in the private (not public like Wifi 2.4/5.x Gh) range and thus never be overlapped.

What am I missing?

<comment><USER25> > What am I missing?

So there is a few reasons.

Flying is serious business. You don't want to take any risks having your metal box carrying a few hundred people fall down. You really do not.

Aircrafts are also pretty complex, and the parts, electronics, engines, wires and so on are undergoing heavy testing and verification before you use that part to build an aircraft. This is quite unlike consumer devices such as mobile phones, which just have to pass the minimum government tests to be sold to common people.

As there's numerous different mobile phones, with all sorts of radios in them, it's too hard to test/verify that none of them interfers with any of the electronics your airplane has. (I'm sure you've heard the recognizable sounds in a nearby speaker on an incoming call/SMS on a GSM phone - these devices really do influence other electronic.)

The easy solution is to just ban them, and require them to be turned off, because even if the chance is ever so small, you don't want to risk your plane full of people to fall down.

Once that policy was in place, many many years ago, it takes a lot of inertia to change. No executive wants to be the one making the decision and a few days later learn that something quite bad happened.

Add in the bonus of not having passengers be annoyed at the neighbour chatting away at the phone, and the passengers being more attentive during takeoff/landing.

<comment><USER26> _Flying is serious business. You don 't want to take any risks having your metal box carrying a few hundred people fall down. You really do not._

Sounds like an excellent reason to prohibit bringing untested electronic devices onboard in the first place.

The fact that such a prohibition is not in place means that the whole thing is just so much security theater.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I just got home from my first trip since the FAA changed their rules, and it was really quite refreshing not to be able to continue using [non-radio] devices. Among other things, I think it generally calms the passengers and makes them less unruly.

</comment><comment><USER28> Skymall is fucked.

</comment><comment><USER29> Such a bunk rule anyways. If there was the remotest chance of a phone / kindle / whatever interfering with in-flight systems, bringing any electronics onboard would be expressly forbidden. They'd take them away from you at the security screening (like they do with the extremely dangerous water bottles and nail clippers these days..)

</comment><comment><USER30> As long as they never allow anyone to talk on their cellphone during flights, I'm happy.</comment>


The UK is gunning for more tax from tech giants. But it's not easy UK - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.co.uk/article/turnover-tax-tech-companies-web-tax?utm_content=buffere9de7&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer <comment><USER2> They are using "intellectual property" to avoid taxes. Easy. Revoke IP laws. Drop the Berne convention. Root of all evil right there.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'll believe it when i see it</comment>


It all started as a noble idea - Identity Cards in Uganda - <AUTHOR> https://financialcryptography.com/mt/archives/001415.html <comment><USER2> Does that site throw up a warning for anyone else?</comment>


Creating My Website (PeriodicTable.com) with Mathematica - <AUTHOR> http://blog.wolfram.com/2007/11/creating_my_website.html

<comment><USER2> anyone out there have experience in mathematica and the learning curve involved? i've gazed wistfully at it for years but never thought it applied to me but this v6 edition with it's buttons and web tie-ins is making me think it might worth a 1000 hours (i'm interested in analysis/display not programming)</comment>


Wi-Fi Alliance Announces Wi-Fi Direct Spec - <AUTHOR> http://www.pcworld.com/article/173695/wifi_alliance_announces_wifi_direct_spec.html?tk=nl_dnx_h_crawl

<comment><USER2> Another day, another step closer to ubiquitous computing. At least, I'd like to think so.</comment>


A Historical Tour of Silicon Valley - <AUTHOR> http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/svtour.html <comment><USER2> Although the history of television was complicated and multi-faceted, the article makes the statement of invention so blunt that I need to call out that others were involved, not least John Logie Baird:

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

Still, great to see such a thorough tour of so many historic technology locations. Just a reminder/note that we often simplify or omit important details when we collectively create genesis stories.

</comment><comment><USER3> As the founders of Zapier and many other of you know, the first YC building in Silicon Valley was co-located with Anybots, across the street from the building in the photo:

(scroll down to photo): [https://zapier.com/blog/3-dudes-missouri-built- product-found...](https://zapier.com/blog/3-dudes-missouri-built-product- found-paying-customers-and-got-yc/)

</comment><comment><USER4> here [0] is the plaque in front of the Fairchild site, and a new one [1] they added in 2009. I used to work across the street at SUNW's PAL1 building and liked to walk by the original plaque when walking over to KFC.

