Show HN: BackYourStack – Support your open source dependencies - <AUTHOR> https://backyourstack.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi, I'm François, an engineer at Open Collective and this is one of my first projects there.

When I joined Open Collective, I was excited to see so many great Open Source projects (like Babel, Webpack, etc ...) managing their financing on the platform. However, it was also quickly clear to me that most users of these Open Source projects have absolutely no idea about their efforts to become financially sustainable.

Discussing this problem within the team, we thought scanning for dependencies (such as package.json and composer.json) would be a simple way of matching users with projects, BackYourStack was born.

We started this for the community to use and own. It's Open Source itself and we would love to provide more detection patterns, also feature other financing strategies (outside of Open Collective). Looking forward to your feedback!</comment>


Ask HN: This site seems to be stealing blog posts - <AUTHOR> Anyone knows this site - http://126kr.com/ It seems to be be a bot crawling and posting contents of other people articles and blogs without giving due credit. I could see my own blog post appear there. Though I don't mind if someone publishes my post but a due credit must be given to the original author.
The link to "original article" seems to be broken and redirects back to its own homepage which makes it all the more suspicious.
Whois lookup didn't give much info on the owners also or any contact about them. <comment><USER2> Contact the hosting company. File DMCA take down letter.

[http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/07/06/sample-dmca-take- down-l...](http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/07/06/sample-dmca-take-down- letter/id=4501/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Can you help me out here please. Whom should I send DMCA to? Whois does not discloses any owner's information. [http://whois.domaintools.com/126kr.com](http://whois.domaintools.com/126kr.com)

<comment><USER2> [https://www.misk.com/kb/find-hosting-company](https://www.misk.com/kb/find- hosting-company)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Has anyone contacted these guys to request to an article to be removed? I dont like that they didnt ask permission - and the back link isnt working</comment>


Apple, Your Developer Agreement Tramples on Free Speech and Innovation - <AUTHOR> https://act.eff.org/action/apple-your-developer-agreement-tramples-on-free-speech-and-innovation

<comment><USER2> The politics of Apple really is quite fascinating.

Is there any other company that people feel so passionately about that they are prepared to totally reverse their normal political positions? Mention Apple and you can get a bunch of free market libertarians to come out and demand strong consumer rights regulation, purely because they hate Apple so much. Conversely you can get a bunch of socialists sticking up for the right of a multibillion dollar mega-corp to use DRM, censor all competitors from their platform and sell products containing materials extracted through slave and child labour, purely because they like Apple products more than the alternatives.

<comment><USER3> "sell products containing materials extracted through slave and child labour" has no basis in fact; besides every phone manufacturer builds their devices in the same factories. At least Apple and a few others make attempts to verify conditions publically. Not everyone even tries.

<comment><USER2> Heh, you are kind of making my point for me here. Buying the rare elements needed to build a modern phone is just about impossible to do without sourcing things from the Democratic Republic of the Congo or other places where child and slave labour is likely to be involved.[1][2]

The fact that all the other phone manufacturers are just as bad is a convenient line to use in 'winning' an online platform war argument, but it's not a good moral argument.

[1] [http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/11/search-...](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/11/search- smartphone-soaked-blood)

[2] [http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/25/smartph...](http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/apr/25/smartphone- samsung-tin-bangka-island)

<comment><USER4> Just a nit pick... they are sourcing from Rwandans... which is the first sign that they are dealing with bad guys. The materials they get from the Rwandans have come from the Congo... where the Rwandans ethnically cleanse areas so that they can mine the minerals.

So technically... the materials they source from the Rwandans are conflict materials procured from genocidal Rwandans... not really materials procured through child labor.

Of course... that just means it's much WORSE than child labor... I just thought people should have the facts straight more as a matter of principle.

<comment><USER5> Can you post some links for proof?

<comment><USER4> You can start by googling Laurent Nkunda. To get a feel for what the Rwandan backed militias who loot these mines are like. Fair warning... that reading is really not for the timid though.

You can read background on the actual technical and logistical aspects of the mineral trade from Nest. The book is titled "Coltan".

[http://www.amazon.com/Coltan-Michael- Nest/dp/0745649327](http://www.amazon.com/Coltan-Michael-Nest/dp/0745649327)

If you want the actual dry but raw data of the UN reports there are several which touch on the DRC mineral situation, and they are all at the UN's site. (They only go back to 2004... to go further you'd actually have to get it out of google cache. But obviously the UN has compiled reports going back much further for the purposes of future Crimes Against Humanity prosecutions.) In any case, you can find them here:

[http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1533/egroup.shtml](http://www.un.org/sc/committees/1533/egroup.shtml)

Also, several lawsuits against American suppliers of conflict minerals related to the DRC morass. For example, here:

[http://oecdwatch.org/files/raid-foe_vs-_us- companies_press-r...](http://oecdwatch.org/files/raid-foe_vs-_us- companies_press-release)

And finally, if you want to get involved you can read information at Friends of the Congo here:

[http://friendsofthecongo.org/resource- center/coltan.html](http://friendsofthecongo.org/resource-center/coltan.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Is this actually from the EFF or is the EFF Action Center a change.org-style site where anyone can submit petitions?

