The Chinese Decade - <AUTHOR> http://www.cringely.com/2010/10/the-chinese-decade/

<comment><USER3> I have to say I am quite worried about China's economy if I'm honest. Everytime you build a big black box that sucks in and spews money but nobody is entirely sure how it works (think American mortgage market/banking system circa 2008) and anytime you try and question why it works your told to shut up because you just don't "understand the new way" I think you should be deeply suspicious. China is in most respects one giant black box. My main concern is that they've done a fairly similar thing to what Britain did back around 2000. When the US hit a recession from the .com bust we responded by opening up the credit taps and made doing anything and everything on cheap credit very easy. We avoided recession but in doing so we caused one hell of a banking/housing/credit bubble ten years later. I suspect the chinese have unfortunately done the same, they've opened up the credit taps hugely in order to glide through the slowdown in the west, but with that much credit sloshing around there will always be problems. I think those problems are China's regional and local governments, who more or less run their own little fiefdoms and have been financing much of their operations from land sales and off balance sheet investments vehicles...

<comment><USER4> Whenever I walk into a hole-in-the-wall shop here in China on a weekday, the PC screens are alight with share trading graphs. As they said 10 years ago in the US, "when the taxi drivers are giving share tips, it's time to get out." Both the Chinese housing and stock markets could blow at anytime, and the Chinese don't have the institutional memory to deal with it.

<comment><USER3> And ironically this is around the time of the "new leader" coming to the fore. Since the last two were preordained by Deng Xiaoping and this one won't be I expect they will try very hard to paper over any cracks in order to maintain an orderly succession. I do not like that particular mix of politics/economics all coming together in one time period.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Just a copy and paste of a comment I wrote on his blog....

\---start comment--- This is funny, I just wrote about the Chinese middle class a couple of days ago: [http://www.pakg1.net/2010/10/changing-chinese- mindset-toward...](http://www.pakg1.net/2010/10/changing-chinese-mindset- towards.html)

I think your points were correct maybe 3 years ago. I don't think they are now. China still has a lot of issues that could cause it to stumble, but I don't think a lack of a middle class is one of them.

As well, I cannot think of more Indian executives than I can Chinese executives. In fact, I think Chinese executives by far have the lead, simply because HK and Taiwan are more westernized and advanced than maybe even India. The simple fact is that HK and Taiwan play nicer with China than a lot of people know, simply because the economics make it worthwhile. There may be a lot of political strife in the news, but there's a lot of money flowing behind the scenes.

Finally, as an expat who's living in China right now, I can honestly say that not only does this middle class exist, their English is pretty darn good. And I'm finding that increasingly often, they have a 3rd language (in my case, I'm running into a ton of Japanese speakers).

So in all, I think this view is a tad outdated. India probably has a bright future, but as anyone who attended the APCAC 2010 conference this year can attest (and even Indian panel speakers there attested to this), India is way behind in a number of areas, especially the infrastructure necessary to really rev its economy up. That investment is only now just starting due to the fact that their democratic government apparently has its first real majority government ever.

And you may wish to fix this apparent contradiction when comparing the middle classes of the two countries....

"China has the population, the will, the educational system, the foreign currency reserves — everything to make it the next global superpower except two things: 1) an emerging middle class generation comparable to our Baby Boomers"

"What I find interesting is that most people just take it as bible truth that China will be the next superpower because it is so number-oriented (huge infrastructure dollars, huge manufacturing dollars, higher per capital wealth than India, bigger middle class, etc…)." \---end comment---

<comment><USER6> I don't agree with HK and strongly disagree with Taiwan. If you erroneously include HK and Taiwan executives as "Chinese middle class", the tiny population of these regions still represent a tiny percentage of the area.

Will there be a larget Indian or Chinese middle class? I agree with the post that India will have a rising middle class of hundreds of millions before China. China's top down politics results in hoarding and exporting cash for wealthy families. Successful Indians seem to have a stronger reinvest in technology mindset.

<comment><USER5> When did I call executives middle class? He made two points, one about an alleged lack of a Chinese middle class, and the other about the breadth of Indian executives. They are not the same, and I did not respond as if they were the same. You totally misread me.

Furthermore, if you haven't seen a middle class here in your visit here a few months ago, you haven't interacted with people here. I'm living here in China right now, and I interact with the middle class every day at work, on the streets, in community centres, etc. It's for real. If you live here for a few months and seriously interact with the locals and STILL for some reason don't see a middle class, then I'll start taking your opinion seriously on that matter. But it'll be hard because I'm experiencing the exact opposite.

For the record, the super rich are not the middle class. They are the super rich. Don't get them confused. The Hiltons and other big family money in the US can't be considered middle class either, and it really seems to me that you're referring to those types as your "middle class".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> What _is_ a functional disporia?

From what my Chinese relatives say, most Chinese businesses are family businesses. Fukuyama's _Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity_ confirms this, and says that it naturally imposes a size limit. So that may explain the underrepresentation in public corporations.

<comment><USER8> Yeah... my impression is that there are plenty of ethnic Chinese abroad in small businesses and the professions. I'm not convinced that you have to have lots of people in your ethnic group becoming C-level executives before your diaspora is considered "functional".

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I was just in China and one thing that Cringely probably does not get right is: in China you have a strong majority of people who see it as a social responsibility to work together to improve the economy. One of my guides gave me quite a little speil about this, he was earnest, and I basically believed him.

Otherwise, I agree with the article. BTW, I think it is Thomas Friedman who has been pointing out that a lot of people in India are disappointed with US leadership in the world right now: not effective and they want us as a good buffer to Chinese hegemony.

</comment><comment><USER10> He does have a point about the population aging, but that is by about 2050 if I remember. They have time to turn it around and make laws to pro-create more (they are already loosening the 1 child laws in some places as tests)

Other than that, I think he is wrong. India may produce many managers of companies but it does not matter. The chinese will just buy the companies of the world and keep existing managers on staff as employees. The chinese don't really need to show their faces, they just hold the money, the shares and set the rules. (the golden rule. those who hold the gold, makes the rules)

Next, China has a leg up for infrastructure, it is pretty awesome how fast they are building airports, road networks, train systems, power grids, water processing, energy creation, real estate and entire cities. India can't even clean the garbage from their streets let alone agree on major infrastructure investments. New infrastructure spurs and even creates whole new local domestic economies on many levels.

One party rule. Basically, the party can plan the next 5 years, next 50 years and 100 years and execute in amazing detail. They can and do get their best party minds together and plan what is good for the people and actually do it. Can many other countries do the same? Can you see India planning for the next 2 years, let alone 50 years?

English language. They start very young to learn English now in school, it is mandatory. There are 6 million university graduates per year. In 5-10 years, there will be 6-10 million english speaking graduates coming from China - <USER2> YEAR.

Energy. Both china and india are net importers of energy. China is making deals to get Energy (ie. oil) everywhere and anywhere they can. Nigeria, Yemen, Saudi, Iran, Iraq, Caribbean, Canada and every place on the planet they can get it from. Everywhere the 'West' thinks it is not moral, the Chinese are there building infrastructure, making deals and securing energy for their people. Smart. What is India doing to secure their future energy needs?

Middle class. Have you been there to see the 300+ million people that are now buying apartments, cars, make up, creams, designer clothes et al.? Yup, more people than all of the USA is their newly created middle class. Beijing alone is putting 1000 new cars on the road EVERY SINGLE DAY. There are hundreds more cities with more than 1-2 million people.

Functional diaspora. This argument is pretty moot or even leans towards the Chinese I think. So what you have Indian individuals "integrating in companies". They are individuals, and it means they can produce workers that integrate in other societies, as individuals. The Chinese also have diaspora. It is called China Town. In almost every city in the world has one. They are organized, band together, get real estate in close proximity, create small businesses and make their way and excel in almost every foreign country in the world. Do you see any "Indian Town's" in any city in the world?

My money is on China for sure.

<comment><USER11> Wow, if this is not propaganda...

One party rule is a joke. 50 years ago China was a backwater and it wasn't until the 80s when they experimented with capitalism that they even got to this point. 50 years ago the big government plan was planting enough rice to feed everyone. So how much of that 10, 20, 50 year plan was put into effect?

Anyway I wouldn't consider any Chinatown a positive. Except in a few countries (Singapore) Indians don't have an Indian Town because it isn't necessary. Chinatowns exist because of a failure for chinese immigrants to integrate. So they turn to an insular community that can provide resources that they are reluctant to ask of their native neighbors.

In every Chinatown I have been to it is always, always the rich chinese exploiting the ignorant immigrants. This will be the diner that pays staff less than minimum wage, landlords subdividing apartments, and others extracting a royalty for getting you a job. And lets not get started on how local gangs have infused themselves into Chinatown.

<comment><USER12> Hey. Capitalism and real-world economics saved China, yes. But they were and are still under one-party rule when it happened. Their meritocracy, as corrupt as it can be, is just another approach to solving the problem of government and imho is as valid as any western approach. You cannot overlook the efficiencies of their system in comparison to western governments. There are both pros and cons but it's kind of narrow-minded to say it's all negative.

