Dongle dilemma provokes Apple price cut - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37880723 <comment><USER2> Apple is becoming more and more of a fashion accessory. They do very well with this approach. When they dropped the audio jack in the iPhone 7 for a dongle mediated or wireless interface I thought they jumped the shark. It appears their sales are suffering because of it. Until 2012 or so I had a laptop with a serial port, because working with serial devices was unreliable with usb to serial dongles. Declaring that standard usb ports are legacy will only slow sales of laptops. Very few people want to keep up with a wad of dongles. Laptops should be convenient. It is relatively easy to plug into any presentation display with an hdmi cable and I am happy to have a VGA port on my circa 2012 laptop (ram and ssd upgraded). When people can't use their machine like everyone else, they don't think "Ohh I have such a modern laptop". They think "This is inconvenient and unproductive. I will think twice about buying this in the future."

<comment><USER3> The macbook pro was a workhorse. Well built, lots of connectivity and useful for whatever life threw at it. A little bulky, Not sleek and elegant. Macbook air (and new macbook) are the sleek light and beautiful models.

They're making the macbook pro more like the "air" and "macbook", pretty to look at but much less functional. People who like the OS are left with no where to get the machine they need and aren't happy.

While usb c is the future, its going to be a long time before the usb a port goes away.

The lack of ports usable without dongles significantly hurt functionality. sometimes its just the number of ports, for example: College intern with air bemoans the lack of ability to connect our fast wired internet and monitor at same time as one thunderbolt port. This kind of thing can't help but hurt your reputation. I use every port on my macbook rmbp except the sd card for bioinformatics job, (2 monitors [2 dongles], gig -ethernet[dongle], external drive, external keyboard and mouse). I could in theory get a dock, but its an unnecessary pain.

<comment><USER4> I think the claim of people with newer monitors is that the hub is built in. So no need for a separate dock, just plug your keyboard and mouse into your monitors (I do this on my Dells today) and then when you "dock" your laptop you now get power, Ethernet, display and peripherals all attached to the thing that's actually fixed in place (the displays).

Each of my Dell monitors has 2 or 3 USB ports (and today, I have to connect to them using a single USB to the laptop in addition to each display port connection). I think this new future won't be that bad, but it will require new displays.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> For reference, this article received a substantial number of comments yesterday:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12877381](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12877381)

<comment><USER6> I thought HN auto-redirects you to the main post if you try to post a duplicate? I wonder why the dups keep happening. It's not detecting them?

<comment><USER7> Two different URLs:

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37880723](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37880723)

[http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37880723](http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-37880723)

<comment><USER4> Maybe the mods could also de-dupe some of these hostnames (like m.nytimes.com and nytimes.com).

Though now thanks to AMP, it might make more sense to de-dupe on known prefixes rather than Host particularly. Sadly, for the BBC at least that won't work, since the URLs look like they do /amp instead of their usual sections:

[https://www.google.com/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/36788782?c...](https://www.google.com/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/36788782?client=safari)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The LG 4K and 5K monitors that were announced at the same time as the new MBPs have also had a substantial (temporary) price cut.

I think it's the pricing on the machines themselves that really startled people, though.

</comment><comment><USER9> They claim you cannot connect a new iPhone to a new MacBook Pro without a dongle. Even ignoring the fact that you probably don't have to, you can do this wirelessly. Is it really necessary to buy a dongle for your iPhone for anything realistic?

<comment><USER10> I didn't know you could charge over wireless! That's really cool!

<comment><USER9> Wow, downvotes for a reasonable question. I never need to connect my phone to my laptop. I've also spotted a pattern of the BBC saying dubiously truthful things recently in tech articles. Example from main evening news last week: "foreigners get better mobile reception in the U.K. than we do". So, no, they obviously don't. But they roam between providers (at cost), as has been the case for decades.

The phone comes with a charger.

<comment><USER11> It's not recent - their tech journalism has always been pretty poor. The BBC is a branch of the civil service culturally; anyone who understands science or tech but can't conjugate latin verbs stands no chance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Why and how is it a "dilemma"? If anything, it should be called a "bad product decision" \-- since they get rid of all of those ports.

</comment><comment><USER13> Not only are these not dongles, most people have never seen a dongle.

<comment><USER14> It sounds like you're using a different definition of "dongle" than most people?

<comment><USER15> Dongle was originally a thing that you plugged into a computer that allowed it to execute expensive licensed software like PRO/Engineer or Softimage.</comment></comment></comment>


IPad Magazine Readers to Publishers: More, Please - <AUTHOR> http://allthingsd.com/20111120/ipad-magazine-readers-to-publishers-more-please/?mod=socialflow

<comment><USER2> I haven't bought a physical book for nearly a year. I've got a pile of business magazines that I need to read, but I'd prefer they were on my iPad as well.

Wired magazine's iPad app allows me to access all issues covered by my current and previous subscriptions to its physical magazine. I wish more publishers would do the same.</comment>


Encrypt the Web Report: Who's Doing What - <AUTHOR> http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/11/encrypt-web-report-whos-doing-what

<comment><USER2> Probably relevant: [https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/index.html](https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/index.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> Cryptic.io Founder here, SSL is far from perfect, and the recommended practices really should be standard. Especially if they want us to trust them with our personal files. But thank you EFF for putting pressure. (mini-plug: if you want a completely encrypted solution checkout [https://cryptic.io](https://cryptic.io))

</comment><comment><USER4> Oh cool, stronger locks on the same centralized data warehouses. If not by MUSCULAR, then by blanket court order. If not by court order, then by economics. The "Web" _is_ the problem.

</comment><comment><USER5> They have MySpace but not Facebook...Odd

<comment><USER6> It would be odd except it's not true.</comment></comment>


Spying on you guys is so much fun - <AUTHOR> http://blog.keen.io/post/33829443341/spying-on-you-guys-is-so-much-fun

<comment><AUTHOR> I think some people are misinterpreting "programming is easier than I thought it would be" to mean "programming is easy".

Just because the barrier to entry is lower than I expected does not mean I think your job is easy. I have a ton of respect and admiration for developers. I have led teams of developers that could do things I could never do. There is no need to get defensive.

The google translate metaphor is actually pretty good. Tech is evolving to make it much easier to learn. A lot more folks can dive in now. You don't always need to find a translator :)

<comment><USER2> Thank you very much for this clarification.

I'm glad you're getting your feet wet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> "turns out programming is easier than I thought it would be"

:/

<comment><USER3> Context:

> _I never thought I'd be "playing with APIs", but turns out programming is > easier than I thought it would be. Ruby is a lot more fun than the C++ I > learned in engineering school. Hours after everyone else in the house went > to sleep last night, I was here in the office with 10 tabs open in Chrome. I > was not facebook stalking or reading #binder tweets. I was learning how to > sort hashes so I could make a list of our top 10 apps by event collection > size._

As an engineering-degree earner, I concur with her. I learned C, C++, and Java and decided I didn't want to be a programmer. When I got into a job where I had to use Ruby to do data-gathering and site building, learning it was much, much easier than I had anticipated or remembered from com sci classes.

Part of it is obviously already knowing the abstract concepts in programming and knowing one's way around a command line. A good part of it is the abundance of online, amazing and free resources to learn from (hence, the 10 tabs open in Chrome...and hell, even that browser flexibility is a nice boost) compared to what we had 10 years ago.

But the ease of executing a script is a huge part of why programming seems "easier" than we remember it from Java classes: if I could've learned arrays through scraping live data and aggregation, the concepts would've been much more interesting to me.

<comment><USER2> * Copies and pastes text into google translate * * Clicks the translate button * * Awkwardly reads output phonetically *

Speaking Swahili is easier than I thought! :D</comment></comment></comment>


Engelbart's Violin (2012) - <AUTHOR> http://www.loper-os.org/?p=861 <comment><USER3> "To my knowledge, no child grows up "playing doctor" and still believes as a teenager (or even as a college student) that an actual medical practice resembles that activity. Likewise, no one has a fully functional toy legal system to play with as a child, and as a result goes into law. On the other hand, "adult" programming, seen from afar, is enough like child-programming to set the computer-enthusiast child up for just this kind of exceptionally cruel bait-and-switch."

No, but they do see things like "House MD", "ER","The practice" etc... , which resembles the actual medical or legal profession as much as movie "hacking" resembles computer programming.

Besides, I've never known a child to actually see "adult" programming - <USER2> one of your parents is working from home, most "adult" programming happens in a corporate setting. In the same way I've never known a child to see "adult" psychology, or other professions which are practiced in closed environments.

"Virtually every profession has a concept of professional equipment"

True, but so do programmers. The idea that professional equipment has to be hardware (or for that matter a keyboard) is rather false.

Professional writers use the same hardware as amateur writers - pen, paper, computer . But they might have better word processing software.

And I'm not sure about others, but the hardware I use for programming is much different then what an amateur computer user might have- a lot more memory (to run those IDEs, databases, memory cache etc...) , two or more screens , and software that are unlikely to be used by non professionals (Jetbrains IDE, Beyond compare, virtual machines) etc..

Also - there are keyboards designed for faster typing, from my experience they just not very useful (programming rarely requires fast typing in my experience, better googling would be a thousand times more useful).

<comment><USER4> At my workplace, we have both professional and amateur programmers. I admittedly fall into the latter category. And we use different tools. The pro's have C# and Source Safe. I have Python and git. They produce and maintain a zillion-line-of-code software product. I do R&D, testing, algorithm development, etc.

