The greatest juggler alive quit to open a construction business - <AUTHOR> http://grantland.com/features/anthony-gatto-juggling-cirque-du-soleil-jason-fagone/?2 <comment><USER2> >> _Will it get me another job? ... If you can't understand why I don't waste my energy on doing seven balls overhead for a minute to make a youtube video for people to watch, then you haven't entered the real world yet._

I had a similar discussion with my office colleagues a few weeks back. When there was a call for a 'Hacknight' at our workplace to drive revenues up, when a SVP panicked he was going to miss his target. And the people where asked to contribute and magically rescue the whole situation out of nowhere. Nearly every one agreed that they would not contribute a minute to that 'Hacknight'

When people just give up, start giving damn about things. Its generally because they've been taken for a ride, before. Once hard working night owl hackers stop doing things because they watch some jack ass four levels above them doing 1/100th the work but taking nearly everything that is right fully theirs.

The Hack night was a big flop, ofcourse the SVP called for a meeting next day and lectured about motivation and lack of passion in the team(Meaning, people not ready sacrifice a great deal and give away their work for free). And how despite all the help from the leadership(Meaning, Arranging for biscuits and tea, and then going to home to get sleep) people were not ready to contribute to the company(Meaning, Help the VP make an additional million in yearly bonus).

Ultimately you get what you pay for.

<comment><USER3> Hey, wait, I don't know about you, but I've always thought one of the most rewarding parts of working in tech was being lectured about motivation by someone with 10X my salary, 100X my bonus and 1000X my equity stake :-)

<comment><USER4> No, no - the most rewarding part is proving to them they're an incompetent idiot.

The _most_ rewarding. Not necessarily very rewarding in absolute terms.

<comment><USER5> The reason it's so rewarding is because it's next to impossible to give idiots any self-actualization. And if you do, when you do, their world crumbles into pieces.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I used to run the world's biggest juggling video repository (JuggleThis.net, now defunct) which itself was definitely responsible for a lot of the irritation Gatto found with the new generation of camera-happy juggling kids.

Certainly he was frustrated by newcomers filming 100 takes and showing just one (something I'm guilty of too!). But without being a juggler yourself it's hard to express just how much better than everyone else he really was. If being able to do a trick with N balls is unit difficulty, adding N+2 balls is a factor of 10-100 harder. Being able to _perform_ it is another 10-100 times again.

Gatto regularly performed things the next best jugglers could barely do at all. He was the Donald Bradman of juggling, and I'm very sad we now have to say "was".

<comment><USER7> I'm not ashamed to admit I had to look up Donald Bradman. Cricket? That's the analogy you went with? :-)

<comment><USER8> I had to look him up to, but once I found this, I understood why he went with Donald Bradman over Pele or Jordan or Ali.

[http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/the-most-remarkable-graph- in-...](http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/the-most-remarkable-graph-in-the- history-of-sport/)

<comment><USER9> I assume OP is from the commonwealth. Don Bradman is a household name here

<comment><USER10> And I ask you is he any good?

<comment><USER9> With an average of almost 100, he was the very best and will be the benchmark that all future greats will be compared to.

<comment><USER10> 'Tis a line from the chorus of a famous (?) song about him:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spDWaeBE2AY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spDWaeBE2AY)

      Our Don Bradman - And I ask you is he any good?
      Our Don Bradman - As a bastman he can sure lay on the wood.
      For when he goes in to bat
      He knocks ev'ry record flat,
      For there isn't any thing he cannot do,
      Our Don Bradman - Ev'ry Aussie "dips his lid" to you.

<comment><USER9> Oh woosh! :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I don't see any tragedy here and I doubt Gatto/Commarota does either. He did something amazingly well as a kid and young adult, had fun with it and has now decided it's time to move on. The tragedy with top sports-people is often when they retire and have a lot of trouble adjusting to _not_ being the best in the world at something. From the article it sounds like Commarota finally got tired of the constant stress on his body and the difficulty of supporting and spending time with his family while professionally juggling and is now successfully transitioning to a very 'down-to-earth' career. Good luck to him.

<comment><USER12> I agree, I see no conflict or tragedy also.

He is a man that has pursued excellence, understands quality, likes to work for himself (performer, landscape gardener, etc), seems to have a competitive edge but also seems wise to it, and has demonstrated keenness to carefully coach others or explain how to do things.

It should be quite a successful business.

<comment><USER13> That's probably the most insightful view going - I was simply thinking of him as yet another construction guy. But add that to his story / marketing / brand and ... I will pay extra for the proof of a guy willing to be painstaking to achieve excellence.

Given my current troubles with builders, this is a 2x pricing opportunity for him - quite seriously

<comment><USER14> The company site has zero reference to his past and is registered under his birth name(different from his stage name), so I don't think that's a card he plans on playing.

Do you think he could really have an opportunity to receive 2x pricing? I think there might be a certain opportunity in illustrating the novelty of his past somewhere on the site, but I honestly don't believe most consumers(even for something large like a resurfacing) would take to time to realize the extent to which he excelled at juggling, nor do I think they would translate that to an increased value in his current abilities(at least not a 100% increase). In reality I think that consumer is more often willing to settle for cheap inadequacy than expensive competence, but I might be completely off with that assumption in this industry(or in general).

What do you think? If he could really stand the chance for a significant increase in revenue for something as simple as publicly touting past accomplishments, perhaps he should; he was that good after all.

<comment><USER15> There are definitely consumers who are willing to pay 2x the market price for a job exceptionally well done. However, they're not going to assume that because someone juggled exceptionally well that they'd do an equally good job at construction. He'll have to build his reputation in the industry independently, and given that he's not using his juggling persona to market his construction company, it seems like he's OK with that.

<comment><USER16> "However, they're not going to assume that because someone juggled exceptionally well that they'd do an equally good job at construction."

That's because construction work is a very large field and honestly resurfacing cement doesn't translate very well to juggling.

Now find a construction job that requires working under stress, lots of attention on you, attention to detail, focus on quality, able to repeatedly meet goals and deadlines, maybe a popular analogy with juggling...

How about general contractor? A guy like him has the brain to be a legendary GC, no marketing BS required. If he can twist his brain into using his eyes and mouth to keep 20 subs on track out of each others way, working multiple subprojects and tasks in the correct complicated order and on time instead of using his arms to throw things, I'd pay him a multiple of a typical GC because he would net save me time and money. On a big job, he could be extremely financially valuable, which could be very rewarding to him.

Or if he's not set up financially / people skills wise to be a GC then his legendary coordination and planning skills would make him an awesome heavy equipment operator. I've seen what a truly good crane op can do, and he could be one of the best. One of those guys who works the machine at full speed yet perfectly smooth and 1/4 inch accurate.

Not seeing how troweling cement makes best use of his unusual skills. Then again, if he likes what he's doing, he wins.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Great article but it makes no mention of Michael Moschen, who many (including me) consider the best & most creative juggler in the world.

