VPN Report – Reviews of the top VPNs - <AUTHOR> https://vpnreport.org <comment><USER2> What's the intended audience for this? As a tech-savvy person, reading his commentary on TunnelBear completely discredited his site in my eyes. He talks about things that are completely irrelevant and are incredibly silly to even remotely care about from a VPN provider.

Despite his listed criteria at the top, the star ratings and rank order seem to be based on how the provider made him _feel_ , and has nothing to do with actually how secure and privacy-protecting the provider is. (To be fair, though, without inside knowledge, it's hard to evaluate how up-and-up they are.) Based on _his own metrics_ , PIA should be listed as #1, not #8; it's the only one that hits all nine of his "Important" list.

I'm completely baffled as to why this list was constructed as it is.

On a side note:

"First, I'm upset at Private Internet Access because I had to modify this site's CSS just for their needlessly long name."

Are you kidding me? Really?

<comment><USER3> PIA has a surprisingly broad reach, financially and in some cases structurally supporting Freenode, Snoonet, Fight For the Future, EFF, Software Freedom Conservancy and many more.

Its actually unnerving how many of the same projects and groups they support, in some cases being the main benefactor.

[https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/companies-we- spo...](https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/companies-we-sponsor)

<comment><USER4> Unnerving is definitely the wrong word. If you want to be negative about it, this is just really good advertising to a tech savvy audience. I honestly just switched my VPN subscription over to PIA after reading this list...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Regardless of how you feel about _why_ PIA sponsor the organisations they do, it is surprising to see someone claiming they "perhaps put [their money] to better use" given their record of supporting foss and digital/online rights [1].

Additionally, the characterization as being extremely focused on the tech illiterate I feel isn't really the case either, they have lots of docs about how to use OpenVPN [2].

Thirdly, while there's no online free trial, at DEFCON and other events they do liberally hand out free trial cards.

The above points, as well as reading the commentary, leads me to believe that the author hasn't spent much time at all using or understanding the various product offerings, and the written review and star-score seem to clash with the high feature based score listed above. I can't speak at all for the other providers, but I don't feel like PIA at least has been well researched.

[1] [https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/companies-we- spo...](https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/companies-we-sponsor)

[2] [https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/client- support/](https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/pages/client-support/)

As full disclosure, I'm a unpaid volunteer for a non-profit PIA has contributed to. I have used in the past, but do not currently use, PIA VPN.

<comment><AUTHOR> PIA actually scores as one of the highest on the objective measures. The star count is just a subjective impression and experience with getting it set up. They connect over HTTP on startup instead of HTTPS (which is unacceptable for a privacy company). They then ping almost a hundred servers on startup (no other app does this, at least not to this extent).

<comment><USER6> Hi mobitar. Thanks for the highest score in regard to the objective measures. Regarding the subjective impression and experience, I'd like to let you know what's going on. If you feel that this changes your impression, it would be great to update accordingly!

The HTTP connection upon startup is for the region data request which is signed and verified upon receipt. It's tamper proof, but you can read it. It's something that anyone with the client can read, and the client is free to download.

Arguably, it's more secure to entrust the communication from PIA to the client software itself than to blindly entrust it to HTTPS which has provably been compromised due to bad actors in the past.

We're in #privateinternetaccess on irc.freenode.net to discuss anytime as well!

Thanks for everything mobitar and for taking the time to produce this report.

<comment><USER6> Sorry mobitar, I forgot to address the pings. This is to find the best (closest by network latency) path to you. We're really focused on providing the best possible experience, and that experience is simply providing what we do best, in the most unobtrusive way possible.

And to that extent, when it comes to your privacy and fighting for your internet civil liberties, we'll be second to none.

Cheers,

Andrew

<comment><USER7> I've seen PIA being very active and friendly, along with supporting FOSS which I love, so I say good work.

That said, a question: is there a way for a power user to control this startup ping mechanism in favor of using a single server they have selected as the best? The only reason I see to not do this would be if your IP ranges are volatile time-wise for some reason. Or perhaps I'm missing another factor?

<comment><USER8> If you're using the app, I know you can choose a server instead of "Auto". Not sure if it does the pings.

You can bypass the app. I've identified some servers that work good and are close to me and just use a separate app with the profiles/configuration I need. (You can use the built in VPN on your OS or use the OpenVPN app directly for example if you want).

There are options.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Private Internet Access

> A pretty boring company. Extremely transactional. You get in and get out. It > delivers its experience the way a utility company would. Sometimes, that may > be a good thing. But in this case, since I have choice, I'd rather give my > money to a company who would appreciate it a little more — perhaps put it to > better use.

PIA might be very "transactional" but I like them and I've never had any issues with their service. I'm surprised it didn't get a better rating. I don't need a flashy VPN, a utility is exactly what I'm looking for.

<comment><AUTHOR> They connect on port 80 (HTTP instead of HTTPS) on startup. That's unacceptable for a privacy company.

<comment><USER10> > That's unacceptable for a privacy company.

 _Why_?

The fact of a connection being established in port 80 is to do with how TCP/IP works. You aren't even claiming to understand what _protocol_ is in use on port 80, not to mention whether the data is in the clear, what it is for, etc. This isn't _analysis_ , it's... something far short of analysis that I can't think of a kind name for.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Lol this site is a joke, how much is TunnelBear paying him for the top spot? They're the only VPN provider I see consistently spending money on marketing and sponsoring YouTube videos. 'Fun to use'..what? I don't care if my VPN is 'fun', I want it to protect my privacy.

He mentions that 2 of the VPNs are 'uninspired'. Sorry, I didn't realize that tunneling traffic to protect privacy was an art project and not a technical one.

FWIW I've used PIA for 2 years now with no issues. A TON of torrenting has gone through them and they don't care in the least. In addition when their Russian servers were seized I received an email immediately letting me know their current situation and about their key changes due to the event. Plus they no longer do business in that location due to it. Pretty top notch company in my eyes even if their site does look 15 years old.

<comment><USER12> I agree. I have been using PIA for years and though it is not always blazing fast, it does the job and is very easy to use on both OSX and iOS. I found it really strange that PIA was the only one that hit all 9 of the highly desirable but was "very transactional". I felt the same way about the "fun to use" thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> To steal (and paraphrase) what is basically the perfect summary of this from @SwiftOnSecurity:

Commercial VPNs: for when you want all the security of Ukrainian coffee-house wifi from the comfort of your own home.

Taylor Swift isn't wrong about this. Use something like Algo to run your own VPN if you have to. If you must use a commercial VPN to get to Netflix or whatever, do it from inside a virtual machine that you use for nothing but that.

<comment><USER14> I heard VPNs don't work on netflix anymore.

<comment><USER15> Sort of; they are good at flagging VPN ips but you can always spin up your own to get around this.

<comment><USER16> I assume they are pretty good about blocking popular VPS host ip addresses too, though.

So not just spinning up your own, but finding a VPS host they don't yet know about.

<comment><USER17> Something that can work well on a limited scale is if you have access to ssh into company/edu servers around the world - then you can use sshuttle and your traffic looks like it coming from a company/university campus.

<comment><USER8> Have friends that went back to their homes for summer. They're logging to their universities via the school VPN to watch game of thrones and other things...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This guy has been reviewing VPN services for a while and has put together an incredibly comprehensive table as well as a selection of more detailed reviews, selected from the list at random so as to remain impartial. Recommended.

[https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn- section/](https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-section/)

For example, TunnelBear scores highly on security, but poorly on ethics.

<comment><USER19> I suspect that, for less savvy potential customers (read: the vast majority of them), "That One Privacy Site" can do more harm than good.

I wrote a bit about choosing VPNs, and about my concerns with TOPS, here: [https://davepeck.org/2017/04/16/why-its-hard-to-choose-a- vpn...](https://davepeck.org/2017/04/16/why-its-hard-to-choose-a-vpn- provider/)

PS: Since this is HN, I just want to say that if you can, you should run your own VPN. Use Algo, full stop -- it's put together by some of the best in the business. If you _do_ decide to go with a third party provider, hopefully the six criterion I suggest in my post are helpful.

<comment><USER20> So much wrong about this blog post - first, written by the creator of a VPN company, someone obviously biased, with a stake in the industry:

Many of the items you claim are not addressed by TOPG absolutely are. Questionable/sketchy product marketing & SEO, ethical business practices, etc are all covered in the detailed comparisons Ethics section. Other items you claim he SHOULD look at go against his methodology and are impossible to indepdently verify - such as technical architecture and sustainability.

The main purpose of jurisdiction is to see which countries are more likely to illegally spy on its citizens and which have a track record of being an "enemy of the internet". You claim a VPN located in the US (like the one you made and have a stake in) are subject to government agencies such as the FTC, but many if not most of these companies are regularly allowed to flout FTC rules on native advertising and bad SEO and such which is why the industry is largely in the misinformation mess that it is - and we all know about Five Eyes and why that matters - any laws claiming to protect its citizens are kind of negated by programs such as PRISM, XKeyScore, and every other one we've learned about from Snowden.

You claim you get suspicious of TOPS reliability is because the data is wrong on Cloak - "TOPS claims that Cloak's native apps leak IPv6 and DNS traffic." The detailed comparison actually shows whether the service officially tunnels or actively blocks IPv6 and runs its own first party DNS server. This is worded plainly in the header and further explained in the glossary. Lastly, if these are actually not the case for yours or any service, all he requires is a link to the official site where the data can be validated. I'm wondering if the point of the article was a lead up to the end in an attempt to turn people away from TOPS so your joke of a service (which surprise surprise, didn't score so well on the chart) isn't seen for what it is.

<comment><USER19> Whoa there, WillyTheWalrus!

Thank you for creating a new and anonymous HN account just to deliver your important message.

Alas, it is confused in many particulars. Normally I wouldn't feel the need to reply to posts such as yours, but today the oppressive heat wave seems to have lifted from Seattle _and_ I happen to have a delicious coffee beverage in hand.