[0] [https://www.flickr.com/photos/ryjones/23091714371/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/ryjones/23091714371/)

[1] [https://www.flickr.com/photos/ryjones/23091729811/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/ryjones/23091729811/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Wow I didn't know anything about Piero Scaruffi apart from his music reviews. I also always assumed he lived in Italy.

Take a tour of his website it's really impressive!

</comment><comment><USER6> Bummer about the Shockley lab is there was an historical marker on San Antonio that was no longer there the last time I passed by. Maybe they killed the sign when they demolished the site, though I can't imagine why.

<comment><USER7> Looks like there's something in the works.

"As part of their plans, Geiser said the finished development would include a variety of silicon-transistor-themed artwork as well as a plaque and photos to commemorate the Shockley building."

[1] [http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2015/06/01/big-changes- af...](http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2015/06/01/big-changes-afoot-at-san- antonio-center)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Wow, I didn't know Scaruffi (I'm not in the US) and his website is amazing. Coincidentally, I found this NYT article from 2006 about his work: "The Greatest Web Site Of All Time" [http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/15/arts/15morr.html](http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/15/arts/15morr.html)

</comment><comment><USER9> This is pretty amazing in its comprehensiveness. Next time startup friends visit the area and want something to do, I will recommend they take scaruffi's tour.

</comment><comment><USER10> That Kern Ave Fry's site was actually the _second_ location for Sunnyvale Fry's. Fry's Electronics began in the building of _a former Fry 's Supermarket_ on Oakmead Ave. east of Lawrence, a bit to the northeast. It looked more like an electronics warehouse inside than a retail store.

</comment><comment><USER11> I visited SRI a couple times, it was like stepping in the past and the future at the same time.</comment>


Japan Has a New Emperor and a New Era, but a Dark Future - <AUTHOR> https://www.thedailybeast.com/japan-has-a-new-emperor-naruhito-and-a-new-era-but-a-dark-future-under-shinzo-abe <comment><USER2> So a relatively peaceful, orderly society with little violent crime, health care for pretty much everyone, fairly robust institutions ... is a 'dark future' ... compared to say, any time in Japan's past? I mean, you don't have to go back very far ...

<comment><USER3> What's 'relative' about it ? Every trip we've made in recent years to a Western country has been truly scary or depressingly sobering.

I get told often I could be earning several times more in Europe and even more in the U.S. but this coming 'dark future' seems much more reasonable and safe to me than moving to a country with gun statistics belonging to war, not to civil society, or the mess of unemployment and sluggishness that was, is, and will be the EU.

As with the stories about 'stagnant economy' and 'aging society' constantly being thrown around since the 80s, the scaremongering doesn't match actual daily life, sorry. Give me deflation any time, happy to buy something for the same price every year, or pay the same exact rent in any central city in Tokyo Metro decade after decade.

I just can't see anyone we know living better, being safer or happier in the West, now or in their immediate future, dark or not.

<comment><USER2> "I just can't see anyone we know living better, being safer or happier in the West, now or in their immediate future"

This is basically wrong, by almost every material measure.

So the question then becomes, why do so many feel this way?

I didn't realize that tons of people felt that way about life until I started reading forums etc.

It's hard to explain but it's possible that people don't have a basis of comparison - they weren't alive 50 years ago, or those what were, know we are materially better off. Even the 'complainers' know that 'heart bypass' 25 years ago was a major, dangerous operation, but now a lot of it is trivial.

If you are living in Europe, consider that 2 generations ago 1/2 of it was _flattened by bombs_. That 6 million were executed. 10's of millions dead. If you were male, aged 18-30, probably a 20% chance you'd die in war. A greater chance you'd lose maybe everything.

So just from that ... 'things are unequivocally better'.

At the start of the last century there was no health care insurance (save maybe German government officials). Most medical operations were amputations, and we didn't have antibiotics so you would probably die of that, or any other thing.

My father did not have plumbing or electricity when he was born! Only as a child did they get that, and they were the first in town to get it, i.e. not poor.

