Better Business Bureau rejects Molekule's air purifier claims - <AUTHOR> https://thewirecutter.com/blog/watchdog-rejects-molekule-air-purifier-claims/ <comment><USER2> I expect a lot of people will focus on the problematic BBB in the comments here, but it's important to focus on the core problem:

Molekule's marketing claims have been debunked from the start. Their massive social media advertising campaigns have fed a lot of misinformation to a lot of people since their launch. It's amazing how many people I know who confidently recommend Molekule air filters as superior technology based on nothing more than having seen their Instagram ads. Molekule has secured media puff pieces from several influential media outlets as well as several print publications, none of whom seem to have done the slightest amount of testing to verify their claims.

Both Wirecutter and Consumer Reports actually tested the Molekule and found the performance to be abysmal. Wirecutter went so far as to declare it the worst air purifier they've ever tested: [https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-air- purifier/#molekul...](https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-air- purifier/#molekule-the-worst-air-purifier-weve-ever-tested)

The product just plain does not work, and their marketing material appears to be pure lies. I hope they see some consequences for this.

Perhaps the worst part is that the underlying PECO technology is potentially promising as an adjunct to a traditional HEPA filter. Instead, the Molekule company has gone all-in in their anti-HEPA marketing strategy, creating a false dichotomy for marketing hype instead of trying to create an evolution of the standard HEPA filter.

<comment><USER3> What I find interesting about InstaAds is that whatever product you find advertised is likely garbage... whether it is or isn't you can find it (at the same or higher quality) for 50% off by searching eBay/Alibaba. It's almost a joke now. Maybe I should make a meme and post it to the Gram.

<comment><USER4> I've noticed this as well! I think there are tons of dropship companies that are run by a single person looking to make a quick buck selling rebranded low quality alibaba products. It's endless on my instagram, and I now ignore every single one of them because I know that it's essentially nothing more than spam.

My gf ordered a few things that took AGES to arrive (probably because its shipping straight from China), with 0 customer support (primarily because it's likely run by a single person that couldn't care less about the actual customer who probably subscribes to /r/entrepreneur or /r/juststart). And the final product was as you put it, garbage.

<comment><USER5> > My gf ordered a few things that took AGES to arrive (probably because its > shipping straight from China)

Probably they waited until they had enough orders to fill a container (or a single pallet in someone else's container!) to save money.

<comment><USER6> Maybe, but often they may be shipping single units from China mail via boat, which take about a 4-6 weeks to arrive (from order placement to arrival at your door.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> >Highlights include Molekule's position that its claims weren't referring to the Molekule purifier itself—weren't referring to the product it was selling—but rather were referring only to the underlying PECO "and other" technology. In fact, Molekule based many of its claims on tests of prototypes, or of the PECO filter alone

Seems like we have a mini-theranos on our hands. To make claims in your sales material about you PECO technology filtering VOCs then claim you weren't talking about the product itself is beyond scummy.

</comment><comment><USER8> I always thought that the Internet with its "collective wisdom" would make it more difficult to sell snake oil to unwary consumer, but now I think the opposite is true.

It's crazy how many pseudo-scientific gadgets are hyped up by social media these days. Here in Germany we have startups like "Mitte" that wants to sell "personalized water" produced using smart purifiers and some rather sketchy marketing ([https://mitte.co](https://mitte.co)). They were really successful on Kickstarter (where else) but seem to be in financial trouble now. Maybe that's not surprising since Germany (like many European countries) has really good drinking water, so apart from making the water softer by removing calcium carbonate (which is also only a problem in some regions) there's really not much you can do to improve a basic product like water.

I wonder what's next after air and water though...

<comment><USER9> > "collective wisdom" would make it more difficult to sell snake oil to unwary > consumer, but now I think the opposite is true.

Check out the Fyre Festival documentaries

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> "And the unit's always-on blue glow—which indicates when its primary PECO filter is in operation—can disrupt sleep. (You can't physically block the glow with a coin or tape, because doing so would block the Molekule's delivery of air.)"

I'm not sure when this trend of putting blue lights on devices meant to be put in a bedroom started, or when it will end, but for me, this could be the best filter on the market (it's not) and I would still not purchase it based on the blue light.

I have a Winix Air Purifier I bought from Costco in my bedroom and while it has blue lights, they auto-shutoff in a darkened room. There is one blue indicator on the faceplate that stays on, but I remedied that with a piece of eletrical tape.

<comment><USER11> I've changed out the super high intensity blue LEDs on my computers for amber 30 MCD ones. I don't sleep in the room with them, but if I have someone crash on my couch they don't have search lights blinking at them all night.

They're plenty bright to see in daylight, and personally I like the retro charm.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> > _Founders say they're "very confident that this technology will destroy > Coronavirus"_

I would love if this led to some serious legal consequences. This is creating danger to the public.

</comment><comment><USER13> It's not just Molekule, consumer air quality products in general are full of dubious junk.

This study [0] fairly comprehensively compared the Foobot air quality monitor to a research-grade sensor setup and found that it severely underestimated the temperature (one of the easiest things to get right in my experience), underestimated tVOC, had low correlation on its CO2 output (i.e. the CO2 output was pure garbage) and overestimated PM2.5.

I wish this was unique to Foobot.

The problem seems to be that these companies take a bunch of cheap, low- quality sensors (e.g. using inferred CO2 rather than an NDIR sensor or saving cost by not properly calibrating the sensors), put them in a premium-looking (and priced) package and market them as if they were premium products, because consumers won't know any better.

The worst part is that high-quality sensors really aren't that expensive. A bundle of Sensirion tVOC, CO2, RH/T and particulate sensors can be had for under $200 and with proper calibration they work great. Hook them to an ESP32 or something and put them in a case and you've basically got a Foobot.

[0]: [https://www.j-sens-sens-syst.net/7/373/2018/](https://www.j-sens-sens- syst.net/7/373/2018/)

</comment><comment><USER14> If you're looking for an air purifier, the Honeywell HPA300 ($200) is more than enough four our three bedroom house (despite the 465sq ft rating).

I want to be able to recommend the Bissell Air400, as it is quieter, has a built in PM 2.5 meter, auto adjusts to pollutants, and the filter works at least as well.

Unfortunately, it randomly turns itself off. This seems to be a design flaw, as many other people report the same thing. Also, it doesn't seem to use a PID control loop to set fan speed, so the automatic speed controller sets itself far too low for our house. On the bright side, it is frequently on sale for 50%+ off, since it has a terrible reputation.

In practice, I leave the honeywell on, and use the bissell if there's a problem (cooking smoke, allergies, wildfires, etc). In tandem, the two are able to lower PM 2.5 by over 90%, which is more than enough for fire season.

Edit: In hindsight, I would have bought the HPA 300, and a standalone sensor like the ones from purple air.

<comment><USER15> Do you have something that measures the PM level?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> The BBB's NAD program didn't conduct these tests this because of ordinary people questioning the claims, it's doing it because another business demanded it (and paid for it).

When it comes to dealing with consumer complaints, the BBB's goal is to make its members look good and keep them out of civil lawsuits, regulatory investigations, and media reports. They want to minimize damage to paying members, and will do things like removing bad reviews from its websites (this personally happened to me).

If you have some time check out the CNN report into the BBB (especially "These companies got A+ ratings?"): [https://money.cnn.com/news/companies/bbb- ratings/](https://money.cnn.com/news/companies/bbb-ratings/)

<comment><USER17> Hey I am all for the industry voluntarily policing itself. Reading further into the article reveals that is action is warranted but not followed up on that NAD will refer the issue to the FTC who has the force of law behind it if they find in agreement with the assessment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> To me this looks almost criminal but I don't know advertising laws in the US. In my country you can't claim you are best in something without substantial evidence to back it up. Most just write "one of the best" to avoid having to prove it although that statement in itself has to have some evidence backing it.

In any case I have a general rule. If you need to advertise your product it sucks. If you have a quality product you will sell based on word of mouth of early adopters. The first example that comes to mind is Tesla which spends zero on marketing.

So for me, if I'm looking to buy a certain item and I see an ad for something in that category it will be the last manufacturer that I consider. This isn't always true but so far this rule of thumb has held up for me pretty well.

<comment><USER19> As others have pointed out, Tesla actually spends quite a bit of money on advertising. They also got reprimanded in Germany for lying about pricing in their ads: [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-06/tesla- to-...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-06/tesla-to-drop- misleading-marketing-in-germany-touting-model-3)

<comment><USER18> They had to stop putting the "price after savings" on their web pages in Norway long time ago, it just wasn't compatible with our laws. They also had to pay back money to buyers due to having the combined power of the motors on their web page and not what the battery actually could put out.

I wouldn't count a product web page advertisement but I guess definitions vary.

In any case they spend close to nothing if anything on regular ads and sell a ton of cars (at least here in Norway).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Ok, how can we get them to do the same for Berkey filters, manufactured by New Millennium Concepts?

I used these for years before realizing I had fallen for their shuck and jive.

Backstory: [https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/big-berkey-water-filter- sy...](https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/big-berkey-water-filter-system/)

</comment><comment><USER21> I somehow missed that this air filter exists, but taking an existing, boring product category (air filters, mattresses, razors, toothbrushes, edit: _cigarettes_ ), giving it a design makeover, and following through with marketing on social media and podcasts, seems to be a path straight to the wallets of millennials.

</comment><comment><USER22> They're still coming very close to saying misleading things on their website:

(Source: [https://molekule.com/technology](https://molekule.com/technology) )

> "Developed over two decades by research scientists, PECO is an innovative > technology that utilizes free radicals—the same radicals used to destroy > cancer cells—to break down pollutants at a molecular level, including VOCs, > bacteria, mold, viruses, and allergens. By using nanotechnology, PECO is > able to destroy pollutants 1000 times smaller than what traditional HEPA > technology was designed to trap."