So I'll bite:

> First, written by the creator of a VPN company

Guilty as charged. That I co-founded a VPN company is disclosed quite clearly, both here on HN and on my blog. Let there be no confusion. :-)

> someone obviously biased

It's hard to judge another person's biases from afar. I generally refrain from accusing others of bias when I don't know.

But I definitely understand how you might reach the wrong conclusion here. If it helps, I will reiterate that I am no longer with my old company (I sold it quite some time ago); I no longer have skin in the VPN game.

\---

Before I dive into your specific points, I want to make a meta-point that seems to have been missed both by you and by other people who responded to my post:

TOPS is, in the right hands, a valuable resource. The person who built TOPS appears to have extremely good intentions and has done an amazing amount of useful work.

The problem isn't TOPS in isolation. The problem is when TOPS gets in the hands of the typical unsavvy potential purchaser of VPN services. It is my belief that the right axes on which to judge VPN services are _fundamentally_ resistant to objective measure. In my experience, unavvy customers armed only with objective information are likely to go astray.

Okay, on to the specifics:

> Questionable/sketchy product marketing & SEO, ethical business practices, > etc are all covered in the detailed comparisons Ethics

Let's take a look at the current ethics columns. Today, they break down more- or-less into two buckets.

The first bucket has to do with affiliate marketing and effectively asks three questions of both the VPN provider and its affiliates: is SPAM avoided, is the copy ethical and is disclosure followed properly? Alas, the gradations of unethical behavior run pretty deep in the VPN affiliate world (ask me over beer sometime), and go far beyond copy and disclosure. TOPS is providing useful information here, but capturing the fullness of affiliate behavior would probably require an armada of columns.

The second bucket is for "good faith" behavior and has exactly three columns, including "contradictory logging policies" (do they say 'no logging' but it looks sketchy?), "claims 100% effectiveness" (nobody can!), and "incentivizes social media spam". These are interesting in a shallow sort of way... alas, it's hard to go particularly deep while remaining objective.

Which brings us to the crux of the matter:

> Other items you claim he SHOULD look at go against his methodology and are > impossible to independently verify

Yes and, again, this is the point of my post!

I believe that some of the _most important attributes of a VPN provider_ to consider are precisely the ones that cannot be objectively measured. In other words, trust signals are potentially _far more important_ than many of the objective columns on TOPS. Perhaps I argue this unsuccessfully, but there you have it.

At the end of my post, I suggest six trust signals to look for. These are things that, realistically, cannot be captured objectively. These are also things that I recommend to all potential VPN customers. A handful of VPN providers (including the one I co-founded and providers like TunnelBear and VyprVPN) fit the bill.

> The main purpose of jurisdiction is to see which countries are more likely > to illegally spy on its citizens and which have a track record of being an > "enemy of the internet"

Yup, the US is bad... which has little to do with whether a VPN provider based in the US is fundamentally trustworthy.

There's a bunch of muddled discussion in your paragraph that follows, so I'll just say this: if one of the "bad" countries wants to get at your VPN traffic, do you really think it matters where your VPN provider is located? If the NSA wants your data, they'll probably find a way to get it.

I will provide one specific ding against US-based VPN providers that you _didn 't_ mention: they're subject to National Security Letters. NSLs typically come with a gag order, so providers must both comply _and_ cannot say they have done so. That's quite bad; there's a lot of political momentum in the US right now to change this.

> The detailed comparison actually shows whether the service officially > tunnels or actively blocks IPv6

This column on TOPS is a bit confusing and in my opinion needs to be fixed, since it's effectively using a binary to handle tripartite state. The three possible states seem to be: IPv6 is blocked, IPv6 is supported, and IPv6 isn't blocked and actually leaks. I suppose the right thing to do is to have two separate columns.

I elided this detail in my post, I think reasonably so. But it's a good point to make for people looking at TOPS.

> runs its own first party DNS server

Which the service I co-founded does, despite TOPS's claim to the contrary. A minor data inaccuracy; given the complexity of maintaining TOPS, I don't count this against them. I say as much in my blog post.

\---

> I'm wondering if the point of the article was a lead up to the end in an > attempt to turn people away from TOPS so your joke of a service

Y'know, it really annoys me when thirsty randos show up on the Internet to cast aspersions. But I'll resist the temptation to go further and just have another nice sip of coffee instead. :-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> "The following VPNs were not reviewed due to their website experience being poorly designed. This can mean heavy use of stock photos, utter disregard for detail, difficult navigation, excessive and hard to follow text, non- defaulting to HTTPS, and overall poor usability. "

And apparently that applies to AirVPN? Lol, this guy lost all credibility, this is just another "honest and totally not payed for online review", thats why tunnelbear is righ there at the top (you see their commercials everywhere) and he even says it's his favorite VPN.

0/10

<comment><USER22> That's what it feels like to me too. No mention of Mullvad either? One of the most recommended VPN providers and highly regarded.

<comment><USER23> Mullvad, what an unexpected word to read on HN. It means mole (as in the animal) in Swedish. Pretty clever name.

They do have an image of it in their website, but the connection might not be obvious still.

<comment><USER24> It's a Swedish company.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> > PIA, Somewhat boring company.

I fail to see how being a boring company has anything to do with the service they offer. If anything, being boring is a very good thing.

<comment><USER8> No fluff. Down to business.

Sounds like a perfect provider. Prices are clearly stated on the site. You get what you pay for. They have some guides for people that might need more help setting it up.

...¿? I don't really need fun. Just want something that's boring, quick and works.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> > Extremely bland, stock-photo website. I felt uncomfortable giving them my > email address, let alone my payment info.

That's not valuable information.

> A heavily marketed product lacking inspiration which I ultimately couldn't > get to work properly.

At this point you've given up even trying. It's not a useful comparison any longer.

<comment><USER27> This comment is a nice example of how the "I'm a rational person and only features matter"-mindset actually works against its stated goal.

With any VPN provider, there are certain crucial features where you have to trust them, "no logging" being the most prominent.

Since you're unable to get to the actual truth (until it's too late), you're left with trying to get a sense of the provider's character: are they supporting open source projects in the privacy space? Do they advocate for causes you believe in (by, for example, participating in the net neutrality blackout)? Do they take pride in their work ("show source" may be helpful here)? Do they have humour?

None of these are definitive. But in my experience, it's actually pretty hard for people who aren't members of a certain community to emulate it convincingly.

<comment><USER26> I agree with your basic premise, and I definitely use some kind of fuzzy gut feel metric when doing my own evaluations. That said, if someone is claiming to do an unbiased review, we need more than gut feel.

If your goal is no logging and one of your metics is "Do they have humor"? You're in deep trouble.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> lololol. Half of these VPN vendors show up on Kenn White's VPN Hall of Shame for offering unsafe configurations:

[https://gist.github.com/kennwhite/1f3bc4d889b02b35d8aa](https://gist.github.com/kennwhite/1f3bc4d889b02b35d8aa)

For anything actually sensitive, you're better off not using a VPN than using a VPN which provides an unsafe configuration.

If you'd rather not do your own pager duty for something like Algo, here's a recommendation I put together a while ago:

[https://free-dissociation.com/blog/posts/2017/03/quick- and-d...](https://free-dissociation.com/blog/posts/2017/03/quick-and-dirty- vpn-advice/)

<comment><USER29> Regarding the blog post you shared [0]

> In general, US persons today on residential broadband are safest not using a > VPN.

> Only connect to US-based VPN servers while in the US. Even if your VPN > provider offers servers outside the US.

What? No reasons given. Smells like FUD.

[0] [https://free-dissociation.com/blog/posts/2017/03/quick- and-d...](https://free-dissociation.com/blog/posts/2017/03/quick-and-dirty- vpn-advice/)

<comment><USER30> In the two comments at the bottom, someone asked about both those points, and got detailed answers.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> As someone living in China, a VPN provider that doesn't provide direct download links to their Android client is completely useless. The only way for me to install an app from Google Play store is to flash a custom ROM and install the Google Play Store, install another VPN (?!!) to access the Play Store, and then download the app in question.

Furthermore, the fact that Apple has just pulled VPN apps from its App Store and the unfortunate fact that you can't sideload apps makes iOS an untenable OS choice.

<comment><USER32> > ... Apple has just pulled VPN apps from its App Store and > ...you can't > sideload apps makes iOS an untenable OS choice.

I'm pretty sure you can still install VPN apps (e.g. Potatso 2) from the iOS App Store, although perhaps they're not available if you're logged in with a China iTunes account. iOS allows you to install apps from multiple iTunes accounts on the same device, though, so this doesn't seem like much of a limitation.

(Not sure if they're also blocking by IP address.)

<comment><USER31> Yeah. I was referring to installing the applications from China. I was unaware of the ability to add a non-Chinese iTunes account to circumvent the issue. Thanks for correcting me!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Sad to see AirVPN excluded. While their website isn't the most elegant I've seen, it's not user hostile enough to abandon altogether, IMO.

It also seems a bit odd to rate VPNs on their specific technical merits and features, and then disqualify for their homepage UI or sign up flow. I'd venture most VPN customers would tolerate a lot of ugliness for a truly private, secure, and reliable service. I would.

<comment><USER34> Agree. I have been with AirVPN for years, after having tested many other of the highly rated VPN's. AirVPN has a functional website, works great within my Linux containers and is overall very stable. Highly recommended.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I _strongly_ recommend using That One Privacy Site's detailed VPN comparison charts. There is a lot more information in there.

[https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-comparison- chart/](https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-comparison-chart/)

Edit: Link to his charts as a Google Document [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1L72gHJ5bTq0Djljz0P-N...](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1L72gHJ5bTq0Djljz0P-NCAaURrXwsR1MsLpVmAt3bwg) for a much better usability than the widget on the website itself.

</comment><comment><USER36> > The screenshot of their app on the iOS App Store shows a bunch of credible > logos of their mentions, but then quotes "VyperVPN is the best service on > the market" as coming from a reddit comment by a random user. Questionable > tactic.

