Stallman: Facebook is Mass Surveillance - <AUTHOR> https://rt.com/news/richard-stallman-free-software-875/ <comment><USER2> I find it somewhat ironic that people like Stallman have battled for years to get so much FOSS out there.

What did we do with all this free software? Used it to build things like facebook, google and various SaaS sites that not only tie our data into proprietary clouds but due to the nature of the GPL etc don't really have to share their code anyway.

What they have really achieved is to turn everything they touch into a commodity and moved the "value" of software elsewhere.

We seem to be moving to a world where most of our devices and the servers powering our apps will be running some form of Linux or BSD under the hood but we are actually more restricted than ever.

<comment><USER3> GNU has already given a solution to this kind of situation. It's called AGPL (<http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html>). But the problem is most people would be happy to avoid GPL, and stick with BSD, because a lot of people want that. If anyone can start with AGPL, that's a great start.

PS: AGPL is the strictest GPL there is, like, LGPL is a looser version of GPL. It pretty much means, you give away almost all the stack. I don't understand the whole license, but I do know it's the strictest.

<comment><USER2> Interesting , haven't read that license in detail. Does this mean that as soon as I run something on a network (or just the internet?) I am required to push my changes back upstream immediately?

However I have a feeling that there is a sufficient body of GPL/LGPL code out there that people will just modify that.

Since a lot of OSS code is contributed by companies, they don't really have any incentive to contribute to an AGPL project (in most cases).

<comment><USER4> _Does this mean that as soon as I run something on a network (or just the internet?) I am required to push my changes back upstream immediately?_

Warning: If any of the following is incorrect, I would really appreciate someone correcting me. I use the AGPL, and if I'm incorrect, I would like to know.

You never have to push your changes back upstream. I'm not aware of any license that requires you to submit your changes back to the original author. You just have to make it accessible to your users.

Just like the GPL, you can run AGPL code on a private network and not have to publicly release the source code. It's when the network is public that you have to make the source code available.

If I visit your website, enter in some data, a script/lib licensed under the AGPL does something with it and returns a result. You must release the source code of "everything that it touches".

If you have a business and on the company Intranet you have the same script, while the employees (users) are entitled to have a copy of the source code, you are not required to publicly release the source code. Of course, other laws prevent those employees from also releasing the source code to the public and AFAIK they "trump" copyright laws eg.NDA.

 _Since a lot of OSS code is contributed by companies, they don't really have any incentive to contribute to an AGPL project (in most cases)._

I don't know, companies contribute to GPL licensed code even when they don't explicitly _have_ to. Just off the top of my head, tarsnap comes to mind, he contributes back to libarchive even though he is not required to do so.

That doesn't mean I don't see your point though. You could just as easily suggest that if libarchive was licensed under the AGPL that tarsnap wouldn't have used it in the first place due to the fact he would have to release the source of the entire stack.

So I think you argument should really be "Why should companies even use software under the AGPL" not "Why should they contribute back". I don't really have an answer for that, but the same argument was made about the GPL and companies still use GPL licensed software. I'm sure if you asked rms that question he would say something about not caring about companies that want to restrict his freedom....

<comment><USER5> You are correct about the AGPL, just be careful with wording it like "everything that it touches". I don't think that is true at all - if you have a website and use AGPL code, the AGPL states that your users have a right to see that code. It cannot make a judgment on other software that may be licensed in a different way. For instance, if you have a website that uses AGPL code to produce an HTML page and non-AGPL code to provide a PDF from that HTML page, the two packages would indeed touch, but there would be no obligation to release the non-AGPL code, just the AGPL code.

As for requirements to push back changes - of course not. The only license I know of that does something similar is the SMF - Simple Machines Forum - license[1]. Yuck.

The argument between GPL and AGPL is similar to the one between BSD (or similar) and GPL on the desktop. My own position is that yes, I expect humans to be inherently good, kind and sharing souls and thus the BSD should be the license of choice. However, I have to be pragmatic and say - if we all assume that humans act like that, what's the harm in writing that down into the license? All it can do is make it hard for people who don't want to give back. So in my eyes, that's an important feature to have.

[1] <http://www.simplemachines.org/about/smf/license.php>

<comment><USER4> _You are correct about the AGPL, just be careful with wording it like "everything that it touches"._

Yeah, sorry. I think that was a poor choice of words on my part.

 _For instance, if you have a website that uses AGPL code to produce an HTML page and non-AGPL code to provide a PDF from that HTML page, the two packages would indeed touch, but there would be no obligation to release the non-AGPL code, just the AGPL code._

Interesting, in your example, if your application calls the AGPL code that is used to generate the HTML wouldn't your application also have to be released under the AGPL? Or do you only have to make available the AGPL "HTML generation library" and the changes you have made to it (if any)?

I thought that it had already been established that if you use a library under the GPL any code that uses/calls that library must be released under the GPL. The only reason companies can use GPL code server side is because it is not run on the user's machine (technically not "releasing it"), which was the basis for the creation of the AGPL, to "fix" this "loophole".

edit:

Thanks skore, yeah I think your example still stands. Specifically, in the wikipedia article you linked this part:

 _By contrast, pipes, sockets and command-line arguments are communication mechanisms normally used between two separate programs._

To continue the original example, if your program just runs the HTML generation program and supplies user data via a command line argument then it need not be released under a compatible license. But on the other hand if you were to "copy and paste" the functions from that program into yours, it would need to be licensed under a compatible license.

<comment><USER6> > To continue the original example, if your program just runs the HTML > generation program and supplies user data via a command line argument then > it need not be released under a compatible license.

I wonder what would happen if you modify the GPLed command line program. Would that mean you'd be required to release such changes? I would say no.

<comment><USER4> If it was licensed under the "normal" GPL, then no, if it was released under the AGPL then yes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I just don't see what the big deal is...

The set of information people publish on their own about themselves (like blogs) is almost exactly the same as the set of information they disclose via Facebook.

Anyone can datamine people's blogs for similar surveilance.

.

From Stallman's blog & email history on newsgroups I could work out:

      who he knows
      what projects he participates in
      his age
      infer his sexual preference
      infer his religion (may even be explicit there)
      where he lives
      where he was on any day (conference speaker history)

People shout and scream about themselves as often and loudly as they can. Facebook is just the medium du jour.

Those concerned with privacy have oodles of crypto-tools to do so with.

It's just people can't be bothered. That's the root problem.

<comment><USER8> One thing that he mentions in the video is the fact that Facebook Like buttons are everywhere. They can track many of the sites you visit.

<comment><USER7> A simple grep of your HN comment history shows equivalents to 'Like'

      http://www.webmasterkb.com/Uwe/Forum.aspx/javascript/35764/For-all-those-jQuery-fanboys
      https://github.com/derwiki/redirect_tracker
      http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ltwatch/id482807766
      http://angularjs.org/
      https://github.com/ludicast/angular-peepcode-todo
      etc.

How is Facebook worse than this??

<comment><USER9> I think the point is that the simple presence of a Like button tells Facebook that you've been there. You don't have to click it, you just have to load it. HN comment history is active participation.

<comment><USER7> Ok, so I see the point that the websites you visit invite Facebook tracking onto their pages.

But one can trivially block these autoinclusions.

\</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment>---

<http://webgraph.com/resources/facebookblocker/>

\--

My work's firewall directs Facebook.com and Twitter.com to /dev/null . This stops all such tracking.

Individuals could do their own blacklist via Greasemonkey / Charles proxy equivalent.

<comment><USER10> And that's exactly what some of us do. But there's no way you're getting all of your facebook friends to do the same. Facebook can build a profile on you based on your friend's tracking data. Whether it'll be accurate or not is mostly a technical question - whoever looks at it will assume it's accurate. There are a lot of nefarious uses for this information and there's no useful way to opt out right now, short of not having created a facebook account. Hence the whole "mass surveillance" bit.

<comment><USER7> The leakage of information by friends is a problem.

But it is not a problem owned and invented by Facebook, it is any network.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> There are people who are uncomfortable about the intrusions of various websites, but who use those websites anyway. These people "just" need a better alternative to switch.

But I have no idea what to do about the people who just don't care.

For example, OKC recommended a person to me recently.

EDIT: Redacted a bit more.

She lists her blackberry pin; her facebook account; an email address; her cell / mobile phone number; and her twitter account.

That's enough information to find her profiles on a wide range of websites.

<comment><USER12> Even though you redacted that information it's quite easy to find that person still because of the poor spelling and grammar. Perhaps you should remove it.

<comment><USER11> Yes. You're right. I have done.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Is it true that sites with a facebook like button send the IP address of hits back to facebook?

<comment><USER14> The webpage doesn't send IP address, your browser contacts facebook for the icon and hence sends IP address and cookies to facebook, in the same way that image hotlinking would work.

Remember it's not just IP address, but could be cookies. Facebook can set a cookie that will be stored in your browser and will be sent to facebook each time. So if your laptop moves around, then the facebook cookie follows you.

Since this is at the browser level there are browser extensions that will block this for you if you want.

<comment> mike-cardwell The cookie issue doesn't exist for Safari users as it disables third party cookies by default. I don't know why all browsers don't do this. I've been disabling third party cookies in my browser for years and have never come across a website that it breaks. And if Apple can do it without people complaining, I'm sure Mozilla/Microsoft can too.

