Stop Checking Email So Often (2015) - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/11/opinion/sunday/stop-checking-email-so-often.html <comment><USER2> I don't mean to hijack the focus from email specifically, but i find slack suffers from the same, if not worse, issue. Without exception, the most productive days i have had since my team adopted slack are the days when i forget to open it in the mornings, and achieve hours of uninterrupted work.

All of these conversations, be it open-office/email/slack/etc are a rehashing of something we all know: fewer distractions leads to increased productivity. The trick is to balance that with collaboration and help channels, so the product and collective productivity of a team is improved, not just an individual's.

<comment><USER3> I work remotely from the rest of my team, and only started a few months ago. Often, I have quick questions or clarifications that I can't ask about in person, and need to ask over Slack. Sometimes I don't get responses for hours (meetings, busy, etc), which blocks me on my tasks for the rest of the day. I would be immensely less productive without reasonable latency back-and-forth.

I get needing time without distractions - but when your work is used / others are dependent on it, how do you tradeoff that support?

<comment><USER4> So I think it is necessary to differentiate between "deep work" jobs (See Cal Newport's blog/books...) and "interrupt driven" jobs. Engineering design generally is a "deep work" job. Long periods of uninterrupted concentration are key to productivity.

Other jobs, like receptionist and office managers, for instance, are interrupt-driven. Receptionists add value by responding quickly and handling a continuous stream requests.

Now let's talk about engineering managers. Being an engineering manager is IMHO, an interrupt-driven job. The job of an engineering manager is to tell you where to find answers to your questions, or on a good day, actually answer the question. The friction comes when an engineering manager does not understand that the interrupt-driven nature of his/her job is not reciprocal. A good manager will handle interrupts quickly, but only very judiciously use the power to interrupt.

Another source of confusion is dev/ops. Anything operational will tend to be interrupt driven. An engineering manager that has been running a high- functioning dev/ops team that is a team of crack fire-fighters might be a very disruptive force in a design engineering team if that manager expects a constant volley of chat messages among the team.

<comment><USER5> It's perhaps more accurate to say there are 'deep work' tasks, and there are 'interrupt driven' tasks, and any job is a combination of both, in various ratios. Often you can't even tell ahead of time whether a given job is going to be mostly one or the other.

Maybe what we need is a system where instant messages are allowed, but it imposes a cost of some kind to the person initiating it, so that it won't be used frivolously. Like the proof-of-work antispam captchas, except it should take ~30 seconds and be just once per conversation (defined as ending when 5 minutes go by without message; first replies are free).

We could also add a social cost by displaying how often each user has used this feature in the past 24 hours, next to their username.

<comment><USER6> This is a great point. It's really important to recognize the nature of different tasks and to build different habits around them.

As a startup founder, by far my two biggest tasks are customer acquisition and development. The former is interrupt-driven while the latter is emphatically deep work.

Right now, I try to address this by blocking off 4 hours a day for deep work and the rest of the time is available for sales and general operations. It's working okay but the big problem is that I have an added stress of worrying what important customer messages I might be missing during my deep work time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think this is especially important for developers. Our jobs are very intellectually complex, we have to constantly maintain a mental model of the code as we trace a bug back from the place it manifests to where it originated, as well as when formulating a solution to correct the bug that won't break anything else in the program.

When you get popped out of "the zone", you don't just lose the two minutes it takes you to answer your coworker's question, you also are losing the 15-30 minutes of context that you built up about the behavior of the problem.

Donald Knuth phrased it thusly: "Email is a wonderful thing for people whose role in life is to be on top of things. But not for me; my role is to be on the bottom of things. What I do takes long hours of studying and uninterruptible concentration. I try to learn certain areas of computer science exhaustively; then I try to digest that knowledge into a form that is accessible to people who don't have time for such study."

It's bothered me in the past, now I'm thinking about doing something about it. Like disabling desktop notifications in Outlook for anything that's not flagged Important.

<comment><USER8> > I think this is especially important for developers. Our jobs are very > intellectually complex, we have to constantly maintain a mental model of the > code as we trace a bug back from the place it manifests to where it > originated, as well as when formulating a solution to correct the bug that > won't break anything else in the program.

No one has posted it yet, so here it goes:

[http://heeris.id.au/2013/this-is-why-you-shouldnt- interrupt-...](http://heeris.id.au/2013/this-is-why-you-shouldnt-interrupt-a- programmer/)

I've got it printed out and pinned to my bulletin board.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> My method to stop compulsively checking messages yet still be responsive to my clients' support emails was to institute the Pomodoro Method (25 minutes on a task, 5 minutes off, repeat for the whole work day). I close off all communication (Slack, email, Skype, etc) for the 25 on-task minutes and only check them during the 5 minute breaks. If something urgent comes up, I dedicate my next 25-minute task period to dealing with that item.

This has broken me of my involuntary email/Slack/IM checking and instead keeps me focused on the task at hand.

<comment><USER10> But shouldn't you be using that 5 minutes for relaxing instead of diving back into stress.

Maybe an extended pomodoro session with an extra 3-5 minutes for team communication?

<comment><USER9> I've been mostly fine with my method because every 4 Pomodoro I take a long 30 minute break. Also, not every 5 minute sessions results in messages I need to read and respond to, so those are essentially breaks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Seriously. In this day in age, is email really the big threat? Email feels like bliss to me, compared to the constant bombardment of information via different instant messaging channels. Riot, Signal, Telegram, Wire and WhatsApp ― yes, they're all installed on my phone and they are constantly polling for my attention by blinking that notification led on my Android phone. Yuk.

<comment><USER12> Seriously, remove those apps. For the few apps I keep on my iPhone, THEY ALL have notifications DISABLED. No longer pestered by them, taunting me to log in again and look.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I've read this before and I'm sure it was posted here. If I don't check my email 5-10 times daily I have 100+ message every few hours. I work in a company of 90,000 people and I'm a lead devops engineer supporting around 70 developers.

Checking my email hourly during business hours and once after 5pm keeps my inbox tidy and my stress level much lower. Last time I missed two days of work I came back to 800 messages and it tooks weeks to catch up. The stress of seeing 100s of messages is what gets to me. Constantly cleaning up my inbox is the only way to avoid that stress.

Now if I was allowed to develop infrastructure as code all day this would be very distracting. I hope for that Nirvana one day. However, since I do a lot of support and people depend on me I need to constantly react and switch gears.

<comment><USER14> You need to reduce the amount of incoming mail. How do people like you actually get any work done?

<comment><USER15> Alternatively, if someone gets that much email, it sounds like answering those emails is their primary job, and they should discharge some other responsibilities.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I find it really interesting that modern CPUs are designed for "interrupt coalescing," where they group interruptions into clusters. It'd be great if modern desktop/mobile OSes were designed for that: "Only notify me once every 5/10/30/60 minutes, but then tell me everything."

<comment><USER17> Would also fit well with the Pomodoro technique - [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomodoro_Technique](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomodoro_Technique)

<comment><USER18> I have never understood the pomodoro idea. When I'm busy writing code the _last_ thing I want to happen is to be interrupted by an alarm.

<comment><USER19> That's exactly why I've never tried it. I haven't found many situations where I can clock in at a specific time and clock out a few minutes later. 15 minutes, 25 minutes, however long that clock is set for, what if I haven't even started to grasp the problem? And then I have to reset my mind?

Again, I haven't even tried it, but my technique usually consists of "start working on a problem, stop working when you need a break". Works pretty well, and there's no timer involved.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> One of the things that's noticeably approved my life for personal emails is to simply reduce the amount you get. I objectively examine newsletters and other things as to if any value and if actionable do I ever take. I realized dozens of things I was subscribed to weren't adding value.

Removed all but a few. Now I naturally check personal email less because of less new mail coming.

Same with work emails. Those I can't unsubscribe from so I make rules to push them into a subfolder of a folder I always have minimized for 85%. Then 10% into subfolders in another expanded folder I do check. The rest hits my inbox.

As more inbox mail comes in. If it's something even semi consistent in nature. I'll add rule. Otherwise I'll view it and move on.

It's less about checking email as often. As simply having less email to read subject lines of, this indirectly causing less need to check email as frequently

</comment><comment><USER21> When my manager stops freaking out when an email goes unanswered for 10 minutes (or I get a new job), then I'll stop checking my email so often.

<comment><USER22> If you check my comment history, you'll find I say this a lot:

When I last went job hunting, I would say to the interviewers:

1\. I will check email 3 times a day. When I come in, around lunch, and before I leave. Is this a problem?

2\. Do I need to use any kind of IM on this job?

If lots of email bother you, set your standards higher.

Edit: Reading other comments, I should add: I also point out that physically interrupting me in my cube is OK. Or calling me on my office phone. If it's urgent, come to me or call me. If not, send an email. People treat IM as "urgent" but then don't act as if it is. So I "ban" IM for myself.