Very few people had cars back in the day, and they were dangerous and crap. Now everyone has them.

Flying was for rich people, now working class people can fly.

The number of hours we work is down. Working conditions are considerably safer. Men and women have career choices never heard of. Homes are way bigger. Everyone has air conditioning (which nobody had until a generation ago, and then it was a luxury).

My god man, just the _produce_ available to us - amazing fruits and vegetables all year around! That's a _new_ things.

Any kind of music, entertainment, at your fingertips!

Any number of electronic wizardly and time-saving things.

You can contact anyone in the world with a thing that sits in your pocket! This would have 'blown my mind' (and everyone else's) just 25 years ago, when I was a kid.

Major wars have stopped, the cold war is over, even with the 2007 downturn we have very good economic stability. In previous recessions a lot of people starved!

If you're gay, you can be that now. Even get married.

I could go on and on.

So there are many things that we need to look out for, and I feel we lack a lot of social cohesion and community - but materially, most things are good - and will be.

FYI - 'deflation' is not just prices going down, it can cause economic 'death spirals' \- it's just just a number. And population evaporation has some other, culturally existential spooky things such as _extinction_ of culture, which is scary. Though I don't think that will happen.

Also - going from 3x workers for every 1 retired, to 1 worker for every 3 retired is a hugely existential economic thing. It will be a problem to address.

<comment><USER3> Sure, we can compare life in the EU now with the 1800s too. Or 1492 if you prefer. And Japan today with Japan in 1945.

That's not the discussion. Let's talk about living standards 15 years ago and now. Many EU countries are just reaching parity ( finally 11 years later ! ) with 2008 levels. Life was measurably better here in 2008, and since then until now. The grim dark future of Japan has been predicted again and again for decades now.

Edit : 'measurably' meaning pick any metric you like. Unemployment, health, life expectancy, technology, education, safety / crime, cost of living, real estate... This list can also go on and on.

And this is not to say Japan does not have problems. It's not Paradise at all.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Experimental Evidence for Supersonic Water Ice Using Shock Compression - <AUTHOR> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-017-0017-4 <comment><USER2> Super-ionic, not super-sonic.</comment>


You Shouldn't Host Wordpress on AWS (Except When You Should) - <AUTHOR> https://roberttisdale.com/you-shouldnt-host-wordpress-on-aws-except-when-you-should/ <comment><AUTHOR> Author here! If you read the article, I hope you enjoyed it.

Happy to hear any feedback or war stories from people dealing with Wordpress on AWS :D.</comment>


New record for fusion - <AUTHOR> http://news.mit.edu/2016/alcator-c-mod-tokamak-nuclear-fusion-world-record-1014 <comment> transistor-man Its incredibly frustrating that these folks keep going through funding cuts, engineering staff are constantly keeping an eye out for a wave of layoffs. Frustration doesn't begin to describe it. Science comes to a halt every time there's a change in federal administration, those who make the science are the ones at the short end of the stick.</comment>


Common ground in political flap: senseless laptop bans - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-05-16/common-ground-in-trump-russia-fury-senseless-laptop-bans <comment><AUTHOR> I edited the headline to focus on the laptop ban part rather than partisan politics. I'd rather leave the political scandal to the pundits and focus on the security theater part of the story, if we can.</comment>


Robots Will Need to Able to Do More in Order to Replace Human Lawyers - <AUTHOR> http://abovethelaw.com/2016/05/back-in-the-race-ny-to-190gb-robots-will-need-to-able-to-do-more-in-order-to-replace-human-lawyers/ <comment><USER2> This sort of thing is totally predictable. Automation encroaches on a profession, people in that profession write this kind of defense of humans. You could substitute "outsourcing" for "automation" in the above, too.

But this time, it's different. The profession is "lawyer". Lawyering is superspecial. The attorney/client privilege is the most protected privilege in the USA, at least. Judges routinely make judgements that favor the legal profession itself ([http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/barton.pdf](http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/barton.pdf)).

We can invoke the "lawyer-judge hypothesis here:

Is there a plausible legal result in this case that will significantly affect the interests of the legal profession (positively or negatively)? If so, the case will be decided in the way that offers the best result for the legal profession.

