Chosen: A javascript plug-in that makes long select boxes user-friendly. - <AUTHOR> http://harvesthq.github.com/chosen <comment><USER2> And yet another control that pretends to be a dropdown box, but isn't. No. I'm not complaining about the appearance or the fact that it has a search field while the real dropdown doesn't.

I'm complaining about the way it responds to mouse actions: The real dropdown box, on my machine, expands the menu on mouse down after a no-doubt OS- specific delay. The fake dropdown doesn't - it only reacts on mouse up.

Of course, you can't make a a control work exactly like its native counterpart - but that IMHO just means that you shouldn't even try imitating them and provide its own unique look.

I really dislike nearly-native controls - they feel wrong to me.

But don't get me wrong: The controls are really cool and incredibly useful. If only they didn't try to mimic the native look without quite matching it.

<comment><USER3> My problem with this is that when I see the box (e.g. Multiple Select), I perceive it as a text input. I'd be ill-surprised to discover on a site to (all of a sudden) have this protruding box appear out of nowhere.

Better solution: on mouse click, hide the box. Only show the box for autocompletes.

<comment><USER4> When we do this (with jQueryUI) we add the little down arrow button decoration so you expect the dropdown to appear.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This project looks awesome. This stuff is annoying to have to replicate yourself, and I'm glad to see MooTools support as well.

That said, my first reaction when looking at the first Country dropdown example was that I liked the native one better since in OS X it shows me dozens of choices at once (fills most of the screen vertically) and then in the "after" suddenly I was constrained to only seeing 7 countries at a time. Not a huge deal but felt like a loss in usability (but a gain visually). If the faux dropdown was just a little taller in height it'd be better.

Secondly, this just killed iPhone support. Apple did a good job with <select>s on iOS and this completely breaks it. It should just turn itself off on iOS.

<comment><USER6> The single select also cannot be reached by pressing the tab key (for me, Safari 5.0.5). When I fill out a form, my hands are on the keyboard. I tab to the country field, start typing my country to select it, and move on. So I'd say the single select is worse than native on both Safari and Mobile Safari.

The multi-select is great, though. Why not make the single select work like the multiple?

<comment><USER7> Tab works as expected here in FF4.0.1, when the focus is on the normal control, I can switch to the 'enhanced' version using tab and start typing my country.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The more libs like this I see, the more I feel that the core HTML controls should be improved and expanded. They are getting really, really dated and don't address a lot of common problems.

Things I feel would make a lot of sense:

Collapsible trees. Numeric sliders (preferably done like draggable digits <http://worrydream.com/Tangle/>). Native drag-and-drop sipport for elements. (And yes, this _can_ be done with plain forms. I can explain how if you want.) Native rich tooltips and a standard notation to show that something has a tooltip. Maybe tabs. I think you could do tabs with CSS, but I'm not 100% sure.

If most UI libraries have something, it probably would be a good addtion to HTML spec. It would work faster and eventually have better compatibility.

<comment><USER9> Numeric slider exists in HTML5: <http://diveintohtml5.org/examples/input-type- range.html>

</comment></comment><comment> hendrik-xdest Best plug-in of the year, so far.

Apart from what it says, I do not see problems in IE7 or IE8 (there is some style issues in IE9, though). Also, it is nearly working in IE6. I think I'll try to diddle around with some z-index and CSS stuff to get it working. Can't be much more than that.

<comment><USER10> What's the nature of the nonworkingness on the dodgy browsers? Does it fail catastrophically or degrade satisfactorily?

If you manage to fix it for other browsers I hope you push your fixes upstream.

<comment> hendrik-xdest It looks to me as if there is a z-index problem and the position is not upheld correctly in IE6. In IE9 there is a difference in the linear gradient color. No catastrophes there, imho.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This nearly completely breaks the select ui on iOS. It should do some kind of feature detection so that it can disable itself on browsers that have alternate ui's for controls like this.

For example, this converts a select menu to an input field. On iOS the keyboard comes up instead of the select control.

<comment><USER12> This just seems like a matter of preference to me. It works on iOS pretty much just like it works on a desktop. It may be that some iOS users would prefer the native UI, but you could say the same for some desktop users (particularly keyboard-wary ones). I certainly wouldn't call anything "broken".

<comment><USER5> It's broken. When I tapped it the element the dropdown part of it didn't come up on the screen. The only way to scroll inside it is to do the 2 finger scroll, which 90% of users wouldn't know how to do (since normally you do a 1 finger).

On the desktop the element still feels like a <select>. On the iPhone it feels nothing at all like a <select>

<comment><USER13> I believe that on iOS5, the 2 finger scroll has been removed and replaced with a 1 finger one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Apparently Chosen takes the placeholder text from the select element's 'title' attribute; does it also support the official HTML5 syntax[1] for placeholder attributes in select elements?

How about integration with jQueryUI's theming system?

[1]: [http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current- work/multipage/...](http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current- work/multipage/the-button-element.html#placeholder-label-option)

<comment><USER5> It'd be better if it looked for the HTML5 "placeholder" attribute even in older browsers rather than having to use "title" also. Some JS plugins [1] do this to replicate placeholder support in older browsers and I don't think there's any downside.

[1] <https://github.com/mathiasbynens/Placeholder-jQuery-Plugin>

<comment><USER14> The trouble is that no version of HTML (currently) allows a "placeholder" attribute on a select element, even HTML5. If you want your pages to validate, @placeholder won't do the trick.

<comment><USER5> Ah gotcha, wasn't thinking about <select>s. Makes sense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Excellent. Makes you wonder why browser vendors never improved on the usability of such controls themselves.

<comment><USER16> Some do. Maemo's MicroB browser shows this when you click on a select menu: <http://i.imgur.com/rP6Mz.png> \- one of the few places interacting with a website is actually easier and faster on a mobile than on a desktop browser. I think Nokia's Symbian devices do this too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Um, what use this?

If I click on a dropdown box, I can already type the value on my keyboard to select it. No javascript necessary.

(using chromium on ubuntu)

<comment><USER18> I agree, but 99% of the users out there don't know that. :\

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is fantastic. ComboBox is what's missing in HTML. This is a keeper.

<comment><USER16> HTML5 has the datalist element, which provides suggestions for an input box and is similar to a combo box. The best info I can find on it is: [http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/an-html5-style-google- sug...](http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/an-html5-style-google-suggest/)

This is currently only supported by Firefox Opera. A JavaScript polyfill to get this working in other browsers would be great.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> For the multiple select, I like this one a lot: <http://loudev.com/>

It's way simpler for the average user.

</comment><comment><USER21> The UI widgets like this all have the same defects:

1\. They are slow, as all their markup has to be generated on the client side each time the page loads

2\. They are not ajax friendly. I mean that if you insert a select box in a HTML document with javascript, it will remain a plain native select box unless your script specifically calls the right widget's function. So you have to update all your scripts.

3\. They are not drop-in replacements for native widgets, all your script must know how to handle these widgets for things like getting the widget's value, listening for events, etc.

Points 1 and 2 could be fixed by generating the widget's HTML code on the server side and using delegated events (like jQuery's delegate()). (Progressive Enhancement can still be achieved without doing _everything_ on the client side.)

Other than that, the idea of a text input on the top of the options list is awesome.

</comment><comment><USER22> I've been using the jQuery UI ComboBox for a while, it's essentially this. - <http://jqueryui.com/demos/autocomplete/combobox.html>

</comment><comment><USER23> I would also add a fuzzy matching. I.e. "unitd sta" should match "United States" even with the missing "e". Or "East coast" should match "The East Coast".

</comment><comment><USER24> Love it! Sure it's not perfect, but it's a huge improvement already. I've had similar ideas myself but haven't gotten around to implementing them. The existing HTML input controls are clunky and haven't kept up with the pace of web development, maybe we can improve on them using CSS & JS until we develop a new set of canonical input primitives that then become standardized.

</comment><comment><USER25> On the iPad, the custom control is decidedly worse. The native one is larger and more appropriate for the device. This idea of custom UI elements seems really bad. It's gonna be worse than native on any platform. The issues with native controls should be addressed on their respective platforms.

</comment><comment><USER26> I think it's pretty cool, though it would be nice if they had a simplified single selection version. Which is to change a single select list into a text field with "instant search". The current incarnation make me first go for the pull down rather than just tabbing over and start typing.

</comment><comment><USER27> This plugin makes the case that this sort of functionality should be implemented into browsers very well.

</comment><comment><USER28> So... why don't they use this thing on their own web app? The "Project / Task" select box becomes very unwieldy with a growing client base. I spend way too much time looking for the correct project almost every time I have to create a new entry.

<comment><USER29> Because the plugin is written by a github user, not github themselves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Writing good widgets from scratch is an endless task. It's missing ARIA roles: <http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#combobox>

</comment><comment><USER31> Sexy! I do agree with a previous comment that the more technologies like these that come out, the more apparant it becomes that HTML as a whole needs a long overdue makeover.

</comment><comment><USER32> The first sentence on the linked page has a typo: "javsacript"

</comment><comment><USER33> _Note_ : IE8 (and lower) support is done via Chrome Frame.

<comment><USER21> Does it means this doesn't work on IE when Chrome Frame is not installed ?

<comment><USER34> I just verified that it works in IE8 without Chrome Frame. I think what they mean by "legacy support is enabled" is "it's fugly but it works."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> Hopefully some of these ideas will end up in dojo/dijit (a couple similar takes are already there).