I prevent the IP address leak by using the Firefox addon RequestPolicy to block cross-origin requests.

<comment><USER15> I could be mistaken, but that feature only applies to the creation of cookies by third parties.

If you visit facebook.com, a cookie will be set, then later when you visit another site with a facebook widget, it WILL send that cookie that was set earlier when it wasn't 3rd party.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> RMS: "Free software literally gives you freedom in the area of computing. It means that you can control your computing. It means that the users individually and collectively have control over their computing. And in particular it means they can protect themselves from the malicious features that are likely to be in proprietary software,"

 _Open-source_ , proprietary or not, gives you control over your computer compared to closed-source software. It's not free software versus proprietary software.

Free software goes beyond open-source, and besides safety gives you freedom.

</comment><comment><USER16> "The Anonymous protests for the most part work by having a lot of people send a lot of commands to a website, that it can't handle so many requests. This is equivalent of a crowd of people going to the door of a building and having a protest on the street. It's basically legitimate."

No it's not. This is just a few persons coming in buses and stopping the entry. If you want to equal it to protest then all the requests have to come from real people, not some bots.

I'm also not agreeing with this: "I won't use the non-free software at all! I dedicate my effort to getting away from it! So if they stop making it – that would be great!"

This is ridiculous. I understand that the current IP legislation is a load of crap but trying to get ALL software to be free is absurd. How are developers going to live? How about groceries? Can I pay for that? Or that should be free as well?

<comment><USER2> I agree that you can not always compare a DDOS to people blocking a street. I think there's 2 reasons for this.

1) If you are busy protesting by blocking a street this causes you inconvenience as you can only physically be in one place at once. Whereas leaving your computer on to DOS while you go out to a bar isn't exactly a hardship.

2) Many of the DDOSers would not even be remotely aware of what they are doing , see the JS worm that they used recently.

 _This is ridiculous. I understand that the current IP legislation is a load of crap but trying to get ALL software to be free is absurd. How are developers going to live? How about groceries? Can I pay for that? Or that should be free as well?_

You've just opened up a huge topic there, has been discussed on HN lots of times and while I have seen good arguments for copyright-less software in many areas (OS kernels , web frameworks etc) there are others where I don't think anyone has thought of another viable business model (at least not one that isn't even more freedom restricting in some way).

Some would argue that these areas should just disappear or be done only by hobbyists but I think I would miss professionally produced video games for example, indie or AAA.

To clarify though, I doubt that Stallman would support Anonymous or people who want to pirate software. To him any software that is not libre is irrelevant and should be rejected regardless of monetary cost or who distributes it.

<comment><USER16> In according to his view on this we shouldn't pay for groceries because you don't know how they were grown. Everyone should get a farm and get his own vegetables, mine his own minerals etc. Saying that all software should be free is absurd.

<comment><USER2> I suspect his argument would be more along the lines of when you buy say some potatoes, you can do what you will with them.

For example you could plant them in the ground and use them to grow more potatoes or you could chop and fry them into chips, bake and serve them with with chilli etc.

His issue is not really with the cost of software (that is more a side effect of the GPL). He takes issue with the fact that with software you often have artificial restrictions in use and that the manufacturer may include features that are not to your benefit (e.g DRM , spyware , adware) and you can not remove these without breaking the license agreement.

He would liken this more to buying some potatoes that can only be legally used for one purpose and if you wish to use (physically identical) potatoes for another purpose then you must pay a higher fee.

The commercial issue with the GPL is that if you give people the rights to distribute as they see fit there is guarantee that they will give anything back to the original author.

Personally I would love to get applications with source code available that I can modify as I wish (or just fix bugs) but would require that the original author was paid a fee upon re-distribution (of original or modified version) to someone who did not already hold a license. I see this as a very good compromise in many cases.

The problem with this of course is that if I did wish to distribute the software to an unlicensed person then I could easily remove any copy protection methods prior to doing so.

In such a case ironically the best solution _might_ be stronger copyright legislation to protect the rights of open source but non gratis software developers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Except that it is completely voluntary.

<comment><USER18> No. It's completely "voluntary" and the quotes are important: if your whole social environment standardizes on a platform, you're an outcast if you don't step aboard. If your professional environment standardizes on a platform, you're an outcast if you don't step aboard.

It's only actually completely voluntary if you have infinite money and no issue (and no repercussion from) completely dropping whole social and professional circles out of your life.

And that still requires the network/system is honest about it[0], when Google automagically creates a G+ account for you when you sign up for (supposedly) unrelated services or forces you to create one to access other content, "voluntary" is really debatable. Again, unless you have no issue shedding whole social circles instantly.

[0] [http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2012/01/google- doubles-p...](http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2012/01/google-doubles-plus- membership-with-brute-force-signup-process.ars)

<comment><USER19> I don't know if I've ever really bought into this. I've yet to hear the story of the individual who lost all social ties because they quit Facebook. I made the decision about a year ago, due to excess wasted time on the site and have yet to face any real negative side effects to doing so.

People were social long before Facebook was around, and can remain so without it. Even with an account, the information you share on Facebook is voluntarily given.

I think what Facebook has done most effectively is given people the illusion that their lives are somehow more social because of it.

<comment><USER20> We need more people making this point. How did we manage to socialise up until a mere four years ago? It's still possible today without Facebook. People who say they _can't_ quit Facebook are like people who say it's too hard to quit smoking. No, you really can. You just don't want to.

<comment><USER21> That's not strictly true; you have to consider the entire system, not just the individual. It's not like only you picked up this new tech and can therefore, if you will it, drop it. _Everyone else_ in your social circle needs to, as well.

It's the same as asserting that people _can_ communicate without phones, or that they _can_ get news without the internet, the phone or newspapers. Sure, they _can_ , but it's incredibly inefficient, exponentially so when everyone else still does.

(I've still managed to stay away from Facebook, but, then, I don't have many friends.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> What has to be noted here is that this is published on Russia Today. From my understanding of it, it tries to offset the US crazies like Fox and its ilk...

<comment><USER23> To me RT is a Kremlin mouthpiece giving a voice to obscure anti-US and anti-EU voices. At one stage is was nothing but 24 hr anti-Georgia propaganda.

<comment><USER24> I've seen the BBC and other western media quoting some random unknown Chinese or Russian intellectual and giving them the world stage because they agreed with the western perspective on China or Russia.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> There are a lot of people here who don't seem to understand you can earn money and a good living with 'free' software.

The term 'free' is very misunderstood in this context. Its free as in freedom/free speech, not (necessarily) free as in beer.

Although sometimes (most times) its both. This doesn't stop you using it to earn a living. It allows you to freely use and modify it to your own purposes. Contrast that with non-free (i.e. locked, obfuscated and proprietary).

I've written freely available stuff that people have (never the less _and willingly_ ) paid me rather handsomely for the privilege of using or modding to their own needs. They didn't _have_ to, but people can be inherently decent that way.

I could have made it entirely closed and I think I'd have made less out of it if I had. I would have had to market it for a start -- and that's a fucking headache. I'm not a salesman and don't want to be.

Anyhow, Stallman is 100% right. Everything he's been warning us about for years is already upon us. With _much_ worse to come.

</comment><comment><USER26> Stallmans reminds me of Ted Kaczynski unabomber. (no offence) similair world view, he doesn't care of inovation because probably thinks that it leads to more controlled society. both are Neo-Luddites. only Kaczynski was more radical in his actions. If you want more of the same I suggest you read unabomber manifesto <http://editions-hache.com/essais/pdf/kaczynski2.pdf>

<comment><AUTHOR> The creator of Emacs and gcc is a Neo-Luddite and on the same side as unabomber?!! Apparently there is some kind of nth humor level involved here that I can't really comprehend.

<comment><USER26> yes, what is your point? for fighting technology you can use technology. (and im not saying that he was neo-luddite allways)

<comment><AUTHOR> No offense but you're implying it and my point anyway is that it's somewhat weird (if not anything worse) to draw parallels with unabomber just because Stallman said what's just obvious to anyone but Facebook addicts.

For better or worse there is a growing danger in FB regarding the tons of personal data that the same users would just never give away if it weren't for FB. He is just trying to make users aware of that. He's certainly not the first to do it and hopefully not the last. Also he said nothing that could be interpreted as innovation stopper.

Out and over.

<comment><USER27> Amazing, how discussion involving that person bring out people failing to see things in context, some absolutist blindness.

What "tons" of personal data? I doubt I could myself collect tons or personal data about myself, not to mention data that would be dangerous.

<comment><AUTHOR> Amazing indeed.

I bet that you're quite computer literal yourself (hard to suppose otherwise since we're talking through HN) so as to be quite cautious as to how much of yourself you'll expose on the net. Unfortunately most people aren't plus they are quite good at documenting their lives (photos,videos,writings, etc) and linking in with people they know and share data and the like.