That's referring to reddit the company, and it was quoting one of reddit's sysadmins: [https://www.goldenfrog.com/blog/reddit-gives-every- employee-...](https://www.goldenfrog.com/blog/reddit-gives-every-employee- vyprvpn-business-account-secure-private-online-communication)

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah good catch, will update that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Pretty surprised F-Secure Freedome wasn't mentioned - they're a major player and well-respected.

<comment><USER38> Same thing here. From a respectable company / country, and has been working wonderfully for me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Interesting this showed up on HN the same day as the exposé on Facebook's Onavo VPN logging its users activity.[1] I'm guessing Onavo should be put on that list and given zero stars.

[1] [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14972125](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14972125)

</comment><comment><USER40> PIA has a kill switch on its client. That makes it for me. Lose the VPN connection and you lose the internet connection.

</comment><comment><USER41> "The only thing harder than finding a VPN provider is finding an honest VPN review website."

100% true since the "best VPN" likely has the highest affiliate commission.

In fact, websites that claim honesty and transparency like BestVPN and VPNMentor actually display pop-up alerts advertising their highest rated VPN.

"I built this website because I wanted to finally get to the bottom of the question: which VPN providers are trying to build an honest long-term brand while also delivering an exceptional product experience?"

This is a fair metric. Unfortunately useless for most VPN users but this is another question. And to give him credit: He does not use affiliate links.

I suspect that he knows little about VPNs and why many users have to use them. By the way, I suspect most of these VPNs to fail in China!

Astrill.com is good for China.

vcp.ovpn.to has a good reputation regarding privacy.

</comment><comment><USER42> I'm disappointed that Mo flat out disregards options "due to their website experience being poorly designed." A slick website means that money was spent on the website.

I've been using EarthVPN[1], one of his unreviewed options, for several years, and am very happy. It's cheap and cheerful, but yes, the website isn't great. The company is registered in Cyprus, and at USD40/year with three concurrent connections (from the same IP) and servers in many, many countries, it's a great way to bypass geoblocked websites.

[1] [https://www.earthvpn.com/billing/aff.php?aff=1378](https://www.earthvpn.com/billing/aff.php?aff=1378)

<comment><USER43> Does it currently work with Netflix?

<comment><USER42> I haven't tried. I use one of their UK servers for iPlayer, with dnsmasq and policy routing so that Netflix NZ still works. I should try putting the Roku's default route through the US.

That's the advantage of several connections from the same IP :-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Why is private Internet access so low? It ticks almost all boxes, has a native client for windows/Linux/Mac/android/iOS and I have used it on a 300Mbps connection with no degradation of speed. Yet here it gets 2/5 stars? Why??

</comment><comment><USER45> Are you really prioritizing "fun" over an objectively better (by your own metrics) service (picking TunnelBear rather than OVPN)?

\---

You also seem to be prioritizing aesthetic appeal over function. Is there a reason for that?

> TunnelBear has somehow figured out how to make VPNs fun.

> Extremely transactional. You get in and get out.

> Heavy use of stock photos, fake customer service agent profiles, and > sensational marketing copy.

> Extremely bland, stock-photo website. I felt uncomfortable giving them my > email address, let alone my payment info.

> But I sort of like it when companies show more humility.

> First, I'm upset at Private Internet Access because I had to modify this > site's CSS just for their needlessly long name.

</comment><comment><USER46> Obviously not ideal for non-technical users, but I found it really easy to spin up a VPN on Digital Ocean.

I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to make it almost a turnkey operation, just run the script and you're good to go, and then it would be a viable option for non-technical people.

Of course, not ideal for anonymity, but a perfectly fine solution for if you want the security benefits of a VPN, or to get around geoblocking (I originally spun up my VPN to watch something that was geoblocked, now I keep it for when using open wifi connections).

<comment><USER47> Where do I learn about how to do this?

<comment><USER48> [https://github.com/trailofbits/algo](https://github.com/trailofbits/algo)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> Too be honest despite your reassurance I still expected that there would be affiliate links, purchase cookies or other tracking somewhere (I checked, all good). Thanks for sharing your reviews!

<comment><USER50> god forbid they make money for their time (and money) spent!

<comment><USER49> I don't mind affiliate links. I mind when ratings, scores, ordering of results are influenced by payment from the reviewed companies. Or companies get excluded because they don't offer affiliate programs.

Example [http://www.top10bestvpn.com/](http://www.top10bestvpn.com/) "Please be advised that the operator of this site ACCEPTS advertising COMPENSATION from certain companies that appear on the site, and such compensation IMPACTS THE LOCATION AND ORDER in which the companies (and/or their products) are presented, and in some cases may also IMPACT THE SCORING that is assigned to them." (emphasis mine)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> I'm still looking for a reliable provider that would support openconnect and / or wireguard. Alas, here in China OpenVPN-based VPNs are getting more and more flaky, with talks of shutting down completely soon (not talking about the fake Bloomberg article). IPSec and Socks5 never really worked. Streisand only really works on AWS and having an AWS public IP means no Google most of the time (they block whole IP ranges), annoying Cloudflare captchas and other quirks.

<comment><USER52> I once tried to set up OpenConnect on one of my servers as I heard it provided good results in China. Not only was the setup process relatively annoying, it was also relatively quickly throttled by the GFW. Shadowsocks / Lantern / ExpressVPN combo remains the best working option for me ATM.

<comment><USER51> Interesting. I had decent results with openconnect over daily rebuilding t2.nano instances in ap-* regions. Didn't try wireguard yet since I have a Mac, but UBNT ER-X is on the way and it has wireguard support.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> I've been considering setting up a slightly different VPN service — one that provides each user their own dedicated VPN server (based on my IKEv2 config script, [https://github.com/jawj/IKEv2-setup](https://github.com/jawj/IKEv2-setup)).

100% vapourware web presence here: [http://digitalsnorkel.net/](http://digitalsnorkel.net/)

Feedback?

<comment><USER10> Who is your target market?

I have used both personal VPS hosted and commercial VPN systems at various times (I currently use a commercial VPN to anonymize some traffic sometimes and bypass national-level censorship).

In my understanding of the various pros and cons of those two options, I'm not sure I grasp the core value proposition that this offers. Why do I want: A) A server with fewer (one) unique user(s), and therefore traffic that is much easier to analyse; B) A service with a single static IP and geolocation; but which C) I am trusting a third party to administer.

I seem to be seeing a service which offers me the biggest drawbacks of both sides. Am I missing something?

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> This site seems to me an imitation of sitebuilderreport which was featured on indiehackers recently [1]. The design and copywriting are similar. OP, was your site inspired by sitebuilderreport or are you connected with that site?

[1] [https://www.indiehackers.com/businesses/site-builder- report](https://www.indiehackers.com/businesses/site-builder-report)

</comment><comment><USER55> I'm (British) getting the impression that VPNs are becoming rather important to Americans (int al). Please bear in mind that us foreigners don't always get the memo about the current flavour of the day in all countries. I'm well aware that citizens of CN and many others really need privacy but it seems that there is a reasonably recent strange US fetish with VPNs.

Could someone please explain?

<comment><USER56> US Congress passed a law earlier this year that dismantled FCC internet privacy protections which prevented peoples' internet service providers from fully capitalizing on peoples' internet history. VPN use is a way to encrypt your internet traffic, use not-your-ISP's-DNS, and protecting private information from being siphoned and ultimately sold.

Hope this helps explain the fetish!

Disclosure: I am a PIA employee.

<comment><USER57> [https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/isps-and-fcc- cha...](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/03/isps-and-fcc-chair-ajit- pai-celebrate-death-of-online-privacy-rules/) I presume

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> From the one line summaries, OP seems to prefer native apps vs. open protocols (e.g. OpenVPN/L2TP/etc.), why is that?

I looked at the Chrome extension of TunnelBear and it requires some ridiculous permissions [1], much more than just "change your proxy settings". This doesn't seem right.

[1] [http://imgur.com/3PuH0tE](http://imgur.com/3PuH0tE)

</comment><comment><USER59> TunnelBear claims to be secure but all they offer is an opaque app. Uhh, no thanks. I prefer to run my own VPN client that doesn't have potential spyware in it. I am surprised this was so highly rated by someone reviewing VPNs.

edit: I know you can't make everyone happy, but there are a LOT of VPN options out there and only the very best should be making it through.

<comment><USER60> [https://www.tunnelbear.com/blog/tunnelbear_public_security_a...](https://www.tunnelbear.com/blog/tunnelbear_public_security_audit/)

They just got audited

<comment><USER59> That is nice of them to release a sanitized version of the audit report. I would still prefer openvpn or some other open source client that has been more battle tested for something I intend to use as a privacy tool. I don't think it changes my basic position on a closed source client. Audits are always point in time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> How do you _not_ get IP vanish to work? it's literally just a windows installer & reboot. You can manually add a server on Android too using their guides (they have step-by-step pictures!). O.m.g. I chose IPVanish over NordVPN because the later required me to upload a photo of my passport (to a third party) when paying! Who does that?!

</comment><comment><USER62> "Facebook uses an internal database to track rivals, including young startups performing unusually well, people familiar with the system say. The database stems from Facebook's 2013 acquisition of a Tel Aviv-based startup, Onavo, which had built an app that secures users' privacy by routing their traffic through private servers. The app gives Facebook an unusually detailed look at what users collectively do on their phones, these people say.

The tool shaped Facebook's decision to buy WhatsApp and informed its live- video strategy, they say. Facebook used Onavo to build its early-bird tool that tips it off to promising services and that helped Facebook home in on Houseparty."

via [https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-new-copycats-how- facebook-s...](https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-new-copycats-how-facebook- squashes-competition-from-startups-1502293444)

</comment><comment><USER63> Founder of OVPN.com here. I'm happy to answer any questions regarding our infrastructure, policies or tech stack.

<comment><USER64> Hi, impressed by the specs of your service. You seem to top both this list and this one ([https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-comparison- chart/](https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-comparison-chart/)). And I don't care if I have to pay a little bit more for such high standards.

But are you planning to add more servers in other countries (than the 5 you already offer)?