I really like the multi-select control.

</comment><comment><USER36> I think this is great and would like it to be a browser extension so that I can use it all over the web

<comment><USER37> That looked like a cool project, so here:

<https://github.com/gk777/Easy-List-Select>

Unfortunately, I don't think it's as good as I thought it would turn out to be, but it's definitely neat.

EDIT: it's a chrome extension BTW

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Does anyone know if it's compatible with formalize.me? Does it work well on android/iphone?

<comment><USER39> Works well on Android 2.1 for me here.

Beautiful plugin, bookmarking for definite future use.

<comment><USER40> Seems OK on the default Android browser here too, though there are a couple of non-breaking issues under Opera Mobile.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER41> Multi-select could use some work. Drag-highlighting, shift, ctrl, etc.

</comment><comment><USER42> Awesome. This is going into my UI toolkit.

</comment><comment><USER43> Wow. The results are really polished!

</comment><comment><USER44> Has anyone tried this on an iPad?

<comment><USER45> I did it just now. The divs that contain the choices can only be scrolled with two fingers, a trick most users don't know about. The native select can be scrolled with only one finger.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> I love this. LOVE it!</comment>


"Wake up Japan!" says Dave McClure - <AUTHOR> http://fumijp.blogspot.jp/2013/02/wake-up-japan-says-dave-mclure.html <comment><USER2> > _The speaker was Dave McLure, and he told the Japanese people to wake up, > it's no longer the time for the Japanese to be sitting in the comfort zone, > because this country is on fire. He tells people to become the nail that > sticks out, move fast and break things, and don't be afraid to fail, because > key factor to innovation is creativity, failure and iteration._

I hope this was part of a stand up comedy show.

Else this is cliche-country 101.

You hear better stuff in high school graduation speeches.

<comment><USER3> I do think there is a cultural component to innovation. My fascination is India. There is so much software development talent there. I know a lot of developers from India who participate in the success of international firms like Adobe, Google, and Microsoft, but I'm surprised that we've yet to see that sort of company, a real, international powerhouse of software, emerge from India.

<comment><USER2> > _I do think there is a cultural component to innovation. My fascination is > India. There is so much software development talent there._

Yes, but also so many mediocre, I-cant-believe-those-people-are-paid- programmers too.

Maybe the problem is that the most talented Indian programmers tend to go working outside India.

> _I know a lot of developers from India who participate in the success of > international firms like Adobe, Google, and Microsoft, but I'm surprised > that we've yet to see that sort of company, a real, international powerhouse > of software, emerge from India._

Dunno. Do we even see some "real international powerhouses of software" emerge from the US that often? You mention Adobe, Google and MS, but all three are over 12 years old, and Adobe and MS are actually more like 22 and 30 years old.

Not to mention that while MS and Adobe are "software powerhouses", Google is much less so. It might have a lot of talent nowadays, but 95% of its success lays in its initial foray into the search engine market, which was the work of a very small team, and owned much to network effects, ability to get funding and infrastructure etc, and much less to raw programming chops. And modern success stories like Twitter and Facebook are even less "software powerhouses" -- more like glorified web services, where most of the problems are related to scaling and administration of a large server base.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have been living in Japan for the last 3 years and there is also another Japanese saying. "出る釘は打たれる". Very well known in the West as "The nail that sticks out gets hammered down". This is a culture of uniformity and always taking the safe route and making sure to never lose face. It's not easy for someone to go the start-up way here.

At the same time the Japanese are really hard working and there are some Japanese companies out there which are trying to change the norm and I do sincerely hope they succeed.

To the question if start-ups can grow in Japan I believe so yes. But not in the same way and context as in the west and in the silicon valley. The culture is just too different and as a result so will the start-ups.

I have met some really bright people here and I have also come across many social barriers and rules that don't make sense (to my way of thinking). For the sake of the Japanese economy I hope that the culture slowly but steadily becomes more accepting of start-ups and entrepreneurship and encourages these bright people to create instead of smothering them.

<comment><USER3> When I was living in Japan, my mother would use the game Clue to teach English. The interesting cultural component we noticed was the Japanese players had a really hard time not sharing their cards with the other players. Clue, played cooperatively, doesn't really work that well!

I can't help but think that the American tradition of rugged individualism, though it brings other baggage, has helped create a good climate for startups and innovation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> _There is a famous saying in Japanese "七転び八起き" which means even if you fall 7 times, get up 8 times and move forward. But at the same time, the Japanese wants to do things well and organized, the citizens does not like failure, it's a country that fears shame._

I've been working in Korea for the past 4+ years, and they suffer from the same exact issues - the extreme shame of failure and unwillingness to "lose face."

Korea and Japan produce a lot of engineers and have amazing tech infrastructures even compared to the West, but they'll never be able to become a thriving startup ecosystem because the culture is just too different from that of Silicon Valley. You can relocate or attract new mentors and investors to a given place, but culture is one of those things that just does not change easily, if at all.

<comment><USER6> As a Brit, I've seen this cultural phenomenon in the UK too. Maybe I've just not been exposed to the right people, but "failure" is still a dirty word and it's rarely seen as a stepping stone to success.

Although I'm not all the way through it, I have a feeling this presentation was probably quite a shock to its live audience, and probably perceived as being quite tactless and impolite. I wonder what they actually thought of it and whether it effected any change in mindset.

Edit: I'm cringing all the way through this video. I'm not sure if it's a cringeworthy video or whether it's exposing my own fear of being embarrassed!

<comment><USER7> Londoner here. I think we're closer to Silicon Valley than we are to Japan. I've been working on/around my startups for almost a year now, and despite having not having anything substantial to show yet, get a lot of interest in my work, as well as being pursued all the time to go back into lucrative software contracts.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The OP and this thread (except for a few comments) could be summarized as follows:

[barely testable social theory or hypotheses] [supported by a cliché or historical anecdote].

In my humble and down-to-earth opinion the main takeaway from any talk about "cultures" or "societies" or any other similar human-like concepts (did you notice that we often talk about "cultures" like they are living people?) is the idea that certain traits (fear of failure in this case) could impact my own performance. The next logical step is to modify something relevant in my live to test the effects and adjust behaviour based on this information if needed. Repeat this or just walk by if there are no effects present.

</comment><comment><USER9> McClure continued: "You're simply the best. Better than all the rest. Better than anyone -- anyone I've ever met." _standing ovation_

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm not sure I've learned anything from this video or comments. Nothing is really backed up.

Even the speaker admits they are a VC who's not rich.

Yes westerners all think the Japanese have a culture with problems, but of course we do, I really need some sort proof or a speaker who has proven themselves.

</comment><comment><USER11> You may or may not like DML's antics, but you can't say the guy doesn't have some balls.

</comment><comment><USER12> _McClure_

</comment><comment><USER13> _There is a famous saying in Japanese "七転び八起き" which means even if you fall 7 times, get up 8 times and move forward. But at the same time, the Japanese wants to do things well and organized, the citizens does not like failure, it's a country that fears shame._

Are we really that different? In the US, we seem to have this sense of superiority on this issue, but I think our tolerance of risk is paper-thin. It's superficial.

To get deeper into it, I find VC-istan to be especially hypocritical, because while it takes what seems to be a progressive attitude toward business failure, it's also a world in which, if you're not a C*O by 35 and an investor (read: rich and semi-retired) of some sort by 42, you're written off entirely as a useless human being. How, exactly, is this supposed to encourage resilience? If anything, that's the exact mentality that created the stodgy risk-aversion of these blue-chip corporations VC-istan considers itself ready to replace.

VC-istan is a postmodern corporation in which "tech companies" are disposable, because they're mere sub-projects of the meta-company. "Founders" are nominally independent project managers and investors are the real executives. What seems like a tolerant attitude toward business failure is actually the (probably beneficial, but cutthroat) willingness of this meta-company's executives (investors) to cancel projects for a variety of reasons.

Getting people to "wake up" isn't about changing one culture. The problem is that human nature is to pick leaders based on apparent success, and to ostracize failures. That works well in groups of 20 individuals that are barely surviving-- that is, our evolutionary frame-- but is not what you need in order to design or encourage a rational technological economy.

<comment><USER14> >>In the US, we seem to have this sense of superiority on this issue, but I think our tolerance of risk is paper-thin. It's superficial.

Hmmm... Judging by the overall comments so far, it seems every culture seems to has an acute (and accurate) sense of its own thin-skinnedness that another cultures' perception of them. Most of the points you make is validated by another article making rounds in the first page here: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5270460> From the article linked to that thread:

 _When I was raising my first round, it fell apart because an A-list investor who had given us a verbal commitment backed out. He did this because he had heard from his friend, who I had went out for beers with, said that we were struggling and unsure of what we were doing._

>> The problem is that human nature is to pick leaders based on apparent success, and to ostracise failures.

Given that you've framed it like so, that nails it then? Status quo as it is now, is not going to change anytime soon! Let's stop wasting our time and get on with the rest of our lives, doing whatever it is that we are currently doing, eh? :-| [wry smiley]

P.S: Not being sarcastic, or picking on you in my reply. Hope that comes out clear :-/

<comment><USER13> These problems are easy to diagnose and hard to solve.