Here are some mind-blowing physics that I think the HN community, in particular, would enjoy.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjHoedoSUXY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjHoedoSUXY)

He's also well-known for "contact juggling," where the balls don't leave the hands:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OTb8tga- yg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OTb8tga-yg)

<comment><USER18> BTW, if you remember the crystal ball contact juggling that David Bowie does in Labyrinth, that was Moschen.

<comment> rkuykendall-com An amazing video about his performance in Labyrinth, which he did WITHOUT LOOKING:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U8fTAHxjdo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3U8fTAHxjdo)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Speaking as a juggler: I've seen Gatto in performance (in Kooza in 2008); he's every bit as good as the article says. I've also seen (and met) many other top jugglers.

And yet, to be honest, while I appreciate the talent and skill required to do the kinds of numbers and moves Gatto does, and even though I understand the difficulty of pulling off, e.g., 7 clubs or 7-ball 5-up 360s or 6-club backcrosses — I find this type of juggling fairly boring to watch. No matter how much showmanship you put into it, every performing juggler eventually realizes that technical skill means very little and audiences get bored after about 3 minutes. Most good jugglers with long shows do comedy and variety routines. Gatto clearly didn't want to go down that road. I respect that.

My favorite juggler to watch is Falco Scheffler: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CmnaICnMiw](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CmnaICnMiw) — no high numbers here, just 3 and 4 balls. And way more fun to watch than endless runs of 5 club backcrosses.

<comment><USER20> As a fellow juggler (well, former, I don't really juggle much these days) I agree. I find Gatto amazing in the same way other world record breakers are amazing, but apart from going "wow" it didn't feel inspiring to me as a juggler.

OTOH, there are world-class jugglers who go in different directions and do feel inspiring. I remember when I was starting out, this group with Jay Gilligan, Ville Walo and some other Finnish guy I forgot the name of had a VHS you could order over the 'net which was just unlike anything we'd seen. They were good technically, e.g. no problem with 5 clubs, but they also kept inventing new tricks and new ways of using objects instead of just going for more objects. I can't find any clips from that video[1], but there's some newer stuff from Jay and Ville on youtube: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w-WsyPeLEg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w-WsyPeLEg) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQJ4Q0SdJDo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQJ4Q0SdJDo)

[1] which started out with them pouring a bunch of meat and such into a jar and slurping it down, probably a joke at the large percentage of vegetarians at juggling conventions

<comment><USER21> Also a fellow juggler, but I have always felt the opposite, actually. (And have frequently felt like I'm in a minority.)

I could watch technicians practicing 8 balls, 10 rings, crazy site swaps, endless 5 club back crosses, etc. in a gym for hours. I have certainly enjoyed and appreciated the Jay Gilligan and Michael Moschen's of the world, but the overwhelming majority of "artsy" juggling just doesn't work, at least for me. For every Gilligan/Moschen/etc routine that I've seen that I've thought was well done, I feel like I've seen 4-5 that just fall totally flat for me.

At the other end of the spectrum, the "entertainer" jugglers that are aiming for a non-juggling audience I find almost impossible to watch. They are technically uninteresting, and I just can't get into the endless stream of lame jokes and winking at the crowd. Just awful. I would actually much prefer to watch Gatto practice than do one of his Vegas performances. The performances are impressive technically, but I find absolutely nothing about the presentation entertaining.

I think the reason that I feel this way is that I've always enjoyed the process of juggling (figuring how to do something, figuring out techniques for how to break down a trick into pieces, mastering each piece, etc) more than the end result (a polished, performable trick).

Back when I was juggling a lot, once I felt like I mastered a trick, it didn't really hold much interest for me anymore. When actually juggling, I would much rather spend my time trying to eke out a few more catches of 7 than toss 5 around more or less indefinitely.

But like I said, I've often felt like my preferences here are not all that common.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Even though the answer to the article's question is pretty easy (there are really very few athletic or show business fields of endeavor that you can actually make a good living doing), as I was reading it and watching the videos I was really glad that it was posted to HN. I think it's fascinating to learn about someone who's the best at something incredibly difficult.

</comment><comment><USER23> This reminds me a bit of the Satoshi Nakamoto Newsweek article - A journalist who wants to dig up a juicy story but gets nothing because the guy just wants some privacy. And then he writes an article about being empty handed, accompanied by any research that might have been done along the way.

The guy was a juggler, who probably didn't make tons of money and who was injured & discouraged, or even just going through some regular life struggles (we all have them). He's doing something different for now and harassing him won't change a thing. I feel like he just wanted to be left alone.

</comment><comment><USER24> > _The usual strategies of sportswriting depend on the writer and reader > sharing a set of passions and references [...] but you almost certainly > don't know as much about juggling as you do about football or baseball._

Nope, I knew more about juggling! The author only lost me at the end when it got into analogies with various names in basketball/tennis/golf that I was at most barely familiar with. But other than that, this is a great article. I realized midway through that I've actually seen Gatto's cirque act and didn't realize it was him at the time.

</comment><comment><USER25> Because there's no money in juggling?

<comment> jay-anderson There certainly is some money in juggling. The article mentioned 50k starting salary at cirque du soleil. But maybe working in concrete lets him spend more time with his family for roughly the same amount of money (or more).

<comment><USER26> In my youth, as a devastatingly mediocre musician, I got the opportunity to spend some time with a band. The sex and drinking looked fun, but the nighttime hours, and never being able to settle down with a nice girl and start a family, blow.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> _> >Will it get me another job? ... If you can't understand why I don't waste my energy on doing seven balls overhead for a minute to make a youtube video for people to watch, then you haven't entered the real world yet._

Resuming:

If you are at the top in one hierarchy that doesn't reward you according to your position, what should you do?

a) Stay and struggle (even with some niceties ex:social status).

b) Move to the bottom of another hierarchy where there's plenty to everybody (but where you don't have the skill or the passion to move up).

<comment><USER26> There exists a continuum of possibilities between those extremes.

<comment><USER27> _You can do anything, but not everything - David Allen_

I tried during last years (I'm also dealing with this problem) to be somewhere in the middle of this 2 solutions but doesn't work. To be in the top of one hierarchy (and get the niceties) you need focus. Nowadays to that continuum of possibilities I would call indecision.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I was very excited to see that there was a "Juggling" category on Grantland.

I was very disappointed when it turns out this was the only entry.

</comment><comment><USER29> This is a case of a performer aging and not being able to understand a new medium. Gatto asks if posting videos on youtube will get him another job. He never considers that _it_ can be a job.

<comment> jay-anderson Gatto seems to prefer the well-honed live performance to the recorded performance that may have worked on the 100th take. This is a matter of taste. It's also difficult to judge the skill of a performer in a recording (are they that good or did they edit their video to just have their successes).