That's "tons of personal data" - it's not an absolutist firework but it's the main reason that gives FB such a high market value. AFAIK FB is considered a gold-mine in terms of highly targeted advertising and marketing that's because it hosts "tons of personal data" of high granularity and of high relevance to the real identities of the people uploading it. Otherwise wordpress for example would be considered of at least equal value with FB.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Where can I work a 30 hour week as a Software Engineer? - <AUTHOR>

As I get more experienced, productive and earn more money the marginal utility of more income decreases but the utility of free time remains the same. Instead of chasing an ever higher salary, can I instead work less? My preference would be to 30 hour work week spread over 3 consecutive 10 hour days. I understand that the pay-cut to current schemes would be more than 25% due to benefit costs and other constant per-employee costs. Some of that pay-cut will however be offset with commutes from farther cheaper locales.<p>Why aren't employers offering such work schemes for professionals? And if they are, who are these companies? <comment><USER2> As a founder and employer of a small team I can tell you that this is more complicated than it may look from the employee side. Consider that health care costs, equipment costs, office space, etc.. don't go down by 20% even though your days/week did. Investing in people who will be _motivated_ is one of the most important things a company does.

Besides freelancing, I think your best bet is taking a normal 40-50 hour/wk job, making yourself indispensable (which takes some time) and then negotiating a 4 day week with a commensurate salary cut. I've seen it done, but you really have to sell it to management and convince them your productivity won't decline (don't emphasize your side projects, etc).

</comment><comment><USER3> I think it's more effort for companies to manage it so in general they don't offer it.

I have seen people negotiate a 4-day week, and take a 20% pay cut. In the end, their job didn't really change, so they were paid 20% less and either worked relatively harder than others for less pay, or underperformed relatively to others, so their career stalled and bonus was reduced.

</comment><comment><USER4> I did this with my company. After working for 9 months I proposed to cut my hours to 32, with a 20% pay cut, and let me become the first remote employee. They liked me and thought I was a good enough worker not to say no. My advice would be to go for a small company where you can get to know everyone, prove your worth, and then propose a mutually agreeable deal.

</comment><comment><USER5> Our new employee works 4 days a week, for a 32 hours / week contract. I think it shouldn't be too difficult to find a company that accepts that.

The more difficult part is the "3 days at 10 hours", IMHO. That sounds quite difficult to achieve on top of the 4 days a week thingy.

</comment><comment><USER6> You could start freelancing but I'm sure you already thought about that.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, that it is the most workable alternative right now.

It doesn't come without a couple of downsides. The first downside is the lack of security. The second downside is the extra time you have to spend seeking out gigs and polishing up skills that are in demand right now; the extra time spend creep can be unbound and defeats the goal of working less.

I believe those downsides are enough to rule out working freelance for me. Obviously they are workable for some people, because there are a lot of satisfied freelancers.

<comment><USER6> If you do decide to try it. Build up a bit of buffer so you don't feel the need to get a god client on day one. The market right now is really good so it's a good time to check out how it works for you.

Good luck in any case.</comment></comment></comment>


Sprinkle: easy Ruby on Rails VPS slice provisioning - <AUTHOR> http://redartisan.com/2008/5/27/sprinkle-intro

<comment><USER2> This is more than just slice provisioning. It's a flexible automated installation management system. It would be killer if it was integrated with a configuration management system as well. The current contenders in these arenas don't appeal to me very much.</comment>


Peer Review: Bohannon study has severe flaws itself - <AUTHOR> http://gunther-eysenbach.blogspot.ca/2013/10/unscientific-spoof-paper-accepted-by.html

<comment><USER2> The real issue is that the image science has of itself is completely wrong.

For instance, all of the talk about the "scientific method" and "reproducibility" means very little, because few scientific results are ever reproduced. It's no secret that the median scientific paper is wrong.

If you look at the history of general relativity you can see pretty clearly how scientists are stumbling in the dark.

Great minds including Einstein, Rosen and Feynmann couldn't make up their collective minds as to if gravity waves were real into the 1970s.

Then in the 1970s a generation of physicists spun an elaborate theory of the semiclassical black hole that never made sense, because it introduced an "information paradox".

When you solve for the shape of space-time near a black hole you get a singularity at the event horizon as clear as day. For years you'd take an intro physics class and somebody much older than you with tenure would then do a sketchy coordinate transformation that made the singularity go away at the event horizon letting you see a different one inside.

Quantum mechanics (semiclassical or exact) clearly states that the interesting stuff at a black hole happens at the event horizon which is an information rich object. That coordinate transformation voids the warrantee on the space- time continuum and as a result the whole picture of classical black hole interiors has been wrong for decades.

</comment><comment><USER3> My assumption is that everything I read is either wrong, has a bias or both. You have to filter truth out of the world's uncertainty, but it's better to leave questions in your mind than to blindly follow a falsehood.</comment>


Native lazy-loading support for the Web in Chrome 76 - <AUTHOR> https://web.dev/native-lazy-loading <comment><AUTHOR> Supported in Chrome 76 and any Chromium 76-based browsers.

There is also an open implementation bug [1] for Firefox.

Webkit also has it too [2], just not sure when it will land.

I know this is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I really wish we could make Javascript-less Web Page ( HTML ) better instead making everything Web page an Javascript Web App. Lazy Loading is something I wanted for god knows how many years.

Hopefully someday I could see something like Turbolinks and Stimulus inside browser.

[1] [https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1542784](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1542784)

[2] [https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196698](https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196698)</comment>


Show HN: ThoughtAndPrayers.io Will Make You Want To Crypto Mine for Charity - <AUTHOR> https://www.thoughtsandprayers.io/ <comment><USER2> Well done, and a great idea! One minor thing, clicking your logo in the header brings me to bulma.io

<comment><AUTHOR> Oops. Will fix in next build</comment></comment>


Finland's Hobbyhorse Girls - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/21/world/europe/finland-hobbyhorse-girls.html <comment><USER2> So as an occasional (male) rider of real horses, there's something I've always wondered about: how did the recreation become so gendered?

Up until about the middle of the 20th century there was still utilitarian and military horse riding. Men would learn to ride. Now it seems to be culturally associated almost entirely with young upper-middle-class girls or middle-aged women. Is this the result of toy marketing (My Little Pony from the 80s onwards), or high society, or something else?

What interests me about this Finnish subculture is that it's perfectly cloned the "horse culture", just without any actual horses. It's very close to a cargo cult. Possibly Finland is too cold to have a regular horse culture?

<comment><USER3> My facile observation for the day: I think horse riding is less enjoyable for men due to differences of anatomy.

<comment><USER4> Have you ever ridden one?

<comment><USER5> Not parent poster, but ONCE, and ONLY once, haha.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Well, it's kids playing make-believe, and in a physically active way, I'm all for it.

<comment><USER7> "If someone says we are playing, it strips away everything we made, it strips away the reality," said Ms. Aarniomaki.

it looks like playing to me as well, and not sure why the community would see that as a problem. even professional sports players know they are playing a game. an interesting and unusual perspective for sure.

<comment><USER8> I wonder if something was lost in translation, if that read " it strips away the illusion" then the component of pretending in this type of play makes sense.

I guess much in the same sense that people would probably not be amused if you ran around a Comic Con telling everyone this is just make believe.

<comment><USER9> > I wonder if something was lost in translation, if that read " it strips away > the illusion" then the component of pretending in this type of play makes > sense.

Yes something was lost. In Finnish there are different words for children's make-believe plays ("leikkiä") and sports/adult games ("pelata"). Your example of comic-con is spot on, I think.

<comment><USER10> Given your comment about the two words in Finnish, I think the comment about comic cons has it backwards:

> "If someone says we are playing, it strips away everything we made, it > strips away the reality," said Ms. Aarniomaki.

She's objecting to being compared to comics instead of soccer, hence "the reality" being stripped — you're accusing what they view as akin to gymnastics as being mere fantasy.

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure if I got you right -- a comic convention wouldn't be called with the make-believe word. That would be intentionally belittling if adults (or teenagers, for that matter) are attending. It's used only for small children's plays.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> le-mark My kids have these stick horses, a relative got them for a Christmas gift some years ago. They never play with them. The stick is long and counter balances the head so you have to sort of squeeze your legs together to actually ride the thing. Looks like these horses have shorter sticks, and are balanced so they're rideable in a much more natural way.

It certainly never occurred to me this simple refinement could make an annoying experience into something a kid could actually enjoy.

</comment><comment><USER11> Sometimes I wonder if I'm just getting old and no longer get things, or if the world is just getting crazier.

<comment><USER12> Kids have always played wierd make-believe games.

Sometimes it starts getting more formalized and attracts slightly older kids. People usually think it's weird, then they get used to it. ...like dungeons and dragons.

Skeptical articles lean into the knee-jerk reaction that "something must be broken with society."

Ultimately, lots of stuff is wierd if you approach it from a judgemental outsider's perspective. Wtf is golf all about, for example?

<comment><USER13> Or Quidditch leagues.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> If you don't have 10 year old girls; this may seem strange, but it is the most normal thing you could imagine.

<comment><USER15> My daughter went through a mermaid phase, there was even a TV show, just youthful play and imagination.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> This is simply fantastic.

</comment><comment><USER17> Then there is also this: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobby_horse_polo](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobby_horse_polo)

</comment><comment><USER18> We went to the mall this weekend and literally saw adults carrying large hammers from the movie "Thor". Presumably Marvel's Thor features in the new movie too?