The demarcation is useful. I can try things quickly. But turning my spaghetti code into their good code is a point where all of my conceptual errors and missed corner cases can be wrung out, and they know how to maintain stuff for 10 years without going batty.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> As other have mentioned, his focus on input devices is a misguided. If I lost a month of programming work, and only had a copy on paper, I would in most cases be able to type it in less than a day. My limitation is in logical reasoning, not in typing.

This is actually quite similar for music. A musician can't perform 40 hours a week, the process of playing is only a small part of being a musician. Unlike programmers, musicians typically only get paid for the time time they are performing, while programmers get paid for the time spent at work. This means that programmers really have a much better deal than musicians in general.

The advantage for musicians is that they also get recognition as individuals for their work, while the employers take most of that for programmers. That said, musicians can do the same deal if they choose to work as studio musicians or member of a symphonic orchestra or similar. Then they lose autonomy, but get more predictable pay.

<comment><USER6> > My limitation is in logical reasoning, not in typing.

I thought the same thing until I learned Vim.

If it were just typing, that'd be different. But editing is the real point. Being able to make changes almost as fast as I think them up has revolutionized my ability to get work done. It's not just that it speeds me up, it keeps me in flow, so I just get it done instead of getting bored and frustrated.

<comment><USER5> I know vim, but I don't think that change much. In fact, if I lost a month of work and did not have any printouts or even notes, I would in most cases be able to redo it in 2-3 days, and unlikely no more than a week. The reason is that I remember most of the decisions I made along the way, and don't have to spend time on making the right decisions about the code and architecture, since they were already made, and I would spend less time reading documentation and looking up how the problem can be solved in general.

What I describe is at least true when you solve relatively complex problems, and is a relative experienced programmer that take most high level decisions about the code yourself. If you have a very junior position, where most decisions are made for you by others, and you work in programming languages and framework that require a lot of boilerplate, then what I said will be less true. Then using the right editor may matter at least a bit. Even in that case I doubt it is a major factor.

On the other hand, using the right programming languages, libraries and tools may boost you productivity quite a lot, and have much larger impact than typing speed or input method.

<comment><USER6> Well I'm pretty experienced, nobody else is making decisions for me, and at least sometimes I do fairly complex stuff, but it still helps me a lot. I spend that time thinking, and then I can get it done without getting bored by the tedium and switching away to surf reddit. Or I think as I type and make wholesale changes as I go, because why not, it's easy. YMMV.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Author of the linked article speaking.

Possibly I should have emphasized the specific claim that junky input devices (e.g. QWERTY keyboard) are merely one symptom of the deprofessionalization of computer programming - rather than the 'alpha and omega' of it.

And, in this case, not only of computer programming. The fact that millions of people who make their living entering natural language text do so with the abominable limb destroyer known as QWERTY is an atrocity. Quite like the case of the radium watch dials and the labourers who went to an early grave making them. Or those who worked in the match factories, before them.

<comment><USER8> I just read through what you had to say about the death of HyperCard.

Why do you think Python etc. do not fill the hole HyperCard has left? Is it because of their ever-so-slight price of admission (which tends to push non- professional users away, as compared to the comfortable familiarity of a GUI)?

<comment><USER7> Which Python? Ver. 2 or 3? On what machine? With what graphical libraries? How much study would be involved in knowing _all_ (and yes, it matters) of the Python+libs+os aggregate?

And _does anyone alive know the above aggregate the way a kid can know Hypercard?_

The 'master of all you survey' feeling of a kid on a raw Commodore-64 (or, to a lesser extent, Hypercard) - matters. If you've never experienced it, you are a blind man.

Asking the question re: Python suggests precisely this kind of blindness.

I confess that I do not know how to explain sight to a blind man. Perhaps someone else here is up to the task.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > "Professional equipment [...] sturdier, more solid, more rewarding of > dedicated training, more difficult to obtain, than equipment intended for > amateurs"

That is how I see Linux/Unix, and its tools - vim/emacs, the shell, etc. It doesn't have to be hardware, after all.

<comment><USER10> The OA sees professionals using amateur tools. I've always drawn some comfort from the idea that some young person somewhere not rich can get an old box and download an OS and _the same toolchain_ that people use to build stuff they see.

Hardware can be differentiated: HP Z series work station half a dozen large monitors and a mechanical switch keyboard will feel much nicer than a frankenbox from the local supermarket. I take the OAs point that it is still basically a 'glass teletype'.

<comment><USER9> Yeah, my setup as a developer is a laptop with quad Core i7 CPU, 32G of RAM, 250G SSD and 1TB HDD, plus two 24" monitors.

That is a piece of professional equipment for a developer, and it cost about 4 times what a decent general purpose laptop does. But I could develop on any old box, and I like that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I like the idea. But...

Is faster typing really the solution to the problem of wanting to professionalize computer programming? And is that even a problem?

I play the double bass. The problem that faster "entry" solves for musical instruments is wanting to express complex ideas in real time.

<comment><USER11> >Is faster typing really the solution to the problem of wanting to professionalize computer programming?

I think both you and the article are making a mistake here. If you listen closely to the 1968 demo and, especially, its 1969 follow-up (available on archive.org) it's clear that Engelbart was not using the chorded keyboard for text input but for command input.

You should think of NLS text editor as a vi without cursor addressing: you would enter the command to execute with the chorded keyboard then select the target character/word/sentence with the mouse cursor.

You can follow the evolution of this idea throughout history. Many of Engelbart's "employees" went to work for Xerox Labs, the Xerox Alto used the keyset to give commands just like Engelbart's NLS.

The keyset was removed from Xerox Star after it proved to hard to learn and replaced with an extra block of keys on the left of the keyboard [2] with the most used commands.

When apple copied from xerox they got rid of this extra block (probably in the name of ease of use) but someone kept the idea alive by inventing the ctrl- zxcv for undo, cut, copy, paste that are conveniently placed all on the left side of the keyboard, so that you can use them while your other hand is on the mouse, like Engelbart always intended.

On this page [1] you can see some of the command given using a combination of the keyset (the chorded keyboard) and the mouse, it is not exhaustive however.

[1] [http://chm.cim3.net/cgi- bin/wiki.pl?NlsTechnical/KeysetMap](http://chm.cim3.net/cgi- bin/wiki.pl?NlsTechnical/KeysetMap)

[2] [http://www.digibarn.com/friends/curbow/star/keyboard/keyboar...](http://www.digibarn.com/friends/curbow/star/keyboard/keyboard2.JPG)

<comment><USER12> > Engelbart was not using the chorded keyboard for text input but for command > input.

It was designed for both, and certainly Engelbart himself could and did type with it.

Context menus (originally from Smalltalk) are another substitute for the expanded command set of NLS' chording-augmented mouse.

The advantage of having a chord keyboard for typing is that you can avoid the mouse-to-keyboard-to-mouse hand-movements that are so annoying when you can only type with a two-handed keyboard. However a one-handed chord keyboard is even slower than two-handed QWERTY when it comes to typing, all else being equal, and there is obviously the burden of having to learn it. For programmers and many other people, then, a better setup is probably a two-hand keyboard that lets you control a mouse pointer with minimal hand movement: and in fact we now have these, in the form of pointing-stick keyboards and keyboards with a trackpad in relatively easy reach of the user's thumbs [http://www.loper-os.org/?p=861&cpage=1#comment-16138](http://www.loper- os.org/?p=861&cpage=1#comment-16138) . The mystery is why why people are still selling and buying expensive keyboards without either.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Previous discussion at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4016421](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4016421)

And for who may interested in the idea behind chording keyboard, Bill Buxton wrote an informative chapter in his book [http://billbuxton.com/input06.ChordKeyboards.pdf](http://billbuxton.com/input06.ChordKeyboards.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER14> I actually like this blog. There are some other reasonably sounding posts there: like "Bedrock of Abstraction" ([http://www.loper- os.org/?p=55](http://www.loper-os.org/?p=55)) or "On Formats War" ([http://www.loper-os.org/?p=309](http://www.loper-os.org/?p=309))</comment>


Rackspace Developer+ Program - <AUTHOR> http://www.rackspace.com/blog/rackspace-developer-program-for-developers-by-developers/

<comment> old-gregg Disclaimer: my company was acquired by Rackspace 2 years ago. I am a developer myself and below are my honest impressions (and things I have learend) of Rackspace cloud.

Back when they launched it after having had acquired Slicehost, Rackspace Cloud was the only alternative to AWS and had one significant differentiator back then: the local storage on the instances wasn't ephemeral - it was permanent. The benchmarks and pricing were competitive, so the growth was phenomenal and life was good as a result. And that's when Rackspace dropped the ball by losing some focus and getting obsessed with launching platform services one after another ignoring the compute. They even launched what I believe was the first PaaS ever and gave it an unfortunate name of "cloud sites" (and confusing plenty of developers at that point, who couldn't tell "cloud sites", significantly less powerful service, apart from "cloud servers")

As a result, for a few years the lineup of VMs they offered hasn't changed, while AWS was launching new types all the time.

So about two years ago Rackspace ended up with a great control panel (easiest cloud CP to use IMO), a comprehensive set of back-end services: block storage, object storage, MySQL-as-a-Service, email sending and receiving, MongoDB-as-a- Service, cloud deployments, CDN and many more... But the selection of virtual servers was small and the hardware was getting obsolete at that point.