Basically they may be using "PECO" filters, but there's no guarantee a little fan in a cylinder blowing though a PECO filter in the corner of your room will actually significantly clean the air. And they hint that it cures cancer!

</comment><comment><USER23> So annoyed I bought one of these based on testimonials from people I trust (podcasters with allergies). I haven't seen a significant improvement over a regular HEPA filter.

At least it looks cool and has a HEPA filter at the base. It just doesn't move that much air.

<comment><USER24> Podcasters are always paid for these product reviews. This is out of the playbook for all DTC companies. I'd recommend and support consumer reports. If you're not paying for a review, more than likely it's paid for by a company.

Even review sites that look like they are ad supported and independent are controlled by these D2C brands. Eg: Casper owns Sleepopolis.

[https://www.vox.com/2017/9/23/13153814/casper-sleepopolis- la...](https://www.vox.com/2017/9/23/13153814/casper-sleepopolis-lawsuits- mattress-reviews)

<comment><USER25> Wonder how many podcasters will stop raving about how the Molekule changed their life. Probably none.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> You can make an air purifier as good as molekule with a $15 box fan, $3 20x20 air filter, and four pieces of duct tape. Come at me.

<comment><USER27> That sounds notably better than molekule. You can make an air purifier as good as molekule with a fan, a piece of duct tape, and an LED.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Instagram is full of this bullshit. I routinely get dog food ads that advertise that their dog food has "vegetables" in it. Why the fuck would a carnivore need "vegetables"?

</comment><comment><USER29> I had no idea the BBB did this kind of thing. I thought it was only the regulatory bodies and Consumer Reports.

<comment><USER30> If you're being harmed by false advertising as a competitor you can pay them $10,000-35,000 to look into it and issue one of these.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> There seem to be quite a few air purifier startups. I was reading about one called Mila recently — does anyone know if they are legit? I currently have a cheap air purifier in my apartment, but with concerns about both wildfire season and viruses, I would like to get a nicer one.

</comment><comment><USER9> I've been seeing ads by Molekule and their cofounder attacking a review by Wirecutter, arguing Wirecutter lacked the technical adequacy to review the product

[https://youtube.com/watch?v=sAuZok410V4](https://youtube.com/watch?v=sAuZok410V4)

<comment><USER32> Ah yes, "it doesn't filter out your dust particules because you're not properly dusting your particules!"

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> How do you know you could benefit from or should get an air purifier (one that works I guess, not Molekule's)?

They're not ultra expensive but they're not super cheap either, and it feels a bit like a first world problem.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's a no-brainer for people with asthma or those susceptible to allergies.

The rest depends on your sensitivity to decreases in air quality. Regularly changing a filter in your central AC/heating system is probably enough.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> It's a good thing I didn't buy one of these, and instead opted for a Coway.

</comment><comment><USER34> A spelling error in their name was the first clue.

</comment><comment><USER35> BBB has zero credibility

<comment><USER36> Why ? And where are you from ?

<comment><USER37> BBB is just old people Yelp. They're a rent seeker, and n any sort of government body or regulator.

<comment><USER36> Source/Examples ? (legit asking)

<comment><USER37> [https://money.cnn.com/2015/09/30/news/better-business- bureau...](https://money.cnn.com/2015/09/30/news/better-business-bureau- millions/index.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> Jam-B While I am not defending Molekule, both the BBB and Consumer Reports act based upon money generated from competitive companies. They are not unbiased, and have found to be biased on multiple occasions.

</comment><comment><USER38> The better business bureau is not an authority in the same way that a government regulations body is.

<comment><USER22> True, but this isn't the point of Wirecutter's article.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> In my view, the BBB has become an extortion agency. A business can essentially commit serial murder and maintain an A+, so long as they pay their dues. There are many reputable and fine businesses with low BBB ratings, simply because they refuse to pay for accreditation. An A+ from the BBB, should in my opinion, be a stigma as easily as a credential. It is not always so, but it is a problem.

<comment><USER22> Possibly true, but this is not related to the point of the article.

<comment><USER39> I'll go as far as to agree with commenter PragmaticPulp, but not entirely that the integrity of the BBB is unrelated here.

Edited to add: I have had extensive interaction with the BBB regarding real, genuine product safety issues, which encompassed misleading advertising and due to the indifference of the BBB, led to an FTC report and more.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Book about writing web apps in Go without a framework - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/thewhitetulip/web-dev-golang-anti-textbook/ <comment><USER2> I much prefer to serve Go applications through an NGINX reverse proxy.

It deals with a lot of stuff for you (static assets, SSL, logging, etc.) and lets you focus on developing your application rather than re-inventing the wheel.

Would be a good idea to add in a section on configuring that type of setup.

<comment><USER3> With Caddy[0] around, the only thing that keeps me tied to nginx is its performance and tried-and-tested-ness.

Waiting to see someone do some detailed benchmarks on Caddy before I commit to it for production stuff, because I'm too busy and too lazy to do them myself and I have a while left on my paid TLS certs.

I mention Caddy because it includes LetsEncrypt and HTTP/2 out of the box — and is written in Go.

[0] [https://caddyserver.com](https://caddyserver.com)

<comment><USER4> "the only thing" keeping you with nginx is virtually the most important thing that I want out of my (reverse proxying) web server.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I applaud the approach and the effort, but there are some basic things in this book that are just not correct, or are difficult to read.

One random page that I jumped to: [https://thewhitetulip.gitbooks.io/webapp- with-golang-anti-te...](https://thewhitetulip.gitbooks.io/webapp-with-golang- anti-textbook/content/content/02.5.html)

> Go doesn't allow us to have functions as a part of structs

I don't know what this means. Functions can be fields in structs.

> These methods can only be called by an instance of the struct.

That's not true. Methods are just regular functions, with some syntactic sugar to make them look like methods from other programming languages. They are not dispatched on the receiver value, but rather based on the type.

[https://play.golang.org/p/ER2r58_BRz](https://play.golang.org/p/ER2r58_BRz)

<comment><AUTHOR> You are right, the writing is wrong. I was trying to imply in the C++ class sense where we write functions directly inside a class, in Go, we have to define a function over a struct.

In your example: you call the method using an instance of T right? that was what I was saying, we have to define methods outside the struct declaration and then call it using an object of struct.

(*t).F(nil)

<comment><USER6> If t is nil, the function is still called with a nil value for t.

<comment><AUTHOR> can we call the method without doing t.F()? like just F()?

I accept I have to modify the statement I made.

<comment><USER5> No. F refers to a different function than t.F.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes that was my point when i said we can't declare functions inside struct

We can have methods which work on objects on structs but never a function like class's method

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I am the author of this book, I'd love to get feedback on the book. I haven't updated much in the last few months. But I am always looking to improve the book for newcomers.

<comment><USER7> Don't you think that teaching how to use it with mysql or postegres would be more useful than sqlite?

<comment><USER8> That seems a bit overkill. With telling a user how to use mysql/postgres/&c., there will also be questions about setting up these systems, so it seems that "just use sqlite" is a valid path if you're just wanting to go over basic usage.

<comment><AUTHOR> totally agree. +1

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Like you describe in the book, I had written a web-app in Go in which I was doing all the SQL handling manually, I found that it became very difficult to maintain this over time as I added new columns and more tables. Just the other day I switched to using GORM (github.com/jinzhu/gorm) for my database drivers and so far it's been a life-saver. Since this is a book about not using frameworks, GORM might be overkill for what you want to do, but I thought it was worth mentioning.

<comment><AUTHOR> I used to think that using raw SQL is better than using ORMs because I have had a bad experience using django1's OEM. I will look into the ORM now. Thanks for the advice!

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Side comment, and I'm sure it has been said before, but GitBook is beautiful. It could replace textbooks, cheap $40 tablets can render HTML just fine.

I'm going to read this because I've never done any work with Go, but I feel like I should learn it and websites/apps are in my domain.

Thanks for the work

<comment><USER11> I feel old-fashioned for still preferring books printed on physical media...

<comment><AUTHOR> I love printed books, have built an entire library at my home. Nor a single ebook. Don't own a kindle.

But for programming books i prefer online

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Just looking at the template bit... why do you use text/template and not html/template?

I get that you wrote the templates, you trust them, you don't want the HTML escaping, etc... but is that true of the content you display?

Also missing (in general, from Go instructionals on web apps that dare to stray into HTML) is internationalisation and localisation.

<comment><AUTHOR> > internationalisation and localisation

These will be the next topics to be added :-)

Also, I use visual studio code, so haven't really written import statements on my own! I'll use html/template, because no matter who wrote the templates, escaping them is a good idea

<comment><USER13> FWIW, the reason you're interested in escaping HTML templates is not usually the templates themselves but the user content that gets injected into them.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I understand.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> You may want to mention something about Graceful restarts to avoid downtime when upgrading. A great library to achieve this is: [https://github.com/facebookgo/grace](https://github.com/facebookgo/grace)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, I will add that :) Thanks for suggesting!

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Sorry for not adding much to the conversation, but I've never seen git used for a whole book before. It's such a cool idea.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well mine isn't the first book created with git, my book is actually inspired from astaxie's book on Go, that too is on github

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Thank you for this book! Tiny minor remark (which sometimes happens to me, too). Instead of:

        //If the password matches, return true
        if password == passwordFromDB {
            return true
        }
        //by default return false
        return false

This could simply be put as:

        //If the password matches, return true
        //by default return false
        return password == passwordFromDB

<comment><AUTHOR> This is great! Now I'm wondering why it didn't strike me :D

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> The manning book uses vanilla Go too, but it's not free. However, it's a pretty good book.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I've been using this, found it through Google awhile back. I didn't want a framework and this helps. I had to search more for Redis and PG and Solr but the front-end stuff here (html,css,js) was helpful

+1 to switch html/template

<comment><AUTHOR> I am glad you are using the book :-)

I think we can add a chapter on Redis then!