This makes me think of classical music. Live performances have certainly been on the downward trend for many years. Glenn Gould devoted himself to just recording instead of live performances seeing this as the future of music (see [http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/06/06/050606crat_atlar...](http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/06/06/050606crat_atlarge?currentPage=all)). I think there's room for both live and recorded. Seeing only perfect performances can create unrealistic expectations in people's minds.

<comment><USER30> If your specialty is getting things perfect (almost) every time, and you are competing in an arena where the other people only have to keep trying until they get it right once, then you are going to have a bad day.

The comparison with live and recorded performances is spot on. There's probably a reason the major "live" performances of popular musicians are pre- recorded.

There may be a lesson here for those who are spending years perfecting technical skills when your competition are taking three-month bootcamps.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> This is really a great piece. I particularly enjoyed the intro. You must read it again after you've read the article to truly appreciate it.

</comment><comment><USER32> A good alternative to clubs are Jack Daniel's bottles.

</comment><comment><USER33> Honestly, the concrete how-to video description at the end is the most useful take away I got from the article. Good for him.

</comment><comment><USER34> This article's existence, headline included is the straight-forward definition of ridiculous.

"In the future, the truest sign of human existential crises came not from plague, wars, or conspiracy, but ineffable journalism."

It also comes with a self-esteem hedge in the opening just in case you don't read. What might be an interesting story would the the meta-article on the set of these types of stories.

</comment><comment><USER35> Is there a punchline there? Let me try...

"Why did the greatest juggler alive quit to open a concrete business?... Because juggling is insubstantial!"</comment>


Making Facebook's native mobile app faster using HTML5 - <AUTHOR> http://www.sencha.com/blog/the-making-of-fastbook-an-html5-love-story <comment><USER4> I ran the HTML5 app on my iTouch 4G running iOS 6 (roughly equivalent to iPhone 3GS) and compared it to the native FB app. The HTML5 app had noticeable lag in the swipe transitions. It also crashed once when loading a photo (only once though). Not to mention that they implement almost everything differently and leave out 90% of FB's features.

That being said, it was really smooth on my iTouch 5G.

The demo HTML5 app also runs in Safari. The problem is that Safari's Nitro JS engine is much faster than the older JS engine used in a UIWebView (I think the restriction is supposedly due to security).

For the moment, native is still the way to go, IMO. But I've always believed that at a certain point iPhones/Androids and their browsers will be powerful and efficient enough to negate any performance drawbacks to HTML 5. I think that point might arrive by the iPhone 6 or so, when developers might feel comfortable dropping support for the iPhone 3GS and equivalent. In fact, many devs are already dropping support for the iPhone 3GS.

<comment><USER5> Even when browsers are powerfull enough the mess what is trying to shoehorn technologies created for hyperlinked text into apps development will still be a mess. It may appeal for those who know only the said technologies, but frankly, they would be better of by just learning the native instead of spending time traying to fight quirks. As for the appeal "run everythere"—that's just some more quirks. Good luck with that. I am very experienced web developer and probably know html, css, js and all that jazz better than I do know Objective-C and Cocoa Touch, but building mobile apps with web technologies is the last thing I want to do.

<comment><USER6> What mess? HTML/CSS/JS is exceptionally good at building user interfaces. And you're on the right side of technology by attaching yourself to the HTML bandwagon. I would go as far as to say that if you're starting development on a new ("form-based") native app, your first choice should be HTML. You only go native if you have a very good reason to do so.

<comment><USER7> Because each single browser out there has a different understanding of what HTML/CSS/JS means.

Making web sites that comply to customer requirements down to pixel level, across all required target browsers is a major pain.

<comment><USER6> Even with multi-browser support, it isn't _that bad_. But we're not talking about websites here, are we? We're talking about using HTML/CSS/JS to build native apps for mobile devices - which are by and large webkit-based. This greatly simplifies everything.

<comment><USER8> Oh really? Let's take my webkit-based mobile browser then and look at an instagram picture. Hm, it's cut in half and I can't scroll. Mobile web apps are actually iOS webapps that most of the time work on Android. Stop pretending you actually care about standards and cross-platform, you're only interested in doing less work, learning fewer things and holding users firmly by the balls in the cloud.

<comment><USER9> My issue with HTML apps (like your issue) is many developers think it's perfectly okay to use that iOS interface on Android because Android does not force you to change it. The Android ecosystem is so polluted with apps like this that it almost makes me long for Google to put their foot down and start forcing UI compliance like Apple does.

It's bad enough Android users have to deal with legacy apps on their own OS that still use pre Android 3.0/4.0 UI conventions (or worse, poorly slap them on top of their old interface without consideration). The only apps that should be allowed to get away with rolling their own UI are games.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Why do we see plenty of articles saying that HTML5 can be as good or better than native code and no actual applications doing it?

Facebook and Google tried and miserably failed, LinkedIn and Twitter are probably the ones closest to actually doing it, but users still prefer the native version, why?

One I think is a big reason is clearly visible in the video: scrolling physics are different. It's annoying and feels wrong and I think people notice even if they probably don't know how to describe it.

Maybe with this Sencha contest we'll see some good ones.

<comment><USER11> We've yet to see a web app that meets or exceeds the experience offered by native desktop apps.

Natively built apps are almost always "better" because they're closer to the OS and implement the native UI conventions. At the same time, web apps are almost always cheaper, because you don't have to develop for each platform from scratch (or suffer a lowest common denominator experience by using a cross-platform non-web dev framework.)

Mobile has the same dynamic. Mobile web apps can get away with being worse, as long as they are "good enough" and available on all platforms. The app store's ease-of-shipping bonus has delayed this, but the shift to mobile web apps is pretty much inevitable because of the cost of development and the ease of deployment.

<comment><USER12> Why would a HTML5 app need to exceed the experience of a native app ?

It needs to meet the needs of the user, that's all.

And if that can be done with X-platform HTML5 then that might be the advantage the developer is looking for.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'll be saying this as a user.

I wish most developers would turn to HTML5 today, like right now, and avoid native apps at all cost unless there is really no alternative.

Why?

Because I remember the browser wars and how much it was a terrible idea and the terrible experience it made for users who simply could not experience the internet from a single starting point. This time it's not simply a matter of downloading another browser, if there's content I want to consume and there's not a native app for my phone, what do I do? I buy a different one? What about the content that I already consume and that's not over there? Should I have multiple phones?

I could not care less if it's optimize to integrated well with the native environment or some whatnot, let the browser handle that with default behavior. I want the content, the feature, and not wait for companies to port over apps from one place to the next.

This platform cult is pretty meaningless to me, in fact I don't even want to buy any device right now because I'm pretty sure I'll get burned as a user either way. The only platform I'm betting my money on as a user is the upcoming Firefox OS. Hopefuly Mozilla will be able to undo the damage done in this fragmented mess, again.