The problem with VC-istan is collusion. As a group, they decide who's hot, who's credible, and who's a loser. Rather than competing with each other, VCs communicate in all sorts of inappropriate ways and make these decisions as a herd. This means there isn't a fair market. The powerful people on one side have found it more advantageous to be in each others' good graces than to compete with each other, which would favor people they don't care about.

One thing I've learned having studied history is that the best thing for smart people is to create a cleavage within the elite. The Protestant Reformation was a time of high social mobility for intelligent people as the elites of Europe lost cohesion due to the Catholic/Protestant division. Henry VIII was detested by other nobles in large part because he promoted intelligent commoners (social mobility) to high offices who could assist him in his break from the Church.

Then, there's the Cold War. Just think of how much scientific progress exists because of this hairline fracture in the world's ruling class.

Powerful people want to glom together and form a clique at the top. The best thing that can happen for smart people is for one half of the powerful people to have a mortal hatred for the other half, so this can't happen. As the elites destroy each other, they'll hire smart people from without and that generates social mobility and a resource transfer away from the entrenched elite and toward talented people.

If you want to save VC-istan, here's how to do it. Randomly assign all of the top 500 players to Red and Blue Teams. Team identity follows a person, not a firm. It's inflexible. Whichever team makes more money in the next 15 years owns all the _personal_ financial assets (houses, bank accounts) of the other team. Even if Blue only wins slightly, it means the Reds lose all their financial assets. I don't make this as a serious suggestion, but _that_ will get some genuine technology made.

<comment><USER15> What you say is hardly the case. Top 8 VC firms compete with each other incredibly hard for the best deals. The top-8 as a group make up 80% of all venture capital returns so maybe that should tell you something about their decision making criteria.

The best VC firms _do_ pick and choose what to invest in, and this is based only on what they think will make them the most money. Perhaps that isn't equivalent to "technological progress" but one can hardly call it collusion.

<comment><USER14> You should really read some of the replies from the other HN thread I placed in my reply above. It does a good job of removing the halo effect around VCs and their "decision making criteria"

>> The top-8 as a group make up 80% of all venture capital returns so maybe that should tell you something about their decision making criteria.

Perhaps, this is one possible explanation to that? <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5271839>

_The problem is there is so much 'dumb' money out there 'smart' money is just noise. If you have 50 million to invest then investing 200k in 250 company's at random is a perfectly reasonable choice. And 50 million is a tiny slice of a ridiculously big pie, people spend close to that doing due diligence on really big deals._</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Web Operations Weekly - <AUTHOR> http://webopsweekly.com/

<comment><USER2> Just wanted to thank you for posting this :-) None of my newsletters have ever done well on HN but luckily it hasn't been necessary! :-)</comment>


Live coding - real time programming to compose, play music or design animations - <AUTHOR> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8221235.stm

<comment><USER2> I didn't think I would ever see the sentence "Epic fail," on the BBC.

<comment><USER3> And not as a quote! That is amazing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Does anyone who are pro's in music production/audio engineering wana help a wannabe out?

I'm curious as for a noobie, into computer music what kind of software/languages/theory I should get into. Do these live coding people use plugins for Ableton Live or do they write their own libraries from scratch? As for electronic music theory and improvisation, what books do you guys recommend. Do I really need to understand the theory/language well such as DSP, Max/MSP really well or could I just dive in and improvise? Thanks in advance for all the help.

<comment><USER5> Take a look at ChucK's baby brother 'miniAudicle' if you just want to try the water. It's fun ... you'll have sound in a couple minutes! <http://audicle.cs.princeton.edu/mini/>

For a book on theory try "Computer Music" by Dodge & Jerse. The Curtis Roads books are v.good too.

I'd just get started improvising with whatever! and then as you get time, check out the (many!) software options and see what fits your mental/musical personality. It's always a battle not to get over-lost in the tech side at first because that can cramp your creativity ... and even your motivation.

Finally, for a DEEP course in EM try The CSound Book. CSound will let you make ~any sound you can conceive ... but it's a heavy lift. (More for studio than live.)

</comment></comment><comment> hippee-lee If you like scheme and can use osx try impromptu. When you google it it is the third link i think. The video below is pretty cool but the author also has a video called 'day at the triffords' (that may not be exactly correct) which is my favorite. I also really enjoyed 'a study in keith'.

<http://www.vimeo.com/2502546></comment>


The Body Keeps the Score: Book Summary - <AUTHOR> https://praxis.fortelabs.co/the-body-keeps-the-score-summary/ <comment><USER2> I could be seen as a living case study for these theories.

I started experiencing a complex combination of physiological symptoms in early adulthood (actually in childhood in some ways), that gradually got worse into my 30s.

All kinds of treatments were suggested and tried over several years, but nothing really moved the needle until I started regular practice of subconscious emotional healing techniques. I've been doing this type of work for about 7 years now.

There is improvement in a lot of areas, though the process is not complete. I still have some anxiety and muscle tension/pain, and evidence of inflammation in my body. But it's not nearly as bad as it was before I started the emotional work. And I keep finding new emotional baggage to heal. So it's a long journey, but the results are clear.

It's hard to talk about with peers, as there's a general attitude among scientifically-minded people that the notion of a link between emotions/thoughts and physiology is absurd.

Yet the very same people will generally insist that there is no mind-body distinction, and that consciousness is obviously just an emergent phenomenon of brain matter/chemistry.

Apparently it doesn't occur to a lot of people that if mind and body are one and the same, mind activity must surely be deeply interconnected to physiology.

Anyway, that's a little of my story.

AMA.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for sharing your experience. Could please describe more about subconscious emotional healing techniques? How did you learn about it and is it a solitary practice or one that is guided by a professional?

<comment><USER2> Everyone curious about this is welcome to email me (address in profile).

If you don't hear from me, hit me up again; I'm intending to prepare a doc that explains the approach I've used. I don't want it to be too long, but I just need to find the time to do make it adequate.

But if you can't wait for me to do that, reading/watching content by Bruce Lipton is a good start.

<comment><USER4> Uurgh, dude - it's not the emotional healing that puts scientifically-minded people off, it's Bruce Lipton's language.

"The subconscious mind is operating at a vibrational frequency of theta". What? That's the kind of nonsense I get from the stoners down in my local pub.

If his techniques work, they work, and I'm happy for you that you have improved your life. I, however, find such language so off-putting that I can't imagine ever trying anything like this

<comment><USER2> Are you actually in need of this kind of help in the first place? If not, why not just ignore it and move on, rather than posting drive-by bile like this as your one-and-only contribution to the entire thread?

His presentation style is not for everyone, sure. Nobody's is. He talks in pictures and metaphors, which for many people is the most effective way to receive information.

Not you? No worries!

But consider that you're only talking about persuasiveness of language/presentation for yourself, not science.

The very quote you picked out to mock is perfectly valid science.

<comment><USER5> I feel like I'm in need of this kind of help. I have a lot of physical and emotional issues, which I'm pretty sure are related. However, that kind of language does put me off. I'd prefer if someone just uses normal language to communicate.

So if you know someone who communicates the same ideas in a different way, I'd really appreciate it.

<comment><USER2> You're welcome to contact me for my own doc once I prepare it. I'd welcome your feedback and help in making it valuable to you.

For what it's worth, I come from a mainstream scientific background, and my own view on this subject is not heavily based on Lipton's.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm 48, and suffered from debilitating back pain until the last few years; it started when I was badly beaten up when I was 19, and got worse as the years went on - each episode would become worse and longer-lasting until around 7-8 years ago it was so bad I was in constant pain all day, every day, but with episodes of pain so bad I can't really describe it every couple of months or so. I've never been overweight or had any other issues, and people couldn't understand why my back was so bad or the pain so intense. (me included)

It was only learning to relax (and starting meditation) and stopping seeing my body as the enemy (thanks to the kind encouragement of my girlfriend as well as working with Alexander technique teachers) that I started to make any improvement, and this combined with appropriate physical exercises has meant that I've been fortunate to have nearly 2 years of normal life (which to me in the past would have just been a dream) - no spasms, no 'episodes', and now I can do normal things like go for a walk and not worry if I'll make it back, etc.

I was physically abused by my father when I was a child (fortunately he died when I was 8), and I really didn't think it had effected me much, but I now realise I spend most of my time out in public assessing who poses a physical attack risk to me, and it's only since talking my my girlfriend about it (she's training to be a counsellor and has this book by her bed) that I've realised that this is -not- normal!

My life is unrecognisably better since taking this sort of thinking on board. I'm definitely a 'science' person - lifelong atheist, try to be as rational as possible, etc - but we still don't know everything, particularly of how incredibly complex the human brain is, and how it can control so much of not only our experience, but our existence.

<comment><USER7> Can you elaborate on the specific techniques you used (Alexander technique, meditating)?

<comment><USER6> In terms of meditation, I've been using Sam Harris' "Waking Up" app as it's chimed with me greatly; I was originally using Headspace, but it didn't click with me in the same way (plus I'm a fan of Harris and have listened to his podcast since it began).

Alexander Technique lessons have been a revelation in terms of understanding how I move, and how much tension I was carrying in my body all the time, plus learning to use the 'right' muscles in the body for posture. There is also an element of meditative mindset present with both my teachers, which has helped with my default 'judgemental' mind-state. I think that Alexander Technique is hugely important, but it's subtle and difficult to describe - I think it's a case of going for a few lessons and seeing if it works for/with you, as it sounds like "woo" to a lot of people - it did to me until I tried it.