Since then I've seen tremendous investments being made into the core: the compute. Rackspace launched "performance" line of VMs. They still feature persistent (backed by RAID-10 SSDs) local storage, latest Xeons and ridiculously performant network. In a way it's "advantages of backwardness" at work: the performance line of compute is all fresh latest&greatest gear: the servers, the networks, etc. The performance, particularly on disk I/O, is awesome. I hope they'll keep the ball rolling by keeping it up to date by launching new generations in time.

Moreover, Rackspace hired (or acquired) some brainy engineers out of Bay Area who've pushed for "at scale" compute offering which is now called OnMetal ([http://rackspace.com/onmetal](http://rackspace.com/onmetal)) - <USER2> that's how internet giants internally do compute, container-based architectures without virtualization, running on highly specialized high- uptime servers (open compute). So... Rackspace cloud today is the only way to experience "facebook-style" infrastructure by renting it by the minute.

The culture of "true web scale" infrastructure is very strong internally, that's why Rackspace has been a huge supporter and believer of Docker, and some Rackers - having grown tired of the sad state of Linux distribution - founded CoreOS ([http://coreos.com](http://coreos.com)), the fresh look at running massively scalable infrastructure from the operating system point of view. Today, Rackspace is the only cloud where you can run Docker containers on top of CoreOS natively on highly efficient (performance per dollar) instantly-provisioned OpenCompute gear without noisy cpu/disk/network neighbors and without virtualization tax.

What could be better?

Well... Rackspace is not the cheapest for undersized deployments [1]. They've never been known for doing things like selling the over-provisioned VMs running on the cheapest machines on consumer-grade SSDs in RAID-5 arrays. A typical Rackspace customer treats a server outage as a big deal, "engineering for failure" for many (most?) cases is actually more expensive than just outsourcing reliability into a higher quality infrastructure. They love to make everything redundant and tend to go with higher spec and high-MTBF parts. Another component of the higher pricing is the support organization. The culture of bending backwards to make customers happy is insane, here's an example: if a customer asks for help resolving problems with Sendgrid (a competing email sending service), Rackspace support people will gladly assist, without bothering them with showing off the superiority of Mailgun - <USER3> company Rackspace acquired. I was blown away by that, customer gets help with whatever they feel like getting it.

You can even go as far as asking Rackspace to just run certain components of your infrastructure for you, saving on Devops positions. That's their bread&butter.

While Rackspace offers alternatives to most AWS services, they're not 1-to-1 equivalents. CBS (alternative to EBS) is vastly superior in my opinion because (based on what I know about EBS from public sources) CBS is simpler, has been delivering more predictable and higher performance/uptime experience, Cloud Files (S3 alternative) is comparable, ObjectRocket (MongoDB-as-a-Service) is absolutely phenomenal - the only DBaaS I can recommend anywhere, but there're no Redshift or Glacier counterparts.

I guess what I'm saying is this: Rackspace Cloud has evolved into a grown up contender with a solid feature set matched only by AWS, with multiple DCs all over the world and some unique capabilities (like OnMetal flavor of cloud servers), which differentiates by over-investing into hardware infrastructure and support. So if those qualities matter, take a look. The program Jesse is announcing only makes it easier for you.

[1] Once you cross $10K/mo hosting spend, they're very competitive especially when you factor in the cost of running/managing the infrastructure.

<comment><USER5> > Rackspace Cloud was the only alternative to AWS and had one significant > differentiator back then...

One other big differentiator compared to AWS, and the reason I went to Rackspace in the first place: straightforward pricing. Figuring out how much an AWS machine was going to cost was, back then at least, like trying to figure out how much it'd cost to buy a hundred Yen next Monday, for someone who has no experience with currency markets. Amazon's pricing was very complex, but with Rackspace, it was easy for me to tell how much a month would cost for what I needed.

> if a customer asks for help resolving problems with Sendgrid (a competing > email sending service), Rackspace support people will gladly assist... I was > blown away by that, customer gets help with whatever they feel like getting > it.

While the uptime and performance of the machines I have on Rackspace has been great, the "fanatical support" claim is empty marketing B.S. in my personal experience. A year ago, I had a machine's performance tank while my startup's traffic started to simultaneously ramp up. It turned out there was another host on the same machine slurping too much disk resources, they moved it away. That improved things some, but I ended up needing an expert to take a look at my Apache configuration. I begged Rackspace to help. My startup's life was hanging in the balance: traffic was going up, and performance was going down. I desperately needed help from an expert, and asked Rackspace for help, and offered to pay. They did nothing for me.

I started researching it for myself, and basically trained myself to be much more of an Apache configuration expert over the next 48 hours. I needed help, I had money, I was super desperate, and they did nothing for me.

I guess the real problem was that I didn't need help with SendGrid, or perhaps I couldn't figure out the right people to ask.

<comment><AUTHOR> You should _not_ have had that apache problem and not gotten help. Period. That's unacceptable, and I'm sorry. We're working on it

<comment><USER6> Overall I've been a happy Rackspace customer for years, but we've had the same experience with Apache troubleshooting. The support ended at whether Apache was up and running. Beyond that we were told Rackspace considered it to be "application tuning"\--which covers all the important settings that are used to manage loads and secure Apache. Luckily a development company we had on contract had a great Linux admin who could help us out.

From this perspective Rackspace definitely has _not_ performed a devops role for us. Network administrator? System administrator? Yes, absolutely, and great support for both. But devops is where the application meets the server, and IME Rackspace has stayed away from that.

I do see the reason for it--what does Rackspace know about our application? It's not fair to hold them responsible for that. But it created a gap in our professional support.

edit: words

<comment><AUTHOR> I think support has to move up the stack to be remotely relevant to 2014 markets and beyond. This is my goal and why I'm running point on the dev to dev support. But to your point, on the 15th we precisely outlined what is covered on each support level:

[http://www.rackspace.com/managed-cloud/](http://www.rackspace.com/managed- cloud/)

Fundamentally; support has to become systems level, and not single instance level, and that means gaining knowledge and expertise (which we have in house) about the nuances of a given application stack.

<comment><USER7> I guess it depends on the use case and the sysadmin knowledge of the client. I find that the frontier of responsibility becomes too much blurred when the service provider takes care of anything above the hardware: I personally prefer when the service provider concentrates on power and network stability, and anything else is my responsibility.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Rackspace is a tarnished brand for me. I immediately associate it with ridiculous pricing and bad "cloud" (mosso). With closed eyes it refused to see the quicksand of commodity it built its tower on.

I was hoping to come up with ways that companies with poor brands can recapture a lost audience. But I'm drawing a blank because it's a competitive market. It's like the car industry an the generational memory people have about various manufacturers. So, the only advice I have is: don't fuck with your brand.

<comment><USER9> > Rackspace is a tarnished brand for me.

I have dozen of servers with them (both cloud and hardware) and in terms of support and network they are pretty good.

If you used them back in the day, give it another shot. Totally different picture now.

> But I'm drawing a blank because it's a competitive market.

I don't think there is much competition when it comes to hosting mission critical applications.

Typical options are AWS or Rackspace. If you require any sort of dedicated hardware Rackspace is the only solid choice.

I tried putting stuff on DO last month for another start-up and so far their NY-EAST went down more than any of our cloud instances within Rackspace.

<comment><USER10> You really should take the time to learn how to build your own server cluster. The savings is exponential. The control is complete. The knowledge is priceless.

<comment><USER9> > You really should take the time to learn how to build your own server > cluster.

Not sure where I mentioned that I don't how to do that. But thanks?

> The savings is exponential.

For a lot of start-ups rolling their own infrastructure is generally a giant waste of time and money in both short and long term run.

<comment><USER11> >For a lot of start-ups rolling their own infrastructure is generally a giant waste of time and money in both short and long term run.

Exactly. Which is why people go to Rackspace: not having to hire their own in- house DevOps guy (which doesn't scale as your servers grow) to take care of their servers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> [https://developer.rackspace.com/signup/](https://developer.rackspace.com/signup/)

> _Want two 1GB CPUs or one 2GB?_

No 1.5 GB CPUs? Disappointed. Hopefully they offer 0.25 Terrawatts of RAM at least. That would be nice with 314159 kilohertz of cloud.

<comment><AUTHOR> Argh, typos - <USER4>

<comment><USER13> jnoller, do you work for Rackspace? Don't worry too much about typos, they happen.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes I do - and they've already been fixed!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> So Rackspace wants to compete with the EC2 Free Tier and get developers hooked on their platform. Those developers should consider how much they will have to pay after the first year.

It's a pity that Rackspace is taking away its cheaper, smaller sized instances. Oh well - at least Linode and Digital Ocean still want my money.

<comment><USER15> I'm in the process of migrating from Rackspace to Linode actually. The main issue is, we run a lot of average-powered machines and the prices at Rackspace were too oppressive. It's $80/mo for an 8GB server at Linode vs. $350 NextGen Standard) or $233 (NextGen Performance 1) at Rackspace. Our data size isn't that large so I value redundancy and ~$750/mo for one MongoDB replicaset is far, far too much.

<comment><AUTHOR> FWIW: For MongoDB replicas and scale out - I would recommend taking a look at ObjectRocket. I'm not kidding when I say they're the only way I'm using mongo in an application.

On the pricing: You are right; we are not attempting to be price competitive with VPS providers. We can discuss the difference between Cloud servers (in general) and VPSes as a whole, but they really are meant for different things and will always be priced differently.

Also, as of the 15th, that 8gb box costs $186.88 /mo for a full 730 hour month now. Of course, that doesn't compare to the Linode offering. But then with cloud block storage, autoscale and other features rolled into the application it's a bit different

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> So I'm not sure why there is a spin on this. This is (as others pointed out) basically a free yearly trial.