<comment><USER14> I was with you until you said "This platform cult is pretty meaningless to me." Actually the platform wars are quite meaningful insofar as they represent large-scale manipulation of consumers. Both Apple and Google are playing the following game: hey consumer, here's a shiny device, it's pretty cheap and then we lock you into a 2-year contract, meanwhile you acquire apps that can only be run an iPhone, and now even if you wanted to go to Android, you are faced with the prospect of ditching your entire software library (or vice- versa). It's called lock-in and it's a long-term manipulation of a market. I'm sure that both Apple and Google rationalize that it's a way to recoup R&D costs, and that's true enough, but it's a _sneaky_ way to do it.

There's also the not insignificant problem of app security. Not so long ago there was a news item about the FB native app accessing contacts and uploading them to FB servers. The web app cannot do that, and that's a Good Thing.

There's also another reason why HTML5 apps are better than native: they are composable. There isn't much out there other than search engines that takes advantage of this fact, but webapps can be composed, parsed, and otherwise uniformly manipulated in useful and interesting ways. Android and iOS do indeed offer some integration points for their native apps, but nowhere near at the level that the web allows today.

<comment><USER8> The web app already has all my data on a server somewhere. And that web app is 99% of the time closed source. And the company can cut me off, change the TOS or sell my info to advertisers. Now THAT's a lockin.

While you identified the problem, the solution is a truly open mobile OS, not webapps.

<comment><USER14> How does a truly open mobile OS (and applications, presumably) solve the problem of vendor-specific data lock-in? Data lock-in is a totally separate, and far more difficult, problem. Part of the reason is that our data a) probably wouldn't exist, and b) probably doesn't make sense out of the context of being mixed together with everyone else's data. There is a strong a priori centralizing force for some important kinds of data.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The future is bright for HTML5 apps, clearly. There will come a time when everyone's phone is fast enough to run apps like the FB clone Sencha made and the need for native apps will start to diminish. However, we're still in the transition period where there are a sufficient number of older phones on the market that _don't_ run HTML5 apps well, so until they are filtered out your best option is still native.

I do hope this app silences the HTML5 critics out there who say you can't get a good UX with HTML5, though. The proof is in the pudding.

<comment><USER16> >The future is bright for HTML5 apps, clearly. There will come a time when everyone's phone is fast enough to run apps like the FB clone Sencha made and the need for native apps will start to diminish.

I believe you're wrong. The question isn't whether HTML can keep up with what exists today but what is offered in the future natively.

We are already living in a world with data caps and it will be so for the foreseeable future. That alone hinders the capabilities of the web. We're not even including the distrust that consumers have for paying for something unless it is through a system owned by Apple, Amazon, Google and MS. This is even including Gen Y users.

I have no doubt that the web is the future but the future is a ways off. There are just too many obstacles that are in the way currently.

<comment><USER15> I'm not sure I understand the connection to data caps. HTML5 allows you to cache apps and data locally, and wrappers like Trigger.io and Phonegap allow you to run an HTML5 app completely on the client without any reliance on data from an outside network.

<comment><USER5>
      > HTML5 allows you to cache apps and data locally

In theory, yes. In practice: after all that shamanic dance trying to get all this to work you will wonder, what's the point.

Native is just much much simpler to develop and more performant to run. Yes, you loose the cross-platorm appeal, but which will appeal more to your potential user: an app crafted to run on a few platforms (and therefore alien on all of them), or an app crafted with a specific platform in mind? Not many predict that desktop apps will be replaced by web apps soon, but for some reason this a popular view regarding mobile. But it is backwards: on desktop you have much more room to manoeuvre.

I think it is more likely we will see the web going a bit back to its roots with a more pronounced cloud-web gaining prominence, basically backend servers talking to apps (and browsers) API calls and JSON exchange.

<comment><USER15> > after all that shamanic dance trying to get all this to work you will > wonder, what's the point.

Shamantic dance? It's trivial to the point of being a non-factor. You wrap your app in Phonegap, and make json requests to the web if you need data from there. Otherwise, it is stored and runs on the client.

> Not many predict that desktop apps will be replaced by web apps soon, but > for some reason this a popular view regarding mobile.

For most things, desktop apps _were_ replaced by web apps. Which is why Facebook doesn't maintain a desktop app (or Hacker News for that matter). HTML5 proponents have never made the claim that it will replace all native apps. Instead, it will replace data/list style apps like Facebook or productivity apps, which frankly, make up the vast majority of apps in the app store.

<comment><USER5>
      > You wrap your app in Phonegap, and make json requests to
      > the web if you need data from there.

You know what? I think you should try to do all those things you deem so easy, and then we can talk. Or you can google for phonegap success stories.

      > For most things, desktop apps were replaced by web apps

Can you name a few? I was impressed with GMail in 2004, in 2012 I am using Sparrow to read and write my email.

      > Instead, it will replace data/list style apps

In Cocoa Touch I have highly optimised UITableView for that. In HTML I have what, UL, OL and LI? And If I need to handle selection, edition, caching, cells with different layouts: HTML5 is still superior? Should I send markup over the web too? Or should I go mad trying to make offline cache work properly? If I am doing native I have CoreData. If I am going web route what do I have, IndexedDB? Or do I?

<comment><USER17> >And If I need to handle selection, edition, caching, cells with different layouts

I'm not going to touch the rest of your comments but mutability of presentation is really not the place to wage your battle against HTML/CSS/JS from. Dynamic presentation is really web tech's strong point.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I was tasked with creating the phone app for the company I work for. Here are the key points:

      - The project took 2 months for me to learn the sencha framework AND to build the app from scratch (it's live in the app store).

      - The app performs well on the iphone 4, but the best performance is on the iphone 4S and later.

      - The Android version is not as smooth. It's significantly slower. This means it's not truly cross-platform.

      - People with the iphone 4S / 5 don't know it's not a native app until I tell them.

<comment><USER15> Similar experience here. We actually decided to scrap our Sencha app and go with a hybrid app where some UI components were done using native code and most of the app was done in vanilla HTML5/CSS3/Javascript. It's working out very well so far.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'd like to clarify one thing. The "native" Android app that was tested, isn't actually native. Native newsfeed shipped in Facebook for Android 2.0, but 1.9.2 was used in the comparison. Thus, the comparison was between two html5 implementations of newsfeed. That said, I'd love to see a side by side video with Facebook for Android 2.0.

<comment><USER20> give the comparison a try. fastbook (the sencha html5 facebook app) is here fb.html5isready.com.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I suspect they misunderstood the "HTML5 is not ready" statement. Indeed, HTML5 can perform, and the future is bright. However, as plenty of people in the comments here have mentioned, for mainstream devices.. it's not ready. The frameworks are still coming up a learning curve, the hardware devices out there are still struggling to adopt proper HTML5 support and decent performance. Those points alone lend credit to the fact that it's just not ready.