I ask only because the text of the letter isn't particularly well written and contains some glaring mistakes: "Wrap every app in the _Apple store_ with unnecessary DRM" (emphasis mine).

Apple isn't the government, and no one is compelled to enter into a contract with them. The EFF's reason for removing their Action Center app from the App Store are outlined in this petition, which is ironic considering the app itself is a web app made native with the Ionic framework[2]. Nothing in Apple's terms prevents the EFF from releasing the app on the web (nor do they have to agree to any of Apple's terms to release a web app).

[1]: [https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/12/sorry-iphone-users- app...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/12/sorry-iphone-users-apples-dev- agreement-means-no-eff-mobile-app-iphone)

[2]: [https://github.com/EFForg/actioncenter- mobile](https://github.com/EFForg/actioncenter-mobile)

<comment><USER7> Just because they're not the goverment, it doesn't mean their business values and practices are above reproach, criticism and complaints. Remember, corporations ARE ALLOWED to be criticized for their business practice choices and that's OK. Really.

<comment><USER8> > Remember, corporations ARE ALLOWED to be criticized for their business > practice choices and that's OK. Really.

Sure they're allowed to be criticized. But that doesn't make every criticism good or well-founded, and this one is neither.

<comment><USER9> Given their market power and prominence; you could make a strong case that unduly restrictive covenants in the contract language are in fact against the interests of a society that values freedom and equity.

Many of the arguments on this page in defense of Apple could equally well be applied to a defense of debt slavery or indentured servitude.

Apple taking a third share of every creators work may have been reasonable when they were a small part of the market; but is less so when they are able to turn their dominance in the smart phone market into outsized profits and onerous terms in the media distribution market.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I'm a bit surprised by all the people here who think that the best way to object to a corporation's contract offer is to just avoid working with that corporation. If that's all we do, how is the corporation supposed to know what it's doing wrong?

Make a public complaint, and (a) you provide better feedback, and (b) you maybe convince other people to join your boycott, which improves your chance of modifying the corporation's behavior and making the world a little bit nicer.

<comment><USER11> not buying their products or working with them is the most effective way to let them know they are doing wrong

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This is illogical and amateurish. The title of the petition claims that Apple (1) tramples free speech and (2) innovation. Yet the detailed verbiage of the complaint gives no evidence that they trample free speech, and if their contract terms trample innovation it is a matter of interpretation. Apple's developer agreement bans developers from talking about the developer agreement. A bit draconian, perhaps, but hardly a trampling of "free speech", and actually quite common within contracts generally. The other complaints are simply silly. What's wrong with Apple insisting that developers not jailbreak their devices? What's wrong with Apple approving their own security updates? And we can debate about the morality of DRM, but if you want to see the difference between a DRM-protected environment and an unprotected environment, look at the difference between the App Store and Google Play. Profitability for developers, quality of software, absence of viruses... DRM does accomplish some positive results. And whether it does or doesn't, in no sense are anyone's "rights" quashed here.

It's a contract, people. It can say whatever the parties to the contract agree it should say. If you don't agree with it, don't bang free speech drums and shout yourself hoarse about "rights." Just don't sign it.

<comment><USER13> > actually quite common within contracts generally

Really?

> What's wrong with Apple insisting that developers not jailbreak their > devices?

It's my device and I have the freedom to do with it as I wish. EFF goes into a lot more detail if you want to read it.

> What's wrong with Apple approving their own security updates?

It's not their own security updates, it's security updates to other people's apps.

> we can debate about the morality of DRM

This is about the fact that developers are forced into shipping it even if they don't want it.

> If you don't agree with it, don't bang free speech drums and shout yourself > hoarse about "rights." Just don't sign it.

I won't sign it, and and I will sign a petition, and I will warn other developers about it. It's my right to point out bad behaviour and to complain. You presumably accept this since you just posted a comment complaining about something.

<comment><USER14> Developers aren't forced to develop for Apple products. They aren't forced to do anything

<comment><USER15> It always surprises me when people say this. If somebody forced all fishermen to only sail in circles, catch fish with their tongues and drink a liter of sulfuric acid every morning - they would be up in arms. Sure they're not forced to be fishermen, but you can't blame them for caring.