That was a goimport gotcha, I use visual studio code, so have never really written imports.

</comment></comment><comment> enahs-sf It would be great to see anything on deployment added to this.

<comment><AUTHOR> I know, but the thing is I have 0 practical experience in web app development, I work in the data warehousing field. So really have no idea about deployment, the only deployment I do is from the dev version of my to-do app to my own local version which I call Production :d

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> > Till now we never used any third party library or a framework in this book, > this is for the first time that we are doing so, as per the arrogant people > on HN we better use libraries for handling sessions, since security is the > #1 aspect of any web application,

Stackoverflow is worse in some ways. I'm not sure you (or anyone or Harvard) can ever please HN, so unless that is the goal of your book, why bother?

<comment><AUTHOR> I am sorry, I didn't understand your comment.

<comment><USER19> Why do you mention HN at all? Doesn't seem relevant. It's just a place where people come to disagree.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well I was angry, I see that there is no point of that line, I'll remove it today.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Covid-19: Serial Interval and pre-symptomatic transmission evidence (Study) - <AUTHOR> https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.19.20025452v3 <comment><AUTHOR> This is the most solid evidence I've seen yet on the ability of sars-cov-2 to spread before the onset of symptoms.</comment>


Square Acquires Food Delivery Service Caviar (YC S11) - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2014/08/04/its-official-square-acquires-food-delivery-service-caviar/

<comment><USER2> Congrats to the Caviar team! My wife broke her leg two months ago and Caviar was a lifesaver to help us avoid the boredom and monotony of pizza and Chinese food every night.

</comment><comment><USER3> I used Caviar the other night (just moved to SF - no idea where to eat) and it was fantastic. I left a good review and someone from the company wrote me a very personalized email thanking me.

Pretty neat stuff - but that delivery fee is mighty expensive compared to something like Postmates. Excited to see what Square does with it.

</comment><comment><USER4>
        The difference is most other food-delivery services tap into an already built-in delivery infrastructure.

Is this true? Seems like every modern food delivery company (DoorDash, et al) does this.

<comment><USER5> Seamless and GrubHub operate like that, they just bring an online interface (and easy management) to the store's pre-existing delivery employees.

<comment><USER6> In some cases they connect 3rd-party delivery services with the store as well.

AFAIK, Postmates and Caviar are the only two companies going with the two- party model, but employing their own delivery drivers/couriers.

<comment><USER7> Hm, interesting. Hadn't heard of either of these. On the one hand, they're playing a huge uphill battle and would need to employ thousands of couriers if they want to serve just America's major cities. On the other hand, they could completely rewire the food delivery business. I'm not sure it can work. Restaurants can hire minimum wage or below family members or illegals to deliver as an essentially free service. They live off of tips. Caviar would have to charge a significant premium to stay in business.

<comment><USER8> > Restaurants can hire minimum wage or below family members or illegals to > deliver as an essentially free service. They live off of tips.

Do you live in New York? The "free" delivery with tips model is how things work in New York, but i've never seen it elsewhere.

In SF takeout places only rarely offer delivery.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wonder is it just me or google search for "Caviar" returns their website at the first position, above the Wiki article for actual "caviar"?

<comment><USER10> Incognito: [http://i.imgur.com/yvmBMde.png](http://i.imgur.com/yvmBMde.png)

<comment><USER11> Incognito can still capture your location which will affect the ranking: [http://imgur.com/7O04wwl](http://imgur.com/7O04wwl)

<comment><USER12> 2nd result on DDG: [https://i.imgur.com/zAnFtDp.png](https://i.imgur.com/zAnFtDp.png)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Amazing work Jason!

</comment><comment><USER14> Awesome news for the Caviar team!</comment>


Teaching teachers: What this teenager is doing with Minecraft is mind-blowing - <AUTHOR> https://news.microsoft.com/en-in/features/teenager-teaching-100-teachers-minecraft/ <comment><USER2> What this girl is doing with Minecraft should have been the title. More like this please, great to see such a brave new world.</comment>


Foundr – Find People to Build Things With - <AUTHOR> http://foundr.pagedemo.co/ <comment><USER2> Is there anything more to this than a landing page collecting email addresses?

<comment><USER3> Perhaps they're trying to find a technical co-founder to build out the platform?

(That's not entirely snark!)

<comment><AUTHOR> No, i'm going to build it myself. The conversion rate is substantially lower if I put "coming soon."

Minor annoyance, but I'm not trying to scam anyone.

<comment><USER4> > I'm not trying to scam anyone.

I wonder what your definition of a scam is, because this kind of thing fits my definition of a scam pretty well.

> The conversion rate is substantially lower if I put "coming soon."

Conversion rate is important and all, but it's also important to consider the first impression you're making on your potential future users.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> If they'd just follow Remembear's example and appended a penultimate "a" after the penultimate "e", instead of just removing the penultimate "e", it would have been "Foundear", a much better name.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15777340](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15777340)

<comment><AUTHOR> I actually agree with this, I like the advice.

Feel free to email me at email@example.com

Or provide your email. I'll contact you.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: My mother and her friends keep getting hacked on Facebook - <AUTHOR> Hello, I keep facing this situation in which my mother (60s) and her friends (aprox. same age) keep getting hacked on facebook.
The attacker somehow enter their account and send message to random people telling a long story about being in debt and asks for money (not a large sum, something like 500 US dollars (I am from Brazil)). My mother and her friends do not transfer the money of course because they know each other, but somewhat distant friends do. In fact I am quite happy/surprised about how people can be this helpful/naive.
They are quite oblivious about technology as a whole and use facebook/instagram etc just like whatsapp, for messaging. I've ran the obvious measures (changing passwords, locking content etc) and taught them the basics about how the www works and security etc. But not only the hacking continues (even with new passwords and 2FA) but now it is appearing in a new form: they simply clone the profile with public photo and name and starts a new conversation. It is even worse in Instagram since: 1 - they don't usually message there so there is no older conversation not appearing 2 - there is not the concept of friends, just followers.
I've gone to the police multiple times by now, since they cannot explain to the officers what is happening. Using the bank account provided by the hacker they found some guys, but apparently these guys were hacked too and the hacker(s) is(are) using their account as a proxy.
I don't know what to do, really. I am a techie (CS MS, 10+ years of experience, worked in several areas, including networks) but I am feeling powerless. Every 2 weeks something happens over the realm of Facebook/Instagram.
What can I do? <comment><USER2> Sounds like their computers are compromised.... key loggers, malware maybe??

How are the bad actors getting the 2FA code? Are the phones hacked too? Are the phones on a rogue tower? Why is someone spending time messing with old ladies? There has to be a reason why they are a target for someone to spend this much energy.. Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> >Are the phones hacked too? Possibly! my mother uses Iphone (5 I think) the others I don't really remember >Are the phones on a rogue tower? Never thought about it! How can I check? wireshark?

>Why is someone spending time messing with old ladies? Can't tell, they are by no means rich

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> For the second scenario, I always recommend to the people around me, if someone messages you and doesn't have a lot of the friends you know, then don't respond. That becomes challenging when the person being asked for help doesn't know your friends circle. Also, try to call them anyways before you do something. I.e. message them on WhatsApp or another chat application. It's similar to the old email scam that used to run asking for help with an email address which was changed by one word. It was not that prevalent though.

This is really a crazy thing, would love to see what others can come up with.

<comment><USER4> if someone messages you and doesn't have a lot of the friends you know, then don't respond. then don't respond, agree. because it's one way

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Are they sharing a computer somewhere?

<comment><AUTHOR> they were using the work computer to use facebook, but said that stopped doing that once the attacks started. They do not work at the same place but all are school teachers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> They are getting past 2fa though? That complicates things.

<comment><USER7> It didn't sound to me like the attackers were getting past 2FA, but rather that they were setting up new accounts with the same profile picture. That wouldn't require an attack or compromise at all.

Maybe I'm reading it wrong though.</comment></comment>


Half a year with FastSpring payment processor - <AUTHOR> http://blog.apparentsoft.com/business/227/half-a-year-with-fastspring-payment-processor/ <comment><USER2> We've been using FastSpring for ThinkCode.TV since day one. They are a very good choice.

In my opinion, their main weaknesses are:

* Relatively expensive if you sell low priced items like we do (there is a $0.75 transaction minimum).

* Their anti-fraud algorithm requires customers to complete a huge form before allowing a purchase. This has been, in my experience, a major turn-off for customers.

* No support for recurring billing.

* Their upload applet is a nightmare if you are uploading large files like we do (e.g., 150+ Mb files). Transactions fail all the time.

Other than that, they are a good choice.

<comment><USER3> Hope you won't mind the comments here:

Regarding the huge form, while I know you'd like smaller, I would like to say it is pretty standard for online purchases. Name, Address info, phone in some cases, and email address.

Recurring billing is coming.

The upload applet works great for most, but I agree some have problems with it. The real reason things have moved beyond just simple FTP is that files aren't hosted on simple servers any longer. When things move to cloud computing, adding a file to the cloud is much more complex than the old days of just FTP'ing it into a directory. While we are continuing to work to make it better, anytime a client does have problems, we are quick with some other options, including we can pull the files down and load them for you.

Ken White, Chief Customer Service Officer FastSpring E-Commerce

<comment><USER2> > Hope you won't mind the comments here:

I appreciate them. :)

> Regarding the huge form, while I know you'd like smaller, I would like to > say it is pretty standard for online purchases. Name, Address info, phone in > some cases, and email address.