<comment><USER63> We are launching three servers in a new country next week, Norway. After that it will take a couple of months before we're ready to expand further. It's time consuming to do research regarding datacenters, find ISPs with satisfactory peering and to ensure that our physical security requirements are met.

Even though it will take some time for the next location to be added, feel free to email us with your suggestion.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> I'll just leave it here: [https://torrentfreak.com/vpn-services-anonymous- review-2017-...](https://torrentfreak.com/vpn-services-anonymous- review-2017-170304/)

The scene guys know their stuff.

</comment><comment><USER66> I use KeepSolid. I've been really impressed. I think his review has done them a disservice. They have a really helpful app on all platforms and their staff are friendly, too.

Disclaimer: none. I have no affiliation other than I am a customer.

<comment><USER67> They have been fast, and honest with all 2 of the issues I have had with them over the last almost 3 years. I would strongly recommend them to anyone. If there was a real issue with the service he should have talked about that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> "Honest" is such peacock language. Unsettling seeing it like this.

</comment><comment><USER69> What this review really lacks is the additional features VPN's can provide, such as malware and fishing protection, location diversity, scale, jurisdiction, protocols supported, etc etc.

I am a happy user of NordVPN with all of the above points adressed by them really well. BTW the latest feature, CyberSEC also blocks ads which is a major plus for me, making the VPN that much faster.

[1] [https://nordvpn.com/blog/security-feature- cybersec/](https://nordvpn.com/blog/security-feature-cybersec/)

<comment><USER70> Yeah NordVPN is the best of the bunch. Got my vote as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> I'm looking for a great vpn. After looking at [https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-comparison- chart/](https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-comparison-chart/) I found Hide.me interesting except for the price but on their website they have guides to explain how to manually set up the vpn. I never see Hide.me mentioned. Is there someone using it or thinks it a good choice for privacy on Android, win10 or mac

</comment><comment><USER72> Both iOS and macOS (I don't know about windows, I havent used it recently) have built-in VPN clients so what would be the advantage to using a client from the VPN provider?

<comment><USER73> The built-in VPN clients support old broken insecure protocols (PPTP) and expensive, hard to implement and hard to deploy protocols (IPSEC-LLTP), whereas public vpn providers tend to use simple, secure, easy(er) OpenVPN for the bulk of their connections. So you need a addon client to use them for their best features.

<comment><USER72> Thanks. I've only ever used VPNs to access corporate networks. I'm not going to pretend to be knowledgeable in this area.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> I kind of expected network based tests as reviews.

E.g. throughput, latency, connection setup, encryption strengths, fixed ip address etc etc. This is just a feature compare, where one trusts the vpn provider on their blue eyes, e.g. "No logging or tracking"

I cannot imagine a sane service provider that doesn't have some kind of logging, not of your (in vpn case,) browsing activity itself, but when you connected, what accounts are getting brute forced, etc etc. This is logging too.

</comment><comment><USER75> Could use a breakdown of which criteria each provider supported, because just a colored circle doesn't show which of those criteria are supported or not.

<comment><AUTHOR> You can hover over the circles to see the breakdown. I need to add click support for mobile though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER76> Thanks for this! It's pretty cool and it's nice to have something to pass on to friends who are interested in subscribing to a VPN service.

</comment><comment><USER77> I'm not impressed with this review. The author doesn't even mention the need to prevent leaks with firewall rules.

Edit: As others note, he doesn't include AirVPN, which is one of the best activist-focused services around. And his comments about IVPN are bizarre. It is expensive. But it has no affiliate program, and its apps are among the best. In particular, for being leak free.

</comment><comment> blubb-fish Any opinions on ProtonVPN? I use it now more or less everywhere. No problems with it - it's fast enough (though definitely slows down my connection from about 12 to 16Mb/s to about 5 to 10 Mb/s.

I chose it b/c the organization behind it seems trustworthy. I don't know what the author has in mind when he labels the billing practice "shady".

</comment><comment><USER78> Try [http://www.vpngate.net/en/](http://www.vpngate.net/en/)

</comment><comment><USER79> Horrible article. If he tried the services he didn't like the websites for (fucking childish excuse btw), he would realise that airvpn offers all the services he was treating as a pro. This is a dissapointing read, and even more disgusting it made its way up to the top of this great website.

</comment><comment><USER80> All this article is missing is the referral links - then I don't see any difference with other websites, which the author wants to distinguish from. Actually, there are some good websites around - it just takes a lot of patience to search...

</comment><comment><USER41> Questions, any advise/help appreciated:

1\. oVPN.to Does it work in China? (Support not helpful but I still like them)

2\. Does Softether [https://www.softether.org/](https://www.softether.org/) work in China?

</comment><comment><USER81> Has the world forgotten about iPredator? The VPN service spawning from the legal issues with The Pirate Bay. One would assume that a VPN "by crime riders, for crime riders" would fulfil all the requirements and many more.

</comment><comment><USER82> A Nice-to-have would be static IP address so that you can run a private home server. Pity that the site don't include this since only a few vpn providers have an option for that.

</comment><comment><USER47> If I just don't like the feeling of being logged on some ISP , is paying for a VPN something for me? Any free options for privacy ? Or is it more for torrents and stuff?

<comment><USER83> If you don't like being logged, then having a logless VPN like ExpressVPN, Tunnelbear, etc should be fine. For torrents, some VPNs like Tunnelbear preferred to disable the BitTorrent port completely

So, it's just a matter of finding a VPN that matches your preferences, but I'd avoid using a free VPN.

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> I think that [https://thatoneprivacysite.net/](https://thatoneprivacysite.net/) has a much better VPN comparison.

</comment><comment><USER85> Is the TunnelBear "Vigilant" feature like a kill switch? So if the VPN drops out, it doesn't revert to downloading via non-VPN?

<comment><USER60> Yeah, vigilant is the equivalent of a kill switch. So not connected to VPN = no internet

</comment></comment><comment><USER86> Can you try [https://cypherpunk.com/](https://cypherpunk.com/) and add it to the list?

</comment><comment><USER87> We don't know if IPSec or L2TP is compromised...could be either or both. So why is using Ikev2 with IPSec secure??

</comment><comment><USER88> This seems like a good thread to ask this.

I'm about to move to China. What vpn set up is best?

I use and android phone and Mac laptop.

Thanks..

<comment><USER10> You'll find this extensively discussed in a number of other HN threads: [https://hn.algolia.com/?query=china%20vpn&sort=byPopularity&...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=china%20vpn&sort=byPopularity&prefix=false&page=0&dateRange=pastYear&type=story)

Hope that helps!

<comment><USER88> Thanks, it didn't occur to me that I could search the archives.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER89> What's up with all these VPN review websites? Are the affilite fees that good?

</comment><comment><USER90> He didn't review OpenVPN, or even mention it.

<comment><USER10> Because OpenVPN is a VPN technology (and client) that can be used for secure connections, rather than a subscription VPN service.

Unless you mean Private Tunnel VPN, their VPN subscription product? It's one of many, many products not reviewed here.

<comment><USER90> Thanks, that distinction is helpful :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER91> You know the VPN providers paid for the ranking.

</comment><comment><USER92> I hate to sound like I'm advertising, but I've found blackvpn quite good. It's based in Hong Kong.

<comment><USER93> I frankly wouldn't want any of my traffic going anywhere that close to China regardless of how well they implement their stuff.

</comment></comment><comment><USER94> If they don't test cryptostorm this review is pretty worthless. They are one of the best options out there.

</comment><comment><USER95> shill detected how does this tripe get so high on HN? is this reddit?

</comment><comment><USER96> I use PIA, and it's great. I don't know why they listed it as low stars.

</comment><comment><USER97> > _The speeds were good and the apps work but are kind of boring_

... isn't the point of a VPN do just do its job and stay out of sight? Why is 'boring' even remotely relevant to the VPN equation?

</comment><comment><USER98> >'It's just so much fun to use'

Given that one of the criteria the VPNs were measured on was 'fun' makes me inclined to dismiss the whole thing.

VPNs are to stop the secret police from coming and killing your family and taking you away, 'fun' is coding, not playing with your life.

</comment><comment><USER99> Reading his reviews I felt the author was looking for that warm feeling a toddler feels when being coddled by his mother. Take a look at his comments on PIA, "Extremely transactional. You get in and get out. It delivers its experience the way a utility company would. Sometimes, that may be a good thing. But in this case, I'd rather give my money to a company who might put it to better use."

What? Extremely transactional? You're in and out? When using my VPN I want to click 'connect' to connect, choose US if I want my connection for the US, and 'disconnect' to disconnect... No fancy website or pretty colors needed.

</comment><comment> MachinShinn- Surprised few people picked up on this... this site is 100% Bullshit. The "ratings" are purely driven by which server is offering the author a commission per sign up.

How do I know this? I do the same thing with my sites.

</comment><comment><USER99> How did this make the front page? People voting this story up must not have read his actual analysis. Pathetic.

</comment><comment><USER99> He doesn't like PIA, a company that sponsors dozens of security companies/projects/etc because he would rather the company he chooses put their money to better use.... Like make bear graphics so his VPN is 'fun' to use.

Again - how did this make the front page... Embarrassing for HN.

</comment><comment><USER100> I think you're better off with this for a proper technical feature-set... [https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn- section/](https://thatoneprivacysite.net/vpn-section/)</comment>


"The Precession of Simulacra" by Jean Baudrillard Translated into American - <AUTHOR> http://www.continentcontinent.cc/index.php/continent/article/viewArticle/91 <comment><AUTHOR> Sorry I had to edit the title since the original one didn't fit. The original title is:

        "The Precession of Simulacra" by Jean Baudrillard, Translated from English into American

</comment><comment><USER2> Too much scatological language. Fail.

Somehow the best route to French theory comes through Japan. In the U.S. French theory has been appropriated by an academic establishment that benefits from obfuscation.

<comment><AUTHOR> It is a joke...