<comment><USER23> _> I will check email 3 times a day. When I come in, around lunch, and before I leave. Is this a problem?_

Was going to say exactly that. Works for me too. I'm amazed more people don't do it.

I use a mail client set up so I'm not aware of any incoming email until I look for it....

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Generalized to communications - my phone serves as a notification hub for me and it's on vibrate almost exclusively. Mostly, it's not even in the same room as me.

Unless for specific intent, I don't ever have communication tools fired up on laptop with exception of SMS' and phone call notifications through Continuity.

When I tell people about this, I usually get "stop being selfish" / "get off your high-horse" looks. I don't really care.

</comment><comment><USER25> Email is a social activity. It's not the greatest social activity, but it is more social than programming. I find myself drawn to it partly for this reason.

I don't know exactly what to do with that observation. But I know that the reason I check my email more than once a day is threefold: (1) to feel connected to other people, (2) to feel on top of things (the same urge that drives me to read the news), and (3) to stay out of trouble with work, in case there is some emergency on the website.

If I had a job where all I had to do was check email, and answer them from what was already in my head, that might actually be fulfilling. Or if all I had to do was work on one programming project per week, that would also be great. But email and programming don't mix well.

</comment><comment><USER26> I have no problems not checking my email. Email has become the dumping ground for emphemera. Clingy bullshit from companies you have bought stuff from, people who whine, automated emails from so many different places despite adding new filters every week.

Want my attention? A handwritten note is actually the best way nowadays. Because I only check my work email once or twice per day, and I only check my personal email every two days or so.

<comment><USER27> I use a different mail for online accounts, shopping, whatever. I'm expecting that mail to be full of spam, so I don't even check it (except for reseting passwords).

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I made a Chrome extension for Gmail which uses CSS to make your inbox hidden by default [1]. This makes it easy to search your archives or compose new messages _without seeing your inbox_.

Users of the extension report benefits that sound similar in kind and magnitude to those mentioned in the article [2]. The median user has Gmail open, but the inbox hidden, for 1.5 hours per day (mean: 4.5 hours).

I'm starting to think that "inbox hidden by default" should be the standard UI for an email client.

[1] [https://inboxwhenready.org](https://inboxwhenready.org)

[2] [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/inbox-when- ready-f...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/inbox-when-ready-for- gmai/cdedhgmbfjhobfnphaoihdfmnjidcpim/reviews?hl=en)

<comment><USER29> Google Inbox has this built-in. Just turn on the pinned toggle at the top of the screen.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> If you are checking a feed like email, or chat, you are expecting a new item. If you fail to get a new item 9/10 times you check the feed, it certainly makes sense that you may feel stressed or feel like you have less control over things. You can't control when the items come into your feed. 9/10 times, you are hyping yourself up to expect something, and then getting disappointed when it's not there. I think this kind of result is true for anything that requires _waiting_ for something out of your control. The train, the doctor's office, replies to your comment, etc.

<comment> j-c-h-e-n-g Here's the solution I follow for the problem(s) you point out: [https://www.google.com/search?q=circle+of+concern&espv=2&biw...](https://www.google.com/search?q=circle+of+concern&espv=2&biw=1018&source=lnms&tbm=isch)

<comment><USER30> Interesting, and introspective. I think I _now_ remember doing this in 2nd grade. We don't wanna forget about the things in the circle of concern, but we don't want to dwell on them unless we can actively influence them. If one is keen to dwell on something in the circle of concern, they should make an effort to move it into the circle of control.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Yes. People. This. And it applies even more to texts.

It prevents you from fully interacting with the people who are actually around you when you pull out your phone every 30 seconds to fire off a quick text reply.

There is _absolutely no reason_ to check your texts on a continuous basis, as they come in. It makes you nervous and instills a perpetual low-grade anxiety in you.

If it's an emergency, they'll call you. If it's not, then it can wait.

tl;dr check notifications in batches, at predetermined checkin points, rather than continuously throughout the day. You'll be happier for it.

<comment><USER32> I am a hyper paranoid person. If I don't check my phone, I think that someone might have messaged me. If my phone's notification light is blinking, I think of all the things it could be; the possibilities occupy 100% of my brain. I think -- what if mom just got hit by a bus? What if my doctor's calling me with test results? What if my sister's just found out she's having a baby?

These things are rarely the case. 90% of the time it's a spam e-mail or a note from a friend that doesn't need to be addressed right away. But I will still think about these things, and actively worry about them, until I read the message.

So it helps to put the phone away, somewhere where I can't see it, on silent so I can't hear it -- even still, I have to check it at frequent intervals, without a real pattern, because a random glint in the corner of my glasses will make me think "oh was that my phone? Wait, my phone's in the other room. I wonder if I have messages? Shit, what if someone's been trying to contact me?"

<comment><USER31> Yes, exactly!

The solution is simple (but not necessarily easy): turn off _ALL_ notifications and badges and vibrations, except for the actual telephone function (i.e. when people call you synchronously, a traditional phone call.) Disable all the rest entirely. No blinking, no vibrating, no numeric badges with little numbers quietly ticking up and up in the corner.

Then tell all your important friends and relatives and co-workers to just call you on the phone, a real traditional synchronous phone call, if something truly important happens.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> It might be neat to apply machine learning to something like incoming messages (whether E-mail or text or otherwise), to automatically determine the real importance of a communication based on how you classify other messages.

After awhile, it should be possible to achieve minimal interruption, based on what _you_ consider worthy of an interruption.

I know that I don't like simple solutions like marking E-mail as "important". In my experience, some people will _always_ mark their stuff as "important" and _their definition_ is not _my definition_.

<comment><USER34> Spark already does this. It classifies emails into "personal", "newsletters" and a few others — it will only notify you of personal emails.

<comment><USER35> My understanding of what makecheck is talking about is a more personalized sort of classification, though. I haven't used Spark, but it seems from what I see that this aspect of the product just classifies a few generic types of emails that everyone receives. However; I don't think Spark learns to classifies emails that only I receive. Like I always instantly delete emails from Debby in marketing about upcoming customer engagement sessions. If you could create your own category, and add new emails to that category and once you have a statistically relevant number, ML could start classifying that stuff.

On the other hand, who needs ML when you can just set up a filter to automatically delete emails from Debby with the word "Customer Engagement" in the title.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> That's a great title for a self-help book. I'll read it once I finish 'How to look out the window'. It never occurred to me that obsessive email checking could be a distraction or a negative thing, but now someone has done a study of 124 people it has made me sit up and think, but alas I can't figure out how to stop so I'll need someone to tell me.

</comment><comment><USER37> Nowadays there's not much reason to actually check the email manually because of all the mail-checking browser extensions.

This of course brings up another problem: getting the emails as they arrive can be as distracting as constant stream of notifications from messengers and team chats like Slack.

</comment><comment><USER12> I've disabled all noises, vibrations, and 99% of notifications on my phone. For the few apps I do use, all of them are disabled from pushing notifications. Only iMessage and Unibox(email) get placed into the notifications queue. I just can not be glued to this thing anymore.

</comment><comment><USER38> We don't have this problem, too busy checking Hacker News to check the email often.

</comment><comment><USER39> s/Email/HN/g for me

</comment><comment><USER40> I should add "don't check HN too often" to myself.

</comment><comment><USER41> It's funny (and sad), but people, even when they are not actively interrupted tend to check things like Hacker News a lot when they live in an environment with many interruptions.

This kind of aligns with the idea (backed to some degree by various studies) that trying to do multiple things, which you are doing in such an environment leads to people finding it hard to focus and distracting themselves.

</comment><comment><USER42> I just look at my notifications when I pick up my phone to check what new emails came in, if it's important I'll either reply to it there or if I need to reply later with something I need a PC for I'll leave the notification up so I remember later. I don't have any issue with this and it seems pretty much perfect to me. I don't get the problem.

</comment><comment><USER43> I check my email once an hour. I hate the feeling of imminent distraction, so I close the email client and open it again one hour later.

</comment><comment><USER44> Each to his own but checking email should be done strategically. There are plenty of people who are more than happy to elect to clean out low attention and no value emails inside their work inboxes even when on leave via mobile phones. It makes their 1st day/week back at work all that much less involved in email.

</comment><comment><USER45> Perhaps if we read less email we would have more time to read articles on the nytimes and be subjected to shitty ads.

</comment><comment><USER46> That's when you don't get someone sending you an email and then coming to your desk right after that saying "Hey, so, I've just sent you this email, you don't have to respond right away, but huh, it's about this client... <20 mins of rambling nonsense>"

</comment><comment><USER41> Even though it's about the design of Unix (tools) this seems to be mildly related:

[http://www.linfo.org/rule_of_silence.html](http://www.linfo.org/rule_of_silence.html)

</comment><comment><USER47> I haven't checked my email since 2008. I didn't think many people still did. My phone simply alerts me when one comes, and at work it appears on my screen.