<comment><USER15> Yes, but it _will_ be ready, and the question is will devs and firms that have invested all their time into native development be ready too? It would be prudent to be ahead of the curve when the horizon is so clearly visible.

<comment><USER21> The problem with being a platform that serves such a large audience (indeed, one that gets paid based on the eyeballs it can sustain) is that you need to cater to the largest range of devices and their performance. It's the same reason enterprises still support such obscure browsers and OS's (XP/IE6). They just aren't willing to sacrifice the overall experience of those who are slow to upgrade in favor of pushing the technology forward.

<comment><USER15> You don't have to support obscure markets if you don't want to. I'd say covering iOs 5+ and Android 2.3+ is going to cover an area most companies would be pretty happy with.

And let's not forget that OS fragmentation affects Native developers just like it does HTML5 developers (especially on Android).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Nitro Javascript engine? It could be an important difference between this test and FB's app. Safari gets it. It seems ambiguous still whether UIWebView users get it.

A more apples-to-apples comparison would be to put it in a iOS app running UIWebView and see if the performance is maintained. I'd certainly be interested in the results.

<comment><USER23> It's not ambiguous. On iOS, only Safari can JIT JavaScript. This is because Apple doesn't trust your app enough to let you made code pages. It also doesn't trust the app it makes when you install a web app to your home page (and it's not just a Safari bookmark).

I suspect the latter may change, but I wouldn't count on the former.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Good work. But they are cheating in one main spot:

\- they use a proxy to cut down data transfer

Good choice, but comparing it with the orignal app is not valid anymore (its not really html5 that is making it faster)

Anyway its still a very fast mobile app, and html5 is sometimes the best choice to make.

Because it is very expensive to write a different app for all platforms currently. However, currently, it is also very time consuming to have a html5 app that is on-par with native, and works well in both android and iphone.

So its a tradeoff really, html5 is not better than native, or vice versa.

Like so many things in life, it depends :-)

<comment><USER25> > comparing it with the orignal app is not valid anymore

Facebook could have done the same thing with their app too, so I don't see how this affects validity.

<comment><USER24> If I am comparing the speed of two cars, but one car contains 5 persons while the other one only contains 1, then it's an unfair comparison right?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> To me the most impressive thing is that Sencha Touch can run at any reasonable performance level. Has anyone used the framework? iirc there's >1mb debug JS, randomly-generated element IDs, a mess in general. The thing would hang my chrome for a couple moments just to parse the js. Obviously this is solved with minification/dynamic script loading, but Sencha's kitchen-sink approach really doesn't seem to help much in the area of performance.

<comment><USER11> You're supposed to use the build tools to generate a file with only the subset you need for your project.

By the way, the download time for the native app is also non-zero. With appcache you pay the framework's download cost only once. Admittedly it still needs parsing to load, but i haven't had this seconds-long parsing experience myself in my sencha touch app.

<comment><USER27> > You're supposed to use the build tools to generate a file with only the > subset you need for your project.

Both Ext and Sencha Touch are very monolithic. When you use Sencha Command to pair your app down to just what it uses, it still pulls in well over 90% of the framework.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Here's an interview Robert Scoble did with the guys from Sencha about their Facebook app: <https://plus.google.com/+Scobleizer/posts/ZtnZNrCfWv6>

</comment><comment><USER28> HTML5 is cool and you can do a lot with it, but it has some very real drawbacks - like Android.

Also, if you are doing a bunch of optimizations to make it fast on HTML5, then you're basically doing the same work as writing a native app, so what are you gaining by doing a HTML5?

Seriously, at some point you can get a better user experience, have better access to native API's and can really leverage the full abilities of the device by going native. So, you know, go native.

Disclaimer: I have wrote HTML5 mobile apps and I think it's a great developer experience, but it feels worse as a user.

<comment><USER15> But this argument makes no sense. When you go native, you have to write N number of apps for N number of platforms you want to support. The point is that making a great mobile app is _hard_ no matter what stack you choose to use.

It's also a bit disingenuous to say you are forced to optimize every HTML5 app. The whole point of Sencha's blog post is to advertise the fact that they've abstracted away all those optimizations you need to do so that developers can focus on building cross platform HTML5 mobile apps.

<comment><USER29> HTML5 is not the only way to achieve cross-platform. In native world, HTML5 is just "one of them". There are many cross-platform frameworks and you can choose any one you like. Look this report.

Cross-Platform Developer Tools 2012 | VisionMobile [http://www.visionmobile.com/product/cross-platform- developer...](http://www.visionmobile.com/product/cross-platform-developer- tools-2012/) > the landscape of 100+ cross-platform developer tools

Actually this is a big reason I dislike HTML5 (or _I think HTML5 is wrong_ ). Developers don't have freedom on languages and APIs. There are no healthy competition.

And don't forget that web browser itself is a multi-platform application. You can use Chrome and Firefox on Windows/Mac/iOS/Android. These are written in a "cross-platform language" C++.

In addition, most video games are written in C++ so many games are released on multi platforms (Xbox360/PS3/PC/iOS/Android). I suspect most web developers don't even know this...

<comment><USER15> > HTML5 is not the only way to achieve cross-platform.

Nobody here, as far as I could tell, was suggesting that.

> In addition, most video games are written in C++ so many games are released > on multi platforms (Xbox360/PS3/PC/iOS/Android). I suspect most web > developers don't even know this...

But wait, aren't iOS apps written in Objective-C using Cocoa Touch and Android apps written in Java? I don't think you can simply write your app in C++ and call it cross platform.

> Actually this is a big reason I dislike HTML5 (or I think HTML5 is wrong). > Developers don't have freedom on languages and APIs. There are no healthy > competition.

I've honestly never heard lack of freedom as an argument _against_ HTML5. This argument is strange. How is iOS any more "free" than the web?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> They take offense to Zuckerburg's "HTML5 isn't quite there yet" comment but in order to keep their implementation quick they had to build a custom iframe framework in addition to their TaskQueue and AnimationQueue implementations to replicate the fb timeline. It seems like that was part of Zuck's point - <USER2> would a company with a deadline take on all that technical debt to replicate things that you essentially get for free on a native platform?

<comment><USER15> You're forgetting one small point: you have to write two (or more) native apps once you go that route. Hence the reason Facebook's Android native app came out roughly 6 months after their iOS native app did.

<comment><USER30> That's true but wouldn't you (as of today) still be much more comfortable going that route with a non-trivial project? Less time spent on the cutting edge battling the idiosyncrasies of the platform and more time building your app.

<comment><USER15> It depends on the resources available. If I were a CEO and the company was flush with cash, I'd just brute force it by hiring native developers across all platforms or farm it out to specialized native dev shops. If was a CEO of a smaller company tight on cash with a bunch of web developers, however, I'd go the HTML5 or hybrid route because it'd be the best utilization of my company's time and resources. This isn't a black and white issue.