<comment><USER2> It's not a funny joke.</comment></comment></comment>


Limits of populist technologies: Iranian crackdown - <AUTHOR>

As the recent Iranian elections and the crackdown that follows is showing, autocractic governments seem to have the upper hand in simply blocking sites like Facebook and bringing down text messaging during times when they could be of most use in organizing the opposition. Are we seeing the real limits of democratizing technologies vs oppressive regimes or are these limits just waiting to be hacked? <comment><AUTHOR> A good counterpoint: [http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06...](http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/06/the- revolution-will-be-twittered-1.html)</comment>


Ask HN: What do you use to order airline tickets online? - <AUTHOR>

I'm using Kayak, any better ones out there? <comment><USER3> I just use the airline's website after shopping around.

<comment><USER4> That's what most people we talk to seem to do. Adioso is designed with this assumption.

<comment><USER5> Quick bits of feedback.. We were looking at doing a quick trip to auckland soon.. my Melbourne to Auckland trip pulled up some great results. It was a bit confusing looking at the prices. You show the fare with taxes - <USER2> redirect to Virgin who show the fare without - before the booking screen for virgin that shows the taxes again. Out of your hands I know - but maybe a note saying $154 (including all taxes)

 _\-- Emirates flights MEL-AKL can be awesomely cheap and would love to see you expand and include those. (Also - on Emirates -- their grid view of departure/return dates and prices is an awesome way to look at trips... (Although I did like the dropdown)

_ \-- I'm a Gold Qantas FF -- so I've got some level of incentive to travel on qantas (have to for work - would choose to if the price is almost a wash personally).. I'd like to be able to search "Melbourne to Sydney on Qantas" and just pull back the QF flights... (means I can price shop on your site easier)[1]

 _\-- Your font looks a little too big? Maybe that's just me. Looks like it would be huge in a low res though..

_ \--Looks pretty nice though.. I guess the challenge is that webjet kinda owns this space in my mind - I will try and remember you next time I'm booking a flight though..

[1] Okay - I just noticed the edit tab on the side.. so I can pull these results up after the fact - but I can't just type them in.

<comment><USER4> Did you try searching for "Melbourne to Sydney on Qantas"? It works... <http://adioso.com/search/melbourne-to-sydney-qantas.html>

We'd like to have all the airlines like Emirates, and we will once we're better resourced and properly launched.

As for WebJet, we're really trying to do something very different to them, so if they do all you need right now, you're best to stick with them. Our angle is the casual/flexible market, travelers who are price sensitive but date/destination flexible. Kinda the opposite of business travelers.

Many thanks for the comments though :)

<comment><USER5> I swear I did that search and it didn't work. Working fine now though.

Work travel (big 3 letter IT) is work travel - and I book through work's systems. A system like this wont change that in the slightest. For personal - I'm price sensitive and sometimes date flexi (I've usually got specific destinations in mind though).. so this looks good for the price aspect.

webjets the best that I've had - so it's what I've used.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Don't forget to keep an eye on browser cookies when you surf travel sites. Delete them often, or use a browser that lets you surf in secure "zones".

For me it's Attitude Travel and Asia Room for hotels. Shoe string baby.

</comment><comment><USER7> Farecast - <http://farecast.live.com>

It's prediction method is pretty accurate on timing when you should hold off/when you should buy tickets, and how ticket prices are distributed throughout the year. It also compares to the other budget travel sites (Hotwire, etc.).</comment>


The ultimate ethical/philosophical thought experiment - <AUTHOR> http://www.mindspring.com/~mfpatton/Tissues.htm

<comment><AUTHOR> Maybe someone could whip us up a diagram using that JS lib that was on here earlier today, that might shed some light on the issue.</comment>


Etsy Shop Terminated - How Wrong Facebook Logo Led To Shutdown - <AUTHOR> http://angiemakes.com/an-etsy-shop-terminated-how-we-lost-our-jobs-overnight/ <comment><USER2> "Then it came. Another deactivation promptly followed by a termination notice from Etsy for both of my shops. Banned from Etsy. For life."

Ouch. I can understand closing her account or making her remove her listing. But banned for life on a misunderstanding?

That's harsh, when you take into account that this person was using the website as a source of real income.

I think this story shows that webmasters shouldn't think of user as only "those dumb users with their issues" but as real people.</comment>


Show HN: APOD Chrome Extension by The Trav - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/astronomy-picture-of-the/aedpginojmhafbemcoelnppdcmlfjcdj <comment><AUTHOR> Over the past few years I've built out this Astronomy Picture of the Day (APOD) Chrome/FF extension that shows an APOD as your new tab page. Just recently I've overhauled it with React to try and reign in the features I had built in Vanilla JS originally. Anyway, with these updates I've added a service worker to make it load as fast as possible and in case there are others here that really love the APOD I wanted to share.

Here's the Firefox version: [https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/apod-by-the-t...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en- US/firefox/addon/apod-by-the-trav/)</comment>


A simple way to get a multilingual blog - <AUTHOR> http://www.lengrand.fr/2011/12/a-simple-way-to-get-a-multilingual-blog/

<comment><USER2> What is with the developer antipathy towards Wordpress? It might be ugly spaghetti code but it's fast, it works, and the plugin ecosystem means you can get pretty much any functionality under the sun for free.

The author could have had a working solution up and running in 5 minutes. I don't get it.

</comment><comment><USER3> He should at least have a "lang" attribute in the markup. Or is that considered obsolete now?

</comment><comment><USER4> And "Accept-Language:" wept.</comment>


Ask HN: What are the must read articles/blogs on corporate culture? - <AUTHOR> <comment> knight-errantry [https://corporate-rebels.com](https://corporate-rebels.com) and [https://search.firstround.com](https://search.firstround.com)</comment>


Ask HN: Best way to submit a scientific article for review as a non-academic? - <AUTHOR> I am a software developer with a background in aerospace engineering, and am not a professional academic in any capacity.
The lack of an elegant model to predict drag on airfoils in inviscid and incompressible flow has always bothered me ever since my undergrad days, and I finally devised a model whose predictions match almost exactly with experimental data. There is a lot of confusion about what drag is at a fundamental level and most people believe drag is simply not possible in inviscid / incompressible flow (a statement my theory asserts as false). I want to submit my derivation and results for review.
I want to submit somewhere like AIAA or arXiv, but it seems like I might need to be currently associated with a University. <comment><USER2> (Source: am a university professor)

Do you live near a research university, which employs anyone working in aerospace engineering and/or fluid dynamics? Alternatively, do you ever have the occasion to visit your old university?

I'd try to set up some meetings with professors. Say that you've been working independently, based on questions that were bugging you in your undergrad days, and you'd be extremely grateful if you could discuss your work with them (at their convenience).

Resist the temptation to oversell your work. It sounds like you're claiming to understand drag better than an entire community of experts, who devote their careers to studying it. That is an _extraordinarily_ difficult sell. If you make such a claim, whether in person or in a paper, then your conclusions are likely to be immediately dismissed -- especially at the first sign of _any_ mistake.

Just say you have an alternative theory, and would be grateful to get the chance to discuss it (and have it critiqued) with an established expert. If you make a positive impression, then _they_ will encourage you to publish your results, and will be happy to give you practical advice for doing so.

As a professor, I'd disagree with Nomentatus's suggestion that you should try to "offer to help professors in the area". Accepting help usually creates more effort (for them) than it saves.

It's okay to simply cold-email professors whom you don't know and ask if you could meet them. Be prepared for them to say no, or for them to not reply at all. If they do say yes, don't go in trying to establish a "relationship". The most likely outcome is that they'll say "Oh, that's interesting, you should read X, Y, and Z." Take notes, and -- if you're serious about this -- read X, Y, and Z before you request a second meeting.

In the meantime, make sure you understand _why_ "most people believe drag is simply not possible in inviscid / incompressible flow". If you _thoroughly_ understand the potential objections to your theory, then you might have a shot at convincing someone.

Here is a blog post, which outlines some of the hurdles you could potentially face.

[http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/06/19/...](http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/cosmicvariance/2007/06/19/the- alternative-science-respectability-checklist/#.W-1bBuhKjb0)

In the long run, if your theory is correct, I believe you have good odds of getting it accepted. Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the great advice!

My first thought was reaching out to former professors by email (can't visit in person), but I wanted to see if there was a more appropriate way, like an online pre-print vetting community or something.

I will definitely tone-down my description of the current state of drag prediction; definitely don't want to offend or be considered a crackpot before anyone even looking at my derivation and results.

<comment><USER2> The arXiv does serve as an online preprint vetting community, and it would provide you a venue in which to publicly disseminate your work. (You might need either a university-affiliated email or an endorsement, though -- not sure exactly.)

But it's not really a good place to attract attention. Dozens of papers are published there every day, and the more unconventional ones tend to get ignored (unless they're authored by people who are already famous).

Another thing you might do is attend a scientific conference. If possible, see if there's some small, not-terribly-prestigious conference in a related subject, somewhere within driving distance. In my subject, number theory, these are quite common; they're typically held over weekends and are largely designed to give graduate students a venue in which to speak.

Book a hotel, go to all the talks, ask questions. If you strike up conversations with people, you might can ask if you can run your theory by them.

<comment><AUTHOR> I took a look at registering for arXiv, and since I am not currently affiliated with a University it seems like I wasn't able to proceed. And then there is the question of whether it is beneficial for me, like you said.

I would love to go to conferences, though it might be expensive for the ultimate aim of getting professional second opinions. Will look into it!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> You might consider contacting a Formula 1 team; McLaren, Ferrari, Renault or even Red Bull. All these top teams have their own wind tunnels and design and build their own "chassis" from the ground up.

Their aerodynamicists are also heavily invested in CFD and the designers all have aerospace backgrounds.

A yearly budget of $200-250MM USD is typical of these teams.

Here's the McLaren website if this idea seems like an avenue you might wish to persue "[https://www.mclaren.com/#"](https://www.mclaren.com/#")

GL

<comment><AUTHOR> Potential flow simulations are not very practical these days (maybe for quick back-of-the-envelope), and I highly doubt Formula One would be interested at all. But my theory touches on what is taught to every aerospace engineer, and I think the value of it would be better understanding of the relationship between lift and drag, rather than practical purposes (though it is possible).