Also I find your generalizations about Chinatown a bit offensive. "Chinatowns exist because of a failure for chinese immigrants to integrate." Isn't this true of every cluster of immigrants? You make it sound like it's easy to integrate or something. "In every Chinatown I have been to it is always, always the rich chinese exploiting the ignorant immigrants. This will be the diner that pays staff less than minimum wage, landlords subdividing apartments, and others extracting a royalty for getting you a job. And lets not get started on how local gangs have infused themselves into Chinatown." How many chinatowns have you been to, and I'm sure you know all the landlords and people helping each other out.

I think you're giving immigrants less credit than they deserve. It's hella hard just to decide to stick around here. You can also look up Asian-american bias -- integration isn't just about Asians wanting to integrate. There is a fair amount of anti-asian sentiment in the US. "So they turn to an insular community that can provide resources that they are reluctant to ask of their native neighbors." << This kind of generalization implies that an immigrant has a relationship with their "native neighbors" which is hardly the case when you've just arrived.

Thinking about it the other way around: if you didn't speak Chinese very well and moved to China, wouldn't you also tend toward other english speakers? It's damn hard not to rely on someone you can talk to, when you can barely communicate with your plumber.

<comment><USER11> The russians also had one party rule with 5, 10, and 50 year plans and how did that turn out? More dissenters dead and disappeared than all world wars combined. Grand projects rusting away in former soviet blocs. And the supposed efficiency comes at the price of peoples lives and property. I can assure you the people living around the Olympic village weren't delighted to be kicked out of their homes. I'm not saying. So when you make the rules and can apply them as you please damn right its easy to be efficient.

I don't know how you can find my generalization offensive but not your own. Chinatowns exists because they are a net positive how? Yet Indians, Malays, Japanese, and Koreans don't need them. I've been only to the C-Towns on the east coast, and lived in one. And it is the rich chinese exploiting the poor. You don't hear about white, blacks, indians, or any other nationalities exploiting immigrants in chinatown. It took NYCPD a decade and a half to crack the triads in NYC C-Town and they are still exert a lot of influence.

As to asian american bias this argument is weak since out of all emigrants (except europeans) Asians face the lowest amount of overall discrimination. Americans don't trust the chinese-americans to run the country (due to that same insular community being perceived as unloyal) but they trust them more than they do africans or african americans to do business with according to this study <http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=93457>. I've never met a taxi driver that says he won't pick up chinese or wouldn't stop in chinatown.

If I did move to China I wouldn't restrict myself to english enclaves, working for english businesses and only befriending english speaking people. But I'm not your typical american either.

<comment><USER13> 9 years back, I took a group of Shanghai government officials on a tour of U.S. tech companies. In attempts to appease their stomaches we went to Chinatown in D.C., NYC, SF. They were all terribly disappointed with the food. Why so? Well, it turns out the Chinatowns in the U.S. aren't quite a fair representation of all of China. Be careful about transferring your knowledge of one to the other.

As to your assertion that if you did move to China you would immerse yourself, well, perhaps you should go give it a try. I did it for 10 years. I'm not your typical American and I needed to come up for air every now and then and re- assimilate with my Western brethren.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> When I look at the executives he's talking about here in the US, I don't see Indians; I see Americans of Indian origin.

</comment><comment><USER15> In Silicon Valley, I've never noticed a shortage of either Indian or Chinese engineers and executives. Both seem to have a pretty functional diaspora, at least on the west coast. Maybe in Boston, the Chinese community is more insular.

I also think a perpetuation of huge income/lifestyle disparity is much more likely in India and China than it would be in the west -- a middle class of 50mm vs. 300mm in China isn't necessarily going to greatly hinder them if those 50mm are in the right industries. China can continue to trade domestic consumer quality of life for external competitiveness. It's probably not the best thing for maximizing utility for the Chinese people overall, but it certainly maximizes national prestige.

</comment><comment><USER13> Cringely has a rambling thesis here. Too many loose ends to properly critique.

I will give him this: looking up functional diaspora in the big G yields equally rambling results.

1 - first 2 entries are Cringely's own

2 - third entry is a Google book excerpt on "Hitler's black victims" which has no use of the word diaspora

3 - fourth is the Facebook open source "competitor"

</comment><comment><USER16> Why is it always: they win we loose. That is nonesense. They might win, but we don't automaticly loose. There is some misconception in there. Economics aren't sports.

</comment><comment><USER17> It's an interesting debate to have, but this article is a bunch of hogwash. China has a booming middle class and an extremely "functional" diaspora.

<http://www.wikinvest.com/concept/Rise_of_Chinas_Middle_Class></comment>


How to install Big Sur to Mac Mini Late 2012 and other Catalina-capable machines - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@andv/how-to-install-big-sur-to-mac-mini-late-2012-9d674b563174 <comment><AUTHOR> For those who have trouble with the link:

[https://archive.vn/HNc2B](https://archive.vn/HNc2B)

[https://archive.st/archive/2020/6/archive.vn/s5o9/archive.vn...](https://archive.st/archive/2020/6/archive.vn/s5o9/archive.vn/index.html)</comment>


As We May Think (1945) - <AUTHOR> https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/303881/ <comment><USER2> Here's a brief summary of why this article and why Vannevar Bush was so impactful. (Please note that this is all from memory, so while some of the specifics might be off, the general thrust is right)

Vannevar Bush helped organize the American scientific effort during World War 2, and afterward was instrumental in setting up the modern university research system we have today. The main argument was that research was the "Endless Frontier" (hence the name of the book about him). Things like the National Science Foundation and DARPA are part of this compact, that the Federal government would fund research universities to do fundamental and applied research, which in turn would help contribute to American national security.

Regarding this specific article (As We May Think), I would argue that it's core impact is that it made a case for why information technologies were needed, and laid out a vision for what that world might be like. Even though the article was written in 1945, it talks about information overload(!), and the challenges of finding the right information when there is so much of it. It also imagines an early form of hypertext via a device called the Memex, which later inspired Ted Nelson, Doug Engelbart, and others in their work. There's even discussion of a kind of collaboration in the form of "trails" or paths as to how one found a piece of information in the first place. One might share these trails with others, forming a kind of hyperlink that we don't have a modern equivalent for. Intriguingly, Bush also imagines wearable computers (a wearable camera) that can be used to help augment people's memories.

In short, this article heavily influenced a lot of people's thinking about what computing technologies could potentially do in the future, and was a major part in getting us to where we are today.

</comment><comment><USER3> For those who want to learn more, the book "Endless Frontier: Vannevar Bush, Engineer of the American Century" [0] by G. Pascal Zachary is _very_ good. (G. Pascal Zachary also wrote "Showstopper: The Breakneck Race to Create Windows NT and the Next Generation at Microsoft")

[0] [http://www.gpascalzachary.com/endless_frontier__vannevar_bus...](http://www.gpascalzachary.com/endless_frontier__vannevar_bush__engineer_of_the_american_century__1997__50100.htm)

[1] [http://www.gpascalzachary.com/showstopper__the_breakneck_rac...](http://www.gpascalzachary.com/showstopper__the_breakneck_race_to_create_windows_nt_and_the_next_generation_at_m_50101.htm)

</comment><comment><USER4> One of the reasons I bring him up is that I think it's important for us to have an awareness that we are on a bit of a merry-go-round where tech is concerned. Most days we are answering questions that have been asked in some form for fifty years. Or in this case, seventy.

Don't fool yourself into thinking this is all new. It's new to you. The constraints may or may not be new, but you are often treading old, if fertile, territory.

Why does this matter? Am I trying to be a buzzkill? Maybe. It's about hubris, in part. Knowing there is probably prior art means prior conversations that you might be able to learn from. And those people who disagree with you and you dismiss? They may be on the other side of this argument in five years when the next new/old thing comes back and your amazing work hits the recycling bin.

</comment><comment><USER5> Posted dozens of times, but surprisingly few got more than one comment.

2015 [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9787567](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9787567)

2012 [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4577865](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4577865)

2010 [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1565764](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1565764)

<comment><USER6> It's one of those things that needs context around it to generate discussion. On its own, it, well, stands on its own.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I know it wasn't Vannevar Bush, but I think it was a contemporary of his that made all these elementary robots, each taking the previous one that did something simple (like avoid light) and adding a new behavior. It's driving me crazy that I can't think of his name.

<comment><USER8> Valentino Braitenberg:

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

[https://www.amazon.com/Vehicles-Experiments-Psychology- Valen...](https://www.amazon.com/Vehicles-Experiments-Psychology-Valentino- Braitenberg/dp/0262521121)

<comment><USER7> Thank you!

<comment><USER8> You bet.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Those interested in this might also enjoy E M Forster's _The Machine Stops_ [1][2], which in 1909 predicted (in very rough, general form) something like the Internet, Internet addiction, video chat rooms, and virtual reality.

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

[2] - [https://www.ele.uri.edu/faculty/vetter/Other-stuff/The- Machi...](https://www.ele.uri.edu/faculty/vetter/Other-stuff/The-Machine- Stops.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER10> The name should be corrected to _Vannevar_ in the title.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the pointing that out. I've updated the title.