</comment><comment><USER19> This article makes me feel so old; enough time has passed for hobby horse riding to grow into some kind of competitive sport.

At least it's better than parents turning their adolescent daughters into sexualized dolls on the children's beauty pageant circuit.

</comment><comment> rv-de Given basic anatomy and mechanics - could there be a hidden incentive of the coming of age kind? Puberty is confusing and a lot about discovering new aspects of life ...

</comment><comment><USER20> I didn't know stickhorses were a thing here in Finland until I went to a harness race event with some relatives who are enthusiasts. I was flabbergasted that the first event of the race evening was a stickhorse start, with dozens of young kids (mostly girls) lining up on the trot course. (This was about 10 years ago).

</comment><comment><USER21> There is also a virtual equivalent to hobby horsing called "virtual stables".

A virtual horse is just a webpage for a fictional horse. There are usually pictures of the horse that hobbyists find on the internet/buy on forums/illustrate themselves [1]. The horse obviously also has a name and usually a description of its personality. Horses sometimes age "in real time" but most stables seemed to have a somewhat arbitrary aging rate (e.g. the horse would turn 4 within a few weeks of its "creation", but after that age normally). Horses can also be registered in a database called "Virtual horseback-riders society" [2]. You can use the "Virtual horseback-riders society" to advertise your competitions. A horse/horseback-rider can usually participate in any competition by just signing up (by sending an email to the organizer) and the winner is randomly picked. Another way to interact with other stables is by "taking care" of somebody else's horse - meaning you write a story in a guestbook about what you "did" with the horse, e.g. "I took Cupcake for a walk in the forest. Cupcake was in a bad mood and really reluctant to leave the stable, but cheered up when it saw a patch of grass". You can always create a new horse (obviously, you just create a new webpage), but to be in with the cool kids, you "buy" horses from other hobbyists. The "best" horses are ones that have a long family tree that has been documented in the Virtual horseback-riders society database. There is no currency, there are "selling topics" in the forums, where you try to provide compelling arguments as to why you should get the horse.

The forums were pretty active 10-15 years ago and most hobbyists were girls in their early teens. The community is much less active and older now. However, the community is more tech-savvy than back in the day - people have their own domains and use a database to track their horses (back in the day, most pages were static sites hosted on Freewebs). Some stables have been running for 15 years, the most iconic one being Ionic [3], a stable with around 800 horses.

There is probably something to be said about virtual stables dying out as the Internet has become more centralized. Virtual stables also introduced a lot of young girls to coding and for example, the owner of Ionic works in IT now.

[1] [http://www.seppele.piirroshevoset.com/hevonen.php?id=298](http://www.seppele.piirroshevoset.com/hevonen.php?id=298)

[2] [http://www.virtuaalihevoset.net/](http://www.virtuaalihevoset.net/)

[3] [http://www.hevosmaailma.net/Ionic/](http://www.hevosmaailma.net/Ionic/)

<comment><USER22> Is this exclusively a Finnish thing? I'm unable to find anything about virtual stables like this outside of the links you've posted.

<comment><USER21> No, the hobby originated in the US but it seems to be more popular in Europe. I'm only familiar with the Finnish community, but I was able to find a German horse registry: [http://www.moorwiesen.de/register/?&lang=en](http://www.moorwiesen.de/register/?&lang=en)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> How very strange! Rock on, you strange ones, you crazy diamonds.

</comment><comment><USER24> It makes me sad that this is a "celebration of girlhood" but boys are not even mentioned in this article. Why can't boys also practice hobbyhorse training?

<comment><USER25> It seems boys can, they simply don't. It seems for some reason it became girly thing in Finland (like fake eye lashes, maybe) and boys avoid it.

Citation from another article:

""" There doesn't seem to be that many boys riding hobbyhorses?

Alisa: I think it's quite sad, actually. It feels like boys aren't allowed to do this thing that is considered to be a girly thing. At the same time, I think it also means we have a strong sense of feminism in this community. It's a place for girls to do what they want. But the boys we do have are very much welcomed and included. """

[http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/36050/1/h...](http://www.dazeddigital.com/artsandculture/article/36050/1/hobbyhorse- finlands-bizarre-stick-riding-craze)

<comment><USER26> I have a hard time imagine a area where boys would be allowed to have a similar community with that skewed gender ratios. The common assumption is that any gender segregation is caused by the minority being discriminated against.

If competitive hobbyhorse riding officially became a sport here in Sweden it would have to follow some recent laws dictating affirmative action within the sport organization. A minimum of 40% men and women. No exceptions.

<comment><USER27> So if 40% of boys were not interested, it would be denied to girls? That seems noble in intent, but draconian in application.

<comment><USER28> From what I can tell from a short search, it seems it's 40% of the board of the organization, not 40% of the members.

<comment><USER26> That is right, but the political discussion around it involved more than just the board. The idea is that the organizations need to become more welcoming and as a start the government want that the boards get a minimum of 40% men and women.

Recent survey show that two national organizations that manage a major sport has failed to comply. Ice hockey and horse riding. 80% men in one, 80% women in the other.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> How did this page ended up on HN? It seems quite irrelevant.

<comment><USER30> If you don't like it, just downvote it instead of trying to appeal to a higher power. It's a democracy, not your personal curated news list.

<comment><USER31> How do you downvote a submission?

<comment><USER27> By moving on with your day.

<comment><USER22> No, you get the downvote button once you have 500 karma.

<comment><USER2> I have 45000 karma and still can't downvote submissions, only flag them.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Get indications to your health concerns in seconds - <AUTHOR> http://helth.ai <comment><USER2> Even after signing up (with a throwaway email since the site doesn't indicate much about what it is):

a) the typing-then-erasing effect gets very boring (though admittedly it does kinda give the impression that there's a real person on the other side)

b) There are typos all over (heh, starting with the name of the service) -- doesn't give a very good impression.

c) Service by email only? Seriously? Why did I need to sign up on the site again?

d) For the hell of it, I then emailed the given address with "Blood pressure", and got what seems to be a verbatim copy of the content here: [https://www.zocdoc.com/answers/12061/how-do-you-get-rid- of-h...](https://www.zocdoc.com/answers/12061/how-do-you-get-rid-of-high- blood-pressure)

Just, uh, no.

</comment><comment><USER3> Not really understanding what it is, reluctant to sign up without knowing first.</comment>


The UN thinks we could hit peak births in 2014 - <AUTHOR> http://www.vox.com/2014/7/16/5909709/the-un-thinks-well-hit-peak-births-in-2014 <comment><USER3> The post kindly submitted here links to the UN report with the projection,[1] and that page links also to a detailed report with projections of total world population, given various assumptions, titled "World Population Prospects: The 2012 Revision."[2]

[1] [http://esa.un.org/wpp/Excel- Data/fertility.htm](http://esa.un.org/wpp/Excel-Data/fertility.htm)

[2] [http://esa.un.org/wpp/Documentation/pdf/WPP2012_Volume- I_Com...](http://esa.un.org/wpp/Documentation/pdf/WPP2012_Volume- I_Comprehensive-Tables.pdf)

Projections of world population come to much smaller total population figures now than they did when I was a child. Fertility rates have dropped much more than many people could imagine over the last few decades, and are below replacement rates in many developed countries.

<comment><USER4> No doubt you got the "OMG 10 billion people by 2010, we'll never be able to feed them!" stuff I was exposed to as well.

The interesting thing about this to me is that it implies we will also reach 'peak energy' which is to say that once everyone in the planet is at the agreed upon 'median' lifestyle/perks we will have a fixed number for the amount of energy we need from that point forward. Kind of weird thinking about a planet with humans in equilibrium.

<comment><USER5> > _The interesting thing about this to me is that it implies we will also > reach 'peak energy' which is to say that once everyone in the planet is at > the agreed upon 'median' lifestyle/perks we will have a fixed number for the > amount of energy we need from that point forward._

I doubt that. Reminds me of a concept of Malthusianisms [0].

Some quotes:

 _Why are even some affluent parts of the world running out of fresh water? Because if they weren't, they'd keep watering their lawns until they were._

 _Why does it cost so much to buy something to wear to a wedding? Because if it didn't, the fashion industry would invent more extravagant 'requirements' until it reached the limit of what people could afford._

 _Again and again, I've undergone the humbling experience of first lamenting how badly something sucks, then only much later having the crucial insight that its not sucking wouldn't have been a Nash equilibrium._

[0] - [http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=418](http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=418)

<comment><USER4> Except that Malthusianisms have been shown to be completely bogus.

Let's use an example from that page to deconstruct that:

       > Why can't everyone just agree to a family-friendly,
       > 40-hour workweek?  Because then anyone who chose to
       > work a 90-hour week would clean our clocks.

Except that more and more people _do_ work a family-friendly 40 hour week even with the opportunity to do more. They have "enough" so they want to spend more time with family than at work. The implication is that the pursuit of "money" presumably would allow the person working 90 hours a week to make more than twice or three times as much. But what do they get out of that? Where is their motivation? So that they are rich enough not to work at all?