Just curious, how did you find this question? I assumed it would have been buried by now.

I am thinking of just releasing it publicly on GitHub and asking random people to vet it...

<comment><USER3> Now I see your point.

Not buried yet, it was still front page. Only after I replied, did I notice you posted 2 days ago... peeps getting ready to break loose for the Thanksgiving Break Slowdown? IDK.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Publish your work before starting any collaboration. You absolutely do not need to be affiliated with a University in order to submit anywhere. Many IEEE conferences encourage submissions from first-time authors so if there is one that is a good match for your paper you should submit there. It might also be useful to contact someone on the paper committee to find out if they have special guidance for first time authors. Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER5> Some journals explicitly expect academic association but it is rare

a lot of journals implicitly expect academic association

often though, including in technical engineering from my experience, it is not for people from industry to submit articles.

Basically..start by reading other articles in a journal you are interested in submitting to and getting a feel for how they work. Figure out what sections you will need to have, what prior work you can reference. Have you ever written something similar? Are you interested in publishing the model as a theoretical construction? If so, why does one not already exist? how confident are you in your math? Are you interested in publishing an implementation of the model?

It is worth noting that AIAA and arXiv are TOTALLY different beasts. arXiv is a pre-print repository, that is NOT a peer reviewed journal. On the other hand, AIAA publishes multiple journals with different specific areas. For AIAA, how

What is the value/relevance of the paepr? Not just...novelty...journals get hundreds of 'novel' submissions. What is the value of a model of drag in incompressible flow? can you cite others making that argument?

As someone who regularly reviews (although less now because I won't review paywalled articles anymore) a fair number of journal articles, the reason most get rejected is lack of adherence to field norms and poor writing. Norms aren't god, but they exist for a reason and speak to/provide evidence of credibility in what you are saying. Poor writing...well academic writing is HARD. everything you are doing contributes to building an argument and providing evidence for your key point. It has to be situated, claims have to be supported, references made, etc. There are many problems with academic publishing...and these issues can be applied in exclusionary ways, but they are generally useful. Often, people think that you need some crzy high minded writing for journal articles...you don't. What you are seeing is field norms operationalized. In a way it is a highly practical cargo cult. Each field has a ton of knowledge and needs a way to short hand all of it to their disciplinary peers.

Happy to answer more specific questions or similar off list if you want to get into specifics.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for the long post!

I want at the very least to just get my derivation and results reviewed. I hope to avoid minutia of academic formatting, diction, etc. before getting any reviews...

Honestly, it's a really simple idea with significant consequences (if correct, of course). I have written a full draft and it is no more than 3 pages. Basically all aerospace engineering undergrads get taught early on that airfoil drag is just zero in 2D incompressible and inviscid flows, unless you want to use complicated, empirical viscosity imitation or wake momentum thickness methods (e.g. XFOIL). So my theory if correct would be quite impactful because it is so relevant to what all aerospace undergrads are taught.

My theory asserts that there is an omission of physics that is fundamental to understanding airfoil lift and drag, and how they are physically coupled. In my theory, drag is calculated as naturally as lift is, unlike what is currently taught. Although I strongly believe the physics and derivation are correct, I would not be confident enough to submit it for review if the results didn't match so well with airfoil experimental data (NACA TR-824).

I basically want my theory disproven or validated by qualified people. After that, I don't mind conforming to whatever minutia towards publication.

<comment><USER6> > _Basically all aerospace engineering undergrads get taught early on that > airfoil drag is just zero in 2D incompressible and inviscid flows,_ [...]

Don't you need some adicional hypothesis, like that all the path integrals of the wind field are zero? Most of the easy part of the analysis of the lift in a wing assumes that air is inviscid (except for the initial generation of the vortex around the wing). [And if the speed is much smaller than the speed of sound, you can approximate that the fluid is incompressible.]

For example see [https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/cyl.html](https://www.grc.nasa.gov/www/k-12/airplane/cyl.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> I am not sure what you are trying to say. Thin Airfoil Theory and Vortex Panel Methods all predict zero drag. XFOIL predicts drag by tacking on a wake momentum thickness method.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I agree sometimes someone who is not in the university might still want to post a scientific article; some people are learn and do by yourself instead.

If you cannot post on arXiv then you can post on viXra.

</comment><comment><USER8> Sounds like an excellent target for an X prize. Say one that would reveal one set of data for submissions to match, and not reveal another similar set. The "theory/formulation/algorithm" with the best match for the second set, wins.

Obviously any kind of University contact would be valuable for your kind of quest; do you have any skills you can offer to help professors in the area? So that you could establish yourself a bit before trying to sell your idea? That requires a fair investment in time, I know, but I think that's what you're up against since so does evaluating theoretical ideas "just on spec."

I don't mean to contradict the previous comment, re familiarizing yourself with a journal's style, but that's a bit like teaching yourself Spanish without ever having anyone check your work. So there, too, an insider who can act as a first reader is invaluable.

I wish you luck, the professionalization of the academy is part of why innovation is now slowing IMHO.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's actually a pretty simple idea that could be significant because it touches on what every aerospace engineer is taught about airfoils in incompressible and inviscid flow, and I think it would contribute to fundamental understanding of lift and drag. My full draft with the abstract, derivation, results (comparison with experimental wind tunnel airfoil data), and discussion is less than 3 pages long.

I agree with your Spanish analogy. I don't want to do a lot of work before peer review.</comment></comment>


1D Cellular Automaton Being Fed as Input to a 2D Cellular Automaton - <AUTHOR> https://mrrrgn.github.io/1d2d <comment><USER2> This is cool. However, the blue link text on the black background is impossible to read.</comment>


Ask HN: Is there room for alternative planners? - <AUTHOR>

We know that the traditional gridded calendar is the gold standard for planning out your day, but is there room for apps or web apps that allow you to plan your day in a different way? I'm thinking of an app that would pull events that are in your calendar and then allow you to schedule tasks around them.  Or is the calendar really the best way to do it? <comment><USER2> I suggest you mock up your idea in Photoshop and see if it excites people.

</comment><comment><USER3> I guess you could try adapting a Gantt chart:

<http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gantt_chart></comment>


MPAA Boss 'Forgets' Hollywood's Pirate History - <AUTHOR> https://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-boss-forgets-hollywoods-pirate-history-120428/

<comment><USER2> To be fair, Hollywood wasn't established just to avoid a few patent laws. It was also a more ideal location for filming due to the sunny weather. They didn't have indoor lighting powerful enough for film at the time. Edison's first studio was a rotating building that followed the movement of the sun across the sky.

Edison and his Motion Picture Patents Company partners also hired gangsters to destroy the unlicensed studies and beat up the actors and directors in New York and Chicago.

<comment><USER3> But do you think they first looked for the sunniest places in US where to move it, or did they look for an area where patents didn't apply, and then look for a sunny place there?</comment></comment>


The way we think about charity is dead wrong - <AUTHOR> http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about_charity_is_dead_wrong

<comment><USER2> I agree with the sentiment, but at the same time I think some widely metric for a nonprofit's efficiency must exist. Overheads is not a suitable metric, but neither is the 'size of their dreams' which is basically what he's advocating.

I want to know that my donation is being used to further the cause as effectively as possible. Find a way to communicate that to me, and I will donate regardless of overheads.</comment>


Only 565 people have ever been to space. Virgin Galactic plans to send 3000 more - <AUTHOR> https://www.kevinrooke.com/post/virgin-galactic-and-the-potential-of-space-tourism <comment><USER2> "Been to space" and "been in orbit" are very, very different things. To my knowledge, Virgin only has plans for the first.

<comment><AUTHOR> Correct, and being in orbit is not a requirement to be considered an astronaut. The threshold for being "in space" is 80km of altitude, a height that all Virgin Galactic customer flights will pass.

<comment><USER2> It is only considered astronautics among those who haven't orbited.

On Virgin you get a glimpse of curved horizon, and stars in daytime, at the expense of about the filthiest kind of rocket ever used. Really, the fuel is basically burning tires.</comment></comment></comment>


Is Google App Engine blocking PayPal? - <AUTHOR> http://groups.google.com/group/google-appengine/browse_thread/thread/9059b0750c45703b

<comment><USER2> This was a bug with our anti-phishing protections, and we are currently working on a fix: [http://groups.google.com/group/google- appengine/browse_threa...](http://groups.google.com/group/google- appengine/browse_thread/thread/9059b0750c45703b/b1d0611dd4b04273)

Thanks, Marzia

<comment><USER3> Whew! Thank God! Almost passed out!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I notice that noone is even considering the possibility that it's an anti- fraud measure run rampant.

<comment><USER5> That was one of my first thoughts, but I would assume that GAE spam-bot abuse would be smarter than that. If there really was someone doing this kind of stuff, surely they would just block that particular PayPal account (along with banning the GAE user) - AFAIK valid PayPal accounts aren't easy to generate in large quantities. And I can't imagine it's a reaction to a GAE-based DDoS attack, as spotting that kind of pattern ought to be really easy and resorting to blocking URLs wouldn't be necessary.

To be honest, I suspect this to be a bug rather than deliberate, or else you'd have thought that they'd have notified people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Anyone here independently confirm this yet? Not a good sign from a Google neutrality standpoint.

I'll try it tonight if no one else gets a chance.

<comment><USER6> I got a chance to try it out just to see if a simple URL fetch was blocked:

<http://helloworld-111.appspot.com/>

Locally, this code reports 200 OK for all of those except the last reports a 302 redirect (to the https, I presume). As you can see, on Google, they all fail with an internal exception.

Paypal does have a universal Disallow in robots.txt, so I thought I'd setup why.gd to do the same. But it works fine.

Anyone else find any other URLs that are blocked?