<comment><USER11> Also, (1945).

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, updated!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Roscosmos to Install CCTV Cameras on Russian Segment of ISS - <AUTHOR> https://www.ruaviation.com/news/2019/3/7/13082/?h <comment><AUTHOR> They argument is because of the hole in the Soyuz spacecraft:

> At the end of August 2018 there occurred a drop in air pressure on the ISS. > It took specialists several days to find out that the hull of the Soyuz > MS-09 spacecraft had been drilled from the inside.</comment>


Digital Ocean: Unrecoverable RAID Failure for a hypervisor in SF region - <AUTHOR>

Here's the support ticket that just opened, after receiving $50 in SLA credit.
<comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment></comment><comment>
Unfortunately, our Engineers have reported the hypervisor your droplet was located had encountered unrecoverable RAID Failure. Due to this issue, your droplet and all data contained in it was lost. We have issued a $50.00 SLA Credit to your account with regard to this failure.
We are unable to recover the system so if you have any backups or snapshots of that server please create a new virtual server from them.
If you have backups of the server, do not destroy the server from your control panel yet as that will also remove the backups associated with it.
We are taking this issue very seriously and are in the process of implementing a solution that will eliminate this issue from re-occurring. One of the options includes backing up all VMs on a regular basis.
Additionally, DigitalOcean will be building out an analytics and monitoring feature in the coming months to provide you with utilization and failure alerts.
Again, we're very sorry and please let us know if there is anything we can do on our end to help your situation and provide a better experience.
Thanks,
Etel </comment><comment><USER2> This happened to me on February 4th of this year. And Etel got to break the bad news to me as well:

" Unfortunately it looks like the hypervisor that bean is on has failed. We were working with the datacenter technician and it seems that they had replaced the wrong drive which has corrupted the RAID volume.

We are unable to recover the system so if you have any backups or snapshots of that server please create a new virtual server from them. "

Between a signup credit, and my SLA credit from this event, I wont need to pay them for over a year after my initial signup. Besides this event, I've had no issues, though I'd think twice now about how/if I store data on the service if I were doing any real computing with them (as opposed to just noodling around).

</comment><comment><USER3> Digital Ocean has disappointed me. They are a tick below average. Their support has been mediocre. The system is broken (tried creating a droplet with different images, only one worked). And the security is not really that good either. Been poking around my own droplet and am not happy with how they set things up. Overall, I'm going to to stick to getting my VPSs from lowendbox.

</comment><comment><USER4> Welcome to the cloud.</comment>


Some recent updates to Tipjoy - <AUTHOR> http://tipjoys2cents.blogspot.com/2008/05/some-recent-updates-to-tipjoy.html <comment><USER2> I have a Tipjoy account, but I doubt I'll ever use it unless you add the following functionality: Charge me five bucks a month, and then let me choose however many sites I want for that money to be divided up among. The problem with the micropayment concept is the cognitive load is through the roof. Deciding whether to spend money on something is stressful, and Tipjoy asks me to make that decision every time I go to a webpage.

Figuring out if a webpage is worth tipping is like going to the store and trying to figure out which toothpaste is the best. It's stressful as hell because they all look the same and you're afraid if you buy the wrong one you're teeth are going to fall out. Except instead of having to do that every three months, Tipjoy asks me to do it every couple of minutes. Even if you're only tipping a quarter the cognitive load is just as bad as if it's a much larger amount. In many ways it's worse because you know the people you're tipping are only getting a quarter for the mental effort; the end result just doesn't justify the process. So just let me contribute as big a pie as I want, and then make hitting the tip button just cut out an extra slice from the pie. It completely eliminates the stress of having to figure out whether or not to spend money, and the cognitive load goes down a lot as well because you can, for example, favorite Fred Wilson's blog once and then a slice of the pie automatically goes to him each month. And speaking of, Crest solved this problem by just releasing their new Pro Health product, the one that costs an extra couple bucks but just does everything. Which of course is the toothpaste I now buy. Tipjoy has to figure out a way to do the equivalent. Because as is, Tipjoy makes being nice feel like pulling teeth.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good idea. It's actually in the works.

But I think there is very much a place for in-the-moment support. It's such a good feeling to get some excellent content online. I actually love tipping.

I'm eager to get that same feeling when I listen to music. It's exactly when you're listening to favorite song of yours that you want to give back. That's downright sexy compared with buying music on itunes.

<comment><USER2> Good deal. Once you add that functionality you should get websites to offer the user plums in exchange for giving them a slice of the pie. Sites like K5 and Fark and Slashdot already offer plums-for-money, so if you could make it easier for more sites to do this it would seem to be quite viral.

Edit: I think the idea of donating in real time would be most rewarding satisficers. The problem is that early adopters, almost by definition, are rarely satisficers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Wait, I thought you guys gave up because you stopped posting on your blog.

<comment><AUTHOR> It was a tough decision, but we've decided to focus on our company blog full time, and give up any further development.

<comment><USER3> Oh crap, nobody has written on our blog for almost 2 weeks. We must have given up too.</comment></comment></comment>


hash.ai - <AUTHOR> https://hash.ai/ <comment><USER2> Looks very interesting. Though I would love to see a few sample simulations to get a better idea of what's possible...

</comment><comment><USER3> This was re-posted 9 hours later and received significantly more attention: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21728776](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21728776)</comment>


NASA planning mission to an asteroid worth $10,000 quadrillion - <AUTHOR> http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/nation-now/2017/01/18/nasa-planning-mission-asteroid-worth-10000-quadrillion/96709250/ <comment><USER2> Because USA Today is driving me insane with its "relatable" dollar figure without talking about size or composition...

"16 Psyche is one of the ten most-massive asteroids in the asteroid belt. It is over 200 kilometers in diameter and contains a little less than 1% of the mass of the entire asteroid belt. It is thought to be the exposed iron core of a protoplanet...

Radar observations indicate that Psyche has a fairly pure iron–nickel composition."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16_Psyche](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16_Psyche)

<comment><USER3> The purity of it seems like it would allow for easier manufacturing in space. Thus you can build components, especially the larger bigs, without having to expensively send them up from the earth's surface.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The staggering supposed worth is beacause of the shear size of the asteroid, not the preciousness of its contents. Iron ore is only worth about 4 cents per pound on earth. There's just a lot of it.

<comment><USER5> And they forget what would happen to the price of iron if the supply went up 100000x .

<comment><USER6> Yeah exactly. That's why I hate articles like this.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> NASA sending probe to Earth, a planet that is worth roughly (All of the money ever). They plan to exploit it for resources that will be used, in part, for space exploration.

</comment><comment><USER8> You're on a trajectory beyond a 64 bit number of dollars there.</comment>


Oracle sues Google over use of Java in Android - <AUTHOR> http://www.marketwatch.com/story/oracle-sues-google-for-patent-infringement-2010-08-12?reflink=MW_news_stmp <comment><USER3> The biggest issue I see with Oracle's lawsuit is not with Android itself, but the future of Java as an open platform.

The claims are pretty serious, and Oracle is going straight for the jugular. It'll be interesting to see how it shakes out, but I've got to hope that Google will come out of this in good shape for the sake of Java. It's unfortunate that Oracle is interpreting Google's implementation of Dalvik and a Java-based system as a direct infringement upon their patents.

Android aside, it raises some fairly serious questions around Java's future development as a platform vis a vis the uncertainty recently resolved between Microsoft and the Mono project. While Microsoft extended their "Community Promise" to Mono implementors and users, Oracle seems to be taking the opposite approach to companies developing alternate JVMs and Java-based devices. It'll be interesting to see Oracle's stance toward other alternate JVMs such as IBM's.

If you're curious, the original complaint is here: [http://www.scribd.com/doc/35811761/Oracle-s-complaint- agains...](http://www.scribd.com/doc/35811761/Oracle-s-complaint-against- Google-for-Java-patent-infringement)

The patents upon which Oracle claims infringement are:

\- Protection domains to provide security in a computer system (6,125,447)

\- Controlling Access to a Resource (6,192,476)

\- Method and apparatus for pre-processing and packaging class files (5,966,702)

\- System and method for dynamic preloading of classes through memory space cloning of a master runtime system process (7,426,720)

\- Interpreting functions utilizing a hybrid of virtual and native machine instructions (6,910,205)

\- Method and system for performing static initialization (6,061,520)

<comment><USER4> Oracle may claim that Google infringes on all those patents, but they'll never sue. Patents are just a nuclear deterrent.

Edit: Wow, -7 and dropping. I guess I should have included a sarcasm symbol. Spoiler: My point was that patents do get used, and this argument about them just being for defense is nonsense.

<comment><USER5> A nuclear deterrent only works if both sides have nukes. Google is a pretty young company, with few patents. Oracle is a much older company, that bought many old companies along the way. Oracle's patent portfolio vastly outstrips that of Google.