<comment><USER12> Well but the key word there is "somebody." If there was a single, all- encompassing, global world government that forced all fishermen to do this, then yes, we'd have a problem. If the United States (for example) caused its fishermen to do this, then the people of the United States would be well- advised to change this law, else they'll soon be out of fish. But even if they didn't, it's still not a question of "forcing" or "rights." Fishermen would simply fish elsewhere; at great cost, perhaps, with a loss of opportunity, no doubt, but it's still a question of choice.

<comment><USER15> Well you can't go anywhere else and be an ios developer. Maybe you could learn something else and bring some of your customers with you, but it certainly is harder than just going somewhere else to fish.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Ok I up voted, but couldn't some of these points be made stronger? For example the security updates, what exactly is being proposed, that patches should be able to go into the App Store without review and Apple's static analysis checks? Or are they just saying there should be a checkbox during submission for "Security related, please expedite"?

<comment><USER17> There is an email address where you can request an expedited review. I'm sure they would accept for security issues (assuming you only make occasional requests).

<comment><USER18> Expedited requests generally get serviced pretty quickly, from experience. Within 8 hours both times I've had to request one.

<comment><USER19> I've had an expedited fix go thru in 2 hours flat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> If people don't like Apple's terms, don't develop for them.

Personally, I vote with my feet (ie. I currently own nothing Apple, the way they're going, probably never will again).

<comment><USER21> >If people don't like Apple's terms, don't develop for them.

This has been the EFF's exact response, and this community has lambasted them for it. We are told that organizations like the EFF and developers of security/privacy software should compromise on their ideals and not forsake deserving users on iOS. This is a classic Catch-22, because providing beneficial software (Chatsecure, Firefox, etc.) to these users just perpetuates their abusive relationship with Apple.

<comment><USER22> Are people lambasting them for not developing for Apple? Or are people lambasting them for all the accompanying crocodile tears?

<comment><USER23> The tears may have been predictable (and maybe even planned), but they most certainly _aren 't_ crocodile tears.

These are issues the EFF and its membership deeply and sincerely care about. The whole point of the organization is to call attention to these issues and push for change. Complaining that they're working on their mission is pretty silly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I don't see how this first item -- "Ban iOS developers from ever speaking about the developer agreement" \-- is true. First, I don't see any such clause; second, you're allowed to discuss anything that's publicly available, and you can read the agreement without signing it as part of the developer program application process, so the agreement is publicly available and thus can be discussed. You're welcome.

"Require Apple to approve every security update, which means that unaddressed security bugs could linger and leave users at risk."

Yes, the App Store approval process _could_ cause lingering security problems. In practice, Android -- which has no such requirements -- is festooned with malware and iOS is not. So let's protest a _hypothetical_ problem caused by a solution to a _real_ problem.

Apple also requires that your code with signed and checksummed before installation. How evil!

"Wrap every app in the Apple store with unnecessary DRM, which limits what users can do with their apps even if the code is published as free software."

How is it "unnecessary"? It's how the App Store works. It's what allows Apple to remotely disable an app that turns out to be malicious (and which has slipped through the approval process). It's part of the iOS value proposition -- pay us extra to give you a device that won't screw you.

<comment><USER25> > I don't see how this first item -- "Ban iOS developers from ever speaking > about the developer agreement" \-- is true.

Section 10.4. It's plain English. "You may not issue any press releases or make any other public statements regarding this Agreement, its terms and conditions, or the relationship of the parties without Apple's express prior written approval, which may be withheld at Apple's discretion."

Then you create a cartoonishly bad alternative and use that to justify Apple's policies. The Google Play Store isn't "festooned with malware," and nothing in Apple's review process catches malware. Similarly, every application that runs on Android must be signed, but it doesn't have to be signed by a certificate signed by Apple after paying a yearly developer fee and agreeing to an overbearing contract. The DRM is unnecessary because free software doesn't require it, and malware in the Play Store can be yanked off phones without wrapping apps in DRM, so your claim that it's for malware doesn't hold either. (The agreement doesn't restrict Apple from disabling apps for any other reason, unlike the Play Store agreement, which does. Applications installed by the user outside the Play Store are left alone.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Honest question, if you are interested in freedoms why not develop for Android? You know what you are getting yourself into when you devote your time developing for a closed system and culture like Apple's.

<comment><USER26> I'd argue that Firefox OS is an even better proposition if you care about freedom. Android is slowly becoming the shadow of its former self with more and more core functionality (from the point of view of a developer) slowly moving to Google Play Services (which is proprietary).

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> > Developers shouldn't have to sacrifice their rights to speak and innovate > freely just to bring their applications to millions of Apple users.