If this hypothesis holds, we can expect to see no legal AI for a very long time.</comment>


UProxy Demo Video - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGOXMRJWSeg

<comment><USER2> The question that stands is whether Uproxy is going to skirt trivial snooping on citizens by agencies like that NSA or just another smoke screen</comment>


Scrubadub PII from dirty dirty unstructured text - <AUTHOR> http://scrubadub.readthedocs.io/ <comment><USER2> Seems like it could be really useful for analyzing conversations between customers and customer support teams. Most of the companies I've worked with were too nervous to release that data because people are idiots and accidentally type their SSNs and phone numbers into those messages.</comment>


Which Word Should You Use? Quick Copywriting Hack - <AUTHOR> http://www.kikabink.com/news/which-word-should-you-use-quick-copywriting-hack/

<comment><USER2> I wouldn't have said either of those sets of numbers was enough different that it mattered which you picked. It the numbers were a bit further apart, then it could make some difference.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point. I have certainly used this approach with words that seemed similar but had radically different degrees of frequency. Having said that, it's also a 'psychological hack' in that it helps me make a decision over which word to use. Somehow, knowing that one word is used even slightly more often than another seems to give me more confidence in using that particular word than if I simply flipped a coin... unless, of course, the number of searches is the same for each word! (Uh-oh, gotta think for myself again...)</comment></comment>


The Remote Work Report by Zapier - <AUTHOR> https://zapier.com/blog/remote-work-report-by-zapier/ <comment><USER2> Working 100% remote (software dev) for about a year and a half. 15 years in various offices before that. I can't imagine having to get up extra early, get ready, drive across town, park, walk into the office, settle into my open office air space, finally get working...then reverse the process at the end of the day.

A recruiter cold called me recently on a local full time dev position at a big bank. He asked "...how do you feel about wearing a tie to work?"

<comment><USER3> Not only is that all dead time but since starting to work for myself I've found that the hours right after I've just woken up, assuming no alarm clock was involved, are the most productive I have.

I wake up, put on pants and a shirt, walk over to my office, and just dive right in. I'm not historically a person that does that. I waffle about and waste a tremendous amount of time. But now it just sets the tone for my whole day as productive. By the time I'm eating breakfast or dealing with another person, I've knocked out a few hours of work. It's just a really good position to be approaching the day from, like no matter whatever happens to it now it at least wasn't a waste.

Turns out my problem isn't so much that I'm just generally not that productive so much as once I start faffing about I struggle to stop.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Has anyone here had good luck with junior engineers working remotely? (I'm sure companies like Zapier have solved this). I've found that with senior engineers (defined not by the job title but the ability to take a coarsely defined problem like "figure out what is causing the I/O performance issues on this service and fix it") it's very easy to have them remote. Junior engineers with a senior engineer leading/managing them on-site, also fine. But I have not been able to successfully work with junior engineers who need mentoring and learning remotely.

What processes/practices/tools have people succeeded with here?

<comment><USER5> Many software companies lack formal training programs and documentation processes that juniors need to grow. They come to depend on informal training/documentation like tapping a senior on the shoulder to ask about a legacy piece of code.

The solution is to invest heavily in regimented training programs with clear KPIs (key performance indicators), better documentation, and a certain level of redundancy so that remote stakeholders can hold eachother accountable.

Obviously this isn't super attractive to C levels so they are trying to hire "Senior" developers who "don't need training". It's not working out great for them (IMO).

\---

Realize how I don't mention remote once because failures by remote worker are symptoms of problems that still exist even if everyone is in the same broom closet all day.

<comment><USER6> If you can't read the code, you drag those who can down with you.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I remote work because I don't want to commute.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I was pretty surprised by some of these numbers about remote work in the U.S. For example, 31 percent of Millenial knowledge workers surveyed work remotely full time. 27 percent for Gen X.