<comment><USER6> We currently have enough nukes to destroy the world many times over. If you take the comparison between patents and nukes to its logical conclusion, the same probably holds. Google vs. Oracle == mutually assured destruction, regardless of how much bigger Oracle's portfolio is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> _"Java is the single most important software we've ever acquired," Oracle Chief Executive Larry Ellison said during a conference call [...]_

... "and if you don't do everything I say, I'll blow up the moon! Ah- hahahahah!"

How do you not love this guy? Somebody get him a black cape.

<comment><USER8> He is just trying to save /more/ children in Africa. [http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748704...](http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB10001424052748704017904575409193790337162.html)

Larry Ellison is a saint! ... and an asshole.

<comment><USER9> The letter he wrote for the Giving Pledge website actually shows a bit of him being a saint and an asshole:

<http://givingpledge.org/#larry_ellison>

 _To whom it may concern,_

 _Many years ago, I put virtually all of my assets into a trust with the intent of giving away at least 95% of my wealth to charitable causes. I have already given hundreds of millions of dollars to medical research and education, and I will give billions more over time. Until now, I have done this giving quietly – because I have long believed that charitable giving is a personal and private matter. So why am I going public now? Warren Buffett personally asked me to write this letter because he said I would be "setting an example" and "influencing others" to give. I hope he's right._

 _Larry Ellison_

On one hand, he _is_ giving a lot, on the other, you can tell he couldn't care less about the pledge and the letter.

<comment><USER10> I wonder how much did google give away till now...

<comment><USER11> "In 2004, when Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin wrote to prospective shareholders about their vision for the company, they outlined a commitment to contribute significant resources, including 1% of Google's equity and profits in some form, as well as employee time, to address some of the world's most urgent problems. That commitment became a range of giving initiatives including Google.org."

\- <http://www.google.org/about.html>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> My dream for wrestling my profession away from the lawyers and CEOs is the formation of a programmer's union. The union would mainly be concerned with issues like these patents. A strike would be called on any company that tried to use software patents. A strike would mean not only that the programmers of that company would stop working, but also all programmers nationwide would refuse to work on that company's products and platforms.

If such a union existed it would immediately stop the use of software patents. The union could also lobby congress for the elimination of software patents and could work on other programmer related laws, establish standards bodies, etc. IOW, give programmers some say in the industry that is currently driven by the suits.

<comment><USER13> I'd rather see us become licensed professionals, like CPAs, with a large professional organization (like the AICPA) to lobby for us on issues like software patents, etc.

<comment><USER14> I see your point, but I worry about this creating barriers for people wanting to get into our profession. As it stands, you can still get a job in this field without any formal education in it, as long as you can show you've got the goods. I'm quite fond of this fact, and there is some real talent out there that might get the door shut in their face if there were a wall of licensing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I like this headline because if we sent it back in time 30 years it wouldn't make any sense at all.

<comment><USER16> Looking over the front page, I wonder what the people thirty years ago would have made of some of the other headlines:

"Making GitHub More Open: Git-backed Wikis"

"Twitter Polling in the Cloud in 30s using PiCloud"

or, my favorite:

"Burning man defeats PayPal"

(I envision something like the Biblical story of Jesus driving money-changers out of a temple, but this time, Jesus lights himself on fire first. It's very intimidating.)

<comment><USER17> > Looking over the front page, I wonder what the people thirty years ago would > have made of some of the other headlines

People thirty years ago? Heck, I wonder what my _in-laws_ would make of those headlines :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The most worrisome factor in this lawsuit is how this will impact java as a language and a platform. If Google loses this lawsuit, java as a language and platform could easily die. Many companies would refuse to use it, just to be on the safe side and avoid litigation from Oracle.

Oracle probably doesn't realize the massive damage it has done to the java platform just by going forward with this suit. Due to the looming threat of Oracle closing the java platform, startups and companies may begin avoiding the java platform in the same way they avoid the Microsoft stack. In fact, I can't see any reason why I WOULDN'T choose the .NET framework over java if both are so closed. At least C# has lambdas...

<comment> loup-vaillant If you like lambdas, you'd probably like F# better: lighter syntax, types are inferred, and it looks like it's quite well supported by Microsoft.

But of course, if you consider F#, you may want to use the more free and open Ocaml.

<comment><USER19> You can like lambdas without wanting to go fully functional... just like you can like objects without wanting to go fully object-oriented.

<comment> loup-vaillant Well, I'm not sure. First, assignments are evil[1], which means you should avoid setters. Second, inheritance is evil, for similar reasons (thick interface). Third, every time I saw mixins or class polymorphism, lambdas or sum types, would have been simpler, respectively.

Once you like lambdas, functional programming becomes more attractive than a black hole.

[1]: <http://www.loup-vaillant.fr/articles/assignment>

<comment><USER20> Sum types are not as dynamically extensible at runtime, or by third party libraries, as class polymorphism.

<comment> loup-vaillant For the particular cases I saw, runtime extensibility never mattered. (Do you have one where it does?)

And extending a third party sum type is not very hard:

      data LibType = Zero
                   | One Int
                   | Two Int Int

      data MyType  = ZeroOneTwo LibType
                   | Three Int Int Int

(It of course implies that you use MyType instead of LibType in your code.)

Finally, if you _really_ want to extend a sum type, no work around allowed, you might want to look at Ocaml's variant types.

<comment><USER20> The code using LibType is code you don't control; you can't change it to use MyType instead. Indeed, you don't even have the source code to it. That's also why the extensibility happens at runtime.

<comment> loup-vaillant So What? Just do what you would have done in Java without inheritance: aggregate. For each function that matters, you can write a new one that handle the extra case:

       new_function ZeroOneTwo x = old_function x
       new_function Three a b c  = -- handling new case

<comment><USER20> I'm not sure if you're being willfully obtuse or not. The functions that matter are functions you didn't write. You don't have the source code to them. You cannot rewrite them with an extra case because you can't rewrite all the calling sites, because those are baked into executable binaries.

The world of shrink-wrapped closed-source software may be a foreign world to many functional advocates, but it's the world I live in, and extensibility here is often done with polymorphism and inheritance. The code in the closed- source kernel (application, framework, whatever) interacts with values polymorphically, with modules and third parties relying on inheritance and overriding to work their behaviour into the system.

You want a market for components, where both buyers and sellers are protected; sellers do not necessarily want to reveal their source code, and buyers especially don't. Binary, executable code is the medium of interchange. In order to fit these things together you need protocols: sets of expected messages and documented responses. OO polymorphic interfaces, in other words. Inheritance at the interface level is necessary, and at the implementation level it decreases the burden somewhat - using aggregation instead can lead to problems of identity (the sub-parts of an aggregate each have a different one, since they are mutable).

<comment> loup-vaillant First, I believe that the world of shrink-wrapped proprietary software should die.

Second, I fail to see how inheritance solves your problem: " _The code using LibType is code you don't control; you can't change it to use MyType instead._ "

OK, let's try this with inheritance.

      class LibType                { Handles 3 cases       }
      class MyType extends LibType { Handles a fourth case }

Now tell me: how would you make the code of the library use an object of type `MyType` instead of `LibType`? If you don't control its code, I see only one way: somewhere, this library expects an object of type `LibType` as a _parameter_.

Interestingly, idiomatic functional programming do just that: passing functions as parameters. Or tuples of functions, in that case. You know that an object is just a tuple, right?. For instance:

      // Statically typed, Class based OO language
      class Foo {
        int   bar(int,);
        float baz(float, int);
        int x;
      }

      -- Haskell
      data Foo = Foo (Int -> Int)
                     (Float -> Int -> Int)
                     Int

      -- The same, with record syntax. (for easy access)
      data Foo = Foo { bar :: Int -> Int
                       baz :: Float -> Int -> Int
                       x   :: Int
                     }

Note that the functions in objects of type Foo aren't fixed. So I can override all I want. Class Polymorphism is cool, but I can do the same with mere parametric polymorphism if I really need to. Sure, the library must be designed for extensibility in the first place, but the same is true about OO libraries: inheriting from a class that isn't designed with inheritance in mind is dangerous.

<comment> loup-vaillant Dear down voter: would you care to explain which line I crossed please?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> According to this thread on the Android mailing list, Oracle tried to settle privately with Google but Google refused. This may mean that Google has a strong case against those patents:

[http://groups.google.com/group/android- developers/browse_thr...](http://groups.google.com/group/android- developers/browse_thread/thread/a0d97347e53e94?hl=en)

</comment><comment><USER22> Excuse the really really obvious question, but how can you sue somebody for intellectual property infringement on open-source software? Didn't you already give anybody the license to do what they wanted with it? If they've violated the license terms in some way, isn't that different from IP infringement?

<comment><USER23> It's important to understand that Android doesn't use Oracle's open-source OpenJDK. An argument could be made that Oracle licenses the necessary patents _only_ for OpenJDK and not for alternate implementations such as Dalvik. An argument could be made that Oracle licenses patents only for JVMs that are TCK-compliant, which Dalvik isn't. An argument could be made that Oracle licenses patents for GPLed JVMs but not for ASL-licensed JVMs (because ASL is "too free" perhaps?)