I think the combination of all these things has helped greatly to move me in the right direction towards a better way of living, and not fighting myself all the time.

<comment><USER8> As an alternative to Alexander Technique if it's difficult to find practitioners, you can try Feldenkrais method.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I don't understand how "trauma is universal" is a reasonable interpretation of the facts that are related there. I'm always wary of an argument that hinges on the meaning of a word being changed (the subtle expansion of "trauma"; the standard definition being called "acute trauma" instead), but in this case I don't think even the expanded definition of trauma supports the conclusion that trauma is a "near universal human experience".

The ACE study mentioned ([0]) suggests that about 2/3 of people have 1 or more ACE, but after looking at the definition of ACE they used, it appears to use a significantly weaker definition of trauma than even the expanded one given explicitly in the article: it includes having a parent with a mental health issue, having a chronic health condition while young, or being chronically separated from a parent (due to eg divorce).

Further, it looks like there is quite a bit of clustering: people with ACEs that qualify as classic traumas tend to have several.

Perhaps trauma is much more pervasive than I thought, but it looks to me like the definition of trauma was changed quite significantly to make the claim hold.

[0] [https://www.aap.org/en- us/Documents/ttb_aces_consequences.pd...](https://www.aap.org/en- us/Documents/ttb_aces_consequences.pdf)

There is more info on the wiki page here as well:

[1] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_Childhood_Experience...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_Childhood_Experiences_Study)

<comment><USER2> I agree with that, and held back from including it in my original comment to avoid letting it be too long.

Through the subconscious healing work I've done, few of the events/issues I've processed are ones that I would characterise as _trauma_. Little of it involves abuse, violence, separation or anything else that fits the conventional definition of _trauma_.

But it is a snowballing history of unpleasant life experiences, which all compounds and steadily amplifies one's underlying sense of anxiety, fear and distrust of themselves and the world, along with the severity of physiological symptoms.

<comment><USER10> > But it is a snowballing history of unpleasant life experiences, which all > compounds and steadily amplifies one's underlying sense of anxiety, fear and > distrust of themselves and the world

This fits in so much better with my understanding of how humans learn other things as well: through many tiny increments, not in one sudden dramatic event.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Great book, by the father (to most at least) of PTSD and CPTSD. Has revealed for me the role of trauma in my life, and those of basically everyone around me.

But after reading it, i felt a little... lost. I knew a lot about the problem space, and some solutions outlined, but it wasn't integrated within me, and all i had was a few therapies I could try out and hope the best for.

Luckily, the next book I picked up was Mindsight by Dr. Daniel Siegel, and that has helped _immensely_ in applying the knowledge of The Body Keeps Score, to bring about a shift in focus and presence in our bodies.

One thing he talked about that i found of interest is a column of neurons, only 6 deep, that make up our perceptions of reality. the top 3, take on a top down approach from the cortex downwards; while the bottom 3 come up from the limbic area of our sensory inputs - and it is in the middle of space of the column that reality appears - a mix of our past perceptions and preferences, with what we are observing in the here and now.

So, What happens with PTSD? There is a shift towards the top-down thinking, and a muting (or overriding) of limbic signals. In the tug of war of 6 neurons, the top down wins out over our perceptions - allowing people to experience and truly relive flashbacks of traumas like war in their bedroom - they are detached from their limbic signaling.

Which is why - mindfulness, meditation, and being more present in your body matter so much. What you pay attention to matters - and allows us to hone/reshape firing patterns.

[https://www.amazon.com/Mindsight-New-Science-Personal- Transf...](https://www.amazon.com/Mindsight-New-Science-Personal- Transformation/dp/0553386395)

</comment><comment><USER12> Ironic that the pain clinic doctor who recommended this book to me was also the most abusive doctor I've ever met. They caused trauma through emotional abuse and gaslighting to multiple patients before they were fired.

<comment><USER13> I'm so sorry that happened to you.

For what it's worth, Bessel Van der Kolk is not without issue himself. Here's a partial transcript that I wrote up (so any mistakes are my own) when listening to a podcast episode about trauma and abuse. The relevant part is around time code 30:00.

[https://www.probablypoly.com/post/episode-25-interviewing- sa...](https://www.probablypoly.com/post/episode-25-interviewing-samantha- manewitz-from-polyamory-s-me-too-survivor-pod)

Trigger warning: trauma, gaslighting, and abuse

Mandee Conant: Well, I think it's important not to discount the book, More Than Two, because we know that Eve had a lot of input into this book, but as a whole, just because someone writes a book about something does not make them an expert in it, and I think we kind of… as a community we kind of took that because their book was one of first how-to manual what to do, what not to do resources fo us, so he must be an expert. And we just took that, we took that too easily, and we need to learn to not do that.

Samantha Manewitz: And sometimes even when when people are experts they can still be terrible people. For example, Bessel Van der Kolk, who founded The Trauma Center in Brooklyn, which is my back yard. He wrote wrote the book, The Body Keeps the Score, which is required reading in any grunt school and required reading for anyone who ever wants to go into trauma work. Period, full stop.

I was initially applying for a job at The Trauma Center, and then it came out in The Globe that his co-writer and co-founder and CEO was horrifically abusive and he created a toxic work environment, and the way he responded was just textbook gaslighting, and then sort of [wrote this letter] why these people didn't come tell him to his face. Yes, why would someone with 1 or 2 years under their belt make ever make a criticism about this person who the luminary of trauma work. If anyone should know better, it's Bessel Van der Kolk.

<comment><USER14> "The Globe that his co-writer and co-founder and CEO was horrifically abusive and he created a toxic work environment, and the way he responded was just textbook gaslighting" Not very helpful to throw somebody under the bus for having a bad work partner...

<comment><USER13> Well, I'm not throwing anyone under the bus. I'm literally quoting what others are saying. Here are a few more articles:

[https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/03/08/meet-world- rekn...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/03/08/meet-world-reknowned- author-center-trauma-program-controversy/izjBaELj9iFgdLxPRGSdgI/story.html)

[https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/03/07/allegations- emp...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2018/03/07/allegations-employee- mistreatment-roil-renowned-trauma-center/sWW13agQDY9B9A1rt9eqnK/story.html)

[https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/famous-trauma-therapist- fire...](https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/famous-trauma-therapist-fired- allegedly-traumatizing-staff-214559444.html)

[https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/famed-trauma-therapist- respo...](https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/famed-trauma-therapist-responds- allegations-bullying-outrageous-story-213600039.html)

The reason I mentioned the controversy around Bessel van der Kolk and The Trauma Center that he co-founded (and was fired from) is that his book is basically required reading for many people entering the mental health field. I strongly believe people deserve the right to know about what happened so they can form their own opinions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I cannot praise this book highly enough. Every single person who has ever experienced depression or anxiety should read it.

</comment><comment><USER16> _Bottom-up regulation involves recalibrating the autonomic nervous system (ANS), which originates in the brain stem. We can access the ANS through breath, movement, or touch._

sad as it is, the state of modern yoga, and the bullsh* * of lululemon, 500hr certs, and instagram etc, people had it figured out so long ago, how to go underneath the conscious layer and heal trauma through moving meditation.

I wonder how the future parents of this generation will reduce trauma being carried in their bloodline or add to it?

</comment><comment> Pick-A-Hill2019 I too found the book extremely helpful and informative. A therapist I know recommended a companion book by Peter Levine called Healing Trauma (ISBN: 9781591796589), also available on YT as an audio book. It uses mental imagery as a way of relieving the symptons of trauma without having to relive the actual event(s). Although some of the imagery exercises are sometimes brutal/exhausting it seems the basic under laying theory of the book is using a form of exposure therapy reduces the impacts of flashbacks to the point of ripples in a stream of consciousness rather than the usual roaring tidal wave. YMMV.

</comment><comment><USER17> I had seen and passed this book over a number of times because I never experienced what I thought was true trauma. It was only after evidence of past trauma came out in some neuropsych testing I recently did to see if I had ADHD that I reconsidered my past experiences and how they may have impacted who I am today. I'm looking at some things differently and understanding how they may have affected me - growing up LGBT and isolated as a result, with parents who had a dysfunctional and often rocky relationship. I'm starting to see that trauma doesn't necessarily mean you were subjected to some sort of violence or single life shattering event, especially as a child.

</comment><comment><USER18> > The lawyer would get totally absorbed in devising a strategy for winning a > case, and would stay up all night enmeshed in the details. "It was like > being in combat," he said. He felt fully alive, and like nothing else > mattered. But when the case finished, win or lose, he would lose his energy > and sense of purpose.

This sounds like me but with programming. It's the one thing I can always do and focus on no matter how the rest of my life is going. But outside of it I constantly need to push myself to do anything.

<comment><USER19> Find more exciting stuff to do outside of it. There's something of a percentage of the population that are probably meant to be running on loads of adrenaline all the time, and people are happy to capitalize on their restlessness to make them produce things to sell at work and buy things to feel better outside, like unhappy ever-moving little economic wheels.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> > All of us, but especially children, need such confidence—confidence that > others will know, affirm, and cherish us.