<comment><USER8> Wonder how they sourced their survey respondants.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good question. They did it through Harris Poll, which should make it relatively balanced. Sometimes you see these surveys and the population is sourced from customers/audience of the company, which obviously tilts the kind of responses you're going to get a bit.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Offices are gonna be as dead as brick n mortars and theaters.</comment>


An Atheist's Guide to Spirituality - <AUTHOR> http://nautil.us/issue/16/nothingness/an-atheists-guide-to-spirituality <comment><USER2> In an early paragraph of this text the author states that the 'self' is an illusion. To my uneducated mind in meditation but highly educated engineering mind, it is more plausible that the 'not-self' is an illusion. Like an optical illusion it naturally comes when the mind is in a specific state (of meditation).</comment>


Chinese Data Breach Exposes 'Breed Ready' Status of Almost 2M Women - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/zakdoffman/2019/03/11/exposed-chinese-database-includes-breed-ready-status-of-almost-2-million-women/#6062b62817e7 <comment><USER2> In discussions on reddit yesterday some people suggested this was merely a bad translation of 'child rearing age'. If so, the bottom end (youngest) of 18 seems to make sense and is a lot less dystopian than it might otherwise read.

<comment><USER3> The government tracking when a woman is able to bear a child isn't made less creepy at all by slightly changing the translated name.

<comment><USER4> Yes it is. Do you think the US doesn't maintain similar statistics based on age? The data including more fertility indices, such as health issues or similar would be another story.

<comment><USER5> Keeping statistics on something and keeping an actual list of names isn't the same. E.g., I have statistics on credit card purchases in the US, versus I have a list of every purchase rsch made with their credit card.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> While the breach is a reminder that people don't have good security practices, piling on or focusing on the words 'breed' and 'ready' shows how eager journalism is to jump on something that isn't quite fleshed out.

First, they don't know if it's governmental or otherwise, second they're not sure if the words are mistranslations or a shorthand categorization.

The government is concerned the population drop will happen too fast and are also concerned some men will have issues finding a partner due to previous reproductive policies. These latter issues are socially graver issues that could be discussed at length but the article instead decided to focus on speculation.

<comment><USER7> Or they could publish the actual term used so that anybody could check, but they didn't. But they use Beijing written in the characters, as if it was the important part.

<comment><USER8> They wrote Beijing as 北京市 because that's how it showed up in the database. But they also wrote "BreedReady" because that's how that key _also_ showed up in the database; all the DB keys are English, apparently ([https://twitter.com/0xDUDE/status/1104482014202351616](https://twitter.com/0xDUDE/status/1104482014202351616)). I'd assume it's designed around good ol' fashion fear that not all languages accessing the DB are Unicode-capable for labels and identifiers.

NextWeb's reporting on the Twitter thread suggests that the phrase may be a Chinese attempt to translate to English a Chinese word meaning "woman of child-bearing age" [[https://thenextweb.com/tech/2019/03/11/1-8m-chinese- women-de...](https://thenextweb.com/tech/2019/03/11/1-8m-chinese-women-deemed- breedready-by-creepy-new-database/)], but we don't actually know because we have no primary source on what character was translated as "BreedReady."

<comment><USER7> "Mistranslation" to me implies something that was originally written in another language. Not somebody speaking poor English.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> MongoDB is the premier example [1] of why software should be "secure by default" [2].

1\. [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=mongodb%20unsecured&sort=byPop...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=mongodb%20unsecured&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

2\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_by_default](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_by_default)

<comment><USER10> From your [2]:

> Security by default, in software, means that the default configuration > settings are the most secure settings possible, which are not necessarily > the most user friendly settings.

The hard part is making it both secure by default but also developer (user) friendly.

If you make it so that it is super secure by default, but onerous just to get your product setup because of all the security overhead developers are going to get frustrated and either disable all the security or use a competitor's (less secure) product that is easier to setup and you are back at square one.

There are so many options out there that if you try to launch a product (DB, webserver, etc.) and it's really hard for the developer to get started ("step 1, before you can try out this webserver, first register an account with Let's Encrypt") nobody is going to use it.

It's not an easy problem to solve because people are inherently lazy and want results fast. Security done right is the opposite of that in its current state.

<comment><USER11> When it comes to databases, either 1) listening on localhost by default or 2) requiring a non-obvious password would seem to strike a decent balance between security and usability.

But MongoDB is web scale! Nobody is going to run it on localhost only! So the default (until 2.6) was to listen on all interfaces by default. AFAIK Elasticsearch still listens on all interfaces by default. Does this choice make life any easier for the developer who is just beginning to learn how to use it? I dunno, most of my development work takes place on localhost. I probably won't even notice if a newly installed database only listens on localhost.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I think I play too much Starcraft that when I see "Breed Ready", I immediately think I must've forgotten to morph workers or overlords.