<comment><USER23> Can I assume you don't get 150 emails a day? Or maybe you just have clever filtering that blocks the junk ;-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> For a while Xobni was elite at being able to see metrics and dashboard like stats for email communications. Not sure about the Infinity Version though...

</comment><comment><USER49> I removed access to my email-account from my iPhone. Never regretted it.

</comment><comment><USER50> NYTimes with its lengthy articles is the most ridiculous place to find tips about how-to-stop-being-distracted-by-bs... Not to mention, that NYTimes is some 10 (if not 20) years behind schedule with this particular article...

</comment><comment><USER51> But email tells me when there's a Facebook update.

</comment><comment><USER52> When I saw this in the HN feed, my first thought was "I should see if I got that email"</comment>


Unobtainium - <AUTHOR> https://literaryreview.co.uk/unobtainium <comment><USER2> See also: [http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/29/gm-import-cadillac- ct6-ch...](http://www.autoblog.com/2016/01/29/gm-import-cadillac-ct6-china/)

China has done a terrifyingly good job of capturing the production stream from raw materials to components. This makes it very attractive to move product assembly to China as well.

Developed countries backed themselves into this situation, largely by established companies failing to continuously improve their production methods and quality[1].

Disclaimer: I work for GM, any opinions are solely my own.

1\. [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/561/n...](http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio- archives/episode/561/nummi-2015)

<comment><USER3> Why was this downvoted? If there's a factual error it's better to explain it as readers like myself won't know about it otherwise. Everything started here seems to be supported by the article.

<comment><USER2> Maybe downvoted because both links were about the company I work for - so it's kinda spammy.

I originally wanted to link steel and textiles, but I don't have actual sources for that. Both steel and textiles went overseas for price considerations, but I think that if US management and labor would have focused on improving quality and cost for each of those they would still be in business in the US (and Britain, etc).

In the 1970's GM and Ford started the steps of getting out of the vertical integration business. This meant that their components could come from anywhere - competition was based on cost and quality; but mainly cost. Some perverse metrics here meant that internal suppliers drove themselves out of business because they did not improve quality.

For example: for a very long time, automotive components were produced on an Inspect and Reject scheme, where a large lot of material was built up at one site (internal or external) and then inspected at point of use. The manager at the component production site was compensated based on number of units produced, effectively driving down quality. The manager at the point of use was also compensated based on number of units produced, again driving defects into production units as bad material was used in production.

People who work mainly with code would do well to remember that physical production is _hard_. Also, incentives will _always_ have perverse outcomes over a long enough timeframe. There's no way to list all of your assumptions when you set up incentives.

Anyway, I'd love to hear stories like this from other physical products (like textiles and steel for instance).

<comment><USER4> It had a disclaimer, so should be fine.

Regarding the competitiveness of the US car industry: Vaclav Smil makes a slightly different case in "Made in the USA: The Rise and Retreat of American Manufacturing", where he points out that "For too long the machines stayed too large, too inefficient, and, on average, too unreliable." Add two oil crisis to that, quality problems and high prices and you get a perfect storm.

The NUMI story from This American Life was a great listen.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Did it seem weird to anyone else that this was slipped in?

"...Abraham's main message is that we need products that can be improved or repaired (rather than having an in-built 'death clock', like most Apple devices) and that we should recycle more assiduously what are actually valuable materials within that old computer or phone."

I thought, (anecdotally as the owner of a iPhone 5 running fine) that apple is actually ahead of the curve here. Maybe on MacBooks where battery replacement is hard? Even then my MacBook has outlasted any other laptop I've bought. Seems weird to call the battery degrading a "death clock."

Is this a common sentiment or known fact I've missed?

<comment> chestnut-tree " _apple is actually ahead of the curve here_ "

I'd argue that old-fashioned desktop PCs were (and are) ahead of the curve. No need to wastefully throw everything away, just upgrade the components you want. A reasonable level of standardisation has allowed this to happen.

Desktop PCs might not have the polished, all-in-one usability of an Apple device, but the ability to add or remove components from a PC make them very amenable to re-use. For example, I have an older hard drive (HD) that I removed from my desktop PC and put into an external HD case. It's now used as a backup and storage device.

<comment><USER6> Only a tiny percentage of desktop PCs are ever opened after being manufactured, never mind being upgraded. Retail components also have a high return rate. I would not bet that an analysis of desktop PC resource utilization and upgrades would tell you that upgrade-ability results in lower resource utilization.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> > When Gustave Eiffel built the tower that bears his name, he needed seven > thousand tons of steel.

It's famously made of wrought iron, not steel. I wonder if that mistake comes from the book or the author of the review didn't want to have to explain the difference between the two.

</comment><comment><USER8> The "Buy from our store" link opens an email and the title of the book is mentioned nowhere in the article (although the subtitle is)

So here's the authors page [http://www.davidsabraham.com/](http://www.davidsabraham.com/)

where he has a link to purchase the book.</comment>


How Jeff Bezos parents reacted to son leaving Wall Street to sell books online - <AUTHOR> https://www.businessinsider.de/amazon-ceo-jeff-bezos-parents-wall-street-2018-4?r=UK&IR=T <comment><USER2> >It didn't take long for Jeff Bezos to get his parents on board. According to Stone, the couple invested $100,000 in Amazon in 1995 — even though Jeff Bezos had warned them there was a 70% chance they'd never see that money again.

>Mike Bezos told Stone that, even though they'd seen the business plan, they didn't exactly understand it. "As corny as it sounds, we were betting on Jeff," Mike Bezos said.

That line so great. They were just betting on their son even though they didn't understand the business at the time. I wonder what percentage he gave them? Having believe in you even if its just your parents probably was a big reason he was so successful.

<comment><USER3> Jeff Bezos' cushy job was at D. E. Shaw Group and according to the book The Everything Store, he worked with D. E. Shaw directly, the man who was part of the quant trading wall street innovation. When the internet was starting, they worked together to see what kind of business opportunities might come about due to this new technological innovation, and that's where they came up with the idea for the everything store. Shaw wanted Bezos to build the everything store within the company but Bezos decided to leave and build it on his own in Washington (picked because of their small population and thus less need to collect sales tax and proximity to Silicon Valley). Bezos then proceeded to hire people from his old team at D. E. Shaw after their non-compete of 2 years passed. After their IPO, he let many of his people go to restructure. I could be totally wrong or the book might be lies, but I found that history scary.

Main point though is that Bezos was literally a genius, he was part of an experimental educational program for gifted children, and he was one of the most gifted in that program. He was also ruthless. I want to say, how could you not bet on someone like that? He was working with geniuses, had a vision, and the ability to lead them.</comment></comment>


Worms Armageddon HTML5 Clone - <AUTHOR> http://ciaranmccann.me/wormsjs/

<comment><USER2> This is cool and all, but you messed up back flip. The angle is completely wrong. Pretty good overall, but doesn't have the same feel. Would not play.</comment>


To Hire an SEO or Not to Hire an SEO Shouldn't Really Be a Question - <AUTHOR> https://ameetkhabra.com/2015/05/why-you-should-hire-an-seo/

<comment><USER2> I live in a small town and I have a few friends and neighbors who really depend on search results for their businesses. Unfortunately, since I worked as a contractor at Google for a while they think that I have some inside knowledge, which I don't (I specialize in AI and the semantic web).

Here is what I suggest to them as general advice: write great content that people might enjoy reading even if they may not immediately become your customer; don't repeat the same information on multiple web sites using different domains; use the Google web tools to find ways to fix your HTML; write a blog on your (one) domain and write as much interesting and useful material as you have time to create.

I feel fairly confident giving this advice even if it does involve more work for my friends. Long term, providing good content is key.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Mark,

I completely agree with that advice! Great content that is unique/original is what matters and will be a deciding factor!</comment></comment>


Can Data Conquer Faith? - <AUTHOR> https://email@example.com/can-data-conquer-faith-377e96751451 <comment><USER2> TIL Australia, Canada, Germany have no majority religion.

This is not true, according to the CIA Factbook that was, ironically enough, cited by the infographic:

\- Australia: 52.1% Christian. ([https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the- world-factbook/...](https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world- factbook/geos/as.html), see also [https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject...](https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~2016~Main%20Features~Religion%20Data%20Summary~70))

\- Canada: 67.2% Christian. ([https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the- world-factbook/...](https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world- factbook/geos/ca.html))

\- Germany: 57.2% Christian. ([https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the- world-factbook/...](https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world- factbook/geos/gm.html))

<comment><AUTHOR> What is a better data set or source then? Other than google...