<comment><USER24> Thank you for this explanation. Until reading it this way my understanding of the whole affair was somewhat wrong.

Given that Oracle doesn't seem shy about going after a giant like Google makes me wonder what _other_ software Sun owned the rights to that might be even remotely popular. If I were a company using a lot of old Sun IP in even moderately unique ways, I'd be a little concerned right now.

<comment><USER25> MySQL? BerkeleyDB?

<comment><USER22> Well, Sun own MySQL. But the drop-in replacement MySQL engine makers (infobright, percona, etc) might be a little worried.

<comment><USER26> The comment you're replying to pointed out that Oracle owns MySQL (acquired with Sun) and BerkeleyDB (acquired with SleepyCat).

<comment><USER22> I had forgotten they also owned BerkeleyDB (obviously I know that Oracle own Sun, is that why I'm getting downmodded?).

But my point still stands: makers of replacement engines for MySQL could be in violation of MySQL-related patents, which Oracle could then sue over.

<comment><USER27> They could, but they haven't, and probably won't. Oracle had a big database- related portfolio long before they acquired Sun/MySQL, which had relatively few. They even bought Innobase, makers of the InnoDB engine a few years ago.

Other database vendors (Percona et al., not IBM) don't have assets for Oracle to take, don't directly threaten their core business, and going after them would get Oracle in trouble with regulators.

Better to land a tuna than chase sardines around.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Google's an engineering company and I think they should fight back as such. Get together a team of your best and brightest, take Postgres, and turn it into a drop-in replacement for Oracle. And be very public about your efforts.

<comment><USER29> Because Oracle doesn't own any patents on the implementation of relational databases that they couldn't also sue Google over . . .

The most engineer-ish thing to do is a back of the envelope calculation:

        1. Estimate how much it'd cost to fight the suit.
        2. Estimate the probability of winning.
        3. Estimate the damages if you lose.
        4. Estimate Oracle's ask for licensing the patents.

If (1 + 2 * 3) < 4, fight, else settle. They probably have pretty good numbers on one, three, and four considering they likely discussed this with Oracle before fisticuffs began. The only perilous part is estimating two.

<comment><USER30> ah, but reputation matters here... you don't want to have a reputation for being easy money for patent trolls. Additionally, as google doesn't seem to be a patent troll, it's probably also in their interest to set legal precedents that weaken software patents.

I mean, obviously, this doesn't mean 'always fight' but it's another value you need to punch in to your equation, one weighing in on the 'fight' side.

In my business, a similar example would be the money I spend on running an aggressive abuse desk. Running a less-aggressive abuse desk would be cheaper, both in the work it takes and in customers I've lost, at least in the short term.

But in the long term, /because/ I have succeeded in making my service a hostile place for spammers, my abuse complaint rate is much lower than it would be otherwise. for a while, another VPS company rented a few servers from me... and in spite of being something like 1/60th of my size, they produced more abuse desk work than the rest of my customers combined. I believe, because I have an aggressive abuse desk.

(I mean, there are other costs... I've lost at least one legitimate customer I know of, because he was compromised and his box was spewing ssh attacks over the network. I shut him down with an email notice, the email went to the shut down box, so he never got it. )

my point is that there are real business reasons to fight that sometimes go beyond the immediate results of that fight.

<comment><USER29> Maybe there is some space for a 3.1 step where you factor in the benefit from fighting even if you end up losing, but I doubt there is going to be one nearly as often as your VPS example.

<comment><USER30> in this case, they'd only get the benefit if they won; assuming that if they lost they'd have to pay the other guy's court expenses /and/ a license, it would make loosing more costly, but it would also make the win more valuable, possibly out of proportion to how much more costly it makes losing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The headline should read "Oracle sues Google over literally the only thing keeping Java relevant".

<comment><USER32> I don't necessarily agree about relevance, but I do find it quite mind boggling that Oracle would strike out against what is clearly a massive growth opportunity for Java. If they want to destroy the Java brand the fastest way possible then definitely the right thing to do is start suing people who are using Java. The million dollar question is why would anybody in their right mind do this?

<comment><USER33> " The million dollar question is why would anybody in their right mind do this?"

A slice of Android sales revenue... Perhaps as high as US$1 per handset would be nice.

<comment><USER34> Isn't Android free ? The problem is more for mobile phone companies that may now have to pay a license for using it. This will hurt a lot.

<comment><USER32> It might not hurt too much if Oracle just asks for money. I don't think it's the "free-as-in-beer" quality that is crucial to Android - it's the freedom for carriers to do what they want with it that matters.

They scariest possibility would be if Oracle actually tries to exert some other kind of influence - force their own software or restrictions or branding onto Android (ugh!) - that would really scupper the whole thing. I have no idea if that is possible or not (someone please tell me it is not).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> It seems like defending against software patent claims are a cost of doing anything interesting now days. Create a novel, popular platform or tool, and someone somewhere will probably sue you over infringing on their patents. Google can probably dig into its mountain of cash and come out OK, but the precedent is chilling to smaller companies.

It's also ironic that it's Dalvik that got hit, given the amount of anti- Microsoft hysteria that has surrounded the Mono project.

<comment><USER36> I'm reminded of a comment a Mono developer made about the hullabaloo over whether Mono is a Microsoft Trojan Horse:

"I can only imagine the C++ developers are laughing their heads off at us."

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> What an excellent occasion to try the homoglyph hoax attack on friends and enemies! (See <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1571984> .)

<http://www.google.com/search?q=οraclе>

 _Your search - οraclе - did not match any documents._

<comment><USER38> It seems to be the o and the e at the end. Homoglyphs were a bad idea. Single letter or word homoglyphs in ohterwise latin text ought to be highlit somehow to warn against tricks like that.

<comment><USER39> i just set the default encoding of my browser to latin1 and disabled auto- detection. it doesn't work most of the time because the browser doesn't have to _detect_ anything because of encoding tags in the page code, but it's handy if i have suspicions.

now i see gibberish for everything i don't care about, including utf8 homoglyphs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> I feel a little naive for not expecting something like this. I thought all the Sun/Oracle nonsense would be around MySQL.

<comment><USER41> MySQL: I bet that part is coming.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> What implications, if any, does this have for the future of JVM languages like Scala, Clojure, etc.?

<comment><USER43> Good question. It's got to cast a bit of a shadow over anything based on the VM.

This seems like a catastrophically stupid and short-sighted move on Oracle's part. The reason Java is as big as it is today is that it's been an open playing field for all comers. Start tossing the odd hand grenade into the party and the room is going to clear out fast. The timing could hardly be worse too - Scala and Clojure seem to be building some real momentum lately.

<comment><USER23> I disagree. Java ME is already dead, so there's nothing left to kill. Server- side Java is all properly licensed, so I don't see a problem there.

<comment><USER43> Patent and licensing issues are so complex and the outcome of litigation so unpredictable that good faith and precedent are what count. This suit demonstrates that Oracle is perfectly willing to pursue offensive suits on Java IP and that's a very damaging precedent.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> I bet the mono people are laughing their asses off now...

I think Sun suing Microsoft was a mistake too for the Java platform... the write once, run everywhere ideology made Java the native platform of the server... write once, run everywhere should be the default, but it should be easier and encouraged to escape...

<comment><USER45> Microsoft were destroying Java with their own implementation, which was not compatible with normal Java. They were changing the language, just as they tried to do with HTML in internet explorer and active-x, so we still see people having to use ie6.

Sun had to sue Microsoft, before they changed Java so much it was no longer platform agnostic (or it was way less agnostic).

<comment><USER46> I wonder what would have happened, though. Would the market decide that being platform-agnostic is more important than using MS dev tools? Would developers just have to work (around) with an incompatible platform, as they do with IE.

I wonder if the MS rift caused more harm to Java than letting Microsoft change its implementation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Oracle CEO Larry Ellison are good friends, best man at your wedding kind of friends. Ellison was once on Apple's board of directors after Jobs returned to Apple. Oracle suing Google over Java patent infringements in Android sure plays well for Apple...

Apple vs (Google vs (Facebook && Oracle))

<comment><USER48> … and if you rearrange the letters of "spicy acorn" it even spells "conspiracy"!.

<comment><USER49> That's the beauty of _quid pro quo_ : it's plausibly deniable and you can poke fun at those who suspect it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> This article is a bit light on detail - can anyone explain how the development of Android infringes on Oracle's IP?

<comment><USER51> If they were talking about Oracle's patents, it would make sense. It's the talk of it being copyright infringement that has me confused.

Android is basically, as far as I've read, a Linux kernel, with Google's own user space on top of that--their own equivalent of libc and their own windowing system. On top of that, they run their own JVM, which they wrote themselves and which is NOT even compatible with Oracle's at the byte-code level. Android apps are written in Java and compiled/JITed for Google's VM.

So, unless the Java compiler itself takes code from Oracle's compiler, it is hard to see what in their would contain copies of Oracle code.

<comment><USER49> One thing missing from your list: the standard java libs like java.lang.* etc. Are those google's implementations?