I agree for CC processing. However, for PayPal orders, people expect a quick payment. AFAIK our PayPal customers still need to fill in all the info.

> Recurring billing is coming.

Awesome. This will allow us to implement a better business model.

> anytime a client does have problems, we are quick with some other options, > including we can pull the files down and load them for you.

I can attest that you've usually been helpful when it came to performing operations on S3 for us. Direct access to S3 (for technical users like us) would really be beneficial though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'll say one thing about FastSpring - you can use them like a highly intelligent robot. Instead of going to their panel, I'd send emails like:

"I'd like a source code option on product x, and it should be for free with variation y, and should look like x"

In 15 mins you get a cheerful "No Problem", and 30 minutes later: "All Done."

I used to feel guilty asking them to do this for me instead of doing it myself, but then I realised that that's why I was sticking with them.

Their prices are not high compared to the competition, and the handle all the stuff you should do (like VAT).

</comment><comment><USER5> | 5.9% plus $.95 per transaction or a flat rate of 8.9%

Wow, that's very expensive. I'd prefer PayPal or Google Checkout.

<comment><AUTHOR> Once again, you get a lot of services for the price. If you only need to accept paymemts and you handle all the rest yourself, plus you don't need a good, personal customer service (PayPal and Google's service are not good at all), then PP or GC are a better choice for you.

Plus GC only works in the US. Maybe UK. There's rest of the world as well.

<comment><USER5> Your profit margins must be insane if you can afford to give 6% of your earnings away for some glorified credit card processing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm all for great customer service, but 6-9% discount rates are frightening. It's not that hard to do direct paypal/credit card processing for something in the 2.5-4% range. That's a big chunk of a company's revenue, not to be given up lightly.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's hard or simply impossible if you're not in US/UK.

Also, even in the US, you'll need to build a lot of code on your site to support all the options that FastSpring and other similar services provide, such as all the offers, discounts, cross-sales etc. It's possible to do and maybe even more integrated, but still it's additional work that needs to be done and maintained.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I've been using FastSpring on my site for about 4 months. Customer support is indeed great. I sell software and I like that they have file fulfillment services. After a certain number of downloads/days the link stops working cutting back on piracy. I could code this all myself, but it would take time and it would be a headache to deal with email. Also, I really like how there is no monthly fee. This makes FastSpring ideal for testing new products albeit a little more expensive than alternatives in the long run.

</comment><comment><USER8> I'll also highly recommend FastSpring, their customer service has been phenomenal and the store features have saved me loads of time.

You'd be crazy to try and build a store like it yourself. Instead, go with FastSpring and spend the time you've saved on your product.</comment>


N95 respirators vs surgical masks against acute respiratory infection (2016) - <AUTHOR> https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567 <comment><USER2> I used to do a lot of drywall work and N95 respirators are just not designed for regular extended use.

If mounted properly, they will restrict the airflow and raise the temperature of your face. I would perspire heavily.

Also, unless proper handling techniques are used, the chances of contaminating the insides of the mask with the virus and then continuing to breathe it will worsen the situation compared to not wearing it at all.

A N95 respirator is not something to slap on willy nilly without training.

I think a regular person who has never worn a N95 respirator before and does not use proper handling techniques is exposing themselves to increased risk than wearing a simpler surgical mask that's more intuitive to use.

<comment><USER3> I have found only certain 3M valved models comfortable to use. It is crucial to adjust the nose clamp and it is highly beneficial to limit the facial hair.

Having a valve is essential for comfortable use and for having a proper seal (there is too much air pressure when breathing out and the air will press out from the sides). In medical setting this will mean that the respirator will only efficiently protect the wearer (spread of droplets should be still limited).

The face under the mask will get easily sweaty and the mask will get smelly from the inside while doing physical work. My experience is that 1 mask will at best last a day for construction work. There are other criteria when using in the medical setting. I am not expert in this field.

If used in medical setting then you should keep in mind that if you take your mask off then you may contaminate yourself with the the pathogen on the outside of the mask. The same applies for trying to put the mask back on. It is therefore sensible to avoid reuse whenever possible.

If you do not use protective glasses then you are first risking with direct exposure to the pathogen through the eyes. In addition you are risking the exposure by first touching the mask (to adjust it for example) and then touching your eyes.

I think it does not follow that it is not sensible to use respirators but users should acknowledge that setting up a proper usage procedure is complicated and following the proper use is very difficult and will require a lot of attention and I should not be practiced casually by the untrained people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> _Results of our systematic review and meta-analysis show that there was no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks when used by health care workers to prevent transmission of acute respiratory infections from patients. However, wide 95% CIs from our meta-analysis must be interpreted as insufficient evidence to determine whether there is a clinically significant difference. Findings from the surrogate exposure studies suggest that N95 respirators are superior to surgical masks for filter penetration, face-seal leakage and total inward leakage under laboratory conditions.

It was not surprising to find that N95 respirators were generally more efficient filters with better face-seal characteristics than surgical masks when tested in the laboratory._

</comment><comment><USER5> > N95 respirators are often considered uncomfortable for regular use, and > improper wearing or adjustment of the respirator because of discomfort could > lead to inadvertent face contamination, thus negating the potential > protective benefit

After wearing that kind of mask for short periods of time, I remember doing all of those things: not putting it on properly at first, adjusting it multiple times with the hands up against my face and so on.

The is also an element of a false sense of security from wearing it. "I am wearing a mask so I don't have to worry about getting sick and don't have to take other precautions". That's probably the more dangerous part about it.

</comment><comment><USER6> This is great news, particularly after seeing a huge fraction of N95 wearers in Northern California last summer wear the masks incorrectly in ways that made their presence useless.

<comment><USER7> What great news? They found mostly no difference in risk vs surgical masks...

<comment><USER6> Correct. Surgical masks help. N95 masks help exactly as much as surgical masks. Poorly worn N95 masks are equivalent to surgical masks, therefore poorly worn N95 masks help as much as properly worn N95 masks.

The US is going to be full of people wearing N95 masks incorrectly. This paper says that's ok they are still protecting themselves against viruses, just in a needlessly expensive and uncomfortable way that could be accomplished as well with a surgical mask.

<comment><USER3> There is also change that wearer is using it properly and gets better protection that is not possible with a surgical mask.

<comment><USER6> Except the peer reviewed journal article we are discussing here shows that medical workers, who are trained in mask usage, did not receive any additional benefits from N95 masks over conventional surgical masks. N95 is important for what it's important for but where it isn't it's just security theater. Peer- reviewed meta analysis shows no added benefit of N95 masks over surgical masks for respiratory viruses, including for trained mask users.

<comment><USER3> I think you are referring to this study [https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567](https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567)

Although N95 respirators appeared to have a protective advantage over surgical masks in laboratory settings, our meta-analysis showed that there were insufficient data to determine definitively whether N95 respirators are superior to surgical masks in protecting health care workers against transmissible acute respiratory infections in clinical settings.

<comment><USER6> You are correct on the citation (it's at the top of the page so I didn't think it needed to be re-cited). My read is the researchers found that in actual daily use with trained mask users there was no benefit in respiratory virus infection prevention from N95 over traditional surgical masks (laboratory testing doesn't mean people working in a laboratory, it means a controlled experimental test setting as distinct from actual real world usage). Are you reading a different conclusion from that paper? As I read it, their meta analysis strongly suggests that as far as viral respiratory diseases go, N95 masks add nothing but cost, discomfort, and security theater when compared with cheaper, more comfortable, and easier to wear surgical masks.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


First drug to prevent chronic migraines approved by EU - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/jul/31/first-ever-pill-to-prevent-chronic-migraines-approved-by-eu <comment><USER2> The title is misleading, as other medications have been used for migraine prophylaxis. This is the first drug, per the article, that has been specifically approved for migraine prophylaxis. Medications such as beta blockers and valproic acid are other medications used for migraine prophylaxis but were originally approved for other conditions.

Additionally, please note that this drug has already been approved in the US, since May.

Now, onto the meat of this. If I'm not mistaken, erenumab is a cgrp inhibitor that made much fanfare a few months ago in New England Journal of Medicine when two studies found a clinical benefit in cgrp.

Basically healthcare providers are prescribing this if you failed the aforementioned therapies for migraine prophylaxis (since those are way cheaper).

On a funnier note, medical students such as myself have started referring to all of these new biologic drugs as "what-the-f __*-umabs " since they all have weird names and we can't keep up with the rapid development of them.

<comment><USER3> As someone suffering from multiple auto-immune diseases, I love the "biologic era".

I'm currently taking Cosentyx and it's been life-changing.

More and more the treatment goal of my condition is becoming sustained drug- induced remission.

<comment><USER4> Would Cosentyx also help bring Hashimoto thyroid disease into remission ?

<comment><USER2> Potentially, as there is some evidence that Hashimoto's has some increased interleukin 17a (what cosentyx targets). However, it was my understanding that Hashimoto's is something that could be treated long term with thyroid hormone supplementation (synthroid, etc).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I've been taking Feverfew extract daily (the brand is Mygrafew, I think) and it has reduced my migraines by about 80%. For the rest of the time there's sumatriptan, which works about 70% of the time. Between the two, I've got my migraines under control (maybe one a month).

I used to get at least one a week, and I know there are people who get them much more often. I'm glad there are advances being made in this area because I feel like for all the pain migraines have caused me, I'm mostly a dabbler and others have it much worse.

It's really one of the worst pains I've ever experienced. They are kind of evil. With some pain, you know "at least it's for a reason" (like your body self-healing something). With migraines, it's devoid of any purpose. The pain only exists to torture you. Nasty things.