Ummm... Is this really why they develop for iOS or are they just having fun mostly, enjoying their craft and (sometimes) making a small profit on the side. The App Store is but one way to get apps. Sounds like developers with the beliefs the EFF attributes to them would be better suited to developing for Jailbroken phones.

</comment><comment><USER28> Don't develop on/for Apple devices. That's an easy fix.

</comment><comment><USER3> Having developed for 5 years on iOS I've never found it a burden. Sure you might wait a few days for approval, but at least generally it keeps the App Store content dependable and trustworthy from a customer standpoint. Like people always say, you don't like the rules, don't play in the sandbox. While the EFF has a lot of good things to say, complaining that Apple should do things against its own rules is not constructive. Android is far more open which makes some people happier but makes their store far less trustworthy (and even less so if you get apps outside their Store). You as a developer always have a choice. I don't think this is a useful point of argument for the EFF.

</comment><comment><USER29> Honestly, the DRM and security update aspects are probably acceptable restrictions – in that we know what Apple's policies are, and these are unreasonable in that context.

If course, not being permitted to talk about the product or agreement is stupid.

</comment><comment><USER30> What, they think that 3000 signatures will make Apple change their terms? 3000 devs that in all likelihood will find another reason to whine? 3000 people that do not under what free speech is?

Hey EFF! I want my fucking money back.

</comment><comment><USER31> Wat. How does a stores guidelines and agreements "trample" _free speech_?! It's their store, their rules. Don't like it? Start writing apps for another platform. A muslim supermarket can chose to not carry non-halal food. Does that Trample on My Free Speech if I were a meat producer?! No.

I love this line:

> Ban iOS developers from ever speaking about the developer agreement.

Yeah. That's called NDA and is very common in contracts. Welcome to the real world, kid.

<comment><USER19> Yes, like it or not.

Burger King says "Have it your way", it's your burger, but that doesn't mean you can jump the counter, cook the burger to your own exacting specifications, and pay for it in 1-peso coins.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> It's this kind of grandstanding that annoys the heck out of me and makes me want to reconsider donating to the EFF in the future.

There are far more important and immediate fish that the EFF should be focusing their limited resources on frying. Once said fish are fried then start taking potshots at Apple's Dev Agreement.

</comment><comment><USER33> Your not giving up your rights when you agree not to do one thing in order to do another. You're actually exercising your right to enter into contracts.

You have the right to sleep all day. And perhaps you've agreed to not do that while you are collecting an hourly wage. Nobody's violating your right to sleep.

<comment><USER34> There are limits to what you can do in a contract for a reason.

A hyperbolic example: "I agree to allow you to kill and eat me so you can pay my family thousands of dollars. "

However I think that the rights signed away are not beyond the bound of normalcy. This is more of a campaign to change the expectations of the industry as they are all doing this in some form or another.

The focus on them is just because they are high profile enough to maybe push the rest of the industry.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I was able to get around this issue by not actually reading the agreement.

</comment><comment><USER19> Those barriers are erected precisely because the lack thereof was abused enough to warrant them. Take them down, and something worse than those limits will occur.

The developer agreement is between the developer and Apple. It's nobody else's business.

Jailbreaking tears down walls critical for user-convenient security. Walls, fences, and locking doors are normal in business.

Security flaws can be serviced by expedited review, screening for anything else going wrong as well in as little as 2 hours. Normal review is required to ensure nothing traumatic happens.

DRM ensures that what users get is what they expected from the developer. Repackaged-with-malware is avoided.

I'm disappointed EFF would make such a lame list of complaints, while having locks on their doors.

<comment><USER36> > I'm disappointed EFF would make such a lame list of complaints, while having > locks on their doors.

What are you talking about. Seriously nothing in your post makes sense.

<comment><USER37> I was able to make sense of the post.

I'd say Apple prioritizes their customers' rights to have a secure, safe, functional device that's reasonably free from concerns over things like malware and other malicious app behaviors. This has some developer downsides, but as both a customer and a developer on Apple products, I'd prefer they prioritize the user experience over development.

<comment><USER13> Apple is contractually forcing developers to not discuss the contract, in what way is that good for users?

Apple can still have a walled garden without contractually requiring developers to forgo their right to jailbreak their own device.

DRM does not benefit users at all. It is not necessary to have DRM to have a walled garden.

<comment><USER19> "Good for users"? it's not the users' business to know details of contracts between developers & Apple.

Jailbreak away - but Apple rightfully disavows any predicted or unforeseen consequences, and won't work with anyone who won't work with what Apple considers sensible rules facilitating development & usage. If you're going to bring bags of weed seeds (or anything else which predictably cause problems) into my walled garden, get out of my garden.