<comment><USER2> The CIA Factbook? I'm making the observation that the creator of the infographic has made some errors when translating the data into graphics.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes maybe, here is the original source: [https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-07-17/these-are-most- religi...](https://www.pri.org/stories/2014-07-17/these-are-most-religious- places-world-and-what-theyre-practicing)

<comment><USER2> Ah, so that author is looking for "the most religious countries". Still, it doesn't make sense to highlight Mongolia (53% Buddhist), Laos (67% Buddhist) and even the Democratic Republic of the Congo (50% Roman Catholic), but not Canada, which is 67.2% Christian. Even the United Kingdom, which is also highlighted, is less religious than Canada at 59.5% Christian.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Likely not.

Faith is emotional and traditions based.

Data requires reasoning and logic, as well as allowing changes that conflict with tradition.

This struggle has been occurring in some form since at least the dawn of writing, though likely much longer.

<comment><USER4> Let's start with a question. What is your definition of the word "faith"? I ask this because there is a disconnect between which definition of faith various people use when they are discussing any subject that uses "faith".

I find it interesting that your use in the sentence "Faith is emotional and traditions based" can be applied to all sorts of groups with all sorts of agendas. These can include religious people, atheists, scientists, doctors and medical professionals, politicians, workers' unions, governments, political parties and politicians, teachers, etc., etc., etc.

As far as your next statement "Data requires reasoning and logic, as well as allowing changes that conflict with tradition', well I spent over 20 years dealing with all sorts of data, from analysis to collection to cleansing and so forth. From my perspective, I have to ask you a question as to what specific definition are you assigning to the word "data". This word has quite varying meanings and what one group may use as their definition for "data" may be at complete odds for what another group might be using as their definition.

As far as your statement is concerned, I have had to deal with many groups who do not apply reasoning and logic when it comes to "data". They have "faith" as in the blind kind that their data is correct. It is not uncommon for people to assume that the information at hand is "true" just because it is in some database somewhere or it accords with their belief system.

I am a disciple of Jesus Christ. I have looked at the evidence that is available for the historicity of Jesus Christ and what His disciples of that day said and did. The evidence suggests that He is who He says He is. This has lead to studying what other evidence exists and there is plenty. This evidence has lead to a considered trust which is one of the definitions of "faith". To that end, I have accumulated more "data" as in evidence that Jesus Christ is the Creator of the universe and that what He has said as recorded in the New Testament is consistent with reality.

What has interested me is that there are many who stand in opposition to the idea that Jesus Christ is Creator of the universe and all that goes with this and they exhibit a blind "faith" in their worldview. It appears that their "faith" is emotional and traditions based with an underlying attitude that anyone who actually investigates the matter is an idiot.</comment></comment>


How Twin Peaks Changed TV Forever - <AUTHOR> https://redux.slate.com/cover-stories/2017/05/how-twin-peaks-spawned-a-whole-tv-genre-from-lost-to-mr-robot-to-westworld-that-wants-to-be-a-riddle-for-viewers-to-solve.html <comment><USER2> Studio 360's latest episode is about Twin Peaks [http://www.wnyc.org/shows/studio/](http://www.wnyc.org/shows/studio/)

</comment><comment><USER3> There's something a little disquieting about hearing Usenet described as "a kind of proto-subreddit", but I guess I'm just getting old :(.</comment>


Taiwan's New Digital Democracy - <AUTHOR> https://www.economist.com/open-future/2019/03/12/inside-taiwans-new-digital-democracy <comment><USER2> Evidence that Chinese people really can not only govern themselves but also innovate in the development of democracy.

<comment><USER3> Just curious: why writing "Chinese people" and not "Taiwanese people" ?

<comment><USER4> I think he/she was pointing to their ethnicity, not so much about nationality.

<comment><USER3> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Taiwan#Ethnici...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Taiwan#Ethnicity) says

"The ethnic groups of Taiwan may be roughly divided among Taiwanese (84%), mainland Chinese (14%), and indigenous peoples (2%). The ROC government reports that over 95% of the population is Han Chinese, which includes Hoklo, Hakka and other groups from mainland China."

So I guess "Chinese" is a shortcut for "Han Chinese"</comment></comment></comment></comment>


I built a social media analytics tool. Check out the video on the homepage - <AUTHOR> http://www.trenspire.com

<comment><AUTHOR> I am trying to disrupt the social media analytics market, where currently the tools charge exorbitant fees to get simple social analytics.

I am also thinking of exploring some other avenues too, like providing a non- SaaS solution. Although, this may mean I need to get someone else on the ship because of all the support required. What do you guys think?</comment>


Google: We've acquired Motorola Mobility - <AUTHOR> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/05/weve-acquired-motorola-mobility.html

<comment> mkr-hn Google builds a search engine, forces the competition to start improving.

Google buys a webmail service, forces rapid improvements in the competition.

Google builds a browser, forces rapid improvements in the competition (Firefox).

Google buys a smartphone OS, competition already doing ok but probably tweaked some things.

Google starts building an inexpensive fiber network, makes incumbents sweat a little.

Google buys a smartphone manufacturer, forces competition to improve.

Next up, probably a mobile telco provider.

Google's thing seems to be improving the transfer and display of ads. Somehow they've turned that into a benefit to technology as a whole. It's a business model built on disruption.

<comment><USER3> If only there were a struggling US mobile provider looking to be sold that already had a large Android user base...

<comment><USER4> I wonder how long they could play that game before running afoul of antitrust legislation.

<comment><USER5> As long as they wanted, as long as they weren't anticompetitive.

<comment><USER6> ... and operated below the market share (70%) that attracts antitrust scrutiny.

In mobile OS, I think they can avoid being classified having 70% or anywhere near it since Android is technically open source and anyone can fork it, and several flavors such as the kindle version of Android aren't under their control.

In the carrier space, they'd be far from owning a lot of market share.

They just need to make sure that if they acquire such power that they restrain from anticompetitive practices afforded to them by their position.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I hope Motorola sets a new course towards premium iPhone territory.

I've always found raw naked Android much nicer to use than the silly re- skinning every manufacturer wastes time adding. Sense and blur are bad, but Sony's Timescape was absolutely the low-point.

<comment><USER8> Yes

One thing I learned from HW manufacturer is that they _absolutely don't get SW development_

Zero, zilch, nada, NULL

Hence, this results in wasting (a lot of) time with BS projects, lots of NIH syndrome, design by committee, etc

I've heard and seem a lot of stories, I've worked in certain companies and I vowed never to work again there.

They waste million of dollars thinking CrapCase and other "irrational" tools are ok.

And that's why Cyanogenmod releases upgrades quicker than the manufacturers.

<comment><USER9> It isn't really a fair comparison; Cyanogenmod has no legal liability for releasing flawed upgrades.

<comment><USER10> Do carriers? The contract I signed with AT&T was pretty onerous.

<comment><USER11> _Do carriers? The contract I signed with AT &T was pretty onerous._

For you. For AT&T, it says they can come into your house and take any and all children of yours whenever they want. They wrote the contract and you have no choice but to agree, so they're certainly not going to go out of their way to be nice to you. (Their logo is the frickin' Death Star, after all!)

<comment><USER10> That's my point. They've set up the contracts so they don't have much more legal liability for flawed upgrades than Cyanogenmod does.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I thought this acquisition as was just about patents. As much as I would love to see some true "Google hardware," I suspect it will be business as usual.

<comment><USER13> I still think this is the primary consideration in this acquisition. That being said, it will be interesting to see how it plays out. When I was at Google there was a lot of challenges to creating any sort of hardware (the most capable of the groups was the Enterprise group that made the appliance and they still had a hell of a time at it). It is a very different discipline than 'iterate rapidly and ship early.'

For Google's sake I hope they can successfully run this business, or recognize early enough that they can't. If it turns out that it isn't in their DNA to run a hardware biz then it is important to re-spin it out before it dies from mismanagement.

<comment><USER14> This is kind of what I was thinking. I've worked at a HW / Consumer Electronics (One of the big ones) and in many ways all of the comments around here about HW companies not really getting SW are 100% true. However, I don't think it's any less true that many of the SW folks around here have almost no understanding of how HW development works.

<comment><USER15> What do you think a SW person interested in creating hardware as well would be best served to learn? Is it just the results of the release cycles being so much longer, or is it deeper than that?

<comment><USER16> It's a _lot_ more than that. Developing and maintaining a supply chain, shipping finished product, different testing strategies, different pre-release design and prototyping strategies, regulatory approval (for anything that has a radio, among other things)... and that's just a few things off the top of my head.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Most people here focus on the handsets but Moto Mobility's business that currently turns a profit is home (set top boxes and cable branch office equipment) where Motorola is big. I heard that Google is trying to use this advantage to boost GoogleTV but cable companies said they would boycott set top boxes that are Google branded, since they see it as a great threat.

So the question is: will Google sell the Home division? If they do, this may have _huge_ ramifications for the US cable landscape.