</comment><comment><USER6> I know two people who suffer from chronic, debilitating migraines. As someone who gets episodic clusters, I am sympathetic / empathetic to their plight. My attacks (which only happen every two years or so) can be treated pretty effectively with oxygen and/or sumatriptan injections, so it's tempting to think that sumatriptan (primarily a migraine drug in the first place) should just work.

Everyone is different, and there is so much we don't understand about migraines (and clusters, which often benefit from migraine research). If you think that ginger, cannabis, or just avoiding your triggers is all it takes, that's not always (nor probably often) the case.

I hesitate to subject a friend's personal blog to the HN effect, but if you want to learn about chronic migraine from one firsthand account, read through some of the archives at thedailyheadache.com. She has been trying desperately and relentlessly to find peace for a long time.

<comment><USER7> Interesting you mention oxygen -- this means you breath from an oxygen tank? I notice I yawn a lot when a migraine is about to occur -- I always thought this had something do with lack of oxygen.

I always have a supply of MaxAlt (rizatriptan benzoate) with me which short circuits my migraines if I take it in the correct window of time. 1 MaxAlt usually works, 2 or 3 in the worse case.

<comment><USER6> For cluster headaches, a high rate of oxygen (like 10-12 liters per minute) acts as a vasoconstrictor, which can relieve pressure on the nerve.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've found a quarter teaspoon of powdered ginger surprisingly effective for migraines. Don't take my word for it: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23657930](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23657930)

<comment><USER9> I can't imagine how it is to eat powdered ginger given how a piece of solid ginger tastes like

<comment> saiya-jin You can make (rather strong) tea from it, i saw it even being sold in supermarkets straight in tea bags. Add some lemon and honey and it is delicious and great for those long winter evenings

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> There is growing evidence that hyperinsulemia is related to migraines. Insulin-resistant individuals and/or people with metabolic syndrome who suffer migraines could try lowering their insulin levels by removing fast-digesting carbohydrates (refined sugars, starches, junk food in general) and seeing if that helps.

<comment><USER11> Along the same lines: chronic migraine sufferers can sometimes have good results at reducing frequency by lowering the blood pressure.

A low carb diet, or ketogenic diet, can cause lowered blood pressure. The only downside with diet instead of medication is that eating carbohydrates will reverse the effect.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> A couple of naive (and admittedly political) questions I didn't see addressed in the article...

Is there any way to find out how much of the R&D money for the medicine came from public funding? I can understand if the information is simply not available because it comes from a larger pool of R&D monies.

> Erenumab is now expected to be considered by English and Scottish health > agencies to assess whether it is appropriate for NHS use.

Curious whether it has to be approved by the EU first before its use by NHS is allowed (or if its assessment is even worth it until EU approval occurs). Also curious whether "appropriate for NHS use" means at no cost to migraine sufferers.

</comment><comment><USER13> Side effects include chronic migraines and death.

</comment><comment><USER14> Some people have been able to successfully treat migraines, as well as cluster headaches, with hallucinogens such as psilocybin and LSD:

"These patients are in a desperate and vulnerable situation, and illicit psychoactive substances are often considered a last resort. There appeared to be little or no interest in psychoactive effects per se as these were rather tolerated or avoided by using sub-psychoactive doses. Primarily, psilocybin, lysergic acid diethylamide, and related psychedelic tryptamines were reportedly effective for both prophylactic and acute treatment of cluster headache and migraines. Treatment results with cannabis were more unpredictable. No severe adverse events were reported, but it was observed how desperation sometimes spurred risky behavior when obtaining and testing various treatment alternatives." [1]

"The authors interviewed 53 cluster headache patients who had used psilocybin or lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) to treat their condition. Twenty-two of 26 psilocybin users reported that psilocybin aborted attacks; 25 of 48 psilocybin users and 7 of 8 LSD users reported cluster period termination; 18 of 19 psilocybin users and 4 of 5 LSD users reported remission period extension. Research on the effects of psilocybin and LSD on cluster headache may be warranted."[2]

[1] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5584001/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5584001/)

[2] [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16801660](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16801660)

[https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03341689](https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03341689)

<comment><USER15> Yes, it's been found to work well on certain types of "cluster" type migranes. However, it hasn't been found to work for chronic migranes, which is what this new drug is focused on. Prevention of chronic migranes is horribly elusive, and while there's a number of "preventatives," for many people they don't work well or for very long.

<comment><USER16> I have chronic migraines, the frequency isn't too bad (2-3 times a month). Personally I've spent 2 years migraine free doing LSD and psilocybe mushrooms (and other related drugs) every couple of months during a year and a half. Sometimes in the range of microdosing: ~25µg LSD monthly for the last 3 months). I know, n=1, but still.

<comment><USER15> Chronic migranes is defined as 15 days or more per month. Many people have it 24 hours a day.

Frequency is what chronic migranes are about.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> you could also just avoid your migraine trigger, I have and get around 3 migraines a year max rather than having one every month or 2 or 3 a week as a teen.

<comment><USER18> You state that as if it's simple and anyone can do it.

What if something common like changes in atmospheric pressure trigger it? What if you have multiple common triggers? What if you don't know all your triggers?

<comment><USER5> Just keep a food log, mood log, sleep log, stress log, barometric pressure log, air quality log, oxygen level log, altitude log, brightness log, screen- time log, eye strain log, face-shoulder-neck tension log, spine pain log, head trauma log, and a blood pressure log.

Then you can hook up all the data into a recurrent neural network that finds the patterns in the data and lets you know what combination of conditions will give you migraines.

It's really easy to find all your migraine triggers if you follow these very basic steps.

<comment><USER19> Should also probably log stool weight/color, mineral/vitamin intake across all foods, etc etc - just to make it even more clear that a person has no time to "just log everything" that could possibly play a role. And at the end, it would probably not explain a majority of the headaches - at least in my experience.

<comment><USER5> > it would probably not explain a majority of the headaches - at least in my > experience

This is my experience too. I know a good number of my migraine triggers, but some days I do _everything_ right: I eat good food (regularly), plenty of sleep, no over-exertion, lots of water, breaks from screen time, no eye strain, etc etc...still get a fucking migraine!

Sometimes there's just not a reason for it.

<comment><USER19> Yep and that list of things you did correct could go on for pages. It's similar for how I treat my headaches. I don't just take a triptan. I do the yoga stretch, maybe a cup of tea (full cup of coffee if I'm in 9/10 zone), some Gatorade, ginger powder, tumeric powder, heat on the traps, TENS unit on the traps/neck/temples, ice, etc and nothing. I've even fallen asleep while doing half of those in the crocodile position before. It worked that time, too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> For a lot of people cannabis works great for their migraines, but I guess it is difficult for pharma to make money off of it so it is still a gray area in the EU. I am only pointing this out because the hype coming from the article makes the situation grotesque.

<comment><USER21> My sister in law lived in the netherlands, and they actually prescribed her mushrooms (the magical kind) for her migraines.

<comment><USER15> It is known to work for specific types of cluster migraines. But unfortunately only those kinds.</comment></comment></comment>


Bypass Quora signup wall by appending "?share=1" to URL - <AUTHOR>

Is this common knowledge? Pretty useful for the folks that don't know this, like me.
Try it yourself:
http://www.quora.com/Working-at-Google-1/Whats-the-worst-part-about-working-at-Google
vs.
http://www.quora.com/Working-at-Google-1/Whats-the-worst-part-about-working-at-Google?share=1 <comment><USER2> My solution: Bypass Quora signup wall by avoiding Quora entirely.

<comment><USER3> Yet another expertsexchange.com just with some added hype.

<comment><USER4> Take care to add the hyphen between experts and exchange, or it becomes a different set of words! ;)

(I never realized that till someone pointed it out. I always wondered why they had the ugly hyphen.)

<comment><USER5> Funny thing is: the didn't always have that!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> They've even mentioned it on their blog: [http://blog.quora.com/Making- Sharing-Better](http://blog.quora.com/Making-Sharing-Better)

> Open any Quora URL. If you come across a Quora link anywhere and you want to > read it without being asked to join Quora, you can add the text "?share=1" > to the end of the URL. Example: [http://www.quora.com/Hostage- > Situations/What-does-it-feel-li...](http://www.quora.com/Hostage- > Situations/What-does-it-feel-like-to-be-a-hostage-negotiator?share=1)

</comment><comment><USER7> What I don't understand is why Quora was/is loved by people like the Facebook team after how much they go through to make using their site difficult for end users. The fact that they require you to log in via a social account just to see answers is very similar to the crap experts exchange is by requiring a paid account.

There was a time when I thought it was a better Q&A site, but they continuously make it worse and worse with workarounds like this for the simple act of viewing a page entirely.

<comment><USER8> You answered your own question:

> What I don't understand is why Quora was/is loved by people like the > Facebook team ... The fact that they require you to log in __via a social > account__

Quora "furthers" facebook by requiring a facebook account, so naturally the facebook team will "love" it. It furthers their (facebook's) business interests.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6300856](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6300856)

</comment><comment><USER10> Quora is one of the most heinous sites on the internet because I know there is useful information but will hit a trap as soon as I click.

How do they get away with gaming Google search results like this? Why is Google complicit in this shady practice? I don't want walled gardens appearing in search results.

</comment><comment><USER11> The quality of Quora's ecosystem should not be judged by it's signup wall.

<comment><USER10> Yes it should. An ecosystem is just that, the whole thing. Some golden nuggets wrapped in excrement is still a ball of excrement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> [https://userscripts.org/scripts/show/159399](https://userscripts.org/scripts/show/159399) does this automatically</comment>


Good design is thoughtful, opinionated, and fearless - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@productchops/great-product-managers-are-designers-soul-mates-e9e36ab06a80 <comment><USER2> > The way I structure them and lead them are heavily influenced by my past > experiences, and it boils down to three core tenets:

> Third, and most important, I have three rules for operation:

So one of the three core tenets is the three rules for operation?