 _But they won 't._

I don't know what fantasy land the author and reviewer live in, but here in America in 2019, the world is a dangerous, knife-edged, and pitiless place where it's a constant fight of all against all. Anyone you meet, even immediate family members, is your enemy by default, and usually an ally at best. Everyone ruthlessly exploits everyone else to survive, everyone kills and dies by inches to eat tomorrow.

I've no idea where these people come from saying people love and support one another. Out here, others are either threats or exploitation targets, not partners.

Very good article nevertheless, helps to sort out adaptive things from maladaptive things.

<comment><USER21> This worldview you are trapped in will damage you in exactly the ways enumerated above. I hope that you find a new story to live in.

<comment><USER22> I disagree, and if you go through life expecting everyone to constantly support you, you won't make it very far once you start to face any real adversity. You have to learn to rely on yourself, at least that's what my experiences have shown me.

You may be living in a story, but the rest of us have to live in the real world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> It is really hard to determine what qualifies as trauma in this article.

It seems like a spectrum of course, but it is hard to tell what region of the spectrum is being focused on.

<comment><USER24> One of his primary arguments in the book is that trauma is not always a dramatic event like those usually associated with PTSD. Instead, trauma, especially as experienced in childhood, can be sustained abuse, degradation, neglect with a cumulative impact equal to that of a dramatic event.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I wanted to upvote this, but the more I read it the more it felt unscientifically culty.

Claims pretty much every psychiatric inconvenience (distraction, laziness, stress, restlessness) can be caused by "trauma." Proposes "trauma" is so blanket that anyone/everyone can have it.

This would all be terribly interesting if there were links to scientific studies _validating_ any of this. Let me know when there's a "cure" for trauma that treats distraction/laziness and a double-blind study finds clinical significance for it.

I'll let the FDA vet my panaceas for me, thank you very much.

</comment><comment><USER26> Thanks for the summary, I will definitely be reading this!!

</comment><comment><USER27> How curious to see this here. I got talking to a guy on a train journey the other day and he gave me this book. He said it had changed his life.

</comment><comment><USER28> It's a great book.

</comment><comment><USER29> [https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=lPVBrRd9wCo](https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=lPVBrRd9wCo)

</comment><comment><USER30> > Consider the case of antidepressants. If they were indeed a permanent, long- > term solution, depression should by now have become a minor issue in > society. Yet it has not made a dent in hospital admissions. The number of > people treated for depression has tripled over the past two decades, and one > in ten Americans now take antidepressants.

This is not how logic works.

<comment><USER31> Would you care to support that statement?

<comment><USER30> > If they were indeed a permanent, long-term solution, depression should by > now have become a minor issue in society.

Chemotherapy is a permanent, long-term solution for cancer, and yet cancer has not become a minor issue in society. Anti-depressants are life-saving medication for many many people, but not everyone gets the right dose, not everyone continues taking them, and in some people they plain don't work.

Claiming that they're somehow not a solution for depression because they don't work for everyone, all the time, is logical fallacies all the way down.

> Yet it has not made a dent in hospital admissions

This is a stupid sentence. First, it's not sourced. Secondly, in the hospital admissions of whom? New patients or admissions of patients on anti- depressants? The first is an absolutely pointless statistic because -- who knew?! -- medicine that hasn't been administered doesn't work.

If he's claiming that over the group of people taking anti-depressants, their rates of admission post anti-depressants doesn't decline, that's still a shitty statistic, for a whole range of what should be obvious reasons, but I can spell out for you in a further comment if needed, but start with the fact that most people _develop_ mental health issues as they get older, and almost anyone who's hospitalized for a mental health issue will get medicated at that point moving forward, and anyone who's been hospitalized once for depression is dramatically more likely to be hospitalized again.

Unless the exact statistic being cited here is that there's no difference in readmission rates for patients who have been hospitalized for depression between those who took their medicine and those who didn't, it's absolutely ridiculous to be using to support his argument. Did I mention he didn't cite it?

> The number of people treated for depression has tripled over the past two > decades

So? It seems like "common sense" that as a society we're better at talking about mental health than we used to be, and referring (rather than simply jailing) the mentally ill than we used to be. I bet his source (oh look, he didn't fucking cite it again) attributes this to many many many other factors rather than the non efficacy of anti-depressants

> and one in ten Americans now take antidepressants.

Again, this has nothing to do with his argument</comment></comment></comment>


"RNG broken for last 4 months" - <AUTHOR> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2015-February/054580.html <comment><USER3> Note that this is FreeBSD-CURRENT only, i.e. the development branch. This does not affect FreeBSD releases.

<comment><USER4> Word on Twitter is that there are some pretty major companies on -CURRENT.

<comment><USER5> Then they deserve what they get.

Honestly, this is probably some kind of confusion over a company or two that has -CURRENT as an upstream to their own fork of the OS because they are reliant on some kind of new changes in the system that aren't in -STABLE.

Even if that's the case, you'd hope they'd be taking extra special precautions considering what they are doing.

<comment><USER6> No they don't. It's reasonable to trust that FreeBSD is providing decent RNG. Even in the dev branch. I mean, why would they not?

Don't blame the user for upstream's mistake.

Do FreeBSD developers (I mean, the ones who had nothing to do with this but also use the dev branch) "deserve" it, too?

In general, do you always blame the victim for someone else's mistakes?

edit: I am not a BSD user. I am reading now that the dev branch is _purposely_ crippled anyway and known to be terribly unstable. If that's the case, maybe it is idiotic for non-developers to use it. I'll leave this comment here instead of deleting in so nobody else says the same thing. In the meantime, I'm glad to be using a rolling release Linux distro that always has bleeding- edge software without ever having any problems.

<comment><USER7> _> bleeding-edge software without ever having any problems_

Did you seriously just suggest that Arch never has any issues? How did you manage to achieve that, because I gave up on Arch due to it breaking at least once a fortnight. The "bleeding edge" is called that for a reason: you're likely to bleed when using it.

<comment><USER8> I run arch with the testing repos on both my work and home desktops, and the normal repos on one of my servers, and I've had updates break things exactly once between them (broadcom NIC wouldn't come up on my home desktop), and the fix was just a matter of rolling back 1 kernel version. So I guess YMMV?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Approximately the worst possible vulnerability, arguably worse than kernel RCE, because a kernel RCE requires an active attacker to intersect with the vulnerable host while it's still there; the broken RNG will leak secrets that will be usable retroactively.

Ouch.

<comment><USER9> Well, no. It was caught in the CURRENT branch -- i.e. latest-and-greatest snapshots for developers. Users who use this branch are supposed to accept some breakage here and there.

Security requires a threat model. Something can only be "the worst possible vulnerability" if it causes a large amount of damage consistent via the threats which are in the model. The threats that you're thinking of are not usually contained within the models of cutting-edge-dev-systems, which will be protected by firewalls etc. on intranets.

There's really a need in both cases for "an active attacker to intersect with the vulnerable host while it's still there." A broken RNG in such circumstances is much, much weaker than kernel RCE.

<comment><USER4> It's a weird rhetorical position you're putting me in, where to agree with you I'd have to simultaneously accept that -CURRENT isn't widely deployed (reasonable!) _and_ that a broken kernel RNG isn't a game-over flaw (not so reasonable!).

<comment><USER9> The reason that the latter point is reasonable is, it trivially isn't a game- over flaw for systems which do not have game-overs.

What we know about every system that installed FreeBSD-CURRENT is that the systems administrators at the time fully accepted an operating system:

1\. That is not in any way "officially supported". (FreeBSD's words, not mine.)

2\. that may for short periods of time "not be buildable."

3\. that "is not a quick way of getting bug fixes as any given commit is just as likely to introduce new bugs as to fix existing ones".

4\. that is much weaker in guarantees than the FreeBSD-STABLE branch, which expressly disclaims, "one should not blindly track FreeBSD-STABLE. It is particularly important not to update any production servers to FreeBSD-STABLE without thoroughly testing the code in a development or testing environment."

If someone has signed off on these topics, then there is no such thing as "game over". The server isn't important enough for "game over". If it is, then the security vulnerability was not the broken RNG but tracking FreeBSD-CURRENT in the first place.

<comment><USER10> Suppose a developer generated an ssh key while running -current and shared /home with -stable. Then the vulnerability would long outlast the use of -current.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Would a broken RNG be a risk to leak private keys? As in, even if the key was _generated_ on a safe kernel, merely using the key to encrypt or sign data on the broken kernel would compromise the keys?

This article mentions DSA private keys and poor RNGs: [http://rdist.root.org/2010/11/19/dsa-requirements-for- random...](http://rdist.root.org/2010/11/19/dsa-requirements-for-random-k- value/)

<comment><USER12> Yes, even with correctly generated keys if you perform DSA signatures with a broken RNG you risk reusing a k value which will leak your private key.

<comment><USER13> You don't even have to re-use a k value - if the attacker can guess your k value, _one_ signature is enough to recover your private key.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Reading the comments here is somewhat frustrating. Even the most recent ones seem to miss the significance of the RNG bug being in the -CURRENT branch only.

They found a bug, and it will be fixed. The fact that this bug was found in -CURRENT is a good a thing. This is a pre-alpha, not for production release. The development model is working as intended, no?