<comment><USER18> In Kansas City, Google is laying it's gigabit fiber to the home.

Earlier this year, Google got regulatory approval to offer video over their fiber service. [1]

Google TV and their fiber service could be a pretty amazing combination. Getting to integrate the Motorola knowledge may make it better.

Or, Google could try to push Google TV onto the companies who buy the Motorola boxes (through discounting/subsidies).

[1] [http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2012/03/16/kansas...](http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2012/03/16/kansas- regulators-say-google-can-offer.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> It looks like they're putting in place some serious hitters in the Moto executive suite alongside Woodside. If it weren't for all the focus on patents, I would think these guys are serious about building hardware/consumer products.

</comment><comment><USER20> I suspect other phone manufacturers will be less eager to invest in Android as a platform. Symbian's ownership was a huge problem back in the day. We will see a repeat of the drama I am afraid.

<comment><USER21> Samsung at least seems to have far too much invested in Android now to consider dropping it (hell, they're making the best-selling android phones on the market).

This isn't a surprise for anyone, though. They have been working towards this purchase for a while, so if any of the manufacturers were likely to baulk at it, they already would have done so.

Here's hoping that google puts out some great handsets, and makes this a real game-changing move.

<comment><USER22> Samsung is however also investing in Tizen. So while I doubt they have any plans of dropping Android, I wouldn't be surprised if they have people working on plans on to handle a situation where doing so becomes expedient.

<comment><USER23> Samsung makes great phones, but they suck at software and at creating a developer community around their software.

I don't see how this is going to change.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Whats the worst thing that could happen? All the manufactures drop Android? Good, then we will get an official, not messed with, Android phone directly from Google. I see only good in this.

<comment><USER22> If that happens then Androids market share will quickly drop below that of WP7, most developers will react accordingly, WP7 will be the new Android and Android will be the new Meego. You might see that as a good thing, but I think many will disagree.

<comment><USER25> You're grossly underestimating how many "Android" fans are out there, how many blogs promoting Android, and so on. The Android ecosystem is quite large. About as large as Apple's. They wouldn't just "leave Android". If anything people will treat Google even more like a cult, as Apple users treat Apple and their products.

If the Google Glasses are successful, that sort of loyalty to Google will only increase, like it did for Apple with the iPhone, then with the iPad, and so on.

<comment><USER22> See I'm honestly not that sure that there are than many true Android fans out there. While Android phones probably outnumber iPhones among my circle of friends by a good 3:1, I don't know if many of them are really fans. Certainly not in the way people are fans of their iPhones. Most of them (including me) bought Android because you got a pretty good smart phone with a good ecosystem for a lot less than an iPhone, or because they preferred the hardware (larger screen, smaller screen, keyboard etc.), or often some combination of the two. "Android" is just an incidental detail that enables the above.

<comment><USER26> > not in the way people are fans of their iPhones

I think this whole Apple Cult thing is pretty overblown. Sure there may be a noisy minority who give that impression but I sure don't know any. I have an iPhone because I considered it the best choice but I'm hardly a raving iPhone zealot. I hate the closed ecosystem too, and resent that I have to chose between a high quality user experience (by my taste) and a more free environment.

I don't really know anyone who fits into the stereotype of an unconditional raving iPhone fan, and this amongst a social circle which is basically exclusively iPhone.

<comment><USER27> I actually got myself into some trouble when I said that a Blackberry isn't really a smartphone by today's standards at a friend's party. Someone else there was apparently pretty proud of her Blackberry, and seemed willing to defend to the death her Blackberry Curve that she got for free on contract. I had to back down from that statement for fear that I would be bludgeoned to death with an outdated business device.

This has almost nothing to do with your point, just that there are rabid fans for everything you could think of.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Please correct me if I am wrong since I am not sure if I got all facts right.

Motorola is currently holding a patent on push technology. One of our courts in Germany stopped iCloud from pushing due to patent infringements. Now that Google bought Motorola Mobility do they own they patent?

If this would be the fact I would predict that we will see more lawsuits against Apple regarding this one patent. Sounds like a great weapon - <USER2> your competitor to kill one of the interesting parts of a service they use for advertisement.

<comment><USER29> Apple is currently suing all the major Android makers, including Motorola.

Best case scenario: Googles new weapons will lead to a series of broad cross- license agreements, which will end the mobile patent wars.

<comment><USER28> I think there is just too much money you can make if you win the mobile patent wars.

Wasn't Google making more money with patent payments from Apple than they make with Android?

<comment><USER30> Huh? Microsoft is making more off of Android than WP7 (almost surely based on easy rough math)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I want my Google MotoGlasses special kit for the GoogleCar now.

</comment><comment><USER32> There aren't many more industries Google can buy into and conquer, or are there? Coming soon: Google Oil Co and Google Power. I wonder what happens once Google have run out of markets to enter? Lets face it, Motorola were a struggling company finding it hard to keep up with the likes of Apple, lets see what Google can do and only hope their efforts are better than the time they launched Google+ and tried competing with Facebook.

<comment><USER33> > Google Power

They have already made strong investments in developing geo-thermal power.

<comment><USER32> Ah, touché they have too. I forgot about their foray into both geo-thermal and solar power.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Lets hope, that Google stops Motorola to produce the most crappy androids. An android phone that is for the trashcan, at the moment you buy it, because its not possible to exchange the kernel to fix long known security bugs.

And lets also hope that Google allows to update Kernels of old Motorola phones, also.

</comment><comment><USER35> I hope this means Android updates will no longer take 6-12 months to roll out to Motorola phones.

</comment><comment><USER36> I expect some interesting announcement for Google I/O.

<comment><USER37> Maybe, but not because of the acquisition and maybe not due to Motorola: it is standard practice for companies that are acquired to operate completely independently until the deal closes and gets full regulatory approval, which would be today.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I like their header design/animation...

<comment><USER39> Didn't see it until you mentioned it. Good design. Could improve on their physics being applied to the ball motions and their bounce but cool stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Looking forward to 'droids that raise the bar. Android/Sense bit rot is horrible!

</comment><comment><USER41> Google bought Motorola just because ballmer said android isn't free? <http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/03/android-isnt-free/></comment>


Show HN: Sandy – A tiny Sandbox to run untrusted code  - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/hobochild/sandy <comment><USER2> Any blacklist-based syscall filtering solution that aims to run untrusted code is bound to be doomed, as the surface of all possible syscalls and ways they can be exploited to bypass some policy is enormous.

Poignantly, the naive approach of 'let's just block read(2) to prevent file access' doesn't work - there's multiple ways to bypass simple read(2) filtering like this. The easiest that come to mind are:

      - using readv(2)
      - using sendfile(2)
      - sym/hardlinks to bypass path checks, and the inherent TOCTOU exploits of further naive checks

The same applies to any other policy you wish to implement, and for every one of those you need to consider the collection of all Linux syscalls and filter all of the relevant ones. There's around 300 syscalls in Linux as of writing.

Not to mention typical newbie mistakes that this project makes: not following forks, not checking for 32-bit syscalls, etc.

gVisor [1] does this well - instead of filtering, it reimplements the logic for handling Linux syscalls in userspace (eg., is actually responsible for handing out FDs and other handles, presenting the filesystem to the user, etc).

[1] - [https://github.com/google/gvisor](https://github.com/google/gvisor)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the input, I agree and I've added a warning to the readme taking this into account and directing readers to this discussion.

I do think there is value in ease of use with something like sandy. I'm unlikely to setup gvisor just to run some arbitrary script I found online. I assume most people today just will run scripts directly on their machine. With sandy, I was experimenting if you could get 80% of the security while still making it really easy to use. I agree that it still hasn't met that mark with regards to security but I think it's possible to improve that.

<comment><USER3> >With sandy, I was experimenting if you could get 80% of the security while still making it really easy to use

This seems dangerous. That 20% insecurity is still pretty large, but small enough it makes users complacent and gives them that false '100%' secure feeling, especially when coupled with ease of use.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't think this really is what people might call a sandbox but it can optionally block or allow syscalls happening (in my mind only one aspect of a sandbox) and it looks like it's interactive. I think this is great. OpenBSD has had great success with pledge and I have been experimenting with seccomp (via the libseccomp project) with both Node.js bindings and a cli in C for doing a very similar thing as Sandy (although not interactively, which is a nice touch).

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, "sandbox" is definitely a stretch, but I couldn't think of a similar but descriptive term. I've also found since posting there are definitely some easy to expose security wholes where the syscalls aren't traced in threads and child processes. So there is lots of room for improvement. I'll take a look at the projects you mentioned to see how they've tackled those issues. Thanks!

<comment><USER5> "Sandboxing" and "untrusted code" usually carry security connotations. I'd suggest you advertise this as instrumentation or tracing instead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm not really familiar with ptrace, but does this

      if regs.Orig_rax == 0 {

mean it only intercepts the read syscall? Seems like any security someone was hoping to provide with this could be bypassed entirely by accident (e.g. a script in a language that always uses readv).