Well I read the rest of the article, and at the end I got to

> three most inspiring highlights about Steve:

Someone likes the number three, it seems.

<comment><AUTHOR> _Omne trium perfectum_

<comment><USER3> et 'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres'.

Nihil sub sole novem.</comment></comment></comment>


Stop giving Wikipedia money - <AUTHOR> http://newslines.org/blog/stop-giving-wikipedia-money/ <comment><USER2> [http://newslines.org/about-newslines/](http://newslines.org/about-newslines/)

"We are the only direct competitor to Wikipedia ..."

</comment><comment><USER3> So you're bellyaching about Wikipedia having $51 million in the bank and spending $684,000 on furniture (if true)?

Don't you realize how tiny those numbers are compared to the incredibly wasteful spending by any governmental agency at any level of government, or by any organization or company with monopoly status, or hell, just any really large company?

For something I use every single day for free (unless I choose to contribute), I think Wikipedia is astonishingly great value.

I think it would be great value even if it had the budget of, say, the US Department of Labor ($13 billion -- billion with a "B").

Why do you pick on Wikipedia when there are things 250 times worse?

<comment><AUTHOR> I am "bellyaching" about the call for donations when none are needed, and those that have been given in the past have not been used appropriately. I am also against government waste.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> 215 employess x Avg tech-based salary ( $85,000) = 18, 275, 000 / yr. Add the 6, 000, 000 to awards and grants and the 2, 500, 000 in server hosting (which seems awfully slim) = 26, 775, 000 / yr. Their cash reserves just barely cover a year of operating costs at LAST year's expenses. If they wish to continue expanding their reach year over year, as any well minded business should, their yearly expenses from just these 3 items would most likely eclipse their cash reserves within the one year period. Zero cash reserves would halt all investments, meaning their current state wouldn't cover two years of these three liabilities without donations. So, now what?

<comment><AUTHOR> Wikipedia doesn't need the money. Here's what a WMF insider has to say: [https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-Decem...](https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-December/075766.html)

Every year we get promises that they'll work on making the banners better. However, it seems when they say better, they mean more effective from the perspective of generating revenue. The message from the fundraising staff and Lila is more of the same.

This year I've started having people I know worry that Wikipedia is in financial trouble. It makes me feel ashamed when I have to tell them Wikipedia is in fact fine, but that the foundation uses this messaging to more effectively drive donations. It makes them angry to hear it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> No, I will not stop. The amount of value I receive from Wikipedia _directly_ is hundreds of dollars a year (subjectively of course). And I suspect the value I receive _indirectly_ , through better access to information for the current and future engineers, doctors, scientists etc is many times greater.

</comment><comment><USER6> You article really had me going until that end part where you shamelessly tried to sell yourself, its not that what you wrote about does not have merit, its just the end part felt like the whole thing is just a ploy to promote yourself

</comment><comment><USER7> The simple story is that the Wikimedia Foundation staff has massively expanded over the past six or seven years; both the revenue and their spending have risen exponentially (from 2 million in 2006/2007 to over $40 million in 2013/2014). Most of this increase in spending has funded the expansion of software engineering staff. It doesn't help that some of their flagship projects have been acknowledged failures (VisualEditor) or extremely controversial and divisive (Media Viewer, Flow). That's partly why Lila Tretikov was hired: to sort that mess out. And some spending was profligate, as Sue Gardner herself acknowledged, with gravy trains forming and supporting previously penniless Wikipedians. And as the spending increases, so of course the reserve has to increase too, to the point where there are now shooting for more than $50 million a year (compare to $5 million in 2007/2008).

The Foundation feel they have to expand because Wikipedia content is free, and is increasingly hosted elsewhere. Wikipedia could survive that, but the Wikimedia Foundation could not. Damon Sicore, the new VP of Engineering Tretikov hired, said the Foundation would have to

"scale to a size that enables us to compete with the engineering shops that are trying to kill us. That means we need to double down on recruiting top talent, and steal the engineers from the sources they use… because… well… they are REALLY GOOD. I want everyone to keep this in mind: If we don't move faster and better than google, apple, and microsoft (and their ilk and kin), they will consume us and we will go away. It's that simple."

Now he may very well be right there. The problem with the current fundraising campaign though is that it tries to manipulate donors into donating, by making it sound there is a financial emergency and the Foundation can not afford to keep Wikipedia "online and ad-free for another year" without people donating. When in fact they have just reported having more money in the bank than ever before in their entire history.

That, and the obtrusiveness of the banners, is what is rubbing people the wrong way. You have long-term, committed Wikipedians now telling Wikimedia management that the campaign is deceptive, manipulative and damaging to the brand, and that they are ashamed to answer their friends and colleagues when they ask him about the financial problems of Wikipedia.

That discussion is here: [http://www.gossamer- threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/532701](http://www.gossamer- threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/532701)

Some quotes:

A Wikimedia staffer:

I agree that the urgency and alarm of the copy is not commensurate with my (admittedly limited) understanding of our financial situation. Could we run a survey that places the banner copy alongside a concise statement of the Foundation's financials, and which asks the respondent to indicate whether they regard the copy as misleading.

An ex-staffer:

The messaging being used is actively scaring people. This isn't the first person that's asked me about this. When they find out there's not a real problem, their reaction quickly changes. They become angry. They feel manipulated.

A Wikipedia admin:

Secondly I'm alarmed about the content. That should come to no surprise to the fundraising team, because I can't imagine this content hasn't been written to evoke the maximum amount of alarm. But it crosses the line towards dishonesty. Yes the WMF can use the donations, and yes they generally spend it well. But the lights won't go off next week if You don't donate.

A Wikipedia admin, and past president of Wikimedia Australia:

Lila, the concern is not that the fundraiser is working, which your soundbite confirms, but that it is deceiving people, or at least manipulating them 'too much' to be consistent with our values.

Ex-Wikimedia staffer:

You have a community that's upset because they believe the fundraising banners are causing long-lasting harm to Wikimedia's brand.

This year I've started having people I know worry that Wikipedia is in financial trouble. It makes me feel ashamed when I have to tell them Wikipedia is in fact fine, but that the foundation uses this messaging to more effectively drive donations. It makes them angry to hear it.

</comment><comment><USER8> This is a quick read. It's a screed about Wikipedia periodically begging for money. Good food for thought.

<comment><USER9> And written by a self-styled competitor.

<comment><USER10> Others have written similar things, like [http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/09/21/wikipedia-keeping-it- fr...](http://wikipediocracy.com/2014/09/21/wikipedia-keeping-it-free-just- pay-us-our-salaries/) .

<comment><USER8> Wow. Quite informative. I urge anyone interested in the politics of Wikipedia to read it.

I didn't know about "affiliate entities". But most surprising was the breakdown of employees. I certainly wouldn't have expected this:

       the Foundation's paid staff and contractors
       page lists 215 people ... They comprise
       2 people in the Office of the Executive
       Director Lila Tretikov,
       18 in Grantmaking,
       17 in Fundraising,
       14 in Legal and Community Advocacy,
       4 in Communications,
       17 in Finance and Administration,
       and 11 in Human Resources.
       The remaining 132 ... work in ...
       Engineering and Product Development

They have 11 HR people out of 215 paid employees???

Finally, to keep it all in perspective, remember what Michael Scott said:

       "Wikipedia is the best thing ever. Anyone in
       the world can write anything they want about
       any subject, so you know you are getting the
       best possible information." - Michael Scott

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Let's go through his line-by-line line-by-line:

> > DEAR WIKIPEDIA READERS: This week we ask our readers to help us. To > protect our independence, we'll never run ads.

> What is the point of a site saying they don't want to show ads, then > covering up 50% of the screen with a request for money? No serious for- > profit site would consider giving up 50% of the page to an ad. It's insane. > At least this year's fundraising banners don't have Jimmy Wales staring out > at the reader like Big Brother. Now I respect Wikipedia's non-ad stance. > They can't very well make money on a site that was created through the free > labor of its contributors, but for God's sake show some decorum.

The substantive objection here is that ads are annoying because they take screen real estate and Wikipedia's drive for donations is annoying because it also takes real estate. He draws an absurdity here from a false equivalence, however - ads are something much more insidious. Ads would track what you are reading on Wikipedia (the modern version of a library) and build a profile of what subjects you are interested in. They would send this data to third parties and those third parties would have the right to sell this data at their discretion. Furthermore ads would run continuously year round. The donation banner is not equivalent to ads, and can not be snubbed for taking up screen real estate because its somehow contradictory to the value position of not running ads.

> > We survive on donations averaging about $15. Now is the time we ask. If > everyone reading this right now gave $3, our fundraiser would be done within > an hour.

> Money is not an issue of survival for Wikipedia. According to its latest > annual report, The Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), the charity that controls > Wikipedia, has $51 million in cash reserves ($28 million) and investments > ($23 million). No-one can seriously claim that an organization that has $51 > million in the bank is in "survival" mode.

Now for some numbers. Wikipedia alone costs several million dollars (~45 million) a year to run (it has been increasing each year as it is getting more traffic; also remember that servers and storage fail and that architectural changes like switching to ElasticSearch serve the world better).

This breaks down into roughly $20m for salaries and wages (~93k on average, does seem high). $13m operating expenses. $5.7m in awards and grants. $2.5m in web hosting and the same in depreciation of capital investments. $2m for travel and conferences (they do these globally, single events can cost an individual $10k or more, so this seems reasonable IMO). $150k for special events.

I don't need to spell it out but $51m can only afford one year of operating costs. Even if you cut the salary number in half and drop the conferences the author seems to hate, we're still not to two years.

> > Yep, that's about the price of buying a programmer a coffee.