<comment><USER13> Clearly China has been communicating with Korea.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> You're better of following the Twitter with the guy that discovered this (I do not have the link on hand but will post when I get to my laptop). He explains why this is not usual and concerning. He goes through unsecured MongoDB (US or China) to see what people are up to.

</comment><comment><USER15> I read on Reddit that it was a bad translation of "has had children". We don't know who owns the database. It might be from a life insurance company.

</comment><comment><USER16> This definitely can't be a database from any Chinese government organization.

Look at the screenshot from tweet carefully and you can find it store "photo" on fbcdn.net. Which totally blocked by firewall of China.

</comment><comment><USER17> Probably just an unsecured database of a dead matching/marriage app...

</comment><comment><USER18> I wonder if Plenty of Fish has a larger or smaller database of breed ready females.

</comment><comment><USER19> a fun game to play is to guess how many of the commenters here on HN who think this is defensible have a uterus and/or are women.

I guess this mostly seems fine to those who are not even potentially affected, as usual.

</comment><comment><USER20> This is clutching at straws... The anti-Chinese propaganda is too obvious on this one, sorry.

</comment><comment><USER21> The usage of "Breed Ready" gives me goosebumps. Feels like the dystopian future is here.</comment>


"La Grange" – ZZ Top (1973) - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vppbdf-qtGU <comment><AUTHOR> Who woulda thunk that a bass and a lead guitar and drums could pump out so much sound? 122+ million views on YouTube.

</comment><comment><USER2> when I first heard this song I was convinced it was john lee hooker</comment>


Avoid using subdomains for accounts in your saas app - <AUTHOR> http://douglastarr.com/avoid-using-subdomains-for-your-saas-app <comment><USER2> I think this misses a whole section on security.

e.g. [https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/33851/protectin...](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/33851/protecting- against-cross-subdomain-cookie-attacks)

<comment><AUTHOR> That's a great link, I will add it in. Thanks.

<comment><USER2> I think you're kind of missing my point. This space is a lot more complicated that the page indicates and the usual warning of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing..." applies.

Some additional context:

\- [https://security.googleblog.com/2012/08/content-hosting- for-...](https://security.googleblog.com/2012/08/content-hosting-for-modern- web.html)

\- [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same- origin_policy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-origin_policy)

\- and other articles on CORS, XSS and CSRF, etc

<comment><AUTHOR> Is there some statement that I wrote that you believe is misleading or incorrect?

I'm trying to warn people off of subdomains, rather than encourage it.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you communicate technical ideas from devs to non-devs, vice versa - <AUTHOR> What tools do you use? A template, format, or live doc editor? How do you do it?
My problem is my boss, who isn't a developer, will send me requirements to code something. This could involve 4-5 different objects in the db, and moving data between those objects and their fields. Basically I feel like I waste a lot of time understanding the db relationship between the objects and the intended steps to achieve to desire result (sudo code).
My main concern is to not waste time coding, by making sure I understand the requirement and steps needed to complete it. This is what I've tried to resolve my problem: once I receive a requirement, I will create a doc with my understanding of the problem. This includes sudo code, object and field names, and any additional logic. Once the doc is done, I give it to my boss to sign off on, to make sure I do understand what they want completed.
As I've attempted to make a tech spec doc, it just feels messy and unclear.
One additional goal I'd like this tech spec doc to achieve, is to be able to hand it off to any other developer, and they can understand if it's something can be achieved or not.
Sorry if these seems jumbled and unclear. I'm not quite sure what discipline is needed to solve my problem. It seems like a mix between technical writing and documentation. <comment><USER2> First off, you're absolutely correct in trying to nail down the requirements before choosing. It sounds like there are a couple related problems that you're trying to solve. 1) You find the database design difficult to understand, 2) you're trying to understand and get sign off on functional requirements and 3) you're trying to write up a design for a technical solution. For 1) see if you can get an ER diagram so you can see the relationships. You may find that additionally you need to document sections of the db schema because you don't understand what certain tables represent. This can be done in a wiki or in the code or both. 2) Can be done using user stories or tickets, but for complex work it's best to write up a business requirements document containing the functional requirements (what needs to be done, not how to do it). There are templates and examples readily available, just adjust for the level of detail you need. This is what your boss should be signing off on. 3) You can probably avoid creating technical specs at the moment. Their target audience are developers and these specify the solution design. Unless you have a real need to choose one solution over another, it's often best to let the developer working on the problem to choose their own solution.