Anyway if that _is_ what it means you should probably not describe this as "to run untrusted code".

<comment><USER5> Yes. There's a number of other ways to get around this too, one that comes to mind is mmap. Plus I'm fairly sure spawning a new thread would work as well: one because it's possible to do so without it being watched, and two because you can TOCTOU, from another thread, the registers while they're being verified.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> The coolest thing about this read is the idea of a free-beer.bounty lowkey CTF file in my home dir.

</comment><comment><USER8> SandFS does not rely on PTRACE, but uses eBPF. No TOCTTOU races. [https://lwn.net/Articles/803890/](https://lwn.net/Articles/803890/)

</comment><comment><USER9> See also bubblewrap

[https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap](https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap)</comment>


Ask HN: How to begin writing? - <AUTHOR> I'm thinking about writing essays or maybe a book. How did you get started writing? <comment><USER2> The general consensus about writing, IMO, is "just do it" and "your first draft isn't your final draft" \-- similar to software's "make it work, make it right, make it fast"

It can't hurt to follow Stephen King's advice: [http://www.businessinsider.com/stephen-king-on-how-to- write-...](http://www.businessinsider.com/stephen-king-on-how-to-write-2014-8)

My personal pet peeves re: software writing are:

1\. Render code nicely 2\. For all that is holy, don't fill your page with a ton of memes and animated gifs 3\. Oxford comma :)

</comment><comment><USER3> Writing essays or a book should be treated like a project work. That means , you first need to find out your readers expectations and then work towards meeting those expectations. So research is the first step. Then, you can create a structure of what you want to write about.

</comment><comment><USER4> Depends on what you're looking for. Advice on how to get motivated and inspired enough to put the work in, advice on how to hone your skills, or advice on sharing your work or getting it published?</comment>


Huawei Just Copied the iPhone–Down to the Last Screw - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2016/05/huawei-iphone-screws-ifixit/ <comment><USER2> Looking at my P9, those are torx screws, soo... this author didn't do his homework.

At the same time, I agree. I bought the phone from overseas and hadn't seen it before. When it arrived, I couldn't believe how much it looked like the iPhone, and that disappoints me. Not because I don't think it's a great phone, I just wish they would have thought for themselves.

Back when everybody was copying the Macbook Air, I got a Lenovo U260. It was the only ultrabook I found that had it's own unique design. 7 years on, it still works and looks great. It doesn't have the dated look of something that has been seen a million times before. It doesn't get confused with something that is out of fashion.

I'm not going to pretend that I don't care. I do. I care not only because I'm not an Apple fan, and it feels like every Apple copy helps to promote the Apple mentality and marketing. More importantly, the Apple design isn't the only way to build a phone. I don't believe there is anything 'magical' about this design. Like most Apple designs, I find it pedestrian bordering on boring. My favorite hardware design is my ZuneHD. The angles and indents feel so good. it has a tactile feel, it isn't just a block of aluminium with carved rounded edges.

I wish manufacturers would look at different materials. I quite like Lenovo's soft-touch on their laptops, bamboo is also a nice warm material (not sure about heat dissipation).

Copy, yes last screw, no.</comment>


Is changing funeral tradition morbid or tabu? - <AUTHOR>

I pose this question because funerals have always been something that would bring a dark shadow over a persons life. Although that will always be the case (shadow) should it be more about what they did while living or should we go on allowing the minister to give words of praise even though they may have never known the person who has passed.<p>Its not a question about religion, but more about life celebration and what we should do about our passing while living. Like why do we not save for our funerals (in general) I mean at some point we all have our turns right? <comment><USER2> The question I've always asked myself is: why is it that of all living things, we humans are the only ones that don't get dissolved back into the ecosystem once we die?

At least not in a natural way, some people get cremated others get put into a box. Why not get buried naked and plant a tree that will feed off of a soil enriched by the decomposition of your body? A tree representing the continuity of life where your loved ones can gather and remember you rather than a stone with engraving on it.

<comment><AUTHOR> I have never looked at human passage in that way. One point for this website in bring that to light. Other than the risk of infectious disease I do see and agree with your point @terrykohla. The problem them becomes what, a forest full of "trees of life"! And the laws that would be birthed from foresters wanting to cut trees down for profit would be yet another war or even worse, create the proverbial forest fire. Great gesture, just too many people on the planet to suffice. I'll have to wear this one on the chest and stick with cremation even though there is great merit to your idea. Thanks for your reply.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Good question! Funerals are one thing that prevents some to do away with religion entirely. We haven't found (or looked for) any good substitute yet.

Probably because the issue is so touchy (mixing death and religion, both very touchy subjects).

<comment><AUTHOR> Very true @joss82. I propose that we all think about what we want on our own epithet daily. Death is a constant (obviously) and although I do not propose drudging through life preparing for the inevitable, I do support rethinking what our ancestors have passed through to us. We live in a new age where information has occupied the speed of light, so life celebration (or preparing for death) could be revisited, however you so shall choose, that's all I'm saying.</comment></comment>


The Boundaries of Westphalia - <AUTHOR> http://www.cato.org/blog/boundaries-westphalia <comment><USER2> This seems to be an ad for "onename.com". It's amusing to see Cato behind this.

"onename.com" is close to the limit for a site which provides no information about what it does until you sign up. What it seems to do is tie your Facebook, Github, and Twitter logins together and log them on the Bitcoin blockchain. You can then send Bitcoins to others who have signed up. (But you have to give a Bitcoin address, which seems to defeat the whole point.)

There's no email address validation. I just signed up "email@example.com", where the FTC collects spam.

If someone could figure out a way so that people could create only one digital identity, that would be quite useful. Most of the trouble with spam in all its forms comes from the ability to create unlimited identities very cheaply. But this doesn't do that.

</comment><comment><USER3> Digital identities are predicated on a having free internet. The digital world may be a more free place, but servers and network infrastructure must exist in a physical, territorially-managed world. Doing away with your birth certificate in favor of an online-only identity just gives power to the owner of the lines you use to connect to the world and the enterprises responsible for maintaining your online identity service.</comment>


VC dean Alan Patricof warns against panic, urges entrepreneurs to seize the day - <AUTHOR> http://www.thedeal.com/techconfidential/vc-ratings/greycroft-partners/vc-dean-alan-patricof-warns-ag.php <comment><USER2> The only company he's currently funding that I recognized was the Huffington Post. The rest were all like "Craolp: Leverages social media across dashboards of other venture backed entrepreneurial demo- and geographically-targeted advertizing startups."

</comment><comment><USER3> This is probably a stupid question, but what does he mean by the last statement: "This is not a time for heroes!" ?</comment>


Why Wu-Tang Will Release Just One Copy Of Its Secret Album - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/zackomalleygreenburg/2014/03/26/why-wu-tang-will-release-just-one-copy-of-its-secret-album/

<comment><USER2> while interesting, i'd be much more intrigued if they shredded the cd after the tour instead. it would be a pretty poignant statement about the fleeting nature of time and our own experience (or what have you).

not quite as much money in that though.</comment>


Rewards of Up to $500,000 Offered for OpenBSD Zero-Days (and other dist.) - <AUTHOR> https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=153039317823190&w=2 <comment><USER2> dupe: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17424085](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17424085)</comment>


Unicorn: A System for Searching the Social Graph [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://www.facebook.com/download/138915572976390/UnicornVLDB-final.pdf

<comment><USER2> Can someone smart summarize what is surprising or educational in this paper?

<comment><USER3> Graph Search at Facebook scale is hard. They have to use tricks to get relevant results quickly. WeakAnd, StrongOr to limit connectedness.

If you are working on a smaller scale... it's easier.

Post: [http://maxdemarzi.com/2013/01/28/facebook-graph-search- with-...](http://maxdemarzi.com/2013/01/28/facebook-graph-search-with-cypher- and-neo4j/)

Code: [https://github.com/maxdemarzi/neo_graph_search](https://github.com/maxdemarzi/neo_graph_search)

Demo: [http://neographsearch.maxdemarzi.com/](http://neographsearch.maxdemarzi.com/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Meanwhile, somewhere in the NSA, a presentation illuminates a darkened room:

UNICORN: Identifying Potential Terrorists by Walking the Graph of Known Social Connections

<comment><USER5> It's hardly an original idea to try to identify terrorists via social networks.</comment></comment>


PhpTree, a fast library to plays with trees - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Here's the link: [https://github.com/drupol/phptree](https://github.com/drupol/phptree)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks !</comment></comment>


Why Rust ditched pure functions - <AUTHOR> https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-April/003926.html <comment><USER2> Very instructive read! Thanks for sharing.