<comment><USER15> I think the tide of blaming people running CURRENT and attempting to dismiss the issue instead of addressing the extremely serious vulnerability is troubling, since even in the limited Venn diagram of people I know that run FreeBSD, one of them matches this template:

1\. STABLE prod fleet

2\. CURRENT dev workstation

3\. TLS certificate private keys in prod generated on CURRENT workstation to be signed by authority

4\. Potentially vulnerable TLS keys existing in STABLE fleet

You folks can twist this to try to deflect severity by pointing to CURRENT, but in the real world, it existing at all for four months is extremely serious and must be taken seriously. My production TLS keys were created on my OS X laptop, because I don't often have to think about a compromised random number generator and this is a tradeoff I make in my own life.

I guess if I truly cared about my TLS keys, I should have made them on a copy of airgapped Warty Warthog and run them through a shitload of random analysis tools before shipping them off to be signed. My bad.

<comment><USER16> You might want to ask them again if 2 is true. In reality, I highly doubt they really use what you described in point 2. (or it's a miscommunication).

Unless they recompile world all the time (a nontrivial amount of work and a waste of time if you are not actively developing the OS itself) - CURRENT is actually much much slower because of debugging flags that are enabled by default. Some of these flags make the kernel panic upon certain types of errors and drop into kernel debugging mode allowing the examination of kernel dumps. I can't fathom why anyone would generate real security certificates in this kind of environment.

You can recompile with the WITNESS (kernel lock counting & validation - <USER2> performance loss but useful for counting kernel data structures) and INVARIANTS (run-time assertion checks and tests for kernel data structures) options off, but then you would have to spend time recompiling the kernel instead of working on your software.

[https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers- handbook/ker...](https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/developers- handbook/kerneldebug-options.html)

Note that CURRENT is packaged as snapshot binaries without binary upgrade capability - which means that once you install "one day's" -CURRENT the only 2 ways to upgrade are a) download the new iso and reinstall the entire OS or b) check out the freebsd source code via svn and recompile the system (often world changes as well so you need to do both kernel + userland).

If 2. is actually true, then the person you know who is doing that, unless they are being paid to work on freebsd features or perhaps validating and porting freebsd to a different hardware platform like ARM or PS4 or an embedded device like a medical imaging device or a router (ie Junos), they are wasting a lot of their employer's time and foot-gunning themselves massively in security.

If you show them this post, ask them what they are doing with -CURRENT?

I am open to learning new things so I'd really like to know!

<comment><USER16> I spent way too much typing this reply. I should just join the freebsd development team and learn the answer to my own question.

Thinking about this again - yah - the poster might be referring to some kind of workflow like this:

production machines are platforms that run -STABLE

there is some kind of device, embedded or otherwise, that they keep locked up somewhere in a lab. It could be the new xxyz multicore switching fabric [imaginary name] that is running a new version of BSD-OS variant that's undergoing verification testing - they run hardware development and need -CURRENT's capabilities for debugging the system itself. It generates some keys that will be distributed into the pool of machines running -STABLE so that in the future, when this new variant comes into the market, there will be "pre-seeded" keys for compatability (ie. older versions of systems will be able to interact via signed certs with the new system)

Since FreeBSD _is_ BSD licensed, there can be any number of things people are doing with it without anyone else knowing - so maybe to give the benefit of the doubt, I can envision a workflow that needs -CURRENT as a workstation / dev platform.

I think one weakness to my thinking is that VARIANTS/WITNESS/kdb/ddb can be enabled on -RELEASE and -STABLE distributions as well! Why not just do everything on -STABLE even if you need kernel debugging?

If they need -CURRENT for new hardware support, it shouldn't be too hard to figure out from the svn log and the rolling release notes. It's kinda fun trying to reverse engineer the job of the thread parent's acquaintance!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> As a bit of a tangent: Does this happen semi-regularly because proving "randomness" is so difficult? Is there a system which can, with enough data, show that something is at least nth degree of randomness or is such a thing impossible mathematically?

<comment><USER18> I'm curious about that too. How could you unit/regression test `rand`?

<comment><USER19> Statistic testing seems like it ought to work. However, I believe there's also the issue of actual uses of the RNG; it's not enough to test the kernel implementation, one must also test that libraries are using the implementation correctly (i.e. not using constant or completely-predictable seed), etc.

So it's not a trivial problem, because (among other reasons) nondeterministic, statistical testing is not well-understood in the testing culture.

<comment><USER20> Further complication: many RNGs will produce output as a function of their seed state (e.g., rc4 or chacha20). That output will look really good, even with weak seeds. You'll have a hard time detecting that two chacha20 streams were seeded with gettimeofday() for instance, unless you happen to check the exact time used.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Bears repeating: this does _not_ affect stable versions of FreeBSD. FreeBSD- CURRENT is the development version.

</comment><comment><USER22> I fail to see how a bug in a development branch that nobody should be using in production is worth discussing, from a security incident perspective. Perhaps ways of catching that category of bug in an automated way would be an interesting topic.

</comment><comment><USER23> Does that mean that current/boot time was used as seed i.e. there was no seed, or just that it was something weaker than normally used?

<comment><USER3> There is much less entropy than there should be, but more than none.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Would Dieharder have caught this?

<comment><USER25> Probably, yes. Upthread, someone looked at the code and suggested that it fell back on a linear congruential generator as an RNG. If that is true, I'd expect the Dieharder tests to fail it.

<comment><USER26> Boy I wish this was up higher, thanks!

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diehard_tests](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diehard_tests)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Maybe FreeBSD would do well to rename their 'CURRENT' branch to something suggesting less that to be with the times you need that one. I'm aware of the difference between 'CURRENT' and 'STABLE' but I think that name is at a minimum suggestive enough that people might (and probably have) fall for it.

Something like 'DEVELOPMENT' or 'NOTFORPROD' instead of 'CURRENT'?

<comment><USER22> As far as facts go, there is no indication that whoever is using -CURRENT in production is doing so out of ignorance. I've only seen hearsay so far and I'm guessing that number is very small and comprises actually knowledgeable people that know the risks.

Additionally, it's stamped everywhere [1], if one cares to look, that CURRENT is unsupported, bleeding edge, buggy, "will not build sometimes", etc. Do we really want to modify a development process that has been in use for over a decade because of a few clueless/extremely-gifted people?

Another possibility is that this person is a FreeBSD jedi, well aware of the risks and payoffs. In that case, this bug is no surprise and she/he is prepared to act on it and regenerate some keys, review commit logs (if a developer), and look for signs of intrusion etc.

I still think this is a "non-news" and poor attempt to use HN to spread fear and trigger useless discussions. The usual drama show.

[1] [https://www.google.com.br/search?q=freebsd+current](https://www.google.com.br/search?q=freebsd+current)

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> [https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/278922](https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/278922)

"This does not effect programs that directly used /dev/random or /dev/urandom."

openssl should use /dev/random for key generation and keys generated by openssl is not affected?

</comment><comment><USER29> Is one of /the main prng on FreeBSD actually arc4random? I.e. RC4?

<comment><USER20> Libc arc4random still uses rc4. The kernel code is actually kind of tangly. I think it still uses rc4 for explicit arc4random calls, but I'm not certain exactly what comes out of /dev/random.

<comment><USER30> /dev/random on FreeBSD uses Yarrow: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yarrow_algorithm](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yarrow_algorithm)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The big question: who made the change that introduced this major security hole? This may be an attack, and one that's traceable.

Name?

<comment><USER20> Burn the witch! Burn the witch!

<comment><USER32> You mean burn the possible government infiltrator. From now on, _all_ changes at the crypto layer should have double plus eyes looking at every change (and I don't mean the five-eyes).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> FYI: CURRENT means master/head/pre-alpha or what you would call it.

</comment><comment><USER34> Would this affect Bitcoin private keys generated with this kernel?

<comment><USER35> It says it would affect openssl, which Bitcoin Core used up until the last update. IDK about other wallets.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> It's Debian knocking on the door, they want their RNG back!

</comment><comment><USER37> Will the individual who broke it get the credit?

</comment><comment><USER38> ... and Whatsapp uses FreeBSD extensively. Could this affect the end-to-end encryption that Whatsapp uses?

<comment><USER4> Does WhatsApp run on -CURRENT? That seems unlikely.

<comment><USER39> There was a talk + slides about WhatsApp FreeBSD usage [1, 2].

At around 23:50 in the video, Rick Reed talks about slide #17, they say they are running 9.1 - 9.3, and looking at 10.1 (not in a hurry as 9 works for them).

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TneLO5TdW_M](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TneLO5TdW_M)

[2] [http://www.slideshare.net/iXsystems/rick- reed-600-m-unsuspec...](http://www.slideshare.net/iXsystems/rick- reed-600-m-unsuspecting-freebsd-users)

<comment><USER16> -CURRENT is not a single version number - it refers to a development branch. If someone says CURRENT is version xx, then they don't really know what they are talking about - because while CURRENT may become a versioned release down the line, that is very different from what -CURRENT represents (which is a named tree in source control that people develop against)

All of those freebsd versions you refer to (9, 10) are part of the production release cycles and thus are not -CURRENT.

If whatsapp uses 10.1, then they are NOT using -CURRENT

<comment><USER39> Yeah, I think we are both thinking the same thing. I put the links, and version numbers, in support of tptacek's thought that they were _not_ using -CURRENT.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Hundreds of Botswana elephants dead in mysterious mass die-off - <AUTHOR> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/01/more-than-350-elephants-dead-in-mysterious-mass-die-off-botswana-aoe <comment><USER2> Disease seems like most likely culprit to me. Even if it's not Covid. Could be another virus.