What has been demonstrated repeatedly through history is that that once the 'need' it met the behavior stops. And the example at hand here is population growth. Why do "industrialized" populations have a lower population rate than "pre-industrial" populations? They both have functioning genitalia, they both have time. But when you can't count on being able to work until you are 70 and being able to live off your savings until you die, you really really want family that is younger than you so that you can move in with them. But when you don't perceive a 'need' for children to support you in your golden years, many people forego the obvious cost and bother of having them in the first place. There is no sudden new use for children that substitutes in.

Affluent parts of the world aren't running out of fresh water, they can recycle it or desalinate it. When the costs for doing that are connected with the water they choose to use it differently (like not watering a lawn in Las Vegas for example). We're low on water in California at the moment due to weather, not due to outrageous consumption by individuals.

Similarly with energy, we use less and less. Our stuff gets more efficient, our use gets more refined. From a 350 watt tube TV in the living room to a 50 Watt LCD to a 5 watt tablet/phone. We still consume news and entertainment but we don't consume it using the same methodologies at the same energy costs.

People make extrapolations and hold technologies and attitudes constant, it has been shown time and time again that you always get the wrong answer if you do that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Hans Rosling's "Don't Panic" documentary presents some interesting findings about population and third-world countries.

[http://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts- about-p...](http://www.gapminder.org/videos/dont-panic-the-facts-about- population/)

<comment><USER7> His TED talks are well worth watching too:

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_y...](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen)

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_o...](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_reveals_new_insights_on_poverty)

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_at_state](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_at_state)

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_g...](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth)

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_good_news_of_the_d...](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_good_news_of_the_decade)

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_religions_and_babies)

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_truth_about_hiv](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_the_truth_about_hiv)

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_and_the_magic_washing_...](http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_and_the_magic_washing_machine)

<comment><USER5> I strongly recommend those talks.

The 'magic washing machine' talk is beautiful. One of my favourite quotes of all time comes from it.

 _And what we said, my mother and me, "Thank you industrialization. Thank you steel mill. Thank you power station. And thank you chemical processing industry that gave us time to read books."_

<comment><USER8> IIRC that talk had a powerful ending (beside that quote).

<comment><USER9> Are you referring to the one where he performs sword eating? (I kid you not)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> In a world that continues to develop, this makes sense to me, as a Fertility Rate Map:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_de...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate#mediaviewer/File:Countriesbyfertilityrate.svg)

Has a lot of similarities to a per capita GDP map:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_\(PPP\)_per_capita#mediaviewer/File:Gdpercapita.PNG)

The stronger your country's economy, the fewer babies you have.

<comment><USER11> > _The stronger your country 's economy, the fewer babies you have._

You have to be careful about causation and correlation there. It should be possible to curb population growth even before you get high levels of economic development by educating girls, rather than waiting for economic development to bring empowerment for women to decline to have lots of children.

<comment><USER12> Conversely the first thing that happens when you educate women is they tend to enter the workforce on their own, at which point they gain better access to the means to control their own fertility.

It's a nuanced issue to be sure.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> k-mcgrady Bill Gates' annual foundation letter talked a good deal about birth rates. I found it very interesting.

[http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org](http://annualletter.gatesfoundation.org)

<comment><USER13> It starts out with "By almost any measure, the world is better than it has ever been." sorry, that's just bullshit.

"Melinda and I are struck by how many people think the world is getting worse." Gee. Must be nice to be a billionaire.

<comment><USER14> I've upvoted your comment despite disagreeing with it, because I'm sure many people feel the same way and I understand why.

Over the last 20 years, the real disposable income of Americans and people in the wealthiest Western European countries has decreased or stayed the same, and claims that the world is much better than it was are difficult to swallow if that's your context.

However, the percentage of the world's population that is desperately poor has significantly decreased, famine is much rarer, infant mortality and child morbidity is way down.

You say it must be nice to be a billionaire, I say it must be nice to be a citizen of one of the world's wealthiest countries. To someone starving to death, or someone who has lost 3 out of 7 children in infancy, the lifestyle of a middle class Englishman or American must be scarcely distinguishable from that of Bill Gates.

After all, our children don't routinely die, we always have enough to eat, we have shelter, we're not in a war zone. Yeah, unlike BG, we're not flying anywhere in a private jet but that must seem like a paltry distinction to someone trying to live through a famine.

<comment><USER13> Thanks. I agree that maybe, if you balance out the total good vs total bad, you could make an argument that world-wide things are, on net, better, depending how sanguine you are about population growth/totals. But the way he makes that blanket statement just pisses me off - he's obviously not looking too hard for other indicators. I don't trust anyone who can't take a more nuanced view: some things good, some things bad.

I agree that developed countries - still a large part of the world - <USER2> deteriorating.

\- Debt, of all citizens and particularly of young adults \- Waste - I think there's some giant plastic floating garbage dump in the pacific \- Pollution - Most water bodies in the US are polluted (mercury). Haven't been to china, but I hear it's not a fun place to breathe. \- Food quality (cheap carbohydrates == diabetes for a big portion of the population). Also, how much toxicity do you want in your fish? Do we want to all be beta testers for Monsanto, just to stay alive? \- Food sustainability (pesticides - which eventually get resistant weeds, synthetic fertilizers, over fishing, corn-fed cows) \- Food cruelty (factory farming) \- Energy Sustainability - Pretty sure pumping unknown chemicals into your water supply (phracking) is NOT good. \- Population - There's still the fact that perhaps 2 may chinas may come into the world due to population growth, which doesn't seem like an optimistic outlook. \- Traffic - how much time do we sit commuting in mega-sprawls vs previous generations \- Mobility - how many of us have the option to stay close to our family when finding work (helps when raising kids), vs having to relocate for a megacorp \- Child care - how many of us raise our own children, vs have both parents work

So if we're doing a lot of things that are unsustainable, I don't see that as 'good'. I see that as 'bad'/negative. Maybe we will improve technology in the future, but past performance does not guarantee future results, and it most certainly doesn't mean we can all pat ourselves on the back for being so great ("improving the world").

So yes, I'm US-centric admittedly, but un-qualified rosy (or negative) generalizations piss me off, because you're probably not looking very hard[1]

I will probably read all of his letter some time, but it shouldn't have to be so off putting. Hopefully he doesn't try to sell his "fake meat" crap. You know what? If the world was so better, we wouldn't really have to eat that shit, would we? The same with veganism. Carbs are awful for your teeth. I also don't think most humans are designed to eat carbs, and I've lost enough weight myself to never want to eat them again. So if we all have to eat mass cheap carbs, to stay alive, things are not 'better than they have ever been'.

1\. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult_science)

<comment> k-mcgrady Please read the entire letter. You've got pissed off about a statement without bothering to read the reasons and the data he gives for making that statement.

Let me take just a few of the point you make:

>> "cheap carbohydrates == diabetes for a big portion of the population"

Ok. How about looking at it another way? Cheaper food means less people starving and dying young.

>> "how much toxicity do you want in your fish? Do we want to all be beta testers for Monsanto, just to stay alive?"

If it's a choice between eating toxic fish and living off it for many years or dying or course I want to be beta tester for Monsanto. I despise the company and am all for healthy sustainable food but for a lot of people it's a choice between eating and not eating.

>> "how much time do we sit commuting in mega-sprawls vs previous generations"

You have to sit in traffic in a 'mega-sprawl' and previous generations had to work their ass off on a farm from 6am to 10pm. You drive your nice, air conditioned car to work, or take cheap public transport while people in poorer countries dream of having a job. You have it easy.

You entire position is based on that of a comfortable person living in the US ignorant of the fact that when someone talks about the world they are not only referring to you. His statement was about the world. Here are a few of his points from the letter to save you reading it:

1\. the percentage of very poor people has dropped by more than half since 1990

2\. Since 1960, the life span for women in sub-Saharan Africa has gone up from 41 to 57 years, despite the HIV epidemic. Without HIV it would be 61 years.

3\. The percentage of children in school has gone from the low 40s to over 75 percent since 1970.

4\. Today there are only three countries left that have never been polio-free: Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nigeria.

5\. A baby born in 1960 had an 18 percent chance of dying before her fifth birthday. For a child born today, the odds are less than 5 percent. In 2035, they will be 1.6 percent.

The main reason I posted the link was the following point:

Drops in child mortality have been shown to lead to drops in the number of births. In countries where your child is likely to die at a young age you have many children to 'compensate' for the likely loss. If you can be quite certain your child won't die or measles, polio, malaria etc. then you won't have as many children.

<comment><USER13> The point is not that you can't outweigh all the 'bad indicators' by 'good indicators' that you, personally, weight more highly. If you want to make that argument, great. He said 'by nearly all indicators', which to me, frankly, is dishonest propaganda.

<comment> k-mcgrady I'm guessing 'by nearly all indicators' was referring to standard indicators used to measure these things (infant mortality rates, GDP, quality of life, life expectancy). Of course he's not going to take into account some of your 'indicators' (e.g. level of congestion on morning commute). That's a bullshit indicator. It's relevant to a relatively very small number of people. The indicators I've stated above are relevant to everyone.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I have not studied economics but I have casually heard that larger populations are important for developing countries to build larger economies/GDP and the political power necessary for growth before these countries become efficient enough to rely on other methods for growth and wealth. What does this mean for poorer countries who might be under pressure to reduce their population/births? There seems to be a correlation between population and GDP and also population and GDP/capita.