</comment><comment><USER3> I am not yet convinced, probably because the response is too short. Can somebody explain the problems with the effect system more detailed? "Eventually people just took to making everything io, at which point it was a noise word and we decided to remove it" this is not happening in haskell, is it the domain rust is used that just doesn't have that can't tolerate much purity?

</comment><comment><USER4>
      "It shouldn't be too complex" is sadly optimistic, and your analogy is telling

What a burn.

<comment><USER5> OP here, what I had in mind was simple propagation where only functions marked impure could call impure functions. While I maintain that in the abstract, one could design a language around that feature without incurring a huge amount of complexity, Graydon was right doing it bluntly with annotations is a very blunt tool and anything more granular would have been quite complicated. I never interpreted it as a burn, rather someone who knew far more about Rust educating an experienced Haskeller with essentially no direct Rust experience on some of their design decisions.</comment></comment>


Nietzsche – The Dionysian Impulse (2009) - <AUTHOR> http://harpers.org/blog/2009/07/nietzsche-the-dionysian-impulse/ <comment><USER2> Beyond Good and Evil by Friedrich Nietzsche has been the most influential single text I've read in my life. Over the years, with each reread, it's changed the way I look at the world. Before I read this book, I took the definitions for the words good and evil as givens and for granted.

It's a book that I read, or read about, every time that I'm not convinced with my current beliefs. Out of every book Nietzsche wrote, this is the text that best sums up what I think he thought about in his spare time throughout his entire life in a physically detached but still coherent manner.

</comment><comment><USER3> The Gay Science is another great Nietzsche book. Pick up The Birth of Tragedy if you get a chance though, Nietzche's early views on history and science are also worth reading and considering.

<comment><USER4> Totally agree. Beyond Good and Evil is my favorite.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> The Gay Science (pdf): [http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Gay- Science-...](http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Gay-Science-by- Friedrich-Nietzsche.pdf)

Direct Search: [http://cse.google.com/cse?cx=partner- pub-7001470329354026:d3...](http://cse.google.com/cse?cx=partner- pub-7001470329354026:d3rb24-tcvx&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=nietzsche&sa=Search#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=nietzsche&gsc.page=1)

</comment><comment><USER6> Nietzsche should be studied alongside Plato. I can't remember the quote, but Nietzsche emphasized that the strength of a person could be judged by the strength of the enemies he choses, and Nietzsche definitely chooses Plato as his arch-nemesis.

Some people - like me - even think that Beyond Good and Evil is a direct reply to The Republic. Many amazing and sometimes disturbing lines of thought emerge if BG&E is read as if it were part of the dialogue with Socrates.

<comment><USER7> What are these disturbing lines of thought?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've always loved this and many of the other insights and distinctions introduced by Nietzsche. While "The Birth of Tragedy" is a bit of a turgid read, the works following it are much sharper.

I'd honestly recommend his entire corpus as it's pretty much a goldmine of insights given that you take the time to read and understand the aphorisms. Nietzsche's prose style is undeniably powerful and beautiful, even after translation.

<comment><USER2> I totally agree. If you want my favorite passages I hand selected to a majority of his corpus, the link below is what I put together my senior year in college.

[https://drive.google.com/open?id=1B3SGtiP- YkUMZauBdN9Dkx0caB...](https://drive.google.com/open?id=1B3SGtiP- YkUMZauBdN9Dkx0caBz40MXDirhoyl8Ag0Y)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> As Nietzsche became more and more isolated, socially and intellectually, he had less to say about the Dionysian impulse.

What he's describing is more clearly observed and understood by Jonathan Haidt in The Righteous Mind, when Haidt discusses the hive switch.</comment>


"I can sell only what I like" - <AUTHOR> http://www.sixmonthmba.com/2009/12/i-can-only-sell-what-i-like.html

<comment><USER2> This has made me rethink things a bit. Up until now I have always looked at the mantra "Make something people want" through the lens of "Build something I believe in". But I realize that my personal view of the world excludes lots of interesting options.</comment>


Cigarette Butts the Single Biggest Source of Ocean Trash - <AUTHOR> http://uk.businessinsider.com/new-study-shows-cigarettes-are-single-largest-source-of-ocean-trash-2018-9 <comment><AUTHOR> Cigarette butts are one of those odd things that are still (somewhat) socially acceptable to flick down a drain or into a road - at least that's what I've seen living in Berlin and Estonia and travelling around. It's always been quite odd to me, if you were eating a candy bar on the street you wouldn't just drop the wrapper when you were done, but if it's a cigarette as long as you extinguish it, you can drop it wherever you want

</comment><comment><USER2> I smoked for many years (over a decade ago) and I was under the impression at the time that the filters on my Camels were cotton wrapped in paper. Still litter certainly, but nothing that wouldn't biodegrade. Not that it matters now, but maybe people are just ignorant? Either way, if I was still a smoker I assume this would be one more reason vaping might be more appealing these days. Less mess and smell.</comment>


Simple life Manhattan: a 90-square-foot microstudio (video) - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZSdrtEqcHU

<comment><USER2> Cool place. I've been on vacation for a few weeks (staying in a small, extremely well laid out studio condo) and it's really made me want to downsize even more. My phone and laptop are really the only essential items for me. Everything else seems far less important in my day-to-day life.

With the iPad and AirVideo/NetFlix, I'm even tempted to get rid of my TV.

</comment><comment><USER3> That's so awesome; it reminds of when I went homeless and lived on campus with a storage unit (crazy math+cs grad student days).

</comment><comment><USER4> I could imagine living there if I lived alone, except for that bed. I'd give myself a concussion every morning.</comment>


Unhelpful Larry Page throws Uber's lawyers lots of shade during his deposition - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/alphabet-ceo-larry-page-deposition-transcript-uber-vs-waymo-lawsuit-2017-8 <comment><AUTHOR> The full transcript is worth reading: [https://www.scribd.com/document/355385613/Larry-Page- deposit...](https://www.scribd.com/document/355385613/Larry-Page-deposition- Uber-vs-Waymo)</comment>


From PlayStation to Y Combinator: The Reddit Origin Story, Part 1 - <AUTHOR> http://www.openforum.com/idea-hub/topics/innovation/article/from-playstation-to-y-combinator-the-reddit-origin-story-part-1-alexis-ohanian

<comment><USER2> This is like those stories where the story is artificially separated into different pages for more ad views, except you're forbidden from clicking.

That said, it was a good story so far, and I'm looking forward to reading the rest. I'd like to understand how you can easily go from an idea to pre-order food over the Internet to reddit.

<comment><USER3> Yeah no kidding, I want my up-vote back. . .I should have known better, a title like that is to good to be true.

Somebody please kill this.

<comment><USER4> So, you upvoted something before reading it?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Little jarring to see this link here since I'm currently a developer on the openforum codebase....

"Wait; people are actually going to use this site? People I might actually care about? Creeeepy"

</comment><comment><USER6> don't bother clicking, the first part basically ends with "a girlfriend had this great idea, we'll call it re...[more next week]"</comment>


Doodle or Die, Node Knockout winner for Most Fun, updated - dc-tech-fan http://doodle.no.de/#.TmeURrCd1CE.hackernews <comment> dc-tech-fan [request] Added brown, gray, and orange.

[request] Added undo, faster clear.

[request] If you paint outside the edge you can keep painting.

[new] Cursor changes to match paint color.

[fix] Images are now served as client-cacheable files instead of base64 encoded strings in the html loaded from MongoDB. _(HUGE speed impact.)_</comment>


George Soros: how to save the EU from the euro crisis - <AUTHOR> http://guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/09/george-soros-save-eu-from-euro-crisis-speech

<comment><USER2> Wow that was a long read, but very very interesting. To tell the truth I still don't really understand what Eurobonds are and how they work.

I also wonder if Soros is acting here more as a philanthropist or primarily as an speculator. He is famous for shorting sterling, making a £1 billion GBP and being one of the primary players in Black Wednesday, back in 1992: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Wednesday>

How much of this article is then spin and how much is it truth? Part of me feels that in the depth of the article is a mixture of the two.

As a resident of Germany with both US dollar and UK Sterling investments, I am interested to know where I should start to move my assets should a) Germany accept Eurobonds, or b) Germany leaves the Euro.