<comment><USER31> Definitely agree. I'm not sure why many people think its just so cut and dry. The tradeoffs between html5 vs native are pretty much known at this point. Take those and rationalize along with the resources you have available, the cost, and time you can afford. Just ship something.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Looking at this from a different point of view maybe altogether, one of the big issues I think concerning HTML5 mobile web apps (not used in a native app wrapper to get included in the appstore) is __discovery __.

Where do I actually find compelling mobile web app user experience when I am trying to solve a problem in my web browser as a user when I search using a search engine?

I noticed a few years ago that Google cut out their mobile only results option - and now when you search for anything on a smart phone you get a mish mash of mobile friendly and conventional web optimised results. For a little while there Google would put a little mobile icon next to mobile optimized results - but that has gone too. I know perhaps the point of mobile is moot now - <USER3> we have a sizeable amount of tablets accessing websites too. But just in my own personal research all my friends who aren't techy say they much prefer sites that look right on their 'touch' (be it mobile or tablet). For instance, is there even such a thing as a 'mobile web app store' out there?

If consumers had an easier way of finding great mobile web apps perhaps this would grow this channel? I'd be interested in perspectives on this - maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way.

I'd also like to make the case that I think HTML5 will continue to make a very important contribution moving forward - why? Because as we get more devices, it's really starting to get silly how many apps I constantly need updated and feel like I need syncing. I think as prices come down we will find ourselves with several devices for home, out and about and at work - using the 'fat client' model of installing all these apps just gets annoying.

</comment><comment><USER33> A lot of the points that they make in the video are just flaws with Facebook's implementation of the app, rather than being a point for HTML5 or a point against native.

Truth is - HTML5 apps can be made to perform well but there are limits. Battery life suffers and you may find in future that the cool animation/whatever you wanted to add in is too laggy (especially on older devices).

<comment><USER15> Older devices will slowly dissipate from the market because of the ubiquitous two-year contracts, though, and eventually everyone's phones will be capable of delivering native-like performance on HTML5 apps. It's only a matter of time.

<comment><USER34> The moment older devices slowly fade out from the market, and new high end devices started to fade in, native app speed now doubled.

<comment><USER15> Doubled from awesome to... awesome? Native performance is the goal. I don't see how much better a data heavy native app like FB can get, but I do see how HTML5 apps can get better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> _It started with the implementation of an Infinite List Component that handles items with unknown sizes. Only a very small set of DOM nodes is actually created to fill in the actual visible screen area. They will then be constantly recycled to render next / previous data on-demand. As a result, memory footprint is kept minimal, regardless of the amount of data in the Store. Making this work is the easy part. Making it fast with the complexity and variety of items such as News Feed stories is the real challenge. The bottleneck lies within the core processes that a browser has to perform: layout and compositing._

I wished jQuery Mobile has _Infinite List Component_ that handles the list item recycling the last time I used it. It is the equivalent of UITableViewCell's dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier.

</comment><comment><USER36> I have just finished a mobile app in HTML5. Although it works fine on iOS and Android 4.x, it caused many problems on Android 2.x. As Android 2.x still has more than 50% of Android market share it is a platform we cannot ignore. I am sticking to native development for now.

<comment><USER37> _we recommend at least iOS 5 or Android 4.1_

I agree with you. I was going to ask this same questoin. From TFA, they stated above. Well, that _really_ sounds like Mark Zuckerberg didn't know what he was talking about at the beginning of this year!

A lot of people are still on Android 2.X as you have stated, and a lot of people are on slow Android devices. I know several people on ZTE Blades running 2.3 which were available over a year ago for less than £100. Sure, not the snappiest of devices, but usable. What is the HTML5 version going to be like for these users?

Blah blah blah, hardware limitations, you can't limit yourself to lowest denominator etc. But Facebook _HAS_ to support all these users. And it's not just users in the western world. There are millions of users in third world countries who pretty much exclusively access Facebook from mobile phones, usually not the latest spec (or even close) or most up to date s/w version (I doubt many would even know how to update it).

I agree that web apps are the way to go. But it is VERY much going to depend on your target audience.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> I'd say the problems the Facebook team ran into were related to the universal difficulties of HTML5 development. The tools are nothing compared to native app development. In making native apps, developers can visually create the GUI, double-click an element and immediately program its response. But with HTML5, everything is done programmatically, with great pains. When you run into problems you have to debug JavaScript, CSS, HTML, and any client libraries, possibly written in yet another language. The tools just aren't there, so continuing to maintain an HTML5 app that performs quickly and nicely like "Fastbook" does is far too costly, considering how much more easily a native app can be created and maintained.

</comment><comment><USER39> HTML5 can be fast just like Native applications, but you need to know how to make it faster. Hopefully we are going to get more awesome libraries and frameworks like Sencha Touch to make our life easier.

<comment><USER40> This. It's a lot harder to screw up when using native SDKs vs. the plethora of HTML5 frameworks, some which are more mature than others but none really seem to have a "standardized" way to easily make a performant app in the same way that the native SDKs do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> _We saw the latest generation of mobile devices — running at least iOS 5 or Android 4.1 — push ever increasing performance and HTML5 implementation scores._

Do the new native FB apps only run on iOS5+ and Android 4.1+? HTML5 may be ready on those platforms, but Android still has a lot of 2.x phones floating around. How do the HTML 5 benchmarks for iOS 5 run on the original iPhone 4?

</comment><comment><USER42> A couple of months ago I mentioned these same notions about the Facebook app.

<http://jairaj.org/2012/08/27/facebook-for-ios.html>

Although I have to admit that Sencha's implementation isn't all that great. If you're going to offer an alternative, at least make it better than the other option.

</comment><comment><USER43> I agreed that writing app in HTML5/CSS/JS is easy to mantain. But why not get access to those native features too? Hybrid apps seem to be very logical way to build apps now. Take a look at many emerging services like <http://trigger.io> and get the best of both world.

</comment><comment><USER44> This is cool, however, I'd say HTML5 has a bright future regarding web-based apps, or apps with a specific use case where you pull some data and display it in a list/table view etc .. HTML5 will never be as capable as native if you have many other use cases (ex: image/video processing, music recognition ) ..

<comment><USER45> _"HTML5 will never be as capabable as native..."_

I think its very possible to imagine a world where HTML5 can be just as good as native. It comes down to two things:

1) HTML5 needs more JavaScript APIs to access hardware like camera, contacts, etc. It's is not very difficult to imagine HTML6 (if you will) supporting this in much the same way that it supports geolocation today.

2) Improved JavaScript performance. It's common knowledge that the embedded web views on iOS are much less capable than Safari. There's no reason to think this would continue forever. Furthermore, better JavaScript performance makes things like image progressing, music recognition possible.

Right now, you are absolutely correct that HTML5 is not as capable as native. No argument there. But, this gap narrows as time goes on. I firmly believe the opposite of you; we will eventually see a time when web-based applications rival native apps in terms of power and functionality. You can already do some awesome image processing stuff using canvas and JavaScript.