DRM assures you can use your purchased products on the devices you want ... and that nobody else can, and that nobody is going to repackage apps to include malware.

<comment><USER38> >"Good for users"? it's not the users' business to know details of contracts between developers & Apple.

Who are you to say what a user's business is? If someone is engaging in unethical conduct, it is their customers' right to know about it. How are consumers supposed to make informed decisions if they do not even know what they are funding?

<comment><USER39> What is unethical? What are they funding? Why the emotive language? Who are you or the EFF to say that it _is_ anybody's business to know about two other third parties agreements? What difference will it make to consumers to know what the contract stipulates?

<comment><USER38> >What is unethical? What are they funding?

That's exactly what the consumer wants to know. They are funding whatever is stipulated in those contracts.

>Who are you or the EFF to say that it is anybody's business

I am me, and I say what is my business.

<comment><USER19> Then work out a contract with the other two. If they don't agree to your terms, then it literally is not your business.

<comment><USER38> Attempting to establishing a legal obligation to share information is pretty much that, I would think. Seems like that's the whole point of a democracy, no? To allow the people to make things their business?

I mean, if Apple doesn't want their contracts (which are enforced by democratic American law) to be the business of the American people, then maybe they should leave the country.

<comment><USER39> "Attempting to establishing a legal obligation to share information is pretty much that, I would think. Seems like that's the whole point of a democracy, no? To allow the people to make things their business?" No! Absolutely not!!! How is that _any_ different from the asinine mutterings of David Cameron over data encryption? Freedom of speech does _not_ give you the right to no my, or _anyone_ else's business. What about freedom of privacy?

"I mean, if Apple doesn't want their contracts (which are enforced by democratic American law) to be the business of the American people, then maybe they should leave the country." So you agree that the NSA is right to snoop on the citizens of the US? It's _exactly_ the same thing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> EFF, Your Overweening Moralism Doesn't change The Fact That Developers Target Us First. --Apple

</comment><comment><USER41> >Developers shouldn't have to give up their rights to make an iPhone app. App makers should demand better terms, and the customers who love their iPhones should back them.

If this is what EFF is spending my money on I will never donate to them again. I was with them on the battle to keep jailbreaking legal.

</comment><comment><USER42> This is insulting to everyone who fights for actual free speech rights.

Another clickbait from eff.

</comment><comment><USER43> Apparently, people are generally fine with it. You will routinely hear nowadays that private agreements cannot trample on free speech because that only applies to governments. This argument even made its way to xkcd.

[http://xkcd.com/1357/](http://xkcd.com/1357/)

The other issues are largely trade-offs. How much piracy are you willing to accept? How does it affect sales and availability of software for the platform?

How soon should we patch? Right away or on Patch Tuesday? How thoroughly should we test? How much instability are we willing to tolerate? And so on.

<comment><USER44> > You will routinely hear nowadays that private agreements cannot trample on > free speech

That comic is a response to people complaining about "freedom of speech" after their harassing comments have been removed from a forum or article comment thread. I'm not sure the same line of thinking translates so directly to a corporate software development license agreement.

<comment><USER45> "The right to free speech means the government can't arrest you for what you say."

It doesn't mean anyone else has to tolerate what you say. It doesn't mean a contract between private parties (i.e. not a contract with a gov't entity) can't dictate the things you may or may not discuss about the parties or the agreement itself.

In other words: "free speech" has nothing to do with anything except whether the government can arrest you for running your yap. Which further means a corporate software development license agreement can stipulate anything it wants.

And you are free not to accept that agreement and not partake of the benefits the agreement bestows.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Forgive me, but what a stupid petition, presenting what is basically a consumer preference as a political claim! In my humble opinion, this does nothing but water down the potential significance of real petitions.

</comment><comment><USER47> Apple is a private company, so stop trying to decide what they should or shouldn't do.

<comment><USER48> Are you implying consumers should not have their voices somehow heard (no matter how stupid their requests are) by private companies? I think your comment underestimate the power of consumers and customers of products -- and ultimately of boycotts. If this petition had been signed by 1.5 millions instead of just 1.5 thousand I wonder if you would consider it more... valued? Let them speak out if that is what they want.

<comment><USER49> Signing a petition is easy. If this is to make a difference those 1500 developers need to not support apples policies and boycott the apps tore, and get users to do the same.