As an aside, you mean pseudo code not sudo code. Sudo is a linix/unix command

</comment><comment><USER3> I would try to shift the communication from technical (how it is done) to non- technical (what it is supposed to do). But, dont ask "what is it supposed to do" in general. Ask more concrete specific questions.

I think that the discipline you are looking for is "analysis". it does not matter all that much which specific form document takes - requirements matrix, use cases, user stories, mockups, ... . Important is that it is stored on one place only, easy to update and updated often.

</comment><comment><USER4> It sounds like your boss might be micromanaging. He should not be responsible for defining your data model; he hired you to worry about that. The only thing he should be concerned with is the business requirements, for example, which queries have business value? What queries might we want to make in the future?

It's good he's thinking about the data model, but he's introducing meaningless friction in your relationship by effectively requiring this additional communications step. You could spend that time coding.

In this example, your contract with him is to deliver a data model that optimizes for business requirements, minimizes cost, and maximizes speed. All those variables affect the data model, since you obviously need to consider tradeoffs when designing schemas or creating indices. You have the expertise to make decisions about these tradeoffs. Your boss only has expertise on the business requirements. So why would he try to optimize the data model himself if he is only considering a subset of the variables? He needs to trust you for your expertise and remember why he hired you, IMO.

<comment><AUTHOR> The problem is he designs the data modal for the apps, and I'm suppose to work with it. These are apps that have existed for 1-2 years, mind you. Of course on a new app I design, but these existing apps, the design just seems terrible, and that makes it really hard to communicate what he wants to do with the modal and the apps features.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Get your boss a free copy of Visual Use Case. He can write requirements, user stories, list actors, etc and it will automagically spit out UML chart that you can use to visualize the flow when you code. You can get an upgrade to TopTeam Analyst and that will also give you swim lane diagrams plus manage end-to-end Requirements Traceability for Business Applications, Products and Medical systemsmore. Here is the free version:

[http://www.visualusecase.com/download-visual-use-case- person...](http://www.visualusecase.com/download-visual-use-case- personal-f.html)

Here is a video about the product you can share with him:

[http://fast.wistia.net/embed/iframe/eamru13sx5?autoPlay=true...](http://fast.wistia.net/embed/iframe/eamru13sx5?autoPlay=true&controlsVisibleOnLoad=true&playerColor=4976d1&popover=true&version=v1&videoHeight=563&videoWidth=900&volumeControl=true)

<comment><USER5> And in the upgraded version you can host it on server so you can share it with team members......plus it has a client side to show customers mock ups and such. Although you can add screen shots to the requirements in the free version.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I was a software engineer who became a strategy consultant and part of my role is to communicate ideas back and forth between business and technical audiences.

Short answer: Lots of dialogue, feedback, listening and visual communication (i.e. whiteboard)

Long answer: It's more complicated because the person impacting you is your boss. Ask if he can involve you in the design process next time and let him know that if he can, you'll be able to understand things more efficiently and there's less risk of doing it wrong. When designing, share ideas but avoid directly saying he is wrong. Ask thoughtful questions like what is the business trying to do and what are they trying to solve? What will they eventually do with the database/system?

</comment><comment><USER7> This seems very odd for someone to define a backend portion like this and ask you to build on top of it. The way I would approach this situation is list examples and situations where it makes your job harder and have reasons why a different approach would be better. If telling them that they will be stuck with these issues after you've moved on in a few years and they are ok with that then that's how it goes, nothing else can be done.

</comment><comment><USER8> When you say 'requirements' what exactly is he handing over? I've built out a front-end interactive prototype using just HTML, CSS and a little bit of javascript when facing this issue. This forces my end-user to have something to touch/feel before coding out the back-end. It saves me time and it also forces the end user to start to really think through how their idea will work in the real world.