When I was writing an API client for their cloud infrastructure (before they rolled their own)

> [https://github.com/AlekseyKorzun/rackspace-open-cloud- > php](https://github.com/AlekseyKorzun/rackspace-open-cloud-php)

I had to spin up instances for testing purposes on my own dime, luckily I had disposable income.

In my case, if I money was an issue, their Developer+ program would let me (technically) release 1.0.0 but I would never be able to release 2.0.0 that uses their new API specification because my credit would expire.

<comment><USER16> I have tried Digital Ocean for these types of tests. Very cheap.

<comment><USER9> Yup they are cheap and fast to provision.

I use and recommend them for projects but I'm still not sure about running production grade stuff on their infrastructure.

<comment><AUTHOR> Since I'm honest: I also have a DO account for the things I feel a VPS is good for; IRC bouncer, little programs I just need a shell for, etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> There is no mentioned about Developer+ anywhere in the dashboard, account or billing-pages.

I would suggest that this and the time left is somewhere mentioned because I'm not exactly interested in paying a "infrastructure charge" for spinning up a few test-servers.

Second, I signed up via "International Customer" and according to the Dashboard I can't create servers in London - the only Datacenter in Europe. I'm in Europe so I would want to run my servers in Europe...

(I have opened a support ticket to confirm that I am indeed a Developer+ before I start creating anything.)

<comment><USER17> No reply yet from the "fanatical" support re: a simple billing/account type question.

Linode, whom we use but need a second cloud for DR, answers to these types of questions in minutes.

jnoller: Where in the dashboard can I verify that I have a Developer+ account?

<comment><AUTHOR> Working on that: if you email me: email@example.com I can confirm for you. I run a report regularly that enables a developer+ right hand support drawer.

<comment><USER17> sent!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've been a loyal Rackspace customer for years. The machines have performed well and been ridiculously reliable, and overall I've been pleased with the experience.

I guess this isn't targeted at people like me.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're not quite wrong, but I would (happily) point out that some existing customers are using this as a dev/test program prior to production launching. We can't attach it to an existing account though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> So I just signed for an "international account" (and not UK) and my only server choices are the 3 US locations and HKG/SYD.

Looking forward to that latency :)

Of course it's not your fault, but if UK is the _only_ sensible choice for people in the EU (and needs a seperate account), please don't call the other offer "International".

<comment><USER17> I agree.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'll change the button!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is an Infrastructure Credit like a free trial?

<comment><AUTHOR> Not precisely - I'm the architect behind this and personally, I hate anything labeled free or trial - they tend to draw people in, yes, but they're often crippled or limited.

What this is 50$/month for 12 months (600$) off your cloud usage. There are no support fees or minimum, you have direct access to developers here, etc. There are no limits to what you can consume, no rate limiting, etc.

For anything you use - say, OnMetal, that goes above that credit (which could increase in amount or time) you pay competitive infrastructure only rates.

As a dev; I much prefer the "let me build what I want to, or need to" versus being stuck in a sandbox or worse, surprise costs if I do something crazy.

<comment><USER20> Is it possible to graduate from developer+ to the startups programme you guys run if the situation would allow for it (startups requirements met, all that jazz)?

Obviously you'd hope to be bringing in enough to cover hosting by year 1 but out of curiousity really

Edit: A second question, is it possible to attach developer+ to an account that already exists? Reason my account's a bit unloved at the moment is because I'm not at a point where I can afford Rackspace prices

<comment><USER21> Regarding your second question, it looks like you must be a (relatively?) new customer to participate. From the developer+ T&C:

> _2.1. Company is a New Cloud Customer. "New Cloud Customer" refers to a > Company that does not have a Cloud Account prior to becoming a Cloud > Services customer in accordance with Section 2.2 below._

<comment><USER20> Ah oh dear, I missed that bit! Thanks for that.

I guess if the time comes it'll be registered under its own entity so I'll pop back at that time! :)

<comment><AUTHOR> if you have any issues - gimme a holler: email@example.com

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> It's good they added this - their customer support rep told me this was coming soon. That's after I told them I wasn't recommending them anymore because you can no longer get an account without a $50/mo/service fee as of a few weeks ago.

Might try this out, but pretty happy with AWS.

<comment><AUTHOR> Remember; that 50$/mo fee was _rolled into the product prices_ before. That's why under the old model a 4gb server cost 1/3 of 4, 1gb boxes. The new pricing lowers the infrastructure prices (and levels them so 1gb of ram == 1gb of ram) but clearly states the support fee as a whole.

Note, the minimum fee only triggers if you use Cloud Servers, or OnMetal.

<comment><USER22> Yeah, I use cloud servers. I think the bill on one of my grandfathered account has been ~$16/mo - under the new system I believe it would be $50/mo.

<comment><AUTHOR> You're grandfathered in then - sounds like you're running an old 512mb next gen machine

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I'm signing up. Will report back.

<comment><USER16> There is nothing to report. What do you want to report back? You were just given $50! Go party!

<comment><USER23> What's worth reporting back is whether Rackspace is worth using in a world where AWS exists. A year ago, the answer was "No". OnMetal looks very interesting, though.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Leave new job after one month? - <AUTHOR> I'm nearing the end of my first month into a new job. I'm starting to question whether I made the right decision in taking the job and am thinking of giving notice.
I have about 6 years of backend dev experience, mostly Python and Ruby. I recently fell in love with Elixir and am pursuing a pet project in my spare time.
I am the company's first permanent dev hire - until now they've used freelancers to build the product. The stack in Python/Django.
My team also consists of a frontend developer and two app developers. None of us had to do any form of technical interview to land the job. The result is that the team isn't as strong as it could be - for example no one apart from me has any experience in TDD.
The owner (he sees himself a CTO) is just technical enough to be dangerous. He knows the buzzwords and feels comfortable making decisions without fully understanding the impact. I believe that with some management the risks here could be mitigated, but I don't have the personality or will to manage my boss. Today, for example he threw a spanner in the works of the work that we did over the last month because he didn't mention something crucial. It's not a train smash, but I foresee this kind of thing happening regularly.
Basically I have to build the product, do all devops work, mentor the team to make sure their work is up to scratch and manage the boss. To me this seems like a mammoth task and I don't feel up to it. I also don't like being the "smartest" person in the room.
I think the company needs someone who is looking to move into a CTO role and comfortable with managing developers and business expectations. I just want to do technical work and solve problems for as long as possible.
Would it be fair for me to give notice now and leave? I'd be letting down the team and owner and they would have to find another developer.
Would I be passing up a great opportunity to learn? <comment><USER2> What they ask of you:

Basically I have to build the product, do all devops work, mentor the team to make sure their work is up to scratch and manage the boss.

What you ask from them:

I just want to do technical work and solve problems for as long as possible.

What they need:

I think the company needs someone who is looking to move into a CTO role and comfortable with managing developers and business expectations.

Would it be fair for me to give notice now and leave?

Its not about being fair. Its about being human. You are not a robot. This is a mammoth task and the risk of burnout is very high. Your health is more valuable than any job.

Would I be passing up a great opportunity to learn?

A good learning opportunity does not come with such price of admission.

But what do I know?

I went through the same exact scenario (even using Django) and lost a great deal of time doing so. Life is too short. Better opportunities exist out there. Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER3> _Would it be fair for me to give notice now and leave? I 'd be letting down the team and owner and they would have to find another developer._

Ultimately it's the responsibility of the company to provide a challenging, nurturing, stable, health-promoting, etc, environment. If they fall short, then it's _your_ career, health, and sanity which are as stake -- so really you shouldn't think twice about the possible negative impact on their side, and certainly not about "letting them down" personally. If anything you'd be doing them a favor by quitting after 1-2 months (if you can afford it) rather than 6-9, by which point they would have made a far greater investment in you.

All that's required on your side is to be _tactful_. There've been many posts here about "how to quit my job", but ultimately it comes down to this: don't fuss about preparing some lengthy explanation (or worse, a lengthy resignation letter). At the time you resign, you don't have to say _anything_ up front -- but you should be prepared to give just one simple reason, easy to digest (like a tweet). In your case it could simply be, "I'm sorry, but the role just didn't meet my expectations -- there turned out to be just way more chaos to deal with than I had bargained for. So it seems the most ethical thing, for you as well as for me, is to resign sooner rather than later."

That's pretty much all you have to do. If they press for detail, you can give more detail -- if you want. But the important thing is to not assault them with detail up front (and only provide it if they specifically ask) -- no matter how well-merited the roots of your frustration are, it just makes you look bitter and disgruntled.

 _Would I be passing up a great opportunity to learn?_

Any experience can be a "learning experience" \-- even a negative experience. But it sounds like you have more important things to learn about then how to deal with dysfunctional teams and politically tricky environments.

In sum it sounds like this is definitely on occasion to trust your gut (as soon as you can afford it financially), stick to your guns and do the right thing -- for them, ultimately, as well as for yourself.

</comment><comment><USER4> Perhaps you should have a meeting with your CTO to address your concerns before you decide to leave. Maybe the two of you can come to an agreement over roles/responsibilities (which you probably should have done before you started). If what he needs is more than he hired you for, you may be able to negotiate a salary increase as well.

</comment><comment><USER5> > The owner (he sees himself a CTO) is just technical enough to be dangerous. > He knows the buzzwords and feels comfortable making decisions without fully > understanding the impact.

Three thoughts:

1) The owner/"CTO" is going to create extra stress for you regardless what working relationship you develop. He's not going to get better about this.