<comment><USER19> Petitions mean nothing, when those signing vote the opposite with their feet and wallets.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Protect Your Side Project and Your Day Job - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/what-i-learned-building/20413f8c9ec2

<comment><AUTHOR> Author here. Let me know if you have any questions about making the leap from day job to full-time startup. I've been preparing for 3 years and made the move in July. Contact info in my profile.</comment>


A simple I2C master implementation on the MSP430 - <AUTHOR> http://www.simplyembedded.org/tutorials/msp430-i2c-master/ <comment><USER2> It's amazing how (comparatively) convoluted I2C is on platforms without the Wire library support you see on Atmel platforms.

That's not to say that such platforms are bad (MSP430 has it's advantages and disadvantages depending on what you want to do with it), but more of a testament to the Wire library.

<comment><USER3> It's not too surprising that a high-level I2C abstraction looks less convoluted than a register-level I2C driver.

Here's the equivalent code for the Atmel peripheral: [https://github.com/arduino/Arduino/blob/master/hardware/ardu...](https://github.com/arduino/Arduino/blob/master/hardware/arduino/avr/libraries/Wire/src/utility/twi.c)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Getting a 503 error for the entire site...

Just went to find the page of internet archive:

        web.archive.org has been blocked by Sky Broadband Shield, which lets you choose the websites that can be seen in your home.

I hate ISPs. If someone could update the link, that would be grand!

<comment><USER5> Change your DNS servers?

<comment><USER6> 503 is "Service unavailable" where the service is related to the web server, not DNS.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HTTP_status_codes#5xx_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_HTTP_status_codes#5xx_Server_error)

<comment><USER7> Yes, but this is probably served by the ISP's servers, into which traffic was redirected by the ISP's dishonest DNS.

This is much easier to implement than fully intercepting every HTTP connection, and this is what most ISPs go with.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If someone is interested in a simple and straightforward implementation of I2C on MSP430 with the USI module (the simpler serial module found on cheap low- end chips), I wrote a library a couple of years back, because I couldn't find anything I'd be happy with: [https://github.com/jwr/msp430_usi_i2c](https://github.com/jwr/msp430_usi_i2c)

The code is also fully interrupt-driven, which is important for low-power applications.

</comment><comment><USER9> This is much cleaner than TI's reference implementation.

<comment><USER10> It may be so, but it doesn't implement an interrupt solution, which is a really bad way to program a microcontroller.

Also I found these types particularly amusing. None of that code can be copy pasted without editing:

      while ((err == 0) &amp;&amp; (nbytes &gt; 0))

But since it doesn't support interrupts, I think not being able to copy paste this code is generally a good thing.

<comment><USER9> I'd tend to agree! But for those of us totally unfamiliar with how I2C works, and barely familiar with embedded dev at all, a somewhat gentler introduction to the relevant concepts, that requires close experience with fewer priors than TI's reference example, is no bad thing to have.</comment></comment></comment>


Google Kills Its RSS Subscription Browser Extension Too - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2013/03/15/google-kills-rss/ <comment><USER2> I'm one tinfoil hat away from believing this isn't just about discontinuing unprofitable products, but a concerted effort to kill off support for open standards (RSS, CalDAV, what's next?) and turning the Google universe into a Facebook/Apple style walled garden called Google+.

Evil plan or not, the days of Google as the champion of the open web are over.

<comment><USER3> This is actually the final step for me.

I've been an avid Google fan since the early days. I use all the Google services, I use Chrome religiously, I convince family/friends to switch to Chrome from IE, and I've always been convinced Google is the one we're supposed to look up to for how things should be done.

Yeah they've made mistakes, and G+ is a clusterfuck of brilliant talent thrown down a horrible path of closed socialness and realname ridiculousness... but overall I always thought they were still on the right side of "Don't Be Evil".

I'm totally convinced this quiet attack on RSS is a not-so-subtle attempt to push people into G+, and even though I casually use G+ (about the same as I casually use FB or Twitter), G+ is NOT a replacement for RSS, and it's not how I want to keep track of all the sites I read. I don't want to "like" them or add them to my social networks. I just want to read their shit. Simple.

RSS doesn't care if you're logged in. RSS doesn't care if you use your real name. RSS doesn't care if you're accessing it from work, home, or anonymously via an internet cafe. And that's exactly how it should be.

Throw in the Picasaweb crap they're doing now too, FORCING you to use G+ Photos (which is a horrible horrible experience), and I'm done.

I've just installed Firefox on all my home computers and my phone, for the first time since Chrome came out, and will be looking for a new RSS aggregator.

<comment><USER4> I don't understand why these changes make you switch from Chrome to Firefox.

There appears to be a really prevalent attitude here on HN that you can either really love or really hate a company. If you like it, you use all their stuff. When the switch in your mind flips and you know you must instantly start hating them, it means you must stop using every instance of their software, whether it's related or not to whatever your issues were.

It seems kind of silly.