<comment><USER52> They're from the Apache Harmony project, not from Sun's Java.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> As background, from WikiPedia:

"On November 13, 2006, Sun released much of Java as open source software under the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL). On May 8, 2007, Sun finished the process, making all of Java's core code available under free software/open-source distribution terms, aside from a small portion of code to which Sun did not hold the copyright."

If Sun willingly made the code GPL licensed, and Google isn't using anything outside the GPL code, even if some of the technologies were covered by patents I don't see Oracle having a case. Right now, this sounds very much like the SCO - Linux suit that dragged on forever and went nowhere.

<comment><USER54> Giving out software under the GPL v2 does not mean that you grant others a patent license, that isn't within the scope of the GPL v2.

<comment><USER55> That's not true. See section 7 of the GPL. In part:

For example, if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.

However, it seems Sun can relicence the software under whatever they want, and the current versions of it wouldn't be under GPL anymore. I am not a lawyer, so I don't know exactly what this implies.

<comment><USER56> So you're saying that it grants users of the GPL code an exception from the patent owned by the original developers?

In that case, wouldn't the exception only be extended to Google if their implementation of Java was not independent from Sun's implementation? Because Devrak was derived from Apache Harmony, it might not share _any_ code with Oracle Java.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> I was reviewing some of Ellison's pre-acquisition talk about Java and found this: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Dtqe1e0tXg#t=7m10s>

Interesting and relevant.

</comment><comment><USER58> As a developer, I'm getting scared off the Java platform here. I know it's the JVM that's at issue, but I hate the kind of lock in that this implies - <USER2> think they'll do serious long term harm here.

</comment><comment><USER59> It just goes to show that whatever company-de-jour promises about enforcing the patents that they are granted today, all bets are off when they fall on hard times and are acquired tomorrow.

Serious about openness? Skip the "patent and promise" dance and just release the damn thing BSD.

<comment><USER60> The BSD license would be useless here. Preventing this kind of thing is the whole point of the third revision of the GPL; to my knowledge there are no other software licenses that do this.

<comment><USER61> No, GPLv3 is useless here.

Oracle can sue for patents over any GPLv3 technology, and all GPLv3 says is that the company doing the suing can't distribute code under GPLv3.

But since they own the copyrights of Java, they can always change its license and leave the rest of the world in dust.

<comment> purple-people Uhh, no.

They would be violating the GPLv3 license under which they distributed the source. Changing the license only affects the next person acquiring the source. The people who acquired it under the GPLv3 license cannot have this retroactively revoked or relicensed. If Orcale sued those parties, they would be violating the terms of the license. In the least instance they shouldn't have been distributing the source unde GPLv3 so their claim for infringement would be moot.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Can someone remind me why Google didn't buy Sun when it was on the market? The culture seems like it would have been a relatively good fit and their use of Java related technologies (obviously now) would have made ownership of those technologies useful.

Had they bought Sun and then sold off the hardware side of the business they would have bought a lot of solid engineers and IP.

<comment><USER63> In hindsight, it might have been cheaper to buy them outright than to litigate a battle like this. Then again, they're going to have some undisclosed settlement, so we'll never really know how it ends up.

I'm guessing they didn't buy them because of the business they were in. Selling workstations + Solaris was only part of their business. I think the services part of their work was bringing in more money towards the end. As far as I'm aware, Google doesn't do much in the services realm, which probably factored big into their decision not to buy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> Oracle is sending a very clear message every programmer, young and old.

"If you use Java to make something valuable, we're gonna sue the crap out of you".

This will have long term consequences for Oracle.

<comment><USER65> "Java: Write once, run anywhere, be sued by Oracle"

<comment><USER66> "Java: Write once, run anywhere and hide from Oracle"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> Oracle may do what no other company, even MS, has managed to do: kill java. They are currently making an excellent case that it's time to move on to a new technology, not just open source but actually free to use.

</comment><comment><USER44> Google just bought Instantiations... and Google is getting to release their GUI designers for Swing, SWT, and GWT...

<http://www.infoq.com/news/2010/08/eclipse4-released>

""""" "You said..."it is expected that GWT Designer will make an appearance via the GWT Blog in the coming months"

Actually, we are in the process of Googlizing _all_ of our products; not just GWT Designer. They will all be made available again fairly soon and the announcement will be made on the GWT blog. """""

</comment><comment><USER68> Aren't Larry Ellison and Steven Jobs best friends?

<comment><USER69> A source: [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi- bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/ar...](http://www.sfgate.com/cgi- bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/01/14/MNGS649LVB1.DTL)

"Ellison's best friend … Steve Jobs … did double duty as the wedding photographer [at Ellison's wedding]."

Also Ellison was on Apple's board for a few years after the second coming of Jobs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> This sucks. Android is one the best thing happened to Java in recent times. And this actually means the Apache Harmony people wont get the TCK now. Sucks even more.

</comment><comment><USER71> I am happy about this. This demonstrate that patents and copyright in the IT field can kill the innovation. So a hard war in this field can contribute to abolish copyright.

Small developers are very vulnerable, let's see what happen when the giants eat each other.

</comment><comment><USER72> Amazing, Oracle's strategy seems to be to purchase good technology (MySQL, JAVA,...) and then strangle off and alienate users of that entire business line by being douches.

There must be some kind of business school thing I'm missing here.

</comment><comment><USER73> I'm sure there would be speed issues, but Google is really supportive of Python right? Wink wink, nudge nudge.

(I've heard about the Android Scripting Environment, but it sounds like that is not as fully supported as might be ideal).

<comment><USER74> I believe its already possible package python programs as .apk bundles right?

</comment></comment><comment><USER75> What does this mean for the almost-but-not-quite-JVM implementation in GAE?

<comment><USER16> Do you have a link that explains more? The GAE docs say they use "the Java 6 virtual machine (JVM)."

<http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/java/overview.html>

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Google should switch to C# and Mono. Besides giving them a better language and VM, it would cause the most amusing set of rants from the anti-Mono crowd. Win/win.

<comment><USER50> By better language, do you mean better than Java? The JVM supports many other great languages like Ruby, Clojure and Scala.

I'd love to see Google provide GWT support for Scala, but that's another issue :)

<comment><USER76> The JVM bytecode is shitty. It cannot support dynamic languages at the VM level (yet: <http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=292>), the support for the C# equivalent of structs has been pushed back, and that makes any kind of hardware acceleration painful. Then theres type erasure - a total hack to get generics.

I think Oracle is being beyond stupid here. If anyone has the power to come up with a language and toolchain to make Java utterly irrelevant, its Google.

<comment><USER77> History will repeat itself. Sun sued Microsoft over their implementation of Java. In response, MS drops Java and creates its own language (C#), framework (.NET), and VM (CLR) which now solidly competes with Java in the enterprise software space.

If MS was able to accomplish all of that, then imagine what Google could create if they decided to drop Java altogether ('Go' language might be the preview.) That would be a huge win for the software industry while a big (long term) loss for Oracle as Java further wans in popularity.

(Hmm....if Oracle can sue Google over the non-Java VM they created for Android couldn't they sue MS for their "JVM-like" CLR? This is another reason why their patent lawsuit is so ridiculous.)

No matter how you slice it, Google has the advantage in the long run while patent trolls like Oracle have the most to lose in the long term.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER78> "A Google spokesman said the company hasn't yet been served with the lawsuit, and is therefore unable to comment.

An Oracle spokeswoman declined to comment."

With Oracle knowing obviously knowing this could damage their largest asset, it makes me wonder if they're still in talks. Someone who knows more law than I do could probably tell us. How hard is it do withdraw a suit once filed. How expensive is it to file a lawsuit your not certain you'll follow through on?

</comment><comment><USER79> I'm sorry, but I just don't understand this decision. Is Oracle in need of cash or something? Why did they become patent trolls? I mean, they're not even in the smart phone business, and it's not like Google is going to put a DBMS into Android. How are they being threatened in any way by Google?

<comment><USER23> Oh, but they _are_ in the phone business; every phone that includes Java pays license fees to Oracle... except Android phones aren't paying.

<comment><USER32> This may be true but it would be amazingly bone headed of them. Android is the best thing to happen to Java in the last 5 years, and the perception (at least) that people using Java have less to worry about as far as patents go is one of the few things really giving it a strong advantage over .NET. This is a remarkably effective way of destroying several of Java's strengths all in one go....

<comment><USER80> You're assuming they a) care about Java, and b) care about what's good for the smartphone market. If you flip those assumptions, it's not boneheaded at all. Just very, very slimy...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER81> Oracle must be pretty sure of victory, or a positive outcome at least, otherwise why would they go after Google right away? They could have gone after HTC, as Apple did. That would have been a more likely victory, which Oracle could have used as leverage against Google.

<comment><USER82> On the other hand, why didn't they go after HTC and the other device manufacturers at the same time?

</comment></comment><comment><USER83> This bit at the end was interesting:

 _[...] any software found to be in violation of Oracle's copyrights "be impounded and destroyed."_

How does one go about rounding up all the copies of something as ephemeral and easily duplicated as software? Is this common wording in software litigation?