2) Just because the company needs someone to be the CTO doesn't mean that it's C-suite/board know that. Without explicit communication about trajectory you can find yourself doing a CTO's job without the recognition, respect, or salary.

3) There's no foul in walking away from something bad for you. It's hard to do when you're used to completing what you start, but every once in a while it's the better decision.

</comment><comment><USER6> I left a job after 6 weeks because I felt like they hadn't completely represented the state of affairs and their future vision for development efforts (they were heading down a path that was only clear once I had joined).

It wasn't the best feeling to do so, but it was the right decision for me. I didn't put it on my resume, but I mentioned it in subsequent interviews.

</comment><comment><USER7> If you're already considering leaving, I would take a gamble and tell your CTO/boss exactly what you said and be honest with your employer.

Who knows, maybe they trust and respect you enough to make the right changes and you'll end up loving it there.

All relationships (including professional ones) build; they never start at that perfect place.

</comment><comment><USER8> I don't know enough about the specific case to prescribe something confidently however if your gut and other sensors tell you you should be leaving do it. Better to leave after 1 month (and ignore it in your resume) than to stay for 9 months.

</comment><comment><USER9> It is fair to give notice and leave.

However difficult that turns out to be for the owner and the team, it may be be the best for everyone involved. You can mitigate this by helping steer hiring of the new developer as you seem to have a unique insight in to their needs.

It doesn't sound like you are planning to make management part of your career path, so I don't think you are passing on much.

</comment><comment><USER10> You make a pretty convincing case that this is not the right place for you. It sounds like you already made up your mind and are looking for some kind of justification for leaving.

You don't need a justification. Just leave.</comment>


Jim Fruchterman raises $1.7M for Tech Matters, to help nonprofits do tech better - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/02/jim-fruchterman-raises-1-7m-for-tech-matters-a-new-effort-to-help-nonprofits-do-tech-better/ <comment><AUTHOR> Please do share other resources on social enterprises if you have any you particularly enjoy</comment>


LibrePlan: OS Web App for Project Planning and Monitoring - <AUTHOR> http://www.libreplan.com/home/

<comment><USER2> LibrePlan 1.3 version has been just launched. Release detais can be found at [http://www.libreplan.com/news/detail/article/libreplan-13-is...](http://www.libreplan.com/news/detail/article/libreplan-13-is- here-with-new-cool-collaborative-features/)</comment>


Through-Wall Human Pose Estimation Using Radio Signals - <AUTHOR> http://rfpose.csail.mit.edu/ <comment><USER2> I've noticed, recently, that literally every major chain store I go into blocks my cell signal. I get full bars outside, perfect LTE, and about 5 ft past the glass doors, I'm suddenly cut off. Specifically, Meijer grocery stores and Home Depot are the worst offenders. Coincidentally they offer free in store WiFi to track me with, so I turn off my wifi radio on both smartphone and smartwatch before walking in the door... Note, this was not the case in the exact same physical stores a couple years ago, and they weren't closed for remodeling in the interim.

Does anyone know if this sort of Faraday cage technology for large buildings is easily available for me to install in my own home? If so, what's it called, what does it cost and where do I get it?

<comment><USER3> I believe you can achieve the same result in your home by adding a sheet metal roof, metal cabinets, and refrigerators along every wall.

<comment><USER4> It's a rather unfortunate coincidence, isn't it? Certainly it's not their fault that their buildings just happen to be constructed in such a way, and their products arranged such that it blocks signal causing customers to not be able to compare prices and have to use their approved internet connection. /s

I see this in the Targets in my town. I just expect signal to drop to zero.

<comment><USER5> My Lowe's and Home Depot both have free Wifi. I use it all the time to use their app or site to find the location of items in store (obv. can't talk to humans).

<comment><USER6> Good luck with that. I tried unsuccessfully, to buy an item at both Lowes and Home Depot but nobody was able to determine where in the store the item was even when I pulled the information up on my phone.

<comment><USER7> One of the Home Depot's in my area had broken Wifi for multiple months. You could connect, and go through the disclaimer, but nothing was reachable through it. Particularly annoying because the other store, which is about the same distance away, has working Wifi but horrible reception. Since I'm occasionally in each, I had to remember to forget the Home Depot Wifi and add it back in depending on when I wen tto different stores.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> In a 5-4 decision in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyllo_v._United_States) , the SCOTUS determined that police can't use thermal imaging on a house without a search warrant. I wonder what the vote would have been if the justices could have seen videos like this.

<comment><USER9> Sometimes I wonder is this could be mitigated by literally covering your walls in aluminum foil. Maybe those "tinfoil hats" are on to something.

<comment><USER10> Just get aluminum siding, which was very popular before people switched to vinyl.

<comment><USER11> Having pulled some of it off to switch to vinyl I wish it was still readily available. It's orders of magnitude more durable than vinyl.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> With this paper our last shreds of privacy are being taken away, but they presented the news with nice background music, so there's that.

<comment><USER13> Meh, that seems a little sensationalist. Any significant metal would likely throw this in a loop. You could even buy paint with graphite in it to block weak RF signals outright. IIRC most military bases and data centers protect against this sort of leakage.

<comment><USER14> The potential for open/outdoor spaces is scary though. Radio "CCTVs" that see everyone over a large area.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> What this video (or even the paper) doesn't show is the large antenna arrays that are used to capture the heatmaps. A previous paper called "Capturing the human figure through a wall" [1] shows the type of antenna array used and in this paper they use two such antenna arrays to capture two planes to increase the accuracy.

[1] [https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Capturing-the-human- fi...](https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Capturing-the-human-figure- through-a-wall-Adib-Hsu/2b2d03f8b96aa1e306fb941e0318d403efbde4be)

</comment><comment><USER16> Love it. This is a game mechanic / movie superhero device that's been around a long time, just love the fact that this does it so simply and with so much promise. As sensitivity and the quality of the neural net increases, combined with AR, this is going to make super soldiers out of SWAT teams.

<comment><USER17> but thermal imaging is already available without AI or WiFi..

<comment><USER18> You might want to take a look at Big Clive's video about the radar motion detectors in Chinese E27 socket LED bulbs [0], which have become cheaper even back in mid-2016 than good old PIR motion detectors. The latter are basically a castrated Flir-style camera, the former closer to this.

[0]: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgdXRLjYkc4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgdXRLjYkc4)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> It's pretty amazing that they only trained it to create pose estimation from radio signals, and that its ability to see through walls is only a byproduct of them not blocking RF.

Given how much information is out there that we can't sense I wonder if this area will be a main source of AI advancements. Another example of something like this is using videos of plants that vibrate slightly with sound waves to recreate the original sound.

</comment><comment><USER20> Use ultra-wideband radio pulses, an array of a few thousand 3D printed UWB antennas and a phased-array scanning beam. You'll get a machine you could fit in the back of a truck that can scan a city block in real-time to mm precision. Sweet dreams, citizen.

<comment><USER21> Potentially not that simple, as there are fundamental limits on the information capacity of a MIMO system, based on the surface area of the volume occupied by the antenna array (in wavelengths squared). The capacity limits apply whether you use the array for communications or radar, as both are governed by Information Theory.

Not to say that it can't be done, but the maths exists to definitively prove whether it can be, so no need for speculation and tinfoil. My gut feeling is that you could scan a small volume from afar, but not a whole block. No, I haven't done the maths.

<comment><USER20> Yeah this is why you'd use UWB -- the capacity is insane. Also the raw information theory calculation makes sense only if you have zero prior information about the sample you're reconstructing. But 'people in buildings' is a pretty strong prior. And it's not like you have to do any extra work, just put a simulated raw signal through a neural net and regress to groundtruth data.

But let's do the math, I'm curious!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> The paper [1] doesn't show the antennas, but the text seems to indicate the antennas are quite large, as large as the area being observed. Plus, you have to have two perpendicular axes of antenna, so you have to be behind two walls, or one wall and a floor or ceiling. That's a big setup.

It might be useful if you wanted to count people in a crowd going in and out through a big opening, like a subway station or mall.

[1] [http://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2018/papers/Zhao_T...](http://openaccess.thecvf.com/content_cvpr_2018/papers/Zhao_Through- Wall_Human_Pose_CVPR_2018_paper.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER23> I'll repeat it again.

\- Machines that see through walls are coming

\- Microscopic drones are coming

\- Mind-reading machines are coming

\- Private key cryptography will become obsolete

Fighting for privacy is backward. It's unsustainable. We must work toward a post-privacy world. The sooner we do it, the smoother the transition will be.

<comment><USER24> Describing the exact same inevitable phenomena as "The Age of Transparency" is probably going to elicit a better response from most people. "Post Privacy" is negatively charged and makes it sound like more of a net loss as opposed to progress.

<comment><USER14> But they're the same thing. You can't get rid of the negative consequences just by using a different term.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Wi-fi has been researched for this capability since at least 2015: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGZzNZnYIHo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGZzNZnYIHo)

<comment><USER26> It's a new paper from the same group.

In 2015, the tracker person was just shown as an amorphous blob on the screen. In the recent paper, they display a stick figure modelling the movements of the person's limbs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Do the people that write these papers ever release their source code or trained model? I'm curious about both other researchers reproducing as well as being able to download something and play with it.

<comment><USER26> They're using custom hardware to make this work.

This isn't always clear from the press release. For example, they mention that the technology works at "WiFi frequencies." That's true, but they're sending a radar signal using two huge antennas, not a Wi-Fi router.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Am I correct in assuming they are using a Walabot sensor as mentioned in footnote 2?