> Note the focus on programmers. But programmers don't make Wikipedia. > Wikipedia's core software is essentially unchanged since 2001 when the > project started. Since then Wikipedia's programming efforts have been a > disaster. The Visual Editor (a tool that would allow WYSIWYG editing) was a > failure. Editors still edit using tags and arcane code to create their > edits. The recently introduced Media Viewer is universally hated. The people > who really make Wikipedia are the unpaid volunteers, but hey get nothing > from donations. Nothing, while programmers who don't have a clue get paid. > Is that really where your money should go?

The author reads a lot into the sentence, which I took to mean 'cost of a cup of coffee'. Agreed that programmers are just one role at TWF, but why the ire? Furthermore it's fundamentally untrue what he says about Wikipedia being essentially the same since 2002. This is true on the client side but not on the server side. The transition to ElasticSearch as one example.

> > We're a small non-profit

> This is a flat-out lie. The WMF is not a small non-profit. It raised $46 > million in donations last year and has 215 staff, over 130 of whom work in > the Engineering and Product Development department. Yet all of the money > spent on programmer salaries has produced no measurable change to the site's > quality. These programmers take up a huge amount of the foundation's $20 > million spent on salaries, salary payments that rose $4 million since 2103.

> The closest WMF gets to creating content is the almost $6 million was spent > last year on awards and grants — mostly funding international and regional > staff and workshops to celebrate Wikipedia, such as Wikimania. These grants > have been described as "corrupt" by the WMF's ex-director Sue Gardner. who > said, "I believe the FDC [Funds Dissemination Committee] process, dominated > by fund-seekers, does not as currently constructed offer sufficient > protection against log-rolling, self-dealing, and other corrupt practices." > Oh dear.

I wholeheartedly agree that TWF is no longer a small nonprofit and has entered the range of medium sized. As for the Wikimania mention and the accusation of corruptness - I don't see that as relevant to the small non-profit claim but merely chosen because there wasn't much else for the author to say. I do not know much about Wikimania or associated corruptness, so I will refrain from commenting on that. I would think that if indeed donations are being spent in a corrupt self-serving way this would be a reason to scale back or refrain for donating to TWF.

> > with costs of a top website: servers, staff and programs.

> The same KPMG report says that Wikipedia spent $2.5 million of its budget on > hosting, almost unchanged since 2013. A closer look at the reports line > items shows that the WMF spent almost $684,000 on furniture. That's almost > $3200 per employee. Your donations are going to golden chairs.

Furniture for the past 5 years: 45k, 200k, 200k, 400k, 600k (this year).

Maybe there's another reasonable explanation (outside golden chairs?) Is Wikipedia furnishing a new office? Anyone who has worked on something like that will know how expensive even simple things (like carpeting) are.

Here is a link to the report.

[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/b/bf/Audit...](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/b/bf/Audit_Report_- _FY_13-14_-_Final_v2.pdf)

The selective use of quotation of figures and partial sharing of information reads more like an indictment than a thesis. Please, if you are considering not donating to Wikipedia look at the finances and find the rest of Wikipedia's expenses (some shared above).

> > Wikipedia is something special. It is like a library or a public park > where we can all go to think and learn.

> I guess parks and libraries would be a lot less popular if you had > panhandlers at the doors. Especially panhandlers who have more in the bank > than you.

Given that Wikipedia can survive approximately one year without donations, is it really fair to call them a panhandler?

No, it's more like paying taxes with public money to keep a public space open.

Oh wait...

> > If Wikipedia is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online and ad- > free another year. Thank you.

> More weasel words. Wikipedia is already useful without the extra donations, > and even if donations stopped tomorrow it would still be able to stay > online, continue on cash reserves for years (with some salary cuts).

Covered before. If they cut __all __salary and __all __travel and __all __conferences and __all __awards they would last at _most_ two years.

No weasel words there.

It turns out it does take millions of dollars to run an operation as large and as often visited as Wikipedia.

<comment><AUTHOR> Way to miss the point.

>I don't need to spell it out but $51m can only afford one year of operating costs.

False.

>If they cut all salary and all travel and all conferences they would last at most two years.

False. Salaries alone are $20 million. Awards are $6 million. $2 million for conferences.

>It turns out it does take millions of dollars to run an operation as large and as often visited as Wikipedia.

It doesn't. The cost of hosting has remained steady over the past few years at $2.5million, despite traffic rising. The vast majority of the increase of the use of funds is for staff, most of whom do not contribute to the content or product in any meaningful way.

>Maybe there's another reasonable explanation (outside golden chairs?)

I'd like to hear it.

<comment><USER12> > The cost of hosting has remained steady over the past few years at > $2.5million, despite traffic rising. The vast majority of the increase of > the use of funds is for staff, most of whom do not contribute to the content > or product in any meaningful way.

Do you understand how insanely difficult it is to operate a website at Wikipedia's scale, which has increased exponentially over time? The cost of hosting is negligible compared to the engineering effort needed to design & maintain systems that keep things functional. Here's a quick summary from their blog on the types of things they work on in a given month: [https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/10/18/engineering-report- aug...](https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/10/18/engineering-report- august-2014/#Technical_Operations) . If you think Wikipedia is just a simple deployment of MediaWiki sitting on a few DO instances, you are sorely mistaken.

<comment><USER10> Could you quantize the exponential growth?

The number of new pages is not growing exponentially (see [http://www.wikistatistics.net/wiki/en/articles/full](http://www.wikistatistics.net/wiki/en/articles/full) and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_article_traffic](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_article_traffic) ).

The number of active editors is decreasing (see [http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/520446/the- dec...](http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/520446/the-decline-of- wikipedia/) ).

Looking at the breakdown at [http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm](http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm) , and if I read it correctly, the doubling period for the number of articles is no faster than 6 years (2.4M in Jul 2008 and 4.7M now).

[http://reportcard.wmflabs.org/#](http://reportcard.wmflabs.org/#) suggests that the doubling period for the number of unique users is also no faster than 6 years, though that excludes mobile.

By comparison, their IRS documents report $3.5 million in spending in 2007/2008 and $45 million for 2013/2014, which has a doubling time of about 1.5 years.

I don't see how a doubling of services (or even quadrupling) across 6 years requires 10x more money. Could you explain why they don't have an economy of scale in their favor?

<comment><USER12> I was referring to traffic, not total number of articles or users (although both of those were clearly exponential for a number of years as well): [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Awareness_statistics...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Awareness_statistics#mediaviewer/File:Alexa_traffic_ranking_for_wikipedia.png)

> I don't see how a doubling of services (or even quadrupling) across 6 years > requires 10x more money

Then you clearly have not done serious at-scale software development.

> Could you explain why they don't have an economy of scale in their favor?

Complexity increases exponentially (or worse) as traffic scales and the site matures, as you can clearly see in the blog post I linked. There is no 'economy of scale' when you simply need more engineers to manage that complexity.

<comment><USER10> The graph you showed is from 2003 to 2006. At that time Wikipedia's expenses were something like $100K/year, and they had one employee.

I don't see how it's relevant for this discussion.

I searched for a similar graph for the last decade, but failed to find it.

No, I haven't done at-scale software development. But every single report I've read about at-scale work says Google, Amazon, Wal-mart, etc. did not need 10x engineers in order to provide 2x content or 2x EC2 machines, at least not once they reached a certain threshold. Instead, the additional staff was used to provide more services.

Given that it's true, I would like to know if it continues to be so. If increasing the Wikipedia traffic by another 2x causes the number of support staff to increase by another 10x then clearly it's unsustainable, and there is a serious problem in the immediate future.

However, as the various reports on the topic have pointed out, at least part of the development cost have gone towards developing tools which had not had uptake by the Wikipedia developers.

Hence why I would like to know what numbers you are using to draw your conclusion. What is the relationship between traffic and required engineering staff? Why doesn't it have the same cost savings that other organizations have reported?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


MDT9100 - <AUTHOR> https://trmm.net/MDT9100 <comment><USER2> Back when the local cops had these, a bunch of us used to intercept their communications with radio scanners and some software from the L0pht or some such.

The cops would use them like some early form of proto-instant messaging with apparently no oversight.

Lots of stories about sexual conquests, "check this slut's cleavage on 6th and Monroe out", etc. I remember one interesting conversation one night, where a patrol unit was requesting permission to pull over a train that was speeding through town too fast.

<comment><USER3> My guess is that its less likely it was without oversight, but that oversight wasn't concerned about the contents of messages perceived to be secure. And was this before FOIA? I feel like FOIA put a lot more government entities on alert to keep internal communications professional.

<comment><USER4> The FOIA was effective in 1967; it became a bigger thing in by the late 70s.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have one of these, if you have any questions. I object to gutting them - they're amazing little devices as-is. Some notes:

You can hold down Shift while booting to let you into the Windows 3.0 Program Manager so that you can edit the GUI. (It is not, as claimed in the article, Windows 3.1.)

Holding down Alt-Shift allows you to edit the boot drive, and then there's a SYNC script to write your changes back. But it is VERY EASY to irretrievably brick the device doing this, so be ultra ultra careful.

<comment><USER6> Maybe yours is running a different version of the software? The second picture in the article looks like it's running the original software, and it shows Windows 3.1 (running in 386 Enhanced Mode).

Agreed that it seems like a shame to gut the device. If it didn't boot, it'd be a different matter, but this one looks fairly functional-- seems like destroying a bit of history to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> That is a cool machine. It makes me think of something I wish I had: a portable computer that's (a) only usable for hacking, not surfing or gaming and (b) looks like it's for hacking.

Making good hacker laptops could be a great business. Similar electronics to gaming laptops but with very different industrial design.

<comment><USER8> Well, there's the Novena[1], depending on what kind of hacking you had in mind...