<comment><USER6> Looks fixed now. Very fast turnaround. Nice work, Google.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Not sure what can be done about this, but the URL matching is missing lots of stuff. Posted this five hours ago, with a 1-character difference in the URL:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=213784>

(Ordinarily I wouldn't complain, but it's happened about six times in the last 2-3 days.)

<comment><USER5> In that particular case, stripping off everything after # would have helped. In general, it's practically impossible to defend against dupes because you can just frivolously add query strings, so

[http://groups.google.com/group/google- appengine/browse_threa...](http://groups.google.com/group/google- appengine/browse_thread/thread/9059b0750c45703b)

and

[http://groups.google.com/group/google- appengine/browse_threa...](http://groups.google.com/group/google- appengine/browse_thread/thread/9059b0750c45703b?foo=bar)

aren't dupes, even though they link to the exact same page. There really isn't anything you can do about this particular case except error-prone heuristics.

<comment><USER7> Yeah, it's a difficult problem. In this case, it was a single character that I didn't notice. I'm not even clear on how it got there (or why it wasn't on the second submission URL).

Perhaps the "solution" is to ignore query strings....how many sites use them to distinguish content anymore? Alternately...compare the content of the <head> tag on the linked page? That wouldn't be a perfect solution, but it would probably go a long way.

<comment><USER5> The hash is of course for linking sections _within_ the page, so I suspect the culprit is a link you clicked on the page itself before submitting the story. There are a couple of links with href="#" there, although they all have JavaScript event handlers that cancel the default action.

Do you have JavaScript disabled by any chance, or do you use some obscure browser?

In any case, I think HN should strip the hash and what follows for purposes of dupe detection, but keep them in the link in case someone actually wants to link to a specific spot in the page.

To answer your question: query strings ("?foo=bar&a=b&c") are widely used. Among other places, HN itself uses them. :) Also, whenever you submit a form with GET.

<comment><USER7> I honestly couldn't tell you how I got to the page (or what I clicked on once I got there), but it probably involved clicking a number of links.

I had forgotten that HN was using query strings to reference articles...D'oh. By now, I figured that everyone had adopted the URL-mapping approach. Anyway, detecting collisions based on the head tag still seems like a possibility....

<comment><USER5> You mean matching the title tag if the pre-query-string portion of the URL matches? That could certainly work. Maybe this is something to test with xirium's latest content scrape.

<comment><USER7> Yep. Or, if you were really worried about false-positives, the contents of the entire head.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Can anyone confirm that GAE isn't just dropping SSL requests in general?

<comment><USER6> Yeah, I did a little test above with another https site: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=214055>

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> No. Someone from Google responded to that thread noting that it was a bug, and has since been fixed.

</comment><comment><USER10> Fair play to Google, i think, considering PayPal/eBay block Google Checkout on eBay.

<comment><USER11> eBay are _very_ monopolistic

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Has anybody tried GAE with Amazon FlexPay or another payment service?</comment>


Best way to find people for a closed mobile beta - <AUTHOR>

Hi,
I'm about to finish an iPhone app, and wanted to know what anyone's experience of the best way to get a group of people into a closed beta test ?  I guess asking here for volunteers would be good, but my target audience is more "standard consumer" than early adopter.
Do people post up a few google ad words, post to forums, what have you found to be the best way to do this ? <comment><USER2> Have you read Crossing the Chasm? Going directly from nothing to "standard consumer" is rough and doesn't typically happen. Your first users have to be more open to new things (making them early adopters). The average consumer won't try things their friends aren't already using.

</comment><comment><USER3> what demo is the app targeting? How many beta testers are you looking for? Do you have irl friends?</comment>


Arduino Micro shrinks your favorite DIY platform down - <AUTHOR> http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/08/arduino-micro-shrinks-your-favorite-diy-platform/ <comment><USER2> I must have missed something a while back, but Arduino being sold at Radio Shack is news to me! I think this is great for the maker movement and people trying to get started with Ardiuno. RS is selling a book and various shields - in store no less! I recall reading that RS was going back to its DIY roots [1] - I guess they were serious about it

1\. [http://blog.radioshack.com/2011/05/19/radioshack-the-diy- com...](http://blog.radioshack.com/2011/05/19/radioshack-the-diy-community- you-talked-were-listening/)

</comment><comment><USER3> There are lots of small version of Arduino around such as:

Pro Mini: <https://www.sparkfun.com/products/11113>

Pro Micro: <https://www.sparkfun.com/products/11098>?

Arduino Nano: <http://www.arduino.cc/en/Main/ArduinoBoardNano>

<comment><USER4> Yes, but SparkFun's Pro boards lack the on-board USB hardware, and require you to have a "fancy" USB-to-TTL cable. There's also the ExtraCore (<https://tindie.com/dustinandrews/extracore/>) which has the same requirement.

And the Arduino Nano seems to no longer be carried by Arduino themselves, I was unable to find it in the shop.

I think this looks nice since it's based on a more recent AVR chip, that has on-board USB so that even the small form factor doesn't mean the board can't have a "native" USB connector.

<comment><USER5> There's still the Teensy 2.0/3.0 which is smaller & cheaper than this board. The Teensy 2.0 ($16) uses the same chip (32u4) as the arduino micro, and the 3.0 ($19) uses an arm-m4 chip which also provides a DSP. The best thing about the Teensy is that it's available right now.

<comment><USER6> Is the teensy 3(arm) fully compatible with all the arduino libraries ?

<comment><USER5> Yes and no. Even some arduinos are incompatible with certain arduino libraries. Most of the libraries were written for the most popular 328p chip at the most popular frequency (16mhz), but if you're using a Due or Attiny or even the 328p running a different frequency, you may need to touch up the libraries to get it to work. My guess is the compatibility levels would be similar here.

Most people are probably only aware of the arduino uno which uses the 328p chip, but there are probably 20 other atmel chip models that are also "arduino compatible". I typically use the attiny85 because my one-off projects rarely need all the pins on the 328p.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This reminds me of the Teensy: <http://www.pjrc.com/teensy/>

</comment><comment><USER8> The Teensy has been available for a couple years in this size. Teensy 3 comes with an ARM processor in the same board.

<http://www.pjrc.com/store/teensy.html>

</comment><comment><USER9> Non-blogspam link: [http://arduino.cc/blog/2012/11/08/new-arduino-micro- availabl...](http://arduino.cc/blog/2012/11/08/new-arduino-micro-available/)

</comment><comment><USER10> I love the Arduino, but the boards are expensive when compared to other platforms. I recently started using the TI MSP430 Launchpad which is $4.50 shipped! It's also very flexible and uses very little power. If you want the simplicity of the Arduino IDE, there's a port of it called Energia. The Raspberry Pi is much more powerful than the Arduino and it's around the same price. I know the RPi isn't an apples-to-apples comparison.

</comment><comment><USER11> Not sure what this post is about. The only news is that RadioShack is going to sell a "micro" version of the "nano."

I bought my Arduino Nano earlier this year from gravitech.us and they're still shipping them as of 2012-11-09 09:32am (CST).

<http://www.gravitech.us/arna30wiatp.html>

I have no affiliation with gravitech. For the record, I bought the breadboard it's mounted on from RS. Plugs in tight. I use the avr-gcc tool chain -- and it works.

</comment><comment><USER12> This looks to be even better: <http://digistump.com/#digispark>

Though it's not yet in production (it finished a successful kickstarter funding round in september), which should be sometime in early 2013.

</comment><comment><USER13> I will put my own headers on for $4, thank you.

<comment><USER14> And I'll pay someone $4 to save 5 minutes of my time.</comment></comment>


Google Fiber Phone - <AUTHOR> https://fiber.google.com/phone/ <comment><USER3> A landline phone service seems a bit anachronistic, but there is a place for it. The future of telephony is here, but it sucks. Many here on HN probably don't even remember this, but phone calls actually used to be intelligible. Before cell phones and VOIP, before packet-switching and aggressive digital compression, calls traveled over Ma Bell's glorious circuit-switched network. You could actually understand what people on a conference call were saying, instead of every other word dropping into the digital aether.

<comment><USER4> It's amazing to remember how crystal clear phone calls used to be. I wonder if there's a niche for the first service willing to use more bytes and sacrifice efficiency in the name of analog-era call quality.

<comment><USER5> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wideband_audio](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wideband_audio)

and more specific to cellular phones:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_Multi- Rate_Wideband](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adaptive_Multi-Rate_Wideband)

Search for "HD Voice" from the big cellular companies in the US. It usually requires handset support.

<comment><USER6> I believe apple has supported this with the iPhone for several years now.

<comment><USER7> As has Android, but AT&T and Verizon tend to lock out features like HD Voice and Wifi Calling to be iPhone only.

<comment><USER6> T-Mobile is what I have. I think they were the first? But it sounds great on T-Mobile. I usually just talk to the wife both of us on iPhones and T-Mobile. And then I get the occasional call from someone else and I am like "What the !@# get a decent connection/phone/whatever!"

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Or the hacker's solution to maintaining a landline: get yourself a cheap SIP- capable handset and an account with a wholesale SIP-trunking provider like Flowroute ($1.25/mo for the number, $.0098/min outbound to CONUS, $.012/min inbound).

Proxy through OpenVBX or Asterisk (can be hosted in the cloud or in your home) if you want to get fancy with voicemail, IVR menus, forwarding, extensions for different rooms in the house, etc.

ISP bundled phone services are essentially just packaging this for you with 10x markup. (I worked on VoIP installs for a summer when I was 14; it's not that hard).

Only downside is most of these phones anticipate PoE, so you need to buy the power supply (or a PoE injector) separately. You also have to trust yourself to set up E911 correctly, or keep your cell phone around for that.

<comment><USER9> But won't that fail at the same time your home internet access fails - <USER2> the ISP link goes down? I have a land line as a redundant link, for security.

<comment><USER10> Isn't Google's offering here VOIP based? Sounds equivalent.

<comment><USER11> More or less with a number of caveats :)

Telco/ISP provided "VOIP" is often technically Voice over IP (as in the protocol), but regulations and implementation can be subtly different from VOIP (what people think of as Voice over the Internet AKA "over the top" or OTT).