<comment><USER16> A country does not develop simply because it has a lot of people. It develops when those people acquire skills and contribute to the economy. India and China have almost similar populations now, but look at China's GDP and India's GDP [0]. Why the massive difference? Of course there are many many reasons for it, but China has succeeded in eliminating illiteracy, hunger etc of its people and trained a large number of engineers and is using them.

[0]: [https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&...](https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=gdp_production_current_us&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:CHN:IND&ifdim=region&ind=false&icfg&iconSize=0.5)

<comment><USER17> The US was booming as one of the most sparsely populated countries in the world in the 19th century. Why?

It had tremendous untapped natural resources, a wealth of coal and oil (it was the worlds leading _exporter_ of oil until the late 1940s), and the social structures to allow mobilization of those resources.

Population isn't enough, and can be a curse. Europe saw a tremendous economic _boom_ following the Black Death, largely because financial and real capital was concentrated in fewer hands, and populations were reduced below carrying capacity.

Education isn't enough. Drop a highly educated individual into the heart of Africa or slums of India, and they may do well compared to the locals, but it'll be a small fraction of what they'd be able to accomplish in the US or Europe, or by being _wealthy_ and in India.

The role of resources, particularly agriculture and energy, in economic growth, are highly discounted by contemporary economists.

Hell, you can even get an expert on poverty and a Nobel prize winner on stage saying with an absolutely straight face that economists cannot explain growth:

[http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1wf57z/econ_pau...](http://www.reddit.com/r/dredmorbius/comments/1wf57z/econ_paul_krugman_and_tony_atkinson_we_dont/)

<comment><USER18>
      > Population isn't enough, and can be a curse. Europe saw
      > a tremendous economic boom following the Black Death,
      > largely because financial and real capital was concentrated
      > in fewer hands, and populations were reduced below
      > carrying capacity.

I won't dispute that there was both a population decline and an economic boom following the Black Death, but do you have anything to back up the assertion of causality? Could the boom not be more parsimoniously explained by the inflow of wealth from the New World? Indeed, perhaps the Black Death dampened this boom and ultimately delayed the industrial revolution.

<comment><USER17> The Wikipedia article on the topic gives a good overview:

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

As I recall, James Burke's _Connections_ discusses this tangentially at least once (several times as I recall -- it somewhat traipses back and forth across history a bit).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Is fertility heritable? Some aspects of it certainly are. i.e. lust, passion, lack of self control, working sperm, and mental traits such as the susceptibility to anti-abortion arguments, the desire to have a child in women, and the tendency towards religion are all either already proven to be heritable, or very likely are. I don't think the UN is taking this into account, since it's very un-PC and is mostly fairly recent research.

So as modernity attacks the desire to reproduce (with abortion/birth control, modernity, education, distraction, late marriage, etc.) we end up eliminating people who are vulnerable to not reproducing. The only people left will be ones who are resistant.

So my overall point is, even though the population growth rate may be slowing down, it doesn't mean it'll slow down forever. There are already resistant strains at low frequency in the population now - they will increase in prevalence and become the majority; they'll continuously suffer defections, some of whom will be high achievers due to not spending the time to reproduce, and the mindset that allows them to break away from conventionality - but as long as they don't reproduce, they'll be gone eventually.

<comment><USER20> I don't see any evidence that the heritability of desire to have large families (or the heritability of factors linked to _not_ accidentally having large families) is _anywhere near as strong_ as the effect of socioeconomic trends which have decimated the cultural and rational reasons for having large families in developed countries. Looking at a different aspect of heritability, modernity did far more damage to the intake of celibate religious orders and celebration of virginity than aeons of selective removal from the gene pool of those especially vulnerable to the idea that chastity was a virtue.

Populations of people that think birth control is a good idea and are quite happy to defer their children until later in life still reproduce in sufficient numbers to remain the majority in developed countries, especially assuming that many offspring of reproductive fanatics will end up "defecting" and behaving according to the prevailing social norm rather than their parent's preferences or inherited instincts.

Given the continued reproduction of people who think birth control is a sensible idea, women should have careers and more than three kids is a headache, I think heritability of desire to have large families would have to be almost deterministic for us to start to worry about hyper-fertile people taking over.

<comment><USER19> I think we can keep it going for a while, as you say, by continuously absorbing defectors from more fertile populations. But I think if you admit to any genetic component to this at all, there will definitely be genetic flow, with the more fertile populations eventually taking over.

Being "reasonable" and "planning" are just extremely maladaptive in the current world. For example, reproduction in this population is completely dwarfing reproduction of highly educated, self-controlled, non-criminal groups: [http://www.amazon.com/Promises-Can-Keep-Motherhood- Marriage/...](http://www.amazon.com/Promises-Can-Keep-Motherhood- Marriage/dp/0520241134)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'm surprised no one has talked about atypical reproduction strategies. If someone was the type of person who would like to clone themselves, and they did it 50 times, their kids may be that type of person too (and there would be selection for clone-parents who educate kids to continue the tradition). This would be a locally adaptive behavior, and would end population decline.

<comment><USER21> I don't think that would have influence. If you wanted to have many children, there are easier and especially cheaper ways.

The majority of world population wouldn't be able to afford it, even if it got _really_ cheap, like 100USD per clone, only a small percentage of the population could afford it to really have 50 clones, even if it became a trend that would not have a huge effect.

A person can already decide to have more than 10 children in most cases, basically for free, potentially even with monetary benefits (Canada, Europe, ...).

Just have the next big pop star talk about how great it is to have many children and how everybody should do the same.

Or lets have a big debate about the awful effects of overpopulation.

<comment><USER19> The thing you're ignoring is that the easier and cheaper ways involve two people; and the trend among educated individuals in the US is that those people aren't tending to agree to have more children.

Cloning or alternative strategies leave it up to just one person - so no agreement or negotiation is necessary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Why does the first graph clearly show that the peak is right around 2018?

<comment><USER23> Check again, the peak is clearly at 2014 (each tic is 5 years)

<comment><USER22> Thanks. I see what my brain was trying to do now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> just in time for linux on the desktop

</comment><comment><USER25> Well there are a few things China does good, this is one of them. (Mind you they also do a lot of bad.) On the opposite site you have Belgium: the more kids you have the less you exponentially (limited) have to pay, why ?!?

<comment><USER26> Forced abortions, forced sterilizations, sex-selective abortion leading to a demographic disaster, promotion of eugenics, overcrowding orphanages, child abandonment, and infanticide.

Please do not call what China has done, good.

<comment><USER27> It's complicated. The overall effect on the country -- significantly contributing to raising it out of poverty -- has all kinds of good effects. You also have to see it in connection with certain disastrous policies that came before it, such as the government's previous insistence that everyone have as many babies as possible, to swell the Red Army's ranks. China is still very much recovering from a few decades of insane misrule.

Try to talk to Chinese parents (especially mothers) who are affected by the policy. First, they are all, in my experience, willing to talk about it, even eager. Second, every one of them has said basically the same thing: It is a difficult policy but necessary, and beneficial for China overall.

Difficult: Most mothers' experience is related to not having the children they wanted to have. Abortions too. They often look like they are about to cry when they talk about it. It's definitely tough, and many are deeply scarred.

Beneficial: In an overcrowded country, the up side is obvious. (The mothers I have met are mostly middle or upper class, so it is a biased sample.) They connect the policy with the radical improvements in quality of life. Not just consumerist measures of quality of life, but also education and all that goes with it (that's another discussion, but it includes a happier home life due to improved equality and rights).

<comment><USER28> In terms of 'overcrowded'ness, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong all have greater population density than China[1], yet they all experienced income growth to first-world levels without need for any population control. What evidence is there that the one child policy 'significantly contributed' to raising China out of poverty?

1\. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_de...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_population_density)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Food prices to rise by up to 40% over next decade - <AUTHOR> http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jun/15/food-prices-rise-un-report

<comment><USER2> ALL PRICES are going to rise by up to 40% over the next decade. 40% over 10 years is just 3.4% per year. This is called inflation. Duh!</comment>


Australia seems to pay quite handsomely for programmers - <AUTHOR> http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/it-jobs/demand-for-specialty-it-skills-spikes/story-fna12gpc-1226203132530

<comment><USER2> I only see about two paragraphs of text before I'm prompted to log in to read the rest.</comment>


Ask HN: What skills should back end software developers learn today? - <AUTHOR> To be a bit more precise, what do you think will be the next big opportunities for software developers in backend development. My focus would be on concepts that may become more relevant in the future. Links to notes / tutorials always appreciated. <comment><USER2> Container orchestration (k8s mainly), message bus (Kafka), security practices, posture & automation</comment>


Ask HN: Visa advice for a UK guy to live in SF for a year - <AUTHOR> I'm from the UK. My news year resolution (fireworks are going off now!) is to move to SF Bay area for 6-12 months. And possibly get involved in a business over there. How can I achieve this?
I have modest funds of around $400k in cash set aside to invest in this new venture. I also have a UK based business which is close to passive that earns me about $150k pa.
My dream is to rent a flat in SF, just hang out, get networking, going to conferences, just generally soaking up the atmosphere over the seasons as a local would, and scope out opportunities to either invest or start something up.
My main problem is that I am eligible for the VWP which allows me 3 months. And I don't have a good reason for wanting more than 3 months. My understanding is that a B visa would be denied for this reason.
So I'm in the early stages of looking at E2 etc and even hiring a lawyer..... But I thought I'd post here first in case anyone has relevant anecdotes or experience. <comment><USER2> Be careful with the VWP. I'm an American (for context I'm white) and recently tried to the same thing in the UK. Specifically, I wanted to work on my software business in London for a little less than three months. Just because.