[https://walabot.com/](https://walabot.com/)

EDIT: I see from section 3 that they created their own FMCW antenna array that is somehow similar to a Walabot.

<comment><USER29> May I ask what's FMCW? Of course I can straightaway google but I would like to hear an intuitive explaination.

<comment><USER28> I had to Google it too. :-)

[http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/FrequencyModulatedContinuo...](http://demonstrations.wolfram.com/FrequencyModulatedContinuousWaveFMCWRadar/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Through-Wall Human HeadShot Estimation Using Radio Signals...

</comment><comment><USER31> I wonder how similar it is to the tech used in this paper on gesture recognition through walls: [http://wisee.cs.washington.edu](http://wisee.cs.washington.edu) [2013]

<comment><USER15> They are quite different. Wisee uses a single reciever and uses doppler shift to identify the gestures whereas this "through wall" system uses an array of transmitters and receivers that identify reflections from a position in space.

In layman's terms this system is more like a conventional camera but working in the radio spectrum whereas Wisee is like a microphone that can pick up changes in frequencies around it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Finally, a legit purpose for my tinfoil hat!

<comment><USER32> I know you're joking, but that's an interesting idea... I wonder how would the system "see" your head then? Unless it is trained on people wearing tinfoil hats (and aluminium suits) it might produce interesting results.

<comment><USER15> Adding a tinfoil hat would make you reflect more which the system would pick up even easier.

<comment><USER32> Probably true - but it wasn't trained on such dataset, so I'm curious how robust it is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Just like people running open WiFi access points getting upset about anyone reading their packets. They don't think about what they can't see.

A building that doesn't block radio and IR (and others) is essentially transparent. Putting an emitter like a WiFi point inside is like turning on a light.

What we need is more attention put to building better walls.

<comment><USER34> Does it matter if our WiFi points are always on?

<comment><USER35> Presence detection can easily toggle WiFi on and off based on if people are present.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> The defense applications for this are tantalizing. However, given the staggering amount of room clearing that's been taking place in US military operations for the past 15 or so years, I'd be shocked if there wasn't already an existing capability to detect bad guys through walls in a CQB environment.

<comment><USER11> >I'd be shocked if there wasn't already an existing capability to detect bad guys through walls in a CQB environment.

Existing and exist in a state you can deploy are two totally different things that often happen many years apart. Usually something exists as an impractical wish list item for a long time before some other development pushes it into the realm of being practical to use.

<comment><USER36> Yeah, it's just that western special operations kick in so many doors on a daily basis that one would think such tech would be fast-tracked.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Awesome. I was playing Batman Arkham City yesterday and this is "Detective Mode" in the real life!

<comment><USER38> Yeah, I wonder what they are going to use this technology for. "Helping earthquake victims" probably

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Countermeasures?

<comment><USER19> I bet some RF absorbing material or something that reflects RF at weird angles would probably break it. Or an active RF transmitter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> I guess now we know how that beginning scene in altered carbon could work

</comment><comment><USER41> There are no legitimate uses of this technique. It only applies if you lack the consent of the target. If have that, there are many easier and better ways to monitor them.

<comment><USER42> A personal home security system could make better use of this instead of motion sensors in each room.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> We need multiple home robots to fake our presence now!

</comment><comment><USER44> Amazing what a bit of military funding can achieve.

</comment><comment><USER45> Wow great work! I'm stunned. Not really by the pose-recognition, that's just a bonus.

</comment><comment><USER46> Does it only detect moving bodies?

<comment><USER16> Depends on the training data and the room config. The system sees a difference in an empty vs occupied room, movement doesn't seem to be strictly necessary. The heat map video looks more like radio spectrum signatures, which might even be working on still frames - which would imply that movement isn't necessary at all. It would help the AI, though. Easier to classify moving bodies, the speed and gait is a signal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I would like to get more research of this sort.

Would someone kindly point me towards it?

Thanks.

<comment><USER47> I built and extended this for a college project years ago: [https://ocw.mit.edu/resources/res-ll-003-build-a-small- radar...](https://ocw.mit.edu/resources/res-ll-003-build-a-small-radar-system- capable-of-sensing-range-doppler-and-synthetic-aperture-radar-imaging-january- iap-2011/index.htm)

It's not a bad place to start. And cheap if you want to build your own too (some third party even sells the "cantennas" so you don't have to fiddle with tuning that part (which is kind of infeasible without a network analyzer anyway)).

<comment><USER29> Thanks Jach

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> We could be using this technology to see tumors and other pathologies through patients' skin. Instead we're using it to give soldiers and spies x-ray vision.

<comment><USER49> No we can't use this radio signals to see tumors, because science is not magic and wishful thinking will not solve the technical problems. Let's try to name a few:

The radio signals are absorbed by wet salty meatbags, so you can find them using radio signals, but you can't see thru them. If you raise the power to compensate the absorption, you will cook the meatbags, like a microwave oven.

If you were lucky to get a signal at the other end, the radio signal can distinguish between meat-bone-air-water, but not between tissues like meat and tumors that have a somewhat similar composition. A tomography use contrast to try to distinguish them. A magnetic resonance is better, but it use a huge magnet (and in some cases it use contrast too).

And also, the radio frequency that they are using has a wavelength of an inch approximately. So roughly it can resolve things that are an inch long, so it must be a big tumor to be visible. Perhaps you can try with a higher frequency that has a smaller wavelength.

And if I understand correctly, this device needs a lot of calibration, so you need version of the part of the body without the tumor and a version with tumors of different sizes and positions to calibrate the device and then try to use it in the real subject.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> MIT's new anti-fapping radar!

</comment><comment><USER51> Almost like The Eraser (1996), just add squad railgun rifles and X-ray-like targeting.

</comment><comment><USER52> we have nothing to hide now!

</comment><comment><USER53> Look at the list of names on this paper. We better fix our immigration system for high skill individuals.

<comment><USER54> Devil's advocate: "let's fund PhDs with respectable salaries instead of green cards."

<comment><USER55> We are talking about MIT. Their acceptance rate is around 6%. I am sure they get plenty of applications from the smartest American undergrads. Assuming that they choose the best and the brightest, it makes sense that they would have students from all over the world. Americans don't have a monopoly on intelligence.

<comment><USER56> You are both correct.

Many Americans choose not to go into academia (at every level) because the other options are much more lucrative. It is true that many of America's best minds do not pursue a PhD in large part because of the paltry stipend.

It is also absolutely true that the one top CS PhD program I know of does not compromise in admissions and does not suffer from a lack of highly qualified applicants.

 _> Americans don't have a monopoly on intelligence._

I think it's possible to agree with this point while still believing that American CS Ph.D. programs -- especially those outside the top N -- are not as attractive to domestic applicants as they probably should be.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Gizmodo: We'll Pay You for Photos of Mark Zuckerberg - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/5912827/well-pay-you-for-photos-of-mark-zuckerberg

<comment><USER2> While I don't see any compelling objective here, it will be at least mildly interesting to see how this turns out

<comment><USER3> If I were Zuckerberg I'd just start flooding 'em with photos of myself.

<comment><USER4> Daniel Radcliffe (who played Harry Potter) decided to wear the exact same outfit every time he went out. The paparazzi could never prove that the photos were from a particular day or if they were new or old, because he looked basically the same in every photo. He said they got mad and most of them stopped following him around because they couldn't get any money for the photos.</comment></comment></comment>


MidiWriterJS – Generate Expressive Multi-Track MIDI Files in JavaScript - <AUTHOR> http://grimmdude.github.io/MidiWriterJS/ <comment><USER2> Hey, this is pretty sweet. Makes me think of [http://www.jfugue.org/](http://www.jfugue.org/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Cool, thanks for checking it out. I'm not a Java man, but it does look very similar. Might have to steal some of those ideas, like `new ChordProgression`.</comment></comment>


The Pownce Code You'll Never See - <AUTHOR> http://paulstamatiou.com/2008/12/18/review-the-powncefm-youll-never-see

<comment><USER2> Considering what happened to Muxtape, it's no big surprise that Pownce.fm wasn't launched, even if the acqusition hadn't gone through I'd wager..

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree, I just think it is interesting to see what internal projects never get released that the developers spend a significant amount of time an energy on.

It's a side of start ups that isn't talked about much - what technology disappears when a start up shuts down?

<comment><USER2> Oh, totally. I _love_ posts like this whether the underlying product made any sense or not. We need more "behind the scenes" type stuff like this so your submission is spot on :)</comment></comment></comment>


Damn Vulnerable Linux - The most vulnerable and exploitable distro - <AUTHOR> http://www.damnvulnerablelinux.org/ <comment><USER2> Securing this beast should serve as a nice training course for any sysadmin; bonus points if you start handing out shell accounts to anonymous people in certain neighborhoods of EFNet.

<comment><USER3> Just update packages to the latest, patched version. What so difficult about it?

<comment><USER2> If this is based on a popular distro, maybe; but if you wanted to loosen up a Linux box, you can build a freak from pieces that no one would find lineage for, much less a repo.

<comment><USER3> umm no.

He specifically mentions that all the softwares are vulnerable:

 _"Its developers have spent hours stuffing it with broken, ill-configured, outdated, and exploitable software that makes it vulnerable to attacks."_

Just replace them with the latest, patched, default configured version.

<comment><USER4> What pieces of software do you replace? How do you replace it? Remember that it likely doesn't some with anything like apt to make this easy.

<comment><USER5> You wipe the disk and install OpenBSD.