ISP-provided Voice often comes with requirements for battery backup in the fiber/dsl/ata box so the user can call 911 during a power outage. There's also reporting requirements for outages that prevent a user from dialing 911.

Also, with ISP-Voice the VOIP part is considered a implementation detail so it can be given absolute QoS priority over internet traffic on a given last-mile link. This helps with being able to call 911 while someone leaves bittorrent open or whatever. OTT voip doesn't get that benefit (and that's not technically a net-neutrality violation).

<comment><USER12> What are the regulations surrounding this? They say it works for 911.

Is it like Vonage or like telephone bundled from your cable provider?

Are they providing a battery-backed modem with RJ11 jack?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I like this idea, but I no longer trust Google to shepherd their side projects in the long term. Google voice had amazing promise (and I still use it) but it has also been a completely stagnant, without significant updates for a few years now. It conflicts with Hangouts, Google Fi, and the Android SMS app. Contacts are a mess. Ditto Google Groups.

<comment><USER14> Agreed on Google Voice, I used it all the way back to the Grand Central days and I wish it were maintained more. That being said, the Hangouts integration isn't _that_ bad now. I know it feels risky to hit that 'merge to hangouts' button but I've been using it for a while without any huge inconveniences. The only problem I run in to is when I need to search for old SMS messages, the only way to do it after merging is by doing an 'in:chats searchterm' search in Gmail. That wouldn't even be so bad except that I also use Inbox and the search doesn't work in Inbox.

In theory I actually like the idea of having my SMS / Phone calls / emails / hangouts merged pretty tightly, but there are a lot of subtle ways that they could really screw up the user experience while making that happen so I'm still nervous about it.

<comment><USER4> > is by doing an 'in:chats searchterm' search in Gmail. That wouldn't even be > so bad except that I also use Inbox and the search doesn't work in Inbox.

is there a way to access gmail once you've switched to inbox? I would love to be able to edit my filters again...

<comment><USER15> Just open gmail. They actually did a great job of keeping the two in sync.

(Unless you turned on the auto-redirect to inbox, in which case you need to turn that off: [https://support.google.com/inbox/answer/6230358?hl=en](https://support.google.com/inbox/answer/6230358?hl=en))

<comment><USER14> Even with auto-direct turned on you can get to gmail from the Inbox interface: [http://imgur.com/82iOdLf](http://imgur.com/82iOdLf)

<comment><USER4> Thank you. Obviously that's easy to do- but I never would have thought to look there! Now I can go home and look like a genius to my wife by stealing credit from you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Sort of weird that it's something they bothered with, considering home phones are on the out and out.

Edit: That said, I'm sure there are still 100m Americans with phone service, but I don't know that the demographics of people who care to switch to google fiber and need phones are really that overlapping. Then again, Google probably researched this much more than I did. Just seems odd from my perspective.

<comment><USER17> E911 service is more reliable with a land line, even if it's VoIP, since the location is fixed. Some recommend having a line just for that.

<comment><USER18> It's also powered from the central office, and doesn't require a local electrical power source.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I think there's still a market for landlines although $10/month sounds like a high price point for such a feature. Having a stationary phone is important when you start having kids and they are old enough to know how to use it. There's a gap of several years from when kids are old enough to know how to call others versus old enough to warrant having their own mobile device.

So what happens in the scenario when the kid(s) is/are home with one parent or the babysitter and the adult falls down the steps and is unconscious? Certainly a 4-5 year can learn to call 911 for help and with a landline, hopefully the phone is a static location and always available rather than having to search through the house to find mommy or daddy's dead iPhone.

<comment><USER20> > $10/month sounds like a high price point for such a feature.

As someone who is _forced_ by my monopoly ISP (with collusion from my local gvmnt) to buy bundled basic phone service for an extra $30/month (if I want internet access, which I do, and for which I have to pay $87/month for 30/5), I say people in Google Fiber areas don't know how lucky they are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I feel products like this - [http://www.vtechphones.com/products/product_detail/1673](http://www.vtechphones.com/products/product_detail/1673) \- (just an example) are a better solution to this problem. You dont need a land line subscription, just a cell phone with bluetooth. When my parents get home, their cell phones pair to the home phone, so when they receive a call, the home phone rings. They don't have to carry around cell phones, and they can place calls through their cell phones using the handsets. Seems complicated at first, but saved headache and $$ in the end.

<comment><USER10> I think the major selling point is that you're not SOL if you need to be reached or call 911 while your cell is dead/left in the car/etc.

Not that it's an important enough point for me personally to have a land line, but I can understand why a lot of people would favor that. As a $10/month add- on for existing Fiber customers it's not a bad deal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Apparently no one actually fucking read the page.

> ON-THE-GO

>Get calls on your mobile phone. Stay connected no matter where you are. Have Fiber Phone ring your landline when you're home or your mobile when you're onthe-go.

This isn't about landlines at all.

<comment><USER23> What? This is literally all about landlines. A minor feature is that you can redirect the landline service to your mobile phone, which is a feature that has been included in most landline services since mobile existed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I recall reading almost three years ago about a pair of Google engineers who won a prize in the FTC's Robocall Challenge, but at the time weren't pursuing it further. I wonder if that is what's powering Fiber Phone's spam filtering?

I have a free Ooma landline, which isn't tied to a specific ISP, but if someone can truly crack the problem of call spam, I could definitely see that being a valuable service many would be willing to switch and pay for.

</comment><comment><USER25> I wonder if this means they'll be actually working on improving Google Voice again after all these years, since it looks very much like this product bundles it. (The "ring your mobile" and "transcribe your voicemail" features.)

</comment><comment><USER11> Making a play for lifeline subsidies?

<comment><USER26> I wonder if being a landline phone service provider makes it easier for them to get access to utility poles?

<comment><USER27> It was a helluva lot easier for us ($work) after we became a CLEC.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Anecdata: my Internet drops out for about fifteen seconds three or four times a day. That's not a problem when I'm reading web pages or even downloading files but it would cause problems during a phone call. My ISP offered me a bundled Internet/IP phone combination for about $7 less per month than an Internet/existing landline one. I'm glad I decided to keep the landline.

</comment><comment><USER29> $10 + taxes and fees seems a bit steep, considering that Ooma is < $4.00 once the equipment is fully amortized.

The other odd thing is that "We can't bring Fiber Phone to everyone at the same time, so we're doing it in phases.". Given how few fiber customers there are, I'm wondering why that is..

</comment><comment><USER30> So would it be possible to purchase this and use it as a primary phone service on a data-only smartphone?

<comment><USER31> That's what Fi is for: [https://fi.google.com](https://fi.google.com)

<comment><USER32> Fi doesn't offer data-only plans. You can add data-only SIMs to your main account, but nobody gets out of paying the $20 base rate for unlimited calling and SMS/MMS.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Am I the only one who thinks this is very very expensive? I use an Italian VoIP provider. The rates for international calls are very similar, but I don't have to pay a monthly fee. So I end up charging 6 euros every 4-5 months.

</comment><comment><USER34> John Oliver called this two weeks ago: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU8dCYocuyI&feature=youtu.be...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vU8dCYocuyI&feature=youtu.be&t=5m18s)

</comment><comment><USER35> Oh cool! Let me check my address to see if it's available in my area...

Nope. Never? ok then. thanks.

</comment><comment><USER36> I get that Google is doing this (Fiber) in order to improve internet service, which is in it's best interest. But I can't help but feeling like there is some other goal here.

<comment><USER37> It's all about the bundle. They need to be able to offer the so-called triple play that other ISPs do.

<comment><USER38> This. It's an easy way to bend tax laws.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Why do this when they have google hangout?

I can see that hangout is tied to a person but home phone is not. But making it a different product/service and charging $10/month is absurd.

</comment><comment><USER40> Wait....I thought adding a landline to your internet service magically made everything cheaper. What is Google doing wrong?

</comment><comment><USER41> I wish google fiber would completely take over (especially in San Francisco) where we don't have fios.

</comment><comment><USER42> Just get a device from Obihai and connect your Google Voice account to it. No monthly charge

</comment><comment><USER43> Anyone know if it can pull Caller ID from Google Contacts? That'd be a killer feature.

</comment><comment><USER44> Is there any hope they could do better than PSTN audio quality here?

</comment><comment><USER45> So now Google Fiber will be under CALEA?</comment>


Ask HN: Why haven't open, local smart home ecosystems taken off? - <AUTHOR> In the wake of the Nest fiasco, I have to wonder, why do people still put up with this? These devices aren't <i>that</i> complicated; it's not like only the tech giants can afford to build them, and I'm pretty sure open protocols already exist. Is it just not profitable enough without data collection and/or lock-in? Is there a market opportunity here? <comment><USER2> I am 100% unqualified to provide anything factual, but I have some thoughts.

I think it's possible that part of the reasoning is along the lines of:

\- People who want a full smarthome system, and aren't very technical, generally don't know or care about the implications of said system, and so they will just buy whatever is cheap/convenient/well-marketed and aren't going to care if its open or closed.

\- People who want a full smarthome system, and are pretty techincal might take the opportunity to make outfitting their house as a smarthome a personal pet project.

<comment><AUTHOR> Personally I refuse to install corporate surveillance all over my house, but I also don't care enough to mess with custom Linux distros and arduinos and network configuration just to create a (probably really ugly) thermostat that I could control from my phone.

But I _would_ buy something like Nest off the shelf if it were privacy- friendly, and open enough that I could write some custom scripts to do neat things with it. Maybe I represent a niche market.

<comment><USER2> I'm 100% with you. I was just putting out a pet theory - the market may appear to be really niche to potential entrepreneurs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Because no one manufacturer does _everything_.

In my home, I have... Nest alarm, Lifx bulbs, Onkyo speakers, WeMo plugs, Meross adapters, Alexa voice controls, Toshiba TVs, and a bunch of no-name Chinese kit.

And none of those manufacturers talk to the same standard. So I end up using IFTT and I've cobbled together controls out of various open and closed source code to make them work together.</comment>