The UK Border Force wasn't having any of it. I spent a night in an immigration detention facility (which is broadly speaking a prison) and was sent back on the next flight.

For context: The border force found a receipt for registration as an Irish citizen in my luggage, which they interpreted as a sign I never intended to return to the US [1] [2].

US immigration is at least as severe and our immigration prisons are probably not any fun.

Get a visa from the embassy if you are planning an usual trip even if you are not required to get one, because neither the US or the UK is required to let anyone in.

[1] The irony that Irish citizens are entitled to live anywhere in the European Union was not lost on anyone during these proceedings.

[2] But they also interpreted a card from my aunt that said "have fun on your trip" as a sign that I intended to abandon my life in the US. They are really imaginative people.

<comment><AUTHOR> you were detained on a first visit? That's unlucky, are you sure you didn't accidentally admit to intending to work or something like that?

<comment><USER3> That was my first time visiting the UK.

I told them I intended to work on my company and they weren't bothered by that. They were mostly concerned that I didn't have a job elsewhere that I would have to go back to.

But you are right, it is a matter of luck.

Getting a visa may save you a lot of trouble. You really don't want to spend a night in a California immigration facility with MS-13 gang members [1].

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-13](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS-13)

<comment><AUTHOR> That sucks. I wouldn't have guessed that the UK were worried about people leaving the largest economy in the world to live in England!

I think to play the VWP game, you need to have weighty social and economic ties to your home country. A full time job is good. Luckily my business has deep roots in the UK so I think I should be ok.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Honestly I'd enter on the VWP and fly back to the UK after 3 months then fly back to the US to get 6 months. That's the easiest way but you could be denied re-entry if you can't satisfy the border agents that you don't intend to immigrate (return air tickets and other evidence helps convince them otherwise).

With your funds though, I would have thought that you would qualify for B-1 especially if you book conferences in advance with breaks that span longer than the 90 days.

If you apply and are accepted the B-1 then it's valid for 10 years and allows you to stay for 3-6 months.

</comment><comment><USER5> Talk to an immigration lawyer, but if you have an existing real business (with real revenue) and you really want to stay much longer than 3 months, then E2 would be great. I still recommend you move for 3 months on the VWP, see how much you really want to stay, then if you do, file for E2.

<comment><AUTHOR> I don't really understand how an E2 works if starting a new company.

Yes the company has approx $700k real revenue.

So getting started, could be as simple as paying a few hundred dollars to incorporate a company in the USA, and redirecting $150k of revenue through the new company. (easy to do as it's an online company).

Or am I grossly oversimplifying this?

<comment><USER5> The E2 would be to explore opening a US branch of your existing company, not to start a brand new, unrelated company.

The nice thing with the E2 is that once you have it, you are allowed to work on multiple things at once (unlike an H1-B or L1 for instance).</comment></comment></comment>


Go 1.8 Release Candidate 1 is released - <AUTHOR> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/tr2ZKSQ42zE <comment><USER2> > The GOPATH environment variable now has a default value if it is unset. It > defaults to $HOME/go on Unix and %USERPROFILE%/go on Windows. [0]

Finally. This is going to make it easier for newcomers to the Go ecosystem, since commands such as "go get" will now work out of the box.

[0] [https://beta.golang.org/doc/go1.8#gopath](https://beta.golang.org/doc/go1.8#gopath)

<comment><USER3> Why does Go require a special path for projects to be on? Python doesn't. Rust doesn't. This just seems annoying for no particular reason.

<comment><USER4> Python has a list of locations to look for projects (modules) in (sys.path) and by default includes the working directory as the first item in that list.

Go has a list of locations to look for projects (packages) in ($GOPATH) and by default does _not_ include the working directory. Unlike Python's sys.path, $GOPATH normally only contains a single value.

Python's behavior is similar to $PATH on Windows while Go's behavior is similar to $PATH on Unix.

There are pros and cons to each default value but either language can be overridden to have the other's behavior if you desire.

I personally quite like having a single unified $GOPATH for all of my source.

<comment><USER5> > There are pros and cons to each default value but either language can be > overridden to have the other's behavior if you desire.

How? With Python I can release a package with code like `import foo from .` in it. This will not work in Go, a GOPATH package must import things from subdirectories via GOPATH. At least, this was the case the last time I checked.

<comment><USER6> Vendoring

[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bz5-UB7g2uPBdOx- rw5t9MxJ...](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Bz5-UB7g2uPBdOx- rw5t9MxJwkfpx90cqG9AFL0JAYo/edit)

[https://blog.gopheracademy.com/advent-2015/vendor- folder/](https://blog.gopheracademy.com/advent-2015/vendor-folder/)

<comment><USER7> Vendoring only works inside a GOPATH; if you're outside the GOPATH, the vendor/ folder is ignored.

[https://github.com/golang/go/issues/14566](https://github.com/golang/go/issues/14566)

        There are many problems with running outside GOPATH. Among others, there's no
        caching of built object files, so everything is much slower than it should be
        (go build, go test, and so on). Vendoring is pretty low on the list of problems.

        It may be that GOPATH should be reconsidered but if so it should be done as a
        whole change, not just one piece at a time, like @bradfitz said above.

        The solution for now is to use GOPATH.

        >  rsc closed this on 6 Dec 2016

Once the new dependency tool is done, it seems like GOPATH will be increasingly irrelevant with vendored dependencies and proper tooling.

(You may also be interested in this extended and active discussion on getting rid of GOPATH; [https://github.com/golang/go/issues/17271](https://github.com/golang/go/issues/17271))

<comment><USER6> You're absolutely correct—I just tested it, and I'll be damned. That's what I get for never playing around with it, and had (wrongly) assumed that this would have been one of the most basic features of vendoring.

I appreciate the correction!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> What a blockbuster release (candidate). Congrats golang team!

I can't wait to start adding in the mutex contention to our tests, remove our custom graceful http shutdown library, compile 15% faster, start using context within our queries, write custom comparators [I needed this just last week! We had a type that already implemented the sort interface, but I needed to sort it by a different key in this one-off] for sorting, and have a much better time debugging JSON unmarshalling.

And those were just the big pieces I noticed that will be an immediate improvement!

<comment><USER9> Finally, in 2017, we can write custom comparators.

<comment><USER10> A nice comment which adds nothing.

On a side note, you always could.

<comment><USER11> > On a side note, you always could.

Yes, with brand new sorter types for each different comparison. Knowing that Go had first-class functions from the beginning, it is actually quite surprising that a higher-order sort function didn't already exist.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> One thing that might snag web applications built with Go 1.8 is the change to the html/template library. If you ever need to include script templates in your HTML for usage by a Javascript template framework (in my case it was EJS), then you will need to be aware that html entities will be escaped in a way they were not in 1.7

Given the following literal:

Go 1.8 will escape the EJS delimiter, breaking the template. I.e.:

I selected EJS specifically because I wanted a templating library that didn't conflict with html/template's handlebars syntax. If you're in the same boat you'll want to find a template engine with non-html entity delimiters.

<comment> grey-area Just had a look at your issue:

[https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18569](https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18569)

I think your comment above isn't quite right. The problem you're seeing is that previously this was escaped as js (incorrect), and now it is escaped as text (correct). If you set your type as above to "text/javascript", it works in go 1.8:

on 1.8 outputs:

the one that fails is if you set the type to text/template or similar, which makes sense I guess as it is not js but might be annoying if your library uses <> as delimiters. Should work with text/template though if you mark those snippets as template.HTML type before including in an html/template.

<comment><USER12> Thanks for looking! Yeah, I managed to typo the HN example - yes, my existing templates contain type="text/template", and I think that's how I filed the bug. It's possible for me to inject those templates with a variable instead of including them directly in the template, although that's a bit more invasive of a change than what I was doing before.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> You can easily install the RC as its own binary with the new awesome version tool:

        $ go get golang.org/x/build/version/go1.8rc1
        $ go1.8rc1 download
        $ go1.8rc1 version
        go version go1.8rc1 darwin/amd64
        $ go1.8rc1 build ...

</comment><comment><USER14> There was talk of the go team deciding on a vendoring paradigm. I don't see any mention in the release notes. Anyone have ideas/updates on how much closer we're getting to an official vendoring decision?

<comment><USER15> There is a committee working on it. Here's a detailed update from last month:

[https://blog.gopheracademy.com/advent-2016/saga-go- dependenc...](https://blog.gopheracademy.com/advent-2016/saga-go-dependency- management/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> It would be neat if there was a Go Playground running the latest beta/RC version of Go. (Or is there?)