<comment> mike-cardwell Chrome is created by an Ad company so that they can make more money selling Ads. People are willing to overlook this fact because they trust that Google wont put it's own desire to make profit over keeping the web open. People are losing the trust that this is the case.

If somebody comes up with some new technology that makes the web better in some way, but also means it's more difficult or impossible to target advertising, do you think Google will implement it? Do you think the makers of Bing will?

Am i the only one that thinks that a handful of Ad companies shouldn't be controlling how the web evolves?

<comment><USER5> Does using Chrome or Chromium somehow _serve_ Google and its nefarious goals?

<comment><USER6> Yes - default settings of 3rd party cookies is an obvious start.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think they're going to shut down Blogger next.

It's a neglected platform at best, and it too encroaches on some partial functionality that could be offered by G+.

Picasa is in the process of being absorbed completely into G+. We're in the middle of a massive consolidation. They're closing down and walling off everything they can. When the smoke clears Google will have transformed from an open standards company into exactly the same walled garden everybody else is offering.

<comment><USER8> +1 This is what I have been concerned about also. I rely a lot on Blogger, Gmail, and (now) G+ photo albums. I like the way Blogger is easily mapped to a sub domain (blog.markwatson.com) and I don't have to run blogging software myself. GMail has been central in my workflow and I like the convenience of taking pictures on my droid phone and have all pictures auto uploaded to G+.

However, I have been thinking of starting an open source project that would be a one JAR deploy that would support personal photo album with easy sharing, blogging, live messaging (ironically I would like to use Apache Wave), and perhaps email (but probably not). I believe that since most technical people have their own servers and many of us are tired of walled gardens that this might garner a few users besides myself.

<comment><USER8> Also: for many years I have forwarded email from my own domain to GMail. I am going to stop doing that even though I really like their anti spam service. It probably makes more sense to just use my gmail account for access to customer's shared google docs, etc. in other words, still use useful Google services but stop relying too much on them.

I also now prefer paid services. Evernote and Dropbox, for examples, are clearly motivated to support me because I am a customer not a product.

<comment><USER9> I set up my own domain (hosted by InMotion, who have fantastically good customer service) and run my email through that. My initial reservation was that I'd be relying on spam filters that were inferior to Google's. In practice, it hasn't been a problem at all. Obviously, this is anecdotal, but the light-years ahead advantage in spam filtering that Google one had seems to have eroded to the point where it's no longer enough to keep me on gmail.

I still have my gmail account, but it's no longer primary.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Embrace, give away, extinguish:

      1. Embrace [open web standard].
      2. Give away [standards-based product].
      3. Extinguish: if/after competition evaporates, discontinue product.

Result: walled gardens.

<comment><USER11> Extend works fine here. Google product's are chock-full of extensions to open standards, which is why we have so many Gmail-only email clients floating around out there, etc.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I don't understand what people use to see new information from multiple websites at once if they aren't using RSS. Are they actually visiting 10 or 20 websites a day manually? Do "normal" users stick to just a few websites?

<comment><USER13> You don't need updates from 10 to 20 websites. Find one or two good aggregators. HN and Facebook are enough for me.

<comment><USER14> HN and such aggregators are nice for fluff content, which appeals to a broad range of people. More specific content either isn't aggregated, or the aggregators themselves are so niche that they only update once in a while (e.g. Lambda-the-Ultimate). And frankly, while obviously none is indispensable for my life or well-being, I'd rather miss out on HN than on the smaller blogs and feeds.

<comment><USER13> What about Facebook?

<comment><USER14> I wouldn't know, I don't have an account.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> >The extension, which previously placed a small, orange RSS icon next to the website's URL in the Chrome address bar, no longer functions even on Chrome browsers where the extension is installed and enabled.

So how have they disabled it in browsers where it was already installed? Does it use some backend service that they have taken down? Or was it disabled by a silent Chrome update?

<comment><USER16> It, _RSS Subscription Extension (by Google) v2.2.0_ , is still installed and working in my Chrome. It does not seem to use any backend service. It just reads RSS information on a webpage and creates subscription links for you that go to the RSS webreader of your choice (I've been using Google Reader with it).

But, the extension's website has been removed: [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nlbjncdgjeocebhnmk...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/nlbjncdgjeocebhnmkbbbdekmmmcbfjd)

I believe that version (the original) was written by a Google employee, Finnur Thorarinsson (finnur at chromium.org): <https://plus.google.com/104317586100499660731/posts>

Another extension claims to be a fork, but I don't know any specifics: [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rss- subscription-e...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rss-subscription- extensio/dobjkkjbcmhohalobdalmmenogajjlaj)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Twitter has disabled RSS this month too. Is RSS too open for the big players?