</comment><comment><USER84> Is Oracle faring so bad? Last I looked, a company actively suing for patent infringement meant that they have no real product, so it's their only hope of "generating" "income". It is a sure sign of imminent corporate decline.

</comment><comment><USER5> What I don't understand and can't find anywhere: what is in it for Oracle? Do they want licensing fees? Do they want to destroy Android? Do they want Google to grant them licenses to certain patents Google owns?

</comment><comment><USER85> Interesting.

Please note, I'm not an attorney or expert on Java.

The complaint is quite vague overall, perhaps deliberately. It lists the various patents, says what they are, and alleges that Google infringed upon each one. It also suggests that Sun/Oracle owns heaps of Java source code which has been used by Google, thereby breaching copyright. Oh, and since I own an Android phone I too am infringing on their patents, but fortunately they lay the blame for this at Google's feet. Whew!

Nowhere in the complaint is there any explanation of what licensing obligations were applicable or which govern the distribution of Java. Nor is it clear when Oracle alleges this infringement began in relation to each patent, or why or how they consider it to be infringed upon by Android. The complaint mentions the Dalvik VM specifically.

Looking through the licensing information on the phone itself, there's a bunch of stuff from Sun under a 1993-4 license which is very short and confers the right to use, modify and distribute the software without reservation. Most of the rest is under the Apache Harmony license, and a sprinkling of others. Well, I suppose if google were deliberately infringing, they would hardly mention the fact in their licensing statements.

So where is the problem?

 _14\. On information and belief, Google has been aware of Sun's patent portfolio, including the patents at issue, since the middle of this decade, when Google hired certain former Sun Java engineers._

A good ZDnet article suggests the engineers in question may be 'Lars Bak, Robert Griesemer, and Frank Yellin, all former Sun employees who now work for Google on Java and Web browser technologies, and all of whom appear as inventors on one or more of the patents in question.'

[http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/oracle-uses-james- gosling...](http://www.zdnet.com/blog/burnette/oracle-uses-james-gosling- patent-to-attack-google-and-android-developers/2035)

Also (possibly, IMHO) <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_Bloch>

I don't know what Oracles chances are. On the surface it looks like rather weak sauce, with some of the patents being questionable because of prior art...but like I said, that's an amateur perspective. Oracle appears to be saying the bare minimum necessary at this time. Google will likely move for a summary judgment of dismissal, denying that there is any substance to Oracle's claims, and at that point Oracle may have to make some more specific allegations.

<comment><USER86> Whenever someone says 'You infringe on my patents! Pay me! ... No, I won't tell you how you infringe,' I immediately think they're just spreading FUD.

</comment></comment><comment><USER87> Oh joy. I would like some details before I wave goodbye to java and the jvm.

</comment><comment><USER88> [http://blog.borud.no/2010/08/pull-yourself-together-larry- el...](http://blog.borud.no/2010/08/pull-yourself-together-larry-ellison.html)

my 2 cents

</comment><comment><USER89> Steve Jobs must be laughing from his evil genius lair about this. You know, two dogs fighter over a bone and stuff ...

</comment><comment><USER90> Does this have anything to do with the GPL? I mean, is Oracle trying to enforce Java's GPL license on Google?

<comment><USER23> No, because Java isn't GPLed. OpenJDK is GPLed, but this suit has nothing to do with OpenJDK.

</comment></comment><comment><USER91> I thought we were supposed to use java instead of c# to avoid getting into the this exact situation :-S

</comment><comment><USER92> The biggest issue for Oracle is that Sun's previous CEO publicly congratulated Google about Android:

[http://beust.com/weblog/2010/08/12/oracle-is-suing-google- ov...](http://beust.com/weblog/2010/08/12/oracle-is-suing-google-over-java- theres-just-one-tiny-problem/)

Good luck defending your trademark after the CEO declares it's not really interested in doing so.

<comment><USER93> Intellectual property divides into 3 fields with 3 different sets of rules. Anything you learn about how copyrights, trademarks and patents work is more likely than not to be wrong about the other two.

You're thinking trademark law. This lawsuit is under patent law. It doesn't matter what Jonathan Schwartz publicly said.

<comment><USER94> It's not as strong as with trademark law, but patent law does have some notion of estoppel--- if you know someone is using a patent of yours, and publicly congratulate them for it, and then years later turn around and sue them, your job in pulling off the U-turn is at least a bit harder. Among other things, they can argue detrimental reliance on your public acquiescence to their usage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER95> I expect this to be the first of many lawsuits from "the larry" surrounding Sun IP.

</comment><comment><USER96> As a side note, there is something cooking. In the last weeks, Oracle has been replacing Sun's copyright messages with their own all over in Java. This even effected Eclipses startup code.

<comment><USER97> This is probably because Sun no longer exists.

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> goodbye java ?

</comment><comment><USER99> That is good for Android community and not so good for Java community.

First of all, we should praise Google for making so good decisions, to re-use wast community of Java developers and Eclipse (without which they cannot program ^_^) and avoid bloated and corporative-centered JVM or Java ME, that it resulted in such ridiculous lawsuit about .jar files. ^_^

They also got a lot of buzz and the reputation of not doing evil and even being a victim of a corporate monster and patent trolls.

btw, it looks a lot like an Apples decision about dropping Flash (yet another outdated artificial tumor) just because it simply does not work. Google'd rewrote VM, while Apple invested in LLVM.

So, it is a good news.

</comment><comment><USER76> And needless to say, at least patent 6,125,447 has prior art.

</comment><comment><USER100> Google choosing Java:

<nelson> Ha-Ha! </nelson>

</comment><comment><USER101> Sun released the majority of Java under the GPL. How can you claim that someone you licensed the code to is infringing both its copyright and its patent? I'm looking forward to some more detail when Google publishes a response.

<comment><USER21> But Google's android does not use Sun's GPLed Java, it uses their own Java called "Dalvik" <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalvik_(software)>

<comment><AUTHOR> Note that Dalvik is essentially just an alternate stack-based virtual machine for bytecode that's been converted from the standard stack-based JVM bytecode. You still need a standard Java SDK to develop Android applications in order to compile the Java source code to JVM bytecode.

So far Google has been able to get the best of both worlds by leveraging the vast Java tools ecosystem but then in the final step they convert the standard JVM bytecode to run on their own Dalvik VM which means they don't have to pay license fees for the standard Java runtime. IMO this is what is really annoying Oracle. (To be fair there are also good technical reasons why they created Dalvik.)

I can understand where Oracle is coming from legally, but business-wise I think this lawsuit is bound to backfire. Google has the resources to defend themselves and move away from Java in the long term, but in the meantime Oracle has created serious uncertainty about the openness of the Java platform which will scare technically innovative players away from Java that don't have the financial and legal resources that Google does. So Oracle turns Java into the new COBOL, a technically moribund backwater that is only kept alive for legacy purposes.

<comment><USER102> I don't know why Dalvik exists.

The JVM is GPL'd, you don't have to pay license fees to use.

There are other Apache licensed JVM's (<http://harmony.apache.org/>).

If this lawsuit drives people towards the Newspeak and V8 VM that would be a good thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER103> If I didn't detest software patent suits so much, I would say this is karma for Google's recent actions regarding network neutrality and wireless broadband.</comment>


The Go 1.1 scheduler - <AUTHOR> http://morsmachine.dk/go-scheduler <comment><USER2> Interesting, looks like they've made progress on this:

[https://code.google.com/p/go/issues/detail?id=543](https://code.google.com/p/go/issues/detail?id=543)

Also, from the article:

> Go garbage collector requires that all threads are stopped when running a > collection and that memory must be in a consistent state.

People often ask about how Go differs from Erlang. That one's a fairly large difference under the hood. Erlang does GC on a per process (Erlang process, not OS process) basis.

<comment><USER3> I hadn't looked at that issue before, but have definitely been bit by it.

On our main codebase, we experienced some major issues when moving from Go 1.0 to 1.1 from this exact issue. We had a goroutine that was doing some remote calls wrapped with a timeout, and the call was consistently timing out even though the remote service was perfectly fine (it was another service on the same box).

We found the cause was another goroutine running something in an for loop that didn't do anything that would allow a pause in execution for another goroutine. So, the scheduler just obsessed on that goroutine, running none of the others until that one was done, and by then the timeout on the remote call had expired.

We fixed up that case, but also found a few others were we simply added a very small sleep call... for no other reason than allowing the scheduler to evaluate other goroutines. Meh. It made sense when we finally tracked it down, but was one of those things where we had to pause and ask "really?"... and adding a sleep call with comments "yes, I am really calling sleep".

<comment><USER4> While it would be nice if the programmer never had to worry about this situation in the first place, when confronted with something like this I use runtime.Gosched() rather than a sleep call to yield. It more directly performs what you're attempting to do and is much more clearly self-documenting for situations where you really don't need to sleep for whatever period of time but do need to yield.

<comment><USER3> I hadn't seen runtime.Gosched() before, will take another look at it. Mentioned it to a coworker and they already knew of it, so maybe it was always switched to call it instead of sleep. :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Don't read the design doc, it's too complicated. Instead read this cutpaste!"