<comment><USER3> That was my first thought. "Great, the Coronavirus is coming for the elephants now"

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Around water points. Farmers poisoning would be my first candidate

<comment><USER5> Other animals and scavengers appear unaffected.

<comment><USER4> Researchers might want to look for calcium oxalate crystals in the urinary bladder.

<comment><USER6> The first thing I think of is that case of acacias killing antelope: [https://jstor.org/stable/24997007](https://jstor.org/stable/24997007)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Unrelated to the topic, but damn does The Gaurdian have a long list of vendors they transmit data to or otherwise use for advertising/tracking. On the large blue rectangle, click through to "options", turn everything off, and click the dropdown that is labeled "vendors".

<comment><USER8> Not defending them but our local newspaper has double that list. Rando US news sites have five times that.

Most news sites have inordinate numbers of advertising vectors and tracking elements. One assumes it's because it literally pays the bills. Let an external and manager deal with it because it gets "inventory" filled fast.

But yes, you'd expect The Guardian to be a little more privacy focussed.

<comment><USER7> I agree, most news sites are awful about it. I don't hold The Guardian to a higher standard, because their reporting is often — but perhaps less so than most — just as questionable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> _> "some of them have fallen straight on their face, indicating they died very quickly. Others are obviously dying more slowly, like the ones that are wandering around"_

This seems a bit of a strange analysis. Could they not have all died, to borrow a phrase, gradually then suddenly?

</comment><comment><USER10> Well that's a bummer.

On a lighter elephants note, they're incredibly capable at painting:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLxO7MPUKH8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLxO7MPUKH8)

<comment><USER11> Good on you perhaps for injecting a lighter note, but I'd personally rather that these very upsetting events retain their gravity and perhaps shock us into action.

Case in point the Australian bush fires earlier this year.

Half a billion or so dead animals and millions of hectares of habitat burned to a crisp.

But cue happy news stories about someone rescuing a koala and feeding it milk from a baby bottle - something that makes absolutely not one jot of difference to the massive death and devastation contributed to by our (humans) shitty environmental stewarding.

<comment><USER10> Did we read the same article? The cause isn't known yet.

I'm not in favor of "shocking us into action" when we're not even informed of what it is we're acting on.

Quick, act! Sign this petition banning dihydrogen monoxide!

<comment><USER12> Any action is better than diluting the discussion with irrelevant information

<comment><USER10> > Any action is better than diluting the discussion with irrelevant > information

At least you're aware enough of how embarrassingly dumb your comments are to use a throwaway account.

<comment><USER12> Its even more dumb of you to think that i created a throwaway account just to reply to you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I wouldn't be surprised if it was actually Covid. We know it can jump multiple species and that people have been known to collapse all of a sudden.

<comment><USER14> They are not quite susceptible to this [https://twitter.com/ballouxfrancois/status/12783989319495352...](https://twitter.com/ballouxfrancois/status/1278398931949535233)

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Off topic but relevant:

There are times reading the news can be one hit after another to your mental health. Do please be sensible about reading all this stuff. Read when feeling mentally robust, possibly in the morning. Don't be afraid to just take a break from news for a period of days or longer.

There's a lot happening, ensure looking after yourself is one of those things.

edit: I found those pictures of all those dead elephants unexpectedly upsetting. Unlike all the upsetting news that one is expecting to be so and is around now.

<comment><USER16> I didn't expect this kind of comment here, but I really appreciate that you left it.

I also was hit pretty hard by reading this article. There are a lot of very detailed pictures, and a lot of dead elephants, it's really tragic.

<comment><AUTHOR> I posted the article. I'm sorry it caused you distress. The dead elephants are really not a pretty sight, I guess it's fair they should come with a big warning.

<comment><USER15> You should not be sorry. Thank you for posting it.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks for writing the wraning comment.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What is your favorite Javascript UI framework out there ? - <AUTHOR>

I'm looking forward to build my next web app soon and this time, I thought I'd give a try to a fully featured JS UI library instead of reinventing the wheel. I haven't quite followed JS trends for a while, so I'd like to get some advice from this community.
So far, I'm considering:
- jQuery UI: has been there for a while, great community and tons of plugins but it's still very low level.
- ExtJS: great UI but smaller community and the dual license scares me (I'm not sure I can afford the commercial license yet).
- SproutCore: seems really great and love the UI, but writing all my back-end in JS kind of scares me.
- Cappuccino: same as above.
So, what JS UI framework do you like best ? <comment><USER2> No mention of YUI yet? I have been using it for years and can't imagine using any other framework.

YUI can be somewhat low level, but YUI 2 has grown to provide many impressive components like layout manager, menus, data tables, rich text editors, tree views, tab views, and more. Not to mention one of my favorite parts of YUI, the CSS font and reset files.

YUI 3 is much more reminiscent of jQuery, but doesn't quite have the component list of its predecessor (YUI 2). The YUI community is very active and the people behind the project are very communicative.

Anyways, just thought I would throw in my vote for YUI.

<comment><USER3> I'll also cast a vote for YUI. Caveat - I'm a product manager and not a developer, and the eng team chose YUI on it's own. It really worked out well for the product - we were able to put out some really impressive features using YUI data tables and some light use of other things as well.

Basically, a lot of business app development is taking data from the database and making a table from which users can edit info or add new rows. All of the stuff that you need for that is in YUI - inline cell editing, tabs, hiding columns and picking them, and formatting data. The performance is excellent as well - the data table performed really well even if there were hundreds of rows.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Depends on your requirements. JQuery is great if your goal is also to maintain a progressive experience that somewhat works without javascript.

If you're after a feel closer to desktop apps, or a high level of interactivity, and also don't care much about users who don't sport a modern browser, I think the best library is Ext, both in terms of community size and widget features. But, qooxdoo would be a better choice among free alternatives, (i.e. Sproutcore and Cappuccino)

In a nutshell: In case of Sproutcore, I don't think Sproutcore's widget set is great. As for Cappuccino, I'm not sure about running code over an "Objective-j" layer on top of javascript, which is slow enough. And, I'm not a mac guy at all.

Qooxdoo has introduced some support for progressive pages as well, but it's nowhere near JQuery. I'm also maintaining a project called JsQt, that converts .ui files from Qt Designer to qooxdoo code. See <http://to./3t6p> to get a quick feeling of what works and what doesn't. So you also have a basic gui- designer support for qooxdoo as well.

<comment><USER5> Ext looks great, but for some reason, I've never felt like their licensing seemed very clear cut. Having said that, I'd consider Ext over the likes of Sproutcore or Cappuccino.

<comment><USER6> The licensing is quite clear. If you'd like to benefit from their work for free you must ensure that you pass on your work for free to your users too.

If you want to make money out of their work you must pay them.

Now whether you like such terms are not is a different story entirely.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> If you don't limit yourself to a strictly JS UI library, you can try NOLOH (<http://www.noloh.com>). NOLOH stands for Not One Line of HTML and allows you to work on a single language on the server-side without ever having to deal with the client. Unlike SproutCore, or Cappuccino, which are fat-clients, NOLOH is lightweight and on-demand. This means that your application loads instantly (noloh.com is a noloh app), and there's never any unnecessary code loaded on the client at any time, either on the server, or client. Best of all this is done automatically for you completely transparent to the developer.

Furthermore, all the native widgets & core for that matter are completely skinnable, extendable, and modifiable as you can see from the vast visual differences and feel in the numerous NOLOH applications.

NOLOH also allows you to easily use most 3rd party JavaScript widgets & components out of the box, without a single line of modification to the 3rd party library. You can see how easy that is at <http://github.com/noloh>, take SyntaxHighlighter for example. If you have large set of legacy HTML, no worries, NOLOH allows you to work with that and seamlessly communicate with the server check out a demonstration here: [http://www.youtube.com/phpframework#p/c/C102458C2FFD8ACF/5/i...](http://www.youtube.com/phpframework#p/c/C102458C2FFD8ACF/5/ifcWydvrMOk)

Also, unlike Sproutcore or Cappuccino, the client is only used for rendering and not a store of your business logic. So all your valuable application logic is completely protected from prying eyes.

For all that are wary about NOLOH, give it a watch at <http://youtube.com/phpframework> to see simple and efficient it really is. We've been around since 2005 (though only available to the public since last year) and have a growing set of articles & videos. In the coming month we'll have more demos than you'll know what to do with.

Disclaimer: I'm a co-founder of NOLOH.

[edited for clarity]

</comment><comment><USER8> You can also take a look at qooxdoo. <http://qooxdoo.org/>

It's feature rich (more than cappuccino at this time), it has good documentation, it provides a nice unit test framework and it's easy to use.

One thing that worth noting, is that framework like capp/sproutcore/qooxdoo are design with all the widget in mind(not the case with jQuery). That provide a more coherent api, everything is test against each other, it's easier to build, maintain and update. But all of this at the expense of being a little bit bigger (kb).

One advantage of cappuccino is the GUI builder Atlas, but only if you're on a Mac and all your team members are on a Mac. There is no announcement yet if or when it will be available on Windows and Linux.

</comment><comment><USER9> You don't have to write any of your backend in Javascript w/ SproutCore or Cappuccino.