This is only the beginning...

<comment><USER46> The idea of HTML5 is to avoid using JS in your app.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> If you insert a big image into the DOM, MobileSafari locks up for quite a few frames (whether or not it's preloaded.) Sencha's implementation just swaps pictures when you're not doing anything else! But most native apps can update photos while you're actually scrolling around.

</comment><comment><USER48> Looks and functions terribly in Internet Explorer 10 on Windows Phone 8 unfortunately.

<comment><USER11> Sencha's wp8 support is in beta, it doesn't ship until next year.

<comment><USER49> so then its not ready.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> Where are the benchmark reports on phone's from 1.5 to 4.1? 64% of android phone's are still pre-honeycomb(3.0). HTML5 on Android is good now but it sucks on those earlier phones. I am sure Facebook has to take care of everyone.

<comment><USER51> For those who need a source for segmentation of android versions in use: <http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html>

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> I think the problem with HTML5 is that Android and iOS treat it like a second class citizen. For all its faults, the one thing Windows 8 got right was that it allows developers to build native apps using HTML5.

</comment><comment><USER53> The problem with HTML5 are the different vendors with their different opinions. And that problem will make native apps faster and easier to maintain than html5 for the next few years....

</comment><comment><USER54> IMHO if in 2013 a HTML5 application needs iframe + js proxies hacks to perform faster, there is something deeply wrong.

Sorry for my English

</comment><comment><USER55> All the HTML haters (I jest, but that's not a totally unfair characterization of some here) should check out the Chrome team's efforts for Web Components (although I think the name just changed) for Dart/W3C spec, and AngularJS.

They make building HTML apps much, much, much more similar to building native applications.</comment>


Dangerous Implications of Treating APIs as Copyrightable - <AUTHOR> https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/05/oracle-v-google-and-dangerous-implications-treating-apis-copyrightable <comment><USER2> One this I ( and I believe everybody? ) was very worried when I first read the claims of the lawsuit was: "Oh my god, if Oracle win, it could change the whole Software industry".

The EFF is today relaying their fears over the whole open source world that could be at threat for softwares like Samba - that EFF mentionned - but many others like NTFS drivers, or interoperability layers that make deep use of the claimed "APIs" to work.

Hope that the judges will come to reason about the implications of their decision.</comment>


E Ink Smartphones are the big new trend of 2019 - <AUTHOR> https://goodereader.com/blog/e-paper/e-ink-smartphones-are-the-big-new-trend-of-2019 <comment><USER2> So there are a few new developments, none of which have been widely released. Hardly the big trend of 2019.

<comment><USER3> With 2019 a third over, it would have to be ramp up pretty sharply to be a "big trend". Maybe it'll be a big tend in _announcements_ , followed by a big tend in actual purchases for 2020 rather than 2019.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I love this! In particular i'd love to see a version of the Purism Librem 5 phone with EInk display.

</comment><comment><USER5> I'd be down for this, if they were only available in my country.</comment>


Facebook Explains Why It's Supporting Congress' CISPA Cybersecurity Bill - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/04/13/facebook-cispa-support/ <comment><USER2> This sounds like bullshit. Facebook can already share cybersecurity information with the government/companies when their networks are under attack. The devil's in the details with exemption from liability for sharing or selling user information with the government and other corporations.

I have no idea why people are attacking anti-CISPA people saying that CISPA is not that bad without giving reasons why CISPA is a good law.

Because of the exemption of liability for sharing information, it seems like Google won't protest this bill.

Government and corporations win, and the people lose.

<comment><USER3> Nobody is saying it's a good law, or an improvement. All I feel is that it doesn't change much: as you said, Facebook can already share that information. What requirement is there that they must be "under attack"? This really just doesn't change anything.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is the same story over and over again.

Fear propaganda (the notorious "cyber attacks") used to increase the clutch of the surveillance state (or rather, surveillance corporations) on our lives.

<comment><USER5> Why change something that works for them. Its the Problem Reaction Solution Paradigm that has been used on populations for thousands for years.

The government creates or exploits a problem blaming it on others. Then the government offers the solution that was planned long before the crisis.

What saddens me is not that they are doing it, but that most people seem unable to understand why they would do it. Because in a democracy, the majority of people need to understand something for it to be changed by democratic means. Hence, no change is coming by that method. Ever.

How do you control a democracy? By controlling the media, because the media controls the majority. Internet is a big threat to that. Hence its currently being attacked. Facebook is part of this attack, because it puts millions of peoples actions under the control and monitoring of a single corporation, who in turn shares all the information with the government.

Fascism doesnt like diversity, it likes uniformity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Summary: We want to be able to turn over any information the government wants without being blamed.</comment>


Medieval books reveal the extreme methods with which artists achieved their reds - <AUTHOR> https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2017/02/14/the-red-of-painters/ <comment><USER2> For a brief history of all the other colors, I recommend looking at this veritable hokum post[0]. Make sure to look at the expanded timeline with explanations below infographic.

[0] [http://www.veritablehokum.com/comic/mummy-brown-and-other- hi...](http://www.veritablehokum.com/comic/mummy-brown-and-other-historical- colors/)

</comment><comment><USER3> There's a mention of Mexican cochineal, but nothing about what it supplanted in Europe, the Polish cochineal, which was traded widely in Europe.

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

I also found this bit from the MET:

[https://issuu.com/metmuseum/docs/cochineal_winter_2010_bulle...](https://issuu.com/metmuseum/docs/cochineal_winter_2010_bulletin)

<comment><USER4> I don't remember the source, but apparently one of the many analyses of Stradivarius violins concluded that one of his red pigments was from the Americas.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> And for a much broader look at artists' use of color over time, check out the book "Color A Natural History Of The Palette".

[0] [http://www.powells.com/book/color-a-natural-history-of- the-p...](http://www.powells.com/book/color-a-natural-history-of-the- palette-9780812971422/62-0)</comment>


What are different ways Airbnb/Expedia/Booking.com does their online marketing - <AUTHOR> Can someone help me understand what are the online marketing techniques used by leading travel brands such as airbnb/expedia/booking. Also it would be interesting to know the technology used for their marketing team for promotion/offer management/travel segmentation/campaign management/performance dashboards etc <comment><USER2> All mentioned companies use multiple marketing techniques, from SEO, affiliate partnerships, PR (public relations), content marketing, paid social, ppc, referrals etc. It depends on who they are targeting and market they are operating in.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you. Let us take US market as an example. Can you please help me understand what (successful) solutions are available in the market for 1) SEO 2) Affiliate partnerships 3) PR 4) Content Marketing 5) PPC 6) referrals (how is it different from Affiliate partnership)</comment></comment>


Quiver 2: The Programmer's Notebook for Mac - <AUTHOR> https://itunes.apple.com/app/quiver-programmers-notebook/id866773894?mt=12

<comment><AUTHOR> Quiver 2 is finally here! Quiver is a notebook built for programmers. It lets you easily mix text, code and Markdown within one note, edit code with an awesome code editor, live preview Markdown and LaTeX cells, and find any note instantly via the full-text search.