The single "lock free" idlep looks like it's just moved the futex contention elsewhere. This will almost certainly bounce like crazy on a many-cored system. Would be interested to see benchmarks of the new design before considering it somehow better.

<comment><USER6> > The single "lock free" idlep looks like it's just moved the futex contention > elsewhere.

Possibly. The Go 1.1 scheduler is inspired by Java's fork/join scheduler, which suffered from the same problem in Java 7. In Java 8 it's been improved to no longer have a single wait-list, and external submissions of tasks (i.e. tasks that are not submitted by tasks running in the thread pool, but elsewhere) are multiplexed randomly (IIRC) among the individual thread queues.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Thanks for this. After reading the article I was able to go to the design document and keep my head above water. Go has a lot going for it, but one underrated aspect is excellent propagation of information about the language. The talks by the likes of Rob Pike and the writing here and elsewhere drives the language in popularity and productivity. We learn the language, true, but we also learn very strong computer science. No wonder people become more productive when they switch to Go! By using it and reading about it, they get better at programming! (I'll grant that this is true of learning new languages in general, but maintain it's especially true with Go...)

</comment><comment><USER8> I've said this before. Go's biggest problem will forever be a blocking GC due to the global heap they've decided to go with versus a hybrid global/goroutine local heap style like the beam erlang vm has.

The problem will show up when people try to fire up millions of goroutines and then wonder "why is my latency suddenly spiking in to the seconds! WTF!"

<comment><USER9> That definitely surprised me to learn that go's garbage collection required all threads stop. That can't possibly manifest as anything other than a visible and uncontrollable " _THUNK_ " in your application.

I'd love to see a pros/cons comparison between Go's all at once strategy vs Erlang's per process strategy.

<comment><USER10> The pros and cons are pretty simple.

Go's advantage is that you can share data cheaply while retaining memory safety [1]. The disadvantage is that you have stop-the-world GC and potential for data races, so you must rely on the race detector. Erlang's advantage is that you have no data races and no stop-the-world GC (and Erlang's GC is easier to implement). The disadvantage is that all messages must be copied and parallel algorithms that require data sharing are more difficult to write.

There are hybrid approaches like Singularity, JS with transferable data structures, and Rust (disclaimer: I work on Rust). These systems use some form of static or dynamic access control scheme (for example, uniqueness or immutability) to control data races and perform memory management for shared data structures, while retaining Erlang's thread-local GC.

[1] With one exception, the memory unsafe data race in maps and slices. See: [http://research.swtch.com/gorace](http://research.swtch.com/gorace)

<comment><USER6> Go has gone the Java route (I find both runtimes to be somewhat similar -- well other than the whole JIT thing -- with Java some years ahead in terms of GC and scheduling), and I suppose that Go, too, will get a concurrent GC sooner or later, but even the concurrent GC on the JVM has a few stop-the- world phases.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I really wish D could have an scheduler and goroutines like Go does. I think D has the perfect foundation for gorutines by supporting actors [0] and fibers[1], they just need to be put together by someone clever on the topic.

[0] [http://dlang.org/phobos/std_concurrency.html](http://dlang.org/phobos/std_concurrency.html) [1] [http://dlang.org/phobos/core_thread.html#.Fiber](http://dlang.org/phobos/core_thread.html#.Fiber)

</comment><comment><USER11> I don't understand much about processes and threads, but I do know a bit about queues. What is the meaning of this?

"Once a context has run a goroutine until a scheduling point, it pops a goroutine off its runqueue, sets stack and instruction pointer and begins running the goroutine."

Do they mean: "begins running the _next_ goroutine"?</comment>


Texar: A toolkit for text generation and beyond based on Tensorflow - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/asyml/texar <comment><USER2> Is the name of this product a reference to Texarkana from the book "A Canticle for Leibowitz"? [http://leibowitz.wikia.com/wiki/Texarkana](http://leibowitz.wikia.com/wiki/Texarkana)

<comment><USER3> Texarkana is, incidentally, also an actual city (actually two in different states, as the name suggests: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texarkana_metropolitan_area](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texarkana_metropolitan_area) ), not just a fictional character. :-)</comment></comment>


Guide to Python Import Statements - <AUTHOR> https://chrisyeh96.github.io/2017/08/08/definitive-guide-python-imports.html <comment><USER2> This article de-emphasises an important piece of the puzzle: the -m switch to the python command. This runs a Python file as a module rather than a script, complete with module-ish rules for imports, but with __name__=="__main__" so the script-ish code in it runs. The author says "I am unaware of a clean solution to this problem [of a Python file that could be run as a script or used as a module]", and then mentions -m as a sub-bullet point without explanation. But this _IS_ the clean solution!

Here is a quick example of how it works. Consider the following directory layout:

        topdir/
            pkg/
                __init__.py
                baz.py
                sub/
                    __init__.py
                    foo.py
                    bar.py

You would expect foo.py to start with these lines:

        import pkg.sub.bar
        import pkg.baz

As the article explains, these will not work if you just run foo.py as a script, because sys.path will start with "topdir/pkg/sub/":

        python pkg/sub/foo.py

The simple fix here is to run the python file as a module, with "topdir/" as your working directory, so sys.path starts with "topdir/":

        python -m pkg.sub.foo

After briefly mentioning python -m, the article has quite a lot of text on how to modify sys.path instead. That variable is interesting for understanding what's going on, but you should certainly not be modifying it. The exception is that if you have multiple different root directories containing packages (multiple directories like "topdir"), in which case you should indirectly modify sys.path by setting the environment variable PYTHONPATH. Code should never touch sys.path because the location of packages on your computer is a property of that computer's environment, not of the code.

<comment> loa-in-backup I guess "one way to do the thing" motto is at work here - run python as modules every time. I guess the script part should run the file it contains as a module for graceful fallback

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> You have been an answer to my prayers. I'm a beginner and I've been struggling with importing and understanding the path/environment_variables/etc. And I come across this little gem in the middle of the night while pulling my hair out telling myself I guess i'm just stupid.. now i'm merely stupid and informed.. Thank you so much.

<comment><USER4> Why would you think you're stupid? If the docs you're reading aren't giving you what you need to know, you're either using the wrong docs (in which case just try another one) or the docs have failed at their purpose and it's a bug.</comment></comment>


A Blockchain-based DNS and HTTP server - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/okTurtles/dnschain <comment><USER2> Am I the only one who finds anything bitcoin/blockchain related to come off as so incredibly complex and buzz wordy and technical that the mainstream will never adopt it?

I feel like it would be a really valuable endeavor to try and make this all much more simple to understand. Right now it just reads like gibberish to anyone other than the sufficiently technical.

<comment><USER3> The solution is to just not explain how it works, the public doesn't need to understand how it works to use it and to trust it.

If people who advocated for the web explained the entire networking stack every time they tried to get people to use it they'd miss how it helps them.

<comment><USER4> I agree with all of the above. It's difficult to see how useful this is among the deep technical explanation. The chart on the github page emphasizes features of DNSChain that the current system lacks, but perhaps a chart showing where the current system fails and where this fixes those issues would be more useful?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is a very interesting and potentially groundbreaking solution. I'm just a tad bit concerned that the tech is represented by... a turtle.

<comment> ryan-c This a layer on top of Namecoin which actually was released over three years ago, inspired by Aaron Swartz's musings[1].

1\. [http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/squarezooko](http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/squarezooko)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Remember that some "censorship" is good. When FinFisher is being used by a repressive government against protesters and journalists, or a Zeus trojan has nabbed the credentials for your bank account, it's really nice for the security folks to be able to take down the domains being used for command and control.

<comment><USER7> > Remember that some "censorship" is good.

What you're describing as "good censorship" doesn't actually require any censorship at all. All you need is a mechanism to notify users (or their client software) that a name is designated as malicious. Then the user or the user's client can decide what to do with that information, including ignoring the designation and connecting to the address anyway. That way it can't be used for censorship but it can be used to put ye olde red screen of malware alert in front of the user.

<comment><USER8> How do you determine the authenticity of such notifications without a central authority?

<comment><USER7> You obviously need someone to maintain the blacklist. That party could sign their work. If they do a poor job (false positives / false negatives), users and makers of client software can switch to some other blacklist maintainer at any time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> What are the differences between this and namecoin?

<comment> ryan-c It's middleware running on top of Namecoin's RPC interface. It does not have it's own blockchain.

<comment><USER10> More specifically, it _uses_ namecoin and the information you store in there [0] [1] and makes it accessible to non-namecoin software through DNS and HTTP.

Best use-case, to me: put your TLS certificates with DANE structures, and you can be sure they aren't spoofed by anyone when someone gets your records. No need for the heavy and centralized DNSSEC.

[0] [https://wiki.namecoin.info/index.php?title=Identity](https://wiki.namecoin.info/index.php?title=Identity) [1] [https://wiki.namecoin.info/index.php?title=Domain_Name_Speci...](https://wiki.namecoin.info/index.php?title=Domain_Name_Specification)</comment></comment></comment>