<comment><AUTHOR> There is a whole db schema that he designed for the app that a company is using. He wants me to work with that when fixing bugs or adding features, those are requirements.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I think you need to focus on doing this visually, that is have him/her design the UI, agree on it, and distill that down to internal requirements which you can estimate out. It doesn't seem necessary to be sharing the implementation details with them.</comment>


Money for Something ($10 ebook on investing) - <AUTHOR> https://www.moneyforsomethingbook.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm just sitting down to start reading the book now, but based on the reviews and quotes listed it should be great!</comment>


Opening Process - PMBOK and ITIL - <AUTHOR>

Most of my career has been spent working in FLOSS environments.  I dropped out of college to pursue a couple dreams that didn't pan out, but never gave up the FLOSS fight.  Many like me piled up the certs from Sun to Red Hat, LPI to Oracle to make up for the stunted education.  I've resisted up to now, and recently finished an ITIL cert and a Project Management cert at UCLA in preparation for taking the PMP exam, which I will take in November.  Odd certs for a FLOSS advocate?  Perhaps, but as I work in ITIL and PMBOK environments more, I wonder if there shouldn't be some way to take this knowledge base and open it up.  I find it a bit upsetting that the PMI and ITIL standards are so expensive and locked down, accessible primarily in Windows or non-free application environments.  Shouldn't process like this be open, especially if the intent is to improve IT and Project Management across the industry?  What would it take to produce similar studies, recommendations and standards of practice like ITIL and PMBOK that totally provided via the FLOSS model?  I find great value in PMI and ITIL, but while I have the certs and the knowledge, I feel a little guilty adding those to my resume when the rest of it reflects a love for GNU/FSF and Open Source software ideals and methodologies... <comment><USER2> More open process could encourage adoption, ultimately improving IT project management across the industry. Organizations that have no experience with PMBOK or ITIL may not bother with it due to the expense and closed nature.

As I've been on projects with large schedule overruns, I am becoming more interested in the topic of project management to try to do better. However, ITIL and PMBOK seem way to heavy for what I need at a glance. My first approach is to simply look at following documented agile processes. What says that PMBOK and ITIL are the best options? In order to provide a FLOSS alternative, you'll need to build a community that really wants this stuff and can contribute the body of knowledge.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good point about a community that actually wants it. Perhaps a product of the process should be a demonstrative project, also, similar to how FLOSS projects are products of free and open source development methodologies. Over the last five years of study and practical application of PMBOK and ITIL in my work environment, I've certainly found value. However, from a FLOSS perspective, I also see why Agile and Lean are more favored by our developers as opposed to the more documentation- and process-heavy formal ITIL and PMBOK.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: is foundrs.com a good domain name for my startup? - <AUTHOR>

I had such great success with the feedback from HN before that I'll do it again: do you think foundrs.com is a good domain name for my startup? You may know us under our current name: fairsoftware.net. We allow people with startup ideas to find co-founders and offer them virtual stock-options, backed by a legally binding contract similar to the GPL, except it's for profit.
It's just that everyone keeps making fun of our .NET name, and also of the fact that people think we do software. We don't. So maybe a change of name is in order.
We came up with a few ideas, and one of them is foundrs.com. As you know it's hard to find any .COM name that is still available. This one was. We had other ideas that I won't share so I don't influence the discussion too much.
Thanks! <comment><USER2> For what it's worth ($125 a year) founde.rs is available... on 101domains or any of the other international domain providers.

Edited to say, having the full name with a foreign extension sounds better to me than eating a letter... YMMV

<comment><USER3> I like this suggestion.

<comment><AUTHOR> Apart from delicio.us, I can't think of any decent startup using that naming scheme. I may be wrong, but 99% of non super-geeky users don't understand this syntax and would not dare use it. Am I wrong?

<comment><USER2> You are correct... but super-geeky users = founders.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't mind the missing 'e'. People still use Flickr.

</comment><comment><USER5> sounds too dot com bubblish.

Just do the usual

____founders.

BlueFounders, WidgetFounders, FounderMix</comment>


Facebook.com redirecting to Microsoft.com - <AUTHOR> http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2770024/fb%20to%20microsoft.png

<comment><USER2> Works fine here. Have you checked for Malware? Someone messing with your hosts file/DNS?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> This happening for anyone else? Any explanations?</comment>