<comment><USER2> Good idea, but completely beside the point.

<comment><USER6> Why sit around replacing packages by hand when you're not really learning anything? The best fix for a system like this is to nuke it from orbit and reinstall. I mean, odds are, you'll miss something, and then spent hours fooling around after getting hacked, when you could have just spent your time concentrating on what's important: saving relevant data and configuration, reinstalling, and securing the updated configuration.

<comment><USER7> This is a course in security and thats why the comment is completely beside the point.

<comment><USER6> The important point, which I did miss, is that it's not just a "security course", it's a course about how to break into things, so you need vulnerable programs. If you're not specializing in security stuff, the best course of action, is, however, to just keep your stuff up to date via apt or some similar mechanism.

<comment><USER8> But in order to properly understand what you could be vulnerable to and the why/how, you should learn how to break into things. Yes, normally, you're working at a higher level of abstraction, but if you want to understand how things really work, you work at a lower level for a while.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > Damn Vulnerable Linux - The most vulnerable and exploitable operating system > ever!

Wait, they topped Windows 95 and Windows ME?

Is that even possible?

<comment><USER10> I love how, on those OSes, you could freeze the whole thing solid with a three-byte program:

       cli   # clears interrupts
       loop: goto loop

This ballooned to a colossal four bytes if you put it in an EXE file, of course.

<comment><USER11> Technically speaking, how would an OS avoid that issue, without breaking compatibility (unless that is acceptable)?

<comment><USER2> You can't be bug compatible for things that violate the processor's protection protocol. Access to certain bits of the EFLAGS register is unavailable to unprivileged code. In fact. Just because you were allowed to raid and pillage by Microsoft for a few years doesn't mean it's the norm.

<comment><USER12> Sure you can—just let them stomp all over a _virtualized_ processor/memory space.

<comment><USER13> You cannot meaningfully virtualize access to EFLAGS:IF. You can either emulate(/JIT) almost whole CPU or ignore this issue. And anyway, turning of interrupts is something that essentially does not make sense for user process, so it is better to just disallow that (which is what almost everything else but non-NT windows does)

<comment><USER14> It was usually used as an ultra- critical section. It would have been fine to simulate it as a scheduler-freeze for that process, preserving the meaning without getting hung up on the hardware implementation.

But instead, Intel decided to try to support actually messing with the interrupt enable state, resulting in years of highly-inefficient "solutions" e.g. trapping and simulating. Sigh.

<comment><USER15> What's the (efficient) alternative?

<comment><USER14> A big-hammer approach is to set thread affinity for your process to one hyperthread/processor. But that loses the opportunity for lovely parallelism.

A finer-grained approach is to have a flag bit that prevents preemption, perhaps even just preemption by threads of the same process. This is weaker than CLI because it doesn't prevent I/O callbacks etc from preempting; ideally those would be suspended as well for the process.

This assume a non-priviledge flag word i.e. user-mode code owns the "process flags", not the kernel.

My favorite solution is a "process signal register" in hardware. Its a wide register full of test-and-set bits, shared by threads of a process. They can be used to implement critical section, semaphore, event, even waiting on a timer. All without a trip thru the kernel - essentially zero-latency kernel primitives.

<comment><USER15> Wouldn't an unprivileged EFLAGS-lookalike cause problems of the CLI-HLT persuasion?

And "process signal registers", while sounding attractive, aren't really a feasible alternative, given that the number of processes running even on uniprocessors are overwhelming, at least. Plus, if they're beyond CPU control, privilege issues arise again.

In short, yes, there are many alternatives, but the current model works, and not just for x86. And you know what engineers say..

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> That actually sounds like a fun concept.

<comment><AUTHOR> Seems a decent educational tool too.. run in a virtual box and let your students go all out overflowing buffers and seeing the concepts in action. It comes with easy-to-follow guides.

<comment><USER14> OK for learning about what has been solved; kind of hacking-101. BUt the exploits involved have all been fixed in the products in that distro. What to use for the advanced class?

<comment><USER17> i have it on my VM, can someone point me to where these guides are? KDE confuses me :). i will RTFM, I just need to find it first. thanks.

<comment><AUTHOR> /dvl ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Whats with all the grammatical errors on that site? Is it a joke?

</comment><comment><USER19> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openbsd> is the most secure OS.</comment>


Web Development as Commodity? – Web Testing and Development Flat-rates - <AUTHOR> http://www.position-fixed.com

<comment><USER2> The business model for flat-fee development will make sense about the same time as clients start writing unambiguous and fixed scope requirements.</comment>


Badass CEO Disrupting the Pricing of a Drug That Saves Kids' Lives - <AUTHOR> http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/08/this-badass-ceo-innovated-her-way-to-a-higher-salary.html <comment><USER2> <In 2012 and 2013, Mylan spent $4 million lobbying Congress to pass the 2013 School Access to Emergency Epinephrine Act, which encouraged schools across the country to stock up on her product. The act was passed by the House and Senate (where Bresch's father, Joe Manchin, works)>

That understatement makes it sound like he's a random staffer or something. In fact, he is the _Senior Senator from West Virginia_ ; a Democrat.

</comment><comment><USER3> So who is with me re-engineering a 3d printable epinephrine injector, that is refillable with the per dosage amount meaning you wouldn't have to dispose of the whole injector if unused. Just add a needle and epinephrine...</comment>


Google did something seriously wrong - <AUTHOR> http://www.scripting.com/stories/2010/02/14/googleDidSomethingSeriousl.html

<comment><USER2> I find this very funny, the public is starting to see the arrogance of Google when they slip up on these public facing projects - most Adsense publishers or Adwords advertisers have seen this over and over again in the past with them... It is Google's true colors (always has been).

<comment><USER3> I find it more funny that pretty much every post complaining about this over the weekend repeated the same thing over and over again. Which essentially boiled down to what _Google_ should do to solve the problem.

<comment><USER4> Well, sure. They _caused_ the problem.

The answer for users is "don't trust Google with your information, and get as much of it out of Google's control as you can, even though you don't know how much there is and can't take some of it back."

But we knew that already. The question is "when will Google stop unethically publicizing all the information we don't forcibly remove from their control?"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This has been the first time that I have really felt that Google betrayed my trust. Trust is something that is neigh impossible to get back once it is lost.

It's interesting because I've rationally understood how scary it is that they have all of this data about me. Now I can finally see that there are places where it may come out, or they get hacked and someone steals it etc.

Just a wake up call really, which is something that Google should be scared about, because they have a scary amount of data bout all of us.

<comment><USER6> I'm not sure I get it. Is Google supposed to get everything right on their first try? It seems many people would say yes, even many users of HackerNews. This is very counter to my understanding of the philosophies shared around here. I always thought it was best to push an new idea out there as fast as you can and iterate as you go. Granted Google's mistake is a BIG mistake, but condemning them for one act is somewhat irrational, no?

<comment><USER7> Well Google's play book used to be push stuff out as beta or a labs feature. Let only the very sophisticated users opt-in and try things out before pushing it out to the general public.

This was obviously rolled out in a very different fashion. Plus they attached it to Gmail which is a tried-and-true product. Buzz feels very beta to me.

If Buzz we rolled out under labs or a separate interface I'm sure that there wouldn't be as much backlash as there has been.

<comment><USER8> Perhaps, but I think for this particular market they had no choice but to launch big. Look at Orkut, their previous (dead) attempt at a social network. Facebook is extremely entrenched now, and there's little to no incentive to users to opt-in to something else. To attack the power of Facebook/Twitter, this was really the only way of doing it (although I agree, perhaps a Labs feature would have been a better way of introducing the concept for a couple of months at first).

<comment><USER9> Orkut is hardly dead, just because a product isn't popular in your market doesn't mean it's dead.

<comment><USER10> It's dead for the market that includes its developers as members. Reflexively dead, as it were. It becomes a lot harder to care about maintaining something once you yourself no longer get anything out of using it.

<comment><USER9> Orkut engineering is in India and Brazil.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> As usual with Scripting News, the comments are of more value than the story. No, it's not a "fact" that they exposed the private data of millions ... At most, it's a fact that they casually handed a privacy-invading gun to people and invited them to fire it.

Nothing was exposed to the public unless you agreed to create your Buzz profile. Nothing is exposed to followers unless you post something. Nothing is shared from your Reader unless it was already set to public.

So, you know, if you're a doctor or someone else who values the confidentiality of your user list very highly, don't go blithely clicking "Yes" when Google asks you if you want to make a public something-or-other. And if you could be physically put in danger by your correspondents, don't make comments like "ooh, this will be handy for my new house, its address is 123 xyz St" in public comments on your shared items.

Google didn't make a CEO-apology-level mistake here; they acted reasonably, if a bit cavalierly, and a lot of people had a hysterical and irrational freak- out, and a lot of those who are anti-Google picked it up as a stick to beat them with.

I don't know when their image changed so much. Perhaps it was the string of weird and useless launches recently. Wave must have cost them more reputation than I thought.

But, really, I think their apology was fine. They should be sorry for causing concern. I don't see how much further they could go. "we're sorry for not making it completely safe for you to click 'Yes' on any box we present to you without any consequences at all. We agree that you should never, ever have to read anything. Oh, and you can log in to Facebook _here_ , and finally we pledge to protect your security-by-obscurity whenever you mark something 'public'. Love, Google."

<comment><USER12> > _they casually handed a privacy-invading gun to people and invited them to > fire it_

They didn't invite them to fire, they _forced_ them to fire. It's quite different.