Quiver 2 brought new features such as cloud syncing, shared notebooks, Markdown preview, presentation mode, and more.

[http://happenapps.com/#quiver](http://happenapps.com/#quiver)</comment>


Estimote Beacons with UWB can now automatically create floor plans - <AUTHOR> http://blog.estimote.com/post/154460651570/estimote-beacons-with-uwb-can-now-automatically <comment><USER2> I'm really interested in this market. Does anyone know where having easy-to- build floorplans are actually useful? Especially without expensive HW setups like this?</comment>


Tamagothi (1997) - <AUTHOR> http://www.studiohunty.com/tamagothi/ <comment><USER2> See this article: Building the Infinite Matrix of Tamagotchis

[http://hackaday.com/2015/11/24/building-the-infinite- matrix-...](http://hackaday.com/2015/11/24/building-the-infinite-matrix-of- tamagotchis/)

A limitless network of Tamagachi has been created using some amazing tricks to feed, socialize, and monitor the beast now known as the Tamagachi Singularity.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_-e_cJ1-Gs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_-e_cJ1-Gs)

<comment><USER3> Thanks for sharing the talk

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I made a modern virtual pet, for iOS and Apple Watch. Apple Watch seems like the perfect modern form factor for one of these.

[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/raise- emoji/id1045353760](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/raise-emoji/id1045353760)

<comment> J-dawg This got me thinking, a virtual pet could be a great way of gameifying positive activities. Maybe you could exercise your pet by going for a run yourself, or make it more intelligent by doing a language tutorial. You could connect any fitness or learning app that provides an API. Every pet would end up being unique because of the unique combination of activities done by the owner.

Right now I can't figure out if that's a good idea or a really terrible one. Do I really want a virtual dog looking at me angrily all day because I didn't take him for his morning walk?

<comment><USER5> Nintendo released one of these back during the original tamagatchi craze. It had a pedometer built in, so you needed to exercise to feed your Pokemon.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_Pikachu](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_Pikachu)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Oh wow, I remember this from my school days! (and the Tamagotchi on which it is based, of course). Funny to see it still online. I remember 13-year-old me thinking it was hilarious at the time...

Thanks for the nostalgia trip, OP.

<comment><USER7> > (and the Tamagotchi on which it is based, of course).

Thanks for that, I thought I was in another Berenstain time loop for a second.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I would love a modernized tamagothi, I live in London and aren't allowed pets, but I would love a wee virtual cat.

Face recognition is at the point where you can recognise different faces (members in the family) so that would make the kitty happy and play a bit. Throw a ball around and play fetch, that sort of thing

<comment><USER9> You should try My Talking Tom - [http://talkingtomandfriends.com/tom/](http://talkingtomandfriends.com/tom/). (links to stores in the link). If you're more keen on female cats, there's also My Talking Angela (or other virtual pets from the series). Check it out, it's really well made and tons of fun ;).

<comment><USER10> Another very popular one is Pou.

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=me.pou.app&hl=...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=me.pou.app&hl=en)

It's also an impressive story of a single developer.

[http://www.wamda.com/2013/05/the-24-year-old-lebanese- entrep...](http://www.wamda.com/2013/05/the-24-year-old-lebanese-entrepreneur- behind-pou-top-mobile-kids-game)

I think Pou is much more similar to the original Tamagotchi, and very impressive too.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I remember the Tamagotchi crazy back in the day (this is a very well done play on it, really enjoyed the linked site) but never owned one (and am not sure how they worked exactly on a technical level). I wonder if it is technically possible that some of them are still "alive"? I wonder if the programmers made any implicit assumptions about lifespan that were tested by now (assuming the batteries could be changed without "killing" them).

<comment><USER12> Yes, tamagotchis did age and eventually died even if taken care of.

</comment></comment><comment> J-dawg This reminds me of people holding funerals for their Aibo robot dogs. The future is going to get very weird.

[http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and- tech/new...](http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and- tech/news/japanese-hold-funerals-for-robot-dogs-after-sony-lets-them- die-10098773.html)

</comment><comment><USER13> As an aside, the game that launched the Sony Pocketstation was inspired by tamagochi. "Doko demo issho"

You played with your characters and they would ask you questions like "Tell me something you like". You'd type in something like say "banana". The character would then ask something like "Is it something you (a) use (b) eat (c) drive (d) wear ..." and it might ask "How much do you like it? (a) a lot (b) so-so (c) a little".

Later you might meet a friend, Jill, with a pocketstation. The pocketstations could communicate via infrared. You'd play hangman against each other. While that was happening, in the background the game would transfer some (all?) of your info.

Later you'd be playing with your character and it might say "Hey, did you know Jill really likes bananas?"

It was a big hit in Japan. It never came out in the USA IIRC.

</comment><comment><USER14> Oh gosh, the standalone redistributable flash player with a swf embedded. I remember those.

<comment><USER15> Adobe 'air'? Pretty much Adobe trying to re-make java the flash way.

<comment><USER16> Could always tell when you were using a Flex or Air UI, they had a very distinctive clunkiness.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I owned one of these. I remember them being a genuine problem in school. Some parents would actually agree to look after the pet while the child was at school - not bad for such a simple algorithm.

</comment><comment><USER18> I tried some of those operations (beat, specifically) on some of my sister's 'gotchis; mostly affects the owner, I found.

</comment><comment><USER19> There's probably a joke in the name but being not a native speaker can someone explain it to me please ?

<comment><USER20> It's Tamogachi but with the word "Goth" (short for Gothic, typically used to describe macabre / death-related things. Lots of the colour black, etc.).

<comment><USER19> Got(h) it, thanks !</comment></comment></comment>


Scientific Experts Release Proposals for Loosening the Lockdown - <AUTHOR> https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/scientific-experts-release-proposals-for-loosening-the-lockdown-a-f6247ecc-0583-45b5-a269-ebf385c1e698 <comment><USER2> July 4. To do it before then is problematic. By then we'll have a vaccine that can be used, though it will bypass most of the testing. By then the virus hopefully will not be as widespread. And by then we should have widespread testing available, and therefore widespread contact tracing.

To do it before then is irresponsible and an invitation to an even greater pandemic spike that we might not get under control.

The symbolism of July 4 will also play well with the American people, which will help lift peoples spirits. We will have to be careful to still have bans on gathering in groups more than 10 though, so no massive July 4 celebrations.</comment>


A Thought Experiment About Republicans - <AUTHOR> http://blog.dilbert.com/post/156850873521/a-thought-experiment-about-republicans <comment><USER2> this is just dumb and shallow and I'm not a lefty.</comment>