My favorite by far is Cappuccino. It designed almost exactly like Cocoa, which is a fantastic framework for writing apps with UIs. It comes with a ton of components that are already designed for you. You can completely skip the cost of a graphic designer (you still have understand interaction design).

</comment><comment><USER5> UkiJS (<http://ukijs.org/>) is pretty nice too.

I took a serious look at SproutCore and Cappuccino for a web app (not site) that I'm building, but jQuery is so damned easy to use, that it was not easy to justify spending a few days learning yet another framework.

The thing that made me totally drop any further investigation into SproutCore and Cappuccino (and UkiJS, for that matter) was the JQuery layout plugin (<http://layout.jquery-dev.net/>). It makes your GUI construction super simple, and then you can cherry pick the jQuery UI elements that work for you.

<comment><USER10> Thanks for the pointer to jQuery Layout! It looks very similar to extJS' layouts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> jQuery, hands down. It allows for so much functionality with such small amounts of code.

<comment><USER12> hands down. jQuery is the simplest and most powerful, and has the biggest community.

<comment><USER13> Since the OP is asking for UI frameworks I assume you're both referring to JQueryUI.

A UI framework is only as good as the widgets it ships with and looks to me like JQueryUI is a bit light on in this regard. Certainly a good framework for adding a few simple UI elements like accordions etc. Not as useful for projects requiring more complex elements like grids, treeviews, layout managers etc.

<comment><USER14> >A UI framework is only as good as the widgets it ships with

Completely wrong. A UI framework is only as good as the widgets it _lets you build_ , and how much it helps you while building them. I have never yet worked on a project where I could piece together all the widgets from one library that perfectly fit every use case.

jQuery UI made a few smart decisions in how to build their API. They kept it extremely jQuery-like, so if you are familiar with jQuery coding style you will be right at home. Everything is tied into the jQuery enhanced set object, built for chaining whenever possible, and relies on no external objects.

Instead of opting to build 40 widgets, 90% of which you won't need for your project and the other 10% which will only fit some of your needs, the pattern you will see is _behavior enhancement_. This is what gives you the power to build something more powerful than a cookie cutter widget, with only a few short declarations. You can make something draggable, then sortable, then droppable. You can make something else resizable, draggable, and selectable. You can tie all of these things together with the powerful event and method system, and make something that is greater than the sum of its parts. Then you get the bonus of everything being easily themeable with Themeroller.

I feel like web designers are too often stuck in the mindset of imitating desktop UI's, saying "I need this exact kind of treeview" or "This should be a grid, and this a combobox, and these have to be tabs" when they could be considering all the ways that JavaScript, jQuery, and CSS let you step completely out of this box and make something fresh. Things that have become mini-trends in website UIs like the expandy horizontal accordions or Apple's product scroller are what happens when you apply familiar behaviors to new things. In my experience, jQuery UI has allowed me to be the most creative out of any UI framework, and is the best suited for getting _interesting_ stuff done.

<comment><USER13> of course it goes without saying that a framework should have an extension mechanism that allows you to build custom widgets (and Ext does). It's also nice when you _don't_ have to build a treeview or grid with pagination and sorting and editing etc.etc. Personally I like being able to plug and play someone else's code - There's nothing more wasteful than reinventing the wheel.

There's a good reason people build UIs that mimic desktop applications - it's because a user should be able to sit down at an unfamiliar application and know instantly what each widget does - you don't get that when each app reinvents UI elements to create _interesting_ stuff hehe

Obviously no one is comparing JQueryUI with ExtJS - that would be apples to oranges.

JQueryUI is light and designed for enhancing web _pages_

ExtJS is a ~600kb framework designed for web _applications_.

Both are designed for different use cases.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> jQuery UI:

If you're building a "web 2.0" type web application, jQuery UI is a good fit in my experience. It is lightweight for a UI library and if you're already familiar with jQuery you'll feel right at home. I'm working on such an application right now.

I have to say that the documentation explaining how to create your own widgets is sorely lacking. I hope to write something soon on this subject.

Ext JS:

If you're building a monster web app for intranet / corporate use with a 'desktop application' type of GUI rather than a web friendly interface, Ext JS is an extremely powerful solution. It has ridiculously powerful widgets (the Grid for example). Everything is event driven and class based. Making new widgets or extending core ones is easy through inheritance.

I've worked on 3 such applications so far and it's been great. The documentation is top notch and it's actively supported.

It is however VERY heavy. Both in terms of size and in terms of the markup it generates. Like I said, not for lightweight apps. Build your application completely in JavaScript and forget about html with this one.

</comment><comment><USER16> You might want to take a look at qooxdoo: <http://qooxdoo.org/demo>

</comment><comment><USER17> Depends on how complex the application is.

-JQuery UI for simple widgets to make the UI a bit more functional with JS

\- ExtJS for when the whole web app is a JS application with rich, desktop- like interactivity. Use mostly JSON for communication with the ASP.Net MVC backend.

\- YUI for anything in between those two points mentioned above.

I haven't really tried anything else so far. But I'd like to look at GWT when I can.

</comment><comment><USER18> ExtJS has repeatedly claimed that their Open Source license does not apply to an application in which any part (including the backend) is proprietary. I don't personally agree that that's how the GPL works wrt JS, but if you can't afford the commercial license, be aware that the owners of the project don't think you can use the OSS license on a non-OSS app.

</comment><comment><USER19> If you use Java it is a no-brainer: GWT. You can check out our app for an example: <http://demo.teampostgresql.com>. It is a fairly complex AJAX app written 99% in plain Java. GWT automatically compiles the source to JavaScript targeting different browsers. Awesome.

<comment><USER20> yeah java: java.lang.IllegalStateException: The HTML template 'index.jsp?getpublicresource=DatabaseExplorer_dialog.html' has not been loaded.

<comment><USER19> Nasty. I haven't seen it before even though the app sees a fair amount of use. Do you have the complete stack trace? Any unusual browser / configuration?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Maybe you mean something different, but I'm pretty sure both SproutCore and Cappuccino don't demand your back-end be written in JavaScript, or any particular language.

Also, your framework choice is going to depend on what you want to do. SC/Capp are meant for building webapps, not websites.

</comment><comment><USER22> I love Google Closure. It's a huge library with tons of different modules. Much different than jQuery which is smaller and lighter but great for DOM selection. You could probably use the two of them together.

<comment><USER23> You don't really need to. goog.dom's stuff is very powerful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Cappuccino is my favourite, although the included AppKit framework is large and slow at times. If you rebuild AppKit without Aristo and all the default images it loads quickly.

</comment><comment><USER25> The YUI3 based Alloy UI looks awesome: <http://alloy.liferay.com/demos.php>

</comment><comment><USER26> Jquery by a mile, for all the reasons others have mentioned + I'm also using jqueryUI which supports the newish Theming framework and is a great way to bring a consistant Ui feel to your app. the online theme generator is very slick and is designer friendly too.

</comment><comment><USER27> For information rich applications (ie. B2B-ish), definitely ExtJS. Pretty steep learning curve since, unlike jQuery UI, you sorta have to take all of nothing. We use ExtJS everywhere where using data/information is more important than look-n-feel. Put together CoffeeScript (<http://jashkenas.github.com/coffee-script/>) with ExtJS and you'll be in RIA dev heaven. Fast and very productive.

For applications where look-n-feel, customization, etc is more important (ie. B2C-ish or consumer internet), HTML/CSS/jQuery is the way to go.

</comment><comment><USER28> I've been using Dojo for a while. It has widgets with nearly the breadth of something like ExtJS, but is completely open-source. The documentation isn't all that great—thought it is improving—but the community is responsive and the code is well-written enough that it isn't difficult to figure out what the docs _should_ say.

I don't know that I'd recommend it over jQuery if you don't need the widgets, but I don't have a lot of jQuery experience. The widgets were a big factor for us.

</comment><comment><USER29> javascriptmvc - (<http://www.javascriptmvc.com>) is built on top of jquery and is most effective in a project when jquery doesn't cut it anymore.

</comment><comment><USER30> None. They all make too many assumptions about my user interface design and are too hard to restyle. Often it's like having aqua widgets in a win32 app.

</comment><comment><USER31> Dojo the lastest version

</comment><comment><USER32> gwt

</comment><comment><USER33> MooTools

</comment><comment><USER13> ExtJS is my personal favourite - amazing collection of ready-to-go components, very good doco, a strong community, loads of extensions etc. The performance is also very good.

There have been some issues regarding licensing with some OS purists feeling that Ext 'tricked' its early adopters. Personally I couldn't care less. I treat it as a commercial product for which i'm more than happy to pay $300.

<comment><USER34> One issue few mention about Ext, is that they are shipping bugged releases to non-subscribers.

You only get access to bug-fixes through their subscriber channels, which means that if you go on their site right now and download the public release, it has bugs, they know it, and they let you download it anyway. By my book, that breaks the software engineering code of ethics.</comment></comment>


Frege's Concept Horse Paradox in the Simply-Typed λ-calculus - <AUTHOR> http://dvt.name/2015/freges-concept-horse-paradox-in-the-simply-typed-%CE%BB-calculus/

<comment><USER2> _Thus, e.g., we split up the sentence 'Caesar conquered Gaul' into 'Caesar' and 'conquered Gaul'._

\- A view (on language, not logic) later criticized by linguists such as Tesniere and Fillmore.</comment>