1: [https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio- kosagi/novena](https://www.crowdsupply.com/sutajio-kosagi/novena)

<comment><USER9> I bought a Novena as an act of personal faith. I don't regret it, as it was a religious choice.

It is completely unsuitable for browsing, that's for sure!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Its funny that I remembered the new york resistor group as the people who did my teensy morse code keyboard, when in fact its the same dude. ([https://trmm.net/Morse_Code_keyboard](https://trmm.net/Morse_Code_keyboard))

</comment><comment><USER11> The rest of Trammel's site is worth looking at. He's constantly doing something cool and interesting. I particularly like the sections on driving analog displays...he gets asteroids running on an oscilloscope, for example. In another post, he gets the PRU's in a Beaglebone black to drive the video display on an old Mac SE. Working well enough to display X11.

<comment><USER12> Nearly 20 years ago I was following the progress of his "Autopilot" project closely, to create an autonomous rotorcraft out of a remote control helicopter base platform. Tram went on to commercialise that through Rotomotion, but he's moved on since.

[http://autopilot.sourceforge.net](http://autopilot.sourceforge.net)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> 1.7A is pretty impressive (as in, substantial, for what that device does). My 2018 16-core PC draws like 0.5A at idle and the 30" LCD another 1.25A.

<comment><USER14> Are you saying your desktop idles at 6 W, or are you comparing current draw without regard to voltage difference?

In my experience, 30-50W is a more typical figure for a desktop to be drawing from the wall when idle but not put to sleep.

<comment><USER13> No, I'm saying my desktop idles around 60W and the monitor takes about 150W, on a 120V circuit. You're right, I didn't notice the article's 1.7A figure was on a 12V circuit.</comment></comment></comment>


Damn Cool Illusion - <AUTHOR> https://web.archive.org/web/20051023015008/http://www.patmedia.net/marklevinson/cool/cool_illusion.html <comment><USER2> Neat! I wondered if it was happening per eye, or globally in the brain. Some things to try:

\- cover one eye for a bit. Then uncover it

\- cover one eye for a bit, then switch to covering the other eye

\- cover both eyes. Count to 100. Bet you can't find me!

</comment><comment><USER3> blinking resets/restarts the illusion</comment>


Infamous hacker that blackmailed porn viewers, forced to repay £270k - <AUTHOR> http://www.idahoreporter.com/2019/infamous-hacker-that-blackmailed-porn-viewers-forced-to-repay-270k-and-sell-his-rolex-to-do-so/ <comment><USER2> This is just an earlier (and less advanced) version of ransomware that merely locks the computer as opposed to encrypting files, and the use fear (with police-themed lock screens and threat of arrest over really awful crimes like illegal pornography) to encourage the victims to pay, but I don't see any blackmail.</comment>


The Light Phone - <AUTHOR> http://www.thelightphone.com/ <comment><USER2> I must admit I don't really see this products major benefits over other ways of achieving the same thing (a secondary phone with call forwarding from the main smartphone).

Their price is $100 and with that there's the usual risks of kickstarter delays/cancellations. But as an alternative things like the nokia 130 ([http://www.microsoft.com/en/mobile/phone/130/specifications/](http://www.microsoft.com/en/mobile/phone/130/specifications/)) are already available cheaper have a longer battery life and proven track record...

That said the kickstarter already has £250k so they've obviously convinced some people!

</comment><comment><USER3> What's the advantage over a Nokia 1100 or a generic cheap chinese phone? The only one I can see is it's cute design.

<comment><USER4> It's half the weight of the 1100. Dunno if having sharp edges is an advantage..

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I am sure this fills a need. I've got a $20 phone on my wrist right now.

<comment><USER6> Where do you get that from? Alibaba? [http://www.alibaba.com/product- detail/Good-price-Latest-Wris...](http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Good- price-Latest-Wrist-Watch-China_1464707958/showimage.html)

<comment><USER5> No no, its one of those watch telephones you see on ebay. I bought one in Shenzhen the other week. Still unsure about all the wearable nonsense. Giving a go though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I am sure this fills a need. Sent from my smartphone.

</comment><comment><USER6> I am sure this fills a need.</comment>


The Tcl War (1994) - <AUTHOR> http://vanderburg.org/old_pages/Tcl/war <comment><AUTHOR> I just went spelunking in the HN archives and discovered this interesting war story about the Tcl Wars from a different perspective: [https://web.archive.org/web/20100405014350/http://basiscraft...](https://web.archive.org/web/20100405014350/http://basiscraft.com/0800-0100-the- tcl-war.html)</comment>


Rover Finds New Evidence That Ancient Mars Was Habitable - <AUTHOR> http://www.space.com/21483-mars-life-nasa-opportunity-rover.html

<comment><USER2> In the midst of the PRISIM NSA fiasco, it's amazing to see just how awesome we can be with technology when we put our minds to it. Despite big sister Curiosity showing off, it's incredible that this came from Opportunity, a rover we've had on Mars for a decade!

My favorite part:

> _Opportunity is poised to break the international record for distance > traveled on another world during the drive to Solander Point._

Incredible. Just incredible.

</comment><comment><USER3> Our solar system is old and by comparison our species has been here for mere fractions of a millisecond.

Say what you will, but those machines rolling around Mars, navigating terrain, taking pictures, analyzing samples, using sunlight to recharge, sending data to earth via radio, and countless other capabilities, are a celebration of human intelligence.

</comment><comment><USER4> Related: _Technological Requirements for Terraforming Mars_ ([http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~mfogg/zubrin.htm](http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~mfogg/zubrin.htm))

The author, Robert Zubrin, also developed the Mars-mission plan Elon Musk seems to be following. (Zubrin's book also paints a fascinating picture of what's wrong with NASA: [http://www.amazon.com/The-Case-Mars-Settle- Planet/dp/0684835...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Case-Mars-Settle- Planet/dp/0684835509))

Quotes from the Terraforming paper:

"drastic modification of Martian conditions ... using 21st century technology."

"Humans... would require breathing gear, but pressure suits would be unnecessary"

"Average temperatures could be above the freezing point of water for significant regions during portions of the year, enabling the growth of plant life in the open."

</comment><comment><USER5> Look.. Life on Mars! Oh wait, no.

Look! Life on Mars! Ah, never mind.

Ad infinitum

<comment><USER6> Science isn't just some magical box that you press a button on and get definitive answers out of, it's a process. Sometimes it's frustrating to watch that process narrow in on answers, but that's the nature of discovery. So far as I know there's only ever been one serious claim for life on Mars (the Alan Hills Mars meteorite claim from the 90s).

What has been happening recently has been more and more evidence about the conditions of ancient Mars, especially in relation to the long-term presence of water. We've known for a long time that Mars has had liquid water on it in the past, what we haven't known is how much and for how long and under what conditions. We've known more recently that Mars still contains a substantial amount of sub-surface water ice over much of its area. And we've learned more recently that Mars appears to have had sufficient water to form long-lived lakes and rivers, long enough to allow the formation of both rounded river rocks and pebbles as well as conglomerate rocks made up of those but also hydrate minerals that can only form in conditions of near neutral pH and low salinity.

These are big discoveries, even though from a certain perspective they may seem like yet another "water on Mars!" story. These discoveries are painting a picture of ancient Mars that was not just occasionally wet or perhaps a hellscape Mars covered with brackish or boiling lakes but an almost familiar Mars with lakes and rivers that would be nearly drinkable for humans and that lasted millions of years at least. Certainly conditions that lots of Earth- bound life would find it quite easy to live in. And that provides the tantalizing hope that perhaps some form of life arose on Mars and survived for a time and perhaps lives still in some sheltered underground areas. It's not evidence or proof of life, it's the hint of a possibility. But again, that's the way science works. You narrow down possibilities and provide hints for further investigations.

<comment><USER5> Even if life is found on Mars, the human race has lost it's right to celebrate.

Every 3.6 seconds some child dies of starvation here on Earth. How many children can you feed with $400,000,000+?

[http://goo.gl/s46ol](http://goo.gl/s46ol)

<comment><USER2> Bah. Such terrible logic. Truth is, we can do both. You're also mis-quoting your own source.

[http://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/20120716.gif](http://www.smbc- comics.com/comics/20120716.gif)

<comment><USER5> Explain that to the mothers of the 5,000 children that have died of starvation in their mother's arms in the last 5 hours since this was posted.

Maybe if you down vote this post enough, the problem will go away?

<comment><USER7> It's not about the problem going away or not. Saving a life also increases cost, especially if the life you are saving is non productive (ie require food)

Fact is, there will always be people dying on earth. It's sad. But why bother?

Sending the human race to another planet, then maybe another galaxy, are long term projects, and it makes sense to care about that however.

If it only required the sacrifice of 5,000 children, that would be a very cheap price to pay. It will certainly cost (as in opportunity costs - how the money could be used in different ways) many more lives.

Yet you know what? It's a great deal. If we lose our only current planet, all of humanity goes down, including any possible future "children" one may imagine.

How many people do you expect will have existed in 10,000 years from now (humanity is much older than that!), given our current population? (let's say no grow)? Round that to 5 billion per 100 year with an greatly overestimated lifespan of 100 years to ease our calculations. We have a lowball estimate of (10,000/100)*5b = 5 000 billion

It would be quite a bargain to sacrifice a total of 5 billion to ensure a living of the 5 000 billion future humans that will exist... hell, even a 100 billion!!

So yes, children are dying, it's sad, and your use of "saying that to the mothers" is a call to use sentimentalisms to obscure the facts.

Yet the facts remain : having more than one habitable planet is a necessity to protect the continuous possibility of a thriving human race, in case of major disasters (at mass-extinction level).

<comment><USER5> You obviously have no children.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>