I wanted to quickly test out the new struct type conversion behavior and obviously my code[1] doesn't compile on the normal playground.

Perhaps interesting to note, the `beta.golang.org`[2] homepage specifically adds an inline `display:none` style to the div containing the mini Go Playground which is normally on the `golang.org`[3] homepage - removing that style in the Chrome inspector, you can see the mini Playground, but it doesn't work. Upon closer inspection, the code to init the playground is still there, but the `playground.js` script isn't – the init code, however, checks for this so it doesn't throw any errors.

I like the attention to detail, at least – you don't want the homepage for a beta version to have the plaground running the current stable release version; that would be pretty confusing. Still, I wonder why the HTML and JS initialization code for the playground is still there? If they went through the effort to add a `display:none` style to the HTML and a condition to check if the Playground script is available, why not just remove it entirely?

Just my random thoughts - obviously not a big deal at all, I just found it interesting!

[1] [https://play.golang.org/p/_OSA3O2vTR](https://play.golang.org/p/_OSA3O2vTR)

[2] [https://beta.golang.org/](https://beta.golang.org/)

[3] [https://golang.org/](https://golang.org/)

<comment><USER17> > It would be neat if there was a Go Playground running the latest beta/RC > version of Go. (Or is there?)

umm, no, not automagically. the playground is restricted. it would require some work to be put in to make it work with the latest release. that work isn't available for free.

<comment><USER16> This is why I don't comment on HN.

Maybe I'm stupid and just always make stupid comments, but I think the attitude you displayed with your "umm, no" is way too common around here. Is it too hard for you to not be condescending when making a counter argument?

 _Edit: After re-reading both my comment and yours, I 'm not sure if you were using the "umm, no" innocently in response to the `(Or is there?)` at the end of my sentence, or if you were trying to say it in a condescending way. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was the former. I'm not trying to be one of those SJW people who gets offended at any little thing._

Regarding the rest of your comment:

> the playground is restricted

What exactly do you mean by that?

> automagically

And that?

I'm referring to large RCs like this. I think a lot of people want to test out new features/changes without pulling the latest version to their machine right away.

That work is going to have to be done anyway before the final release, right? And I can't really imagine it would be a lot of work, I would think _maybe_ a few things would break, but otherwise it should work?

And if you think I mean to have the normal `play.golang.org` start using the latest RC, that's not what I mean - I would imagine it would either be on a separate subdomain, like `play.beta.golang.org`. Or, have a dropdown on the main Playground, but that might be potentially confusing?

<comment><USER18> "What exactly do you mean by [the playground is restricted]?"

The Playground is a very special build of Go. I don't even think it's open sourced, often because while you can't depend on security-by-obscurity you still don't necessarily want to just hand people the source to attack on their own. It's written to prevent people from abusing the playground, so for instance, the os package can't read real files, the time package returns constants for "time.Now()" rather than using the clock, and an arbitrary number of other changes are made to prevent abuse. How many changes it is I don't know exactly, but there's certainly a number of them. But, more importantly, the QA work for such a thing is quite substantial. Many of the changes would also preclude using the playground to investigate the new features; for instance, you can't test HTTP2 support on there since you can't open sockets or servers. Presumably updating it would require significant effort, and at the very least, it can't be afforded to make that a blocker for a release.

<comment><USER5> Interesting.

Rust has two playgrounds (official: [https://play.rust- lang.org/](https://play.rust-lang.org/), unofficial: [http://play.integer32.com/](http://play.integer32.com/)), and each is a completely different bit of open-source software ([https://github.com/rust- lang/rust-playpen](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-playpen) , [https://github.com/integer32llc/rust- playground](https://github.com/integer32llc/rust-playground))

They both use docker for isolation, with a bunch of things to make it work. IIRC we haven't had any issues with this. Furthermore, the official playground used to be a third completely different bit of software until it was rewritten in Rust. It also used to use [https://github.com/thestinger/playpen](https://github.com/thestinger/playpen).

I'm skeptical that the problem will take _that_ much effort since Rust has solved it (to some degree) twice.

At the same time, it's likely that Go's playpen does a lot more mitigation, e.g. the time.Now() probably futzes timing attacks. Though in that case they would need to mess with mutexes or scheduling as well (since you can use shared memory to build a timer), which complicates things.

(For timing attacks I still think the solution still lies in how you set up the container, specifically isolating its memory accesses -- instead of tweaking the compiler itself)

<comment><USER19> > They both use docker for isolation

Docker isn't really meant as a security mechanism. Among other things, you still expose the full kernel API as an attack surface. I can't imagine that they _only_ use Docker, at the very least they'll probably have some dedicated machines for the playgrounds. Even then, this is probably not a great idea.

The playground uses NaCl (and AFAIK that includes seccomp), restricting both the instructions that you can use and the set of system calls that you can make (basically just read/write on fds 0-3 and exit). It's what chromes sandbox is based upon.

There are a couple of implications from this (most are described in the blog post linked elsewhere), e.g. that time is faked and that playground-code runs single-threaded. A great consequence, though, is that playground code is 100% deterministic, meaning it can be cached (and it is cached pretty aggressively), reducing the load for popular snippets.

<comment><USER5> Hm, seems like they both just use docker's sandboxing parameters ([https://github.com/rust-lang/rust- playpen/blob/master/src/do...](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust- playpen/blob/master/src/docker.rs#L20) , [https://github.com/integer32llc/rust- playground/blob/master/...](https://github.com/integer32llc/rust- playground/blob/master/ui/src/sandbox.rs#L211) ). The official one _used_ to use libseccomp, but it doesn't anymore. They probably should use [https://github.com/servo/gaol](https://github.com/servo/gaol) (should be drop-in) or seccomp , I'll file issues.

IIRC they're on their own dedicated instances.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20>
      Go 1.8 will be the last release to support Linux on ARMv5E and ARMv6 processors: Go 1.9 will likely require the ARMv6K (as found in the Raspberry Pi 1) or later.

Does this mean that we will not be able to produce ARMv5 binaries or this is only a prerequisite for the compiler?

<comment><USER21> Hmmm. If that's true, then I won't be able to build binaries for my old Synology anymore.

<comment><USER22> More importantly, the cross platform router worm that was ddos-ing everyone a few months back was written in go and will not be able to upgrade to 1.8 :)

<comment><USER20> And IoT companies will have to put trust in another language. We deployed hundreds of ARM5 gateways accross Africa with a golang stack. This kind of decision is not compliant with serious IoT HW providers. Software is easy to upgrade, hardware not. Now we have to bet on another language... welcome rust?

<comment><USER23> They already dropped support for older freebsd systems and at some point discussed to drop freebsd as a first-class target. Already hard to judge the risks for non amd64-linux systems.

<comment><USER24> The issue was about clarifying what "first-class" meant more than about changing how we treat FreeBSD.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> What's a good version manager that allows me to jump versions without moving my whole workspace over? Currently using gvm which installs and runs different versions fine, but whenever you switch version you have to move your entire workspace over or download all your packages again.

Any ideas?

<comment><USER26> gvm! [https://github.com/moovweb/gvm](https://github.com/moovweb/gvm)

<comment><USER25> I'm using gvm now, but updating your workspace is very tedious. Here's the related issue [https://github.com/moovweb/gvm/issues/189](https://github.com/moovweb/gvm/issues/189), also I'm not convinced gvm is maintained anymore.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> No mention if this is picking up the fix for the goroutine stack corruption issue in the release notes.

<comment><USER28> You're right. I think it is included: [https://github.com/golang/go/commit/b902a63ade47cf69218c9b38...](https://github.com/golang/go/commit/b902a63ade47cf69218c9b38c9a783fc8cfc3041) (see the end of the commit message)

<comment><USER29> That's what I call a comprehensive commit comment.

<comment><USER30> For what appears to be a three line code change. Which also includes dozens of lines of new comments explaining the bug and the temporary fix.

That's obviously a bug that really...umm...bugged somebody.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The new plugin package is only supported on Linux? ... hopefully this is just an rc1 limitation.

<comment><USER24> It was going to be Linux & Mac at least, but Mac support was removed at the final hour due to bugs.

Go 1.8 will be Linux-only.

Go 1.9 should add Mac support back, and hopefully Windows if the right people have time to work on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> >Note that many common MIPS-based routers lack an FPU and have firmware that doesn't enable kernel FPU emulation; Go won't run on such machines.

I'm considering using Go for a small service that would live on my OpenWRT router.

What does this mean for me?

<comment><USER33> Nothing. OpenWRT enables Linux's FPU emulation.

Depending on your hardware, you may run into issues with the size of Go binaries.

Off topic: If you use OpenWRT, check out the LEDE Project. It's a fork and development appears more active, but no stable releases yet.

<comment><USER32> Great, thanks! Also, could you enlighten me as to the meaning behind the FPU acronym?

Edit: found it -- disregard my last. Floating Point Unit.</comment></comment></comment>


Mad science at Nodejitsu - <AUTHOR> http://blog.nodejitsu.com/mad-science-at-nodejitsu?

<comment><USER2> true, You can only catch the fruit when you go out on a limb, of course, you can also fall off the tree ... I really enjoyed this article ... dogspeed mad scientists, dogspeed!</comment>