Since a) is presumably probably more likely, would the Euro immediately become stronger? Should I start moving money back into Euros already? My assumption is that should Eurobonds come in, the Euro will regain its previous strength against the dollar and sterling, hence I should be moving money into Euro. I assume that a strengthened Euro would also have a negative effect on sterling? Especially considering the relative weakness of the UK economy in the short to medium term. All of sudden the Euro isn't the punchbag of the speculator and they go after the next lame animal. In my opinion, that could well be the United Kingdom.</comment>


Ask HN: How does Proton compare to SpaceX? - <AUTHOR> http://amazonas5.imgondemand.com/ <comment><USER2> The latest Proton can get payload to orbit for a lower price per kg than an expendable Falcon 9. The price difference isn't huge, less than 10%, and it comes at the cost of using UDMH/NTO for its propellant. This propellant combination is both highly explosive and highly toxic. It's an acceptable propellant choice for ICBMs, which the Proton was developed as, but for everything else it's really unacceptable. The price of the Proton also does not include development costs, making every flight in essence subsidized by the Russian government. Once the price of the Falcon 9 drops due to reusability, it will be the cheapest launch vehicle per kg of payload.</comment>


Mitchell Feigenbaum, physicist who pioneered chaos theory, has died - <AUTHOR> https://www.rockefeller.edu/news/26289-mitchell-feigenbaum-physicist-pioneered-chaos-theory-died/ <comment><USER2> I dwell on chaos theory. I don't think its significance has been properly absorbed by the public consciousness yet. There's something simultaneously liberating and unsettling about it.

For instance I'm often conscious that it's a mathematical near certainty that if I'd done anything different in my earlier years, absolutely anything at all, then my children would not exist, and therefore I cannot bring myself to regret anything I ever did. Conversely it's unnerving to consider how unlikely my own existence is in the first place.

Also, since appreciating chaos theory, I can no longer enjoy any movie involving time travel.

<comment><USER3> Correct me if I'm wrong, but chaotic systems are unpredictable because they are complex and infinitesimally small variations in starting conditions result in hugely different outcomes. They are not, however, non-deterministic. If the universe is merely chaotic and not actually stochastic, then the existence of you and your children are not only not unlikely, it was inevitable.

<comment><USER4> Exactly right. Unless you believe quantum mechanics throws a monkey wrench into determinism. Which it certainly does in the realm of the very small.

Chaos theory and QM are completely orthogonal (by which I mean they say different things about the universe, not that they are in conflict with one another). And they both screw up the idea of a predictable universe.

<comment><USER5> Quantum mechanics demonstrating non-determinism in the realm of the very small necessarily means that the macroscopic realm is also non-deterministic. A non- zero percentage of events occur in which that one particle appearing in one place rather than an is just enough to cause the macroscopic object to take a materially different path. In fact a simple thought experiment shows that a system could be engineered to demonstrate this. Add a sensor that reads which way a particle goes in a double slit experiment and based on the direction, flip a switch that makes a train go east or west based on the sensor read out.

<comment><USER6> Adding a sensor to the double slit experiment to measure which slit the particle goes through removes the quantum effects from the experiment.

<comment><USER5> Not sure what you mean. Quantum effects don't "disappear". They are physical laws. Which slit the particle enters after the wave decoheres is precisely a non-deterministic element of quantum mechanics.

<comment><USER7> But wouldn't measuring something also alter the outcome? Ie. Observer Effect [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_\(physics\))

<comment><USER5> It doesn't alter the outcome. It causes it to decohere into a particular outcome. There is no way to force a particular outcome, hence it being non- deterministic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I remember reading about him in _Chaos: Making a New Science_ where James Gleick portrayed him as a young man. That was in the late 1980s when I was a high school student. Time flies :(

<comment><USER9> Great book, I read it a bunch of times. It made chaos theory really accessible even to a highschooler.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I was peripherally involved in chaos theory in the early 80s. I never met Mitch but I still think of him as a kid not much older than me. I had no idea he was 74. Age creeps up on one.

</comment><comment><USER10> As a kid I remember playing with the logistic map (possibly pointed at it by Dawkins?) following Robert May and Verhulst explanations of population dynamics. Feigenbaum's constant(s) seemed to point a way through the chaos (this at a time when plotting the mandelbrot set - slowly - was all the rage).

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

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

With modern computers and software this stuff should be so much easier.

<comment><USER11> Has anyone found insight into where those two constants come from after all this time? That always seemed like an important question to me.

<comment><USER12> One of Feigenbaum's best known contributions to the subject is a heuristic theory, based on renormalization group ideas borrowed from statistical mechanics, that explains the period doubling cascade and lets one calculate these constants. The first mathematically rigorous computer-assisted proof was due to Oscar Lanford. I think now there are proofs that are not computer assisted, though I'm not as familiar with these developments.

The Wikipedia article linked above links to some of this information. The following article has a slightly more technical summary together with references to many of the original papers (including Feigenbaum's):

[http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Period_doubling](http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Period_doubling)

For those of you with a bit more matheamtical background and access to technical books, I like the summary of Feigenbaum's renormalization picture in Guckenheimer & Holmes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I spent some good times exploring deterministic chaos.

Mathematica had sound outputs for the logistic map. I remember one could distinctly hear the octaves progression, then noise, then a fifth. I remember making a video overlapping the sound and the cobweb plot to "see" what I was hearing.

Instead of studying calculus, I fell for the trap of trying neverending, eardrum busting, iteratibly non-converging functions.

My study method was pretty chaotic.

</comment><comment><USER14> If you're interested in Feigenbaum's constant, check out Numberphile's video about it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETrYE4MdoLQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETrYE4MdoLQ).

<comment><USER6> I learned about that function and the resulting output back in high school, but haven't looked at it since then.

I wish he'd have given at least the beginnings of an explanation as to why you can't go over 4 for lambda though. What happens?

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> He would still be alive today if wasn't for that damn butterfly....

<comment><USER16> too soooon haha

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> The story of Feigenbaum presented in Gleik's Chaos is the reason I chose to do physics.

</comment><comment><USER18> Chaos Monkey is sad.</comment>


Systemd reinvents mount(8) with systemd-mount - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/commit/29272c04a73b00b5420ee686d73c3bc74d29d169 <comment><USER2> Anyone putting money on them still not managing to handle NFS mounts correctly?</comment>


Quake-style dropdown Mintty console using AutoHotKey - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/lonepie/mintty-quake-console

<comment><USER2> I use something like this on Linux, it's called tilda (there are also various similar implementations). It's both awesome and a curse to me. I have it bound to alt+kp_enter and I always keep an irssi/irc session running on it. Every time I need to chat with my friends on our IRC channels I just hit alt+kp_enter and it opens, it's a curse because now I'm always chatting and doing other things while I work, which detracts a lot from my productivity.

Still, really awesome! Nice to be able to share something like this with our windows friends.

<comment><USER3> I've been using guake which has the same functionality as Tilda but a few extra features (hot-key for tabs) that I can't live without.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Can recommend guake[1] for linux users, it looks decent and works like a charm. Modified the code a bit to color the active tab so it's easier to spot[2]. I think it's also included in the most recent version, i.e. if your distro has it or if you build it from source.

[1] = [https://github.com/Guake/guake/](https://github.com/Guake/guake/) [2] = [http://i.imgur.com/njoTQXe.png](http://i.imgur.com/njoTQXe.png)

</comment><comment><USER5> There are many of this kind on Linux. I use stjerm and I like it.

I use it mainly as a home to MoC (Music on Console). You can assign a hotkey with -k option. I run following at startup.

/usr/bin/stjerm -k f12 -o 60 -fg 66ff11 -sh /bin/bash

<comment><USER6> A friend of mine created tilda[1], which I always enjoyed.

[1] [https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/precise/tilda/](https://apps.ubuntu.com/cat/applications/precise/tilda/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I can also recommend guake if you're using Linux:

[https://github.com/Guake/guake/](https://github.com/Guake/guake/)

Edit: see other simultaneous comment :-)

</comment><comment><USER8> For Git Bash users, use together with this: [https://github.com/rpavlik/git- windows-mintty](https://github.com/rpavlik/git-windows-mintty)

</comment><comment><USER9> If you're on KDE, this is great:

[http://yakuake.kde.org/](http://yakuake.kde.org/)

</comment><comment><USER10> You enable this in iTerm under Preferences > Keys > Hotkey (bottom left)

</comment><comment><USER11> Thanks for mentioning TotalTerminal!

</comment><comment><USER12> screenshot?

<comment><USER13> screenshot.png: [https://github.com/lonepie/mintty-quake- console/blob/master/...](https://github.com/lonepie/mintty-quake- console/blob/master/screenshot.png)

<comment><USER12> Looks nice!</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How to identify important emails - <AUTHOR>

I have a big list of emails through a subscription form. and I would like to cross reference those emails to see if there is someone interesting there.<p>Outsourcing this could potentially lead to the leaks of said list, same goes for mechanical turk,  ideas? <comment><USER2> Search through the list with any possible terms that might indicate "something interesting"?

Advanced AI?

</comment><comment><USER3> Maybe a script that looks for interesting domains that belong to Fortune 500s, Alexa Top 500, news orgs, key players in your industry, etc.

</comment><comment><USER4> idea: a web service that does this, and over time, improves its filter algorithm based on testing. Useful reporting and analytics.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yea, that would be cool.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Get an intern :)</comment>