<comment><USER11> No, they didn't. People think that the "want to find out more?" screen was the opt-in point, but it wasn't. The opt-in point was when you made your first Buzz post, when you were told this meant creating a public Google profile.

There are millions of gmail users who haven't done this, and consequently have _no_ public profile, and no information exposed. Users were not _forced_ into anything. Buzz is there and inviting, sure, but I read the screen and was well aware of what would happen.

(Compare Facebook, which _did_ recently force its users into publicising their names, small profile image and contacts list, with nary a whimper. It was a much more complicated opt-out box, too)

<comment><USER13> It was not at all obvious that "create a public profile" was equivalent to "make public the people who I frequently email". Certainly it's much more complex than telling the difference between ReadWriteWeb and Facebook, in which case there was a great deal of sympathy for the clueless users.

<comment><USER11> Yes, and I think Google was too cavalier in how they flagged that up -- the current revisions are much better.

But nonetheless, it doesn't mean they _forced_ people's data public, and it doesn't mean the NYT should have reported that as fact, as Winer demands. It's more nuanced than that, and only hit-seeking shouty tech blogs are saying otherwise. It'd be a disservice to their readers and the truth for the NYT to take their piece to the same histronic level as this link.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Site doesn't load for me.

Ironically Google Cache helps: [http://18.104.22.168/search?q=cache:http://www.scripting.co...](http://18.104.22.168/search?q=cache:http://www.scripting.com/stories/2010/02/14/googleDidSomethingSeriousl.html) ;)

edit: I should probably mention that google will eventually save that you viewed that website in its cache. Just to prevent angry blog post fury.

</comment><comment><USER15> There are a lot of people here commenting on Google's arrogance and/or incompetence.

One of the big unsaid point i think is the expectation from Google. Companies like FB, MS and Apple are "expected" to do the wrong thing while Google is held to a higher standard, the "Do No Evil" standard. This of course has been brought upon by Google on itself hence the particularly strident criticism from the techie quarters.

<comment><USER16> It's actually not a bad problem to have.

<comment><USER15> Oh i agree - its not a bad problem to have , just a problem which requires you to be particularly vigilant.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> ...and they fixed their error - [http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/new- buzz-start-up-expe...](http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2010/02/new-buzz-start- up-experience-based-on.html)

But yeah, damage is still done.

</comment><comment><USER18> It's not just our trust that Google violated. Although legally their privacy policy has enough loopholes, it still says:

 _When you sign up for a particular service that requires registration, we ask you to provide personal information. If we use this information in a manner different than the purpose for which it was collected, then we will ask for your consent prior to such use.

If we propose to use personal information for any purposes other than those described in this Privacy Policy and/or in the specific service privacy notices, we will offer you an effective way to opt out of the use of personal information for those other purposes. We will not collect or use sensitive information for purposes other than those described in this Privacy Policy and/or in the supplementary service privacy notices, unless we have obtained your prior consent._

<comment><USER11> They asked for consent. (Multiple times, in my case). You can argue that they weren't clear enough about exactly what they were getting consent _for_ \-- and I agree they weren't -- but they asked for it all the same.

The "storm" around this is reflecting really poorly on tech news blogs, many of whom are reporting this as if users had absolutely no say and just landed with a public profile. It's flat wrong, and we should stop promulgating that here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> For those saying it's unintentional, it's pretty close to what happened with Google Reader and shared items.

For those that didn't hear about it, with Google Reader you can click on feed items to be shared, in which case they become visible from a URL that only you know about, and you can pass that URL to people you want to see the shared items (and they can subscribe to).

Then one day they decided that everyone you've every chatted to should be able to see what you've shared, which caused some rocky times for peoples relationships / jobs / families. Personally, I thought that was very, very predictable.

It was opt-out, and the official work around was to stop sharing things or to delete your contacts. I think they added some finer grain stuff later, but everyone effected had left by then.

They were unapologetic throughout - they didn't see it as a big thing at all, even with the various tales of woe rolling in. It seemed almost like they don't have any procedures for checking if something leaks personal data and that there were no repercussions when it did. Hopefully that will change now something with more public attention has gone in a similar direction.

They did have a point when they said that they never guaranteed privacy, but the secret (pseudorandom looking URL) implies that they weren't going to splash it around quite as much as they did.

See here for an overview [http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Messaging-and- Collaboration/Google-...](http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Messaging-and- Collaboration/Google-Responds-to-Shared-Reader-Privacy-Furor/) and here for the horror stories and complaints [http://groups.google.com/group/google- reader-howdoi/browse_t...](http://groups.google.com/group/google-reader- howdoi/browse_thread/thread/318c4559e2ac5bbe?pli=1)

</comment><comment><USER20> Calm down. Deep breaths. Big companies sometimes make mistakes. No need for drama.

<comment><USER21> Yeah like Toyota with braking systems. Exposing personal data to people you don't want to have it is no big deal.

<comment><USER20> True, it is a big deal. Google goofed. But it was incompetence, not malice. Google fixed the problem. Let's move on.

<comment><USER22> Toyota's problems were incompetence; it doesn't make them any less of a big deal. Google is primarily a data company; they should understand the risks better than anyone else.

<comment><USER20> I actually think we have a false disagreement. I agree with what you're saying here. I'm just getting weary of the "look how evil (Google|Apple|Microsoft) is" drama lately. ;) It's fine to complain about this Google snafu, but asking for a personal apology from the CEO, etc. etc. just makes it overly dramatic.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Either the Google folks never thought about the privacy issues they were igniting with Buzz; or else they did think about them and decided they weren't important. I don't know which alternative is worse.

</comment><comment><USER24> That'll be the last time they ever roll something out to everyone at once.

<comment><USER25> I highly doubt it. There are countless times when companies have rolled things out to everyone and it caused problems.

The irony here is that Facebook has failed this way many time and here google is trying ot compete with facebook with buzz and did exactly the same thing.

Google is full of regular people and they make regular people mistakes and will continue to do so.

<comment><USER7> That's not ironic. People have very different expectations between Gmail and Facebook.

When I used FB I expect that my news feed is public to my friends. It's used for open social interaction. The same goes for Twitter.

When I use Gmail I expect my emails and contacts to be private. I don't expect strangers to see what I'm doing.

The user's experience and expectations are different. This is why Facebook has more leeway (but they still get __* if they do something that opens up your profile to the public).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> They haven't been doing something wrong before? Like their policy on china and everything else?

<comment><USER27> Yes they did, but that wasn't a wrong move, business-wise. This is seriously wrong, because people actually care about this stuff. People don't really care about China or cookies. This, on the other hand, is so obviously invading people's privacy, that a lot of people seem to understand it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> This is why Eric Schmidt uses a Yahoo email address.

<comment><USER29> heres a source (<http://www.ericschmidt.com>), but I doubt he still checks that address.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Stop bitching about Google Winer, and get a life.

Google's done a lot of good things for us, and to insult them so much just because they made one mistake is just plain ungrateful.

<comment><USER31> What a horrible post. Google hasn't done anything _for us_ , they've done things for their business. It happens that for the moment their business model (largely) requires them to do things that we find convenient or good. This is extremely unlikely to remain the case forever.

Have loyalty to your friends/family. Not to some public company that doesn't know or care about you.</comment></comment>


Show HN: runens - iphone app for social running - <AUTHOR> http://www.runens.com

<comment><AUTHOR> this is the first release, next version on the works already will have more social features embedded. Would appreciate the HN community feedback! :)</comment>


HackerNewsers - <AUTHOR> http://www.hackernewsers.com/

<comment><USER2> This was posted already by the creator : <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1520916>

</comment><comment><USER3> The idea is good but you need to use the current HN data or some sort of connection to our profiles. Having a separate website where you have to register won't really show the user data from here.

<comment><USER4> Take a look at the registration process. You need to place a link to your profile at hackernewsers in your HN-profile to be able to sign up. I like it :).

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This looks a lot like <http://hnhackers.com> \- I think having more than one of these might make both less useful.

<comment><USER6> The title of hnhackers is "Hire HN consultant", that seems very different to me.</comment></comment>


Can I tell you about the most amazing side business I've ever heard of? - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/KStreetHipster/status/1107335990912434178 <comment><USER2> _We had a bank teller who would drive around all the new home construction areas in town, and take photos of houses under construction, especially in middle to upper income areas. She did this for a year, with a plan in mind.

...

It was ALL profit, almost zero overhead._

I guess it's a clever concept, especially if you enjoy driving around town taking photos of homes under construction. But that sounds like a lot of overhead to me.

On the other, if this was supposed to be a spoof of side-hustle culture... well done.

</comment><comment><USER3> I could legitimately see middle class homeowners in the suburbs paying for this. I think my mom would want to buy the pictures, but my dad would talk her out of it. I don't know why, but it disgusts me that people would pay for that. There's something about the upper middle class suburbs that bothers me, and this fits right into that.

<comment><USER4> It disgusts you that people would pay for something they derive pleasure from?

<comment><USER3> Yes. Is that so hard to fathom? I think it is the excess of it that gets me, like people paying for fancy bottled water in places that have very good tap water. Yeah, they derive pleasure from that "fancy" water, but it disgusts me nonetheless that they would waste their money on that.

<comment><USER4> It is yeah, the whole idea of middle class is that people have money to spare on luxury. To me that's the ideal of civilization, where people don't have to worry (much) about the day to day, and can spend their social credit on the things they love and derive pleasure from. Whether that's drinking a coffee with their friends or family, visiting the movie theatre, or looking at pictures of their home under construction.</comment></comment></comment></comment>