<comment><USER18> I disabled it on my blog a long time ago because I want people to actually come to my website to read my posts. See the "related" posts and the "comments" section etc...

I guess it's even more obvious if you have ads on the website.

<comment><USER19> Dont know your site, but be sure I would never come back to it if you dont have a RSS feed (and leave it within 2 secs if there is any ad on it).

<comment><USER18> I know this is some people's problems. But I believe it is the minority. So I've made my decision. I also don't support old IE browsers.

<comment><USER20> But why disable something that you don't have to even support, most (if not all) blog time sites provide an easy way to provide RSS.

You are alienating maybe a minority, but I think maybe a more valuable part of you readers - large part of HN readers use RSS (at least it seams so based on latest Google Reader deprecation).

There is no value in removing RSS, you are just crippling your site.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> It seems that every decision that betters Google+ hurts the Google brand. If Google+ is the new Google, then Google is now Google-, obviously.

The fact that they are (allegedly) surprised at the amount of people using Reader is a tastement to how insignificant it is to their business.

<comment><USER22> They're not at all surprised, can I ask where they said that? I'd love to see how a company that makes billions by knowing as much as possible about their user base words the idea they're surprised by a quantity of users on a product of theirs.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I'll go out on the limb and suggest that google is trying to kill the ecosystem that nurtured it and focus on more mainstream nanny and media for to be cosumable for ages 10-14 or some such number. News papers target groups with lower intelligencer ratio and TV goes even further.

With that I don't think google wants to support independent internet anymore - it does not go well with investors and profitability. And can roust some smart minds that just might bring the whole google empire to its knees(or more aptly make it irrelevant). At this point google can be called the internet in some sense. And if such status can be argued for then it is not interest for google to support resources out side of its "google is the internet" domain.

Most companies go through such cycles and it seems that google is sort of outgrowing itself. It is sort of popular with G+ but largely it has failed in the social arena. I has captured some market share with lowcost android phones. But there is no certain future in Silicon Valley. One can say google is tired and is withdrawing from being rapacious inventor and instigator of new technologies.

...

my 2c. Just an opinion :)

</comment><comment><USER24> Less people reading rss => More people reading on actual web sites => More people exposed to, and maybe click, embedded adsense ads from google + More user behavior data from google statistics.

Simple as that.

</comment><comment><USER25> As I noted recently, Google Currents is an Android application which uses RSS. And it is a product which has been getting updates, and is available at the Play Store here:

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.currents&hl=en)

So if people think Google is getting out of the RSS business, here's a counter-example. Personally, this is how I browse my favorite news/blog sites each morning, looking for interesting content (which can be easily shared via G+ or other any other link sharing service; unlike iOS, it's easy for any Android application, including Google Currents, to share content with other Android applications, whether it be G+, or Evernote, or Digg, etc.)

</comment><comment><USER26> When Google announced they were killing off Reader, the big problem was that there was no obvious alternative. That's not the case when they remove features I like from Chrome. I hear Firefox is pretty good these days, I'll probably try switching over and see how I like it.

</comment><comment><USER27> Its working just fine here...

<comment><USER28> I take this as an opporunity to develope something like multiplx.com. Check it out

<comment><USER29> promo code ? :)

<comment><USER28> HACKERNEWS

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> It is a concerted effort to kill ways to access data without seeing ads. They are killing RSS and forbiding Ad Block em Google Play.

Go Firefox, Go!

</comment><comment><USER31> hey guys

i've forked the google rss extension, updated it and loaded it to the chrome store - so that it works with feedly, newsblur and theoldread * have removed google reader, igoogle etc.. from the list

[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rss- subscription-e...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rss-subscription- extensio/bmjffnfcokiodbeiamclanljnaheeoke)

cheers

justin

</comment><comment><USER32> Hate the GR shutdown but that seems just like a logical house cleaning consequence.

<comment><USER33> Only if you assume the extension existed to support the Google Reader service, which is false. RSS is a standard with many uses outside Google Reader.

<comment><USER32> Sure, but what was the default service?

<comment><USER34> Not the browser extension, but when I check a Feedburner feed in Chrome I see, in order: MyYahoo, NewsGator, MyAOL, Bloglines, Netvibes, Google Reader, Pageflakes, and then a dropdown for other options.

<comment><USER32> the majority of those service is defunct.

<comment><USER34> Sure, but part of the reason why they're defunct is that Google Reader killed them. Which doesn't address this point but does the larger conversation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> I know from some of the parties that have shown interest in my company that the highest levels of media are very concerned about being not just marginalized, but trivialized.

We have made ZERO deals for, always, one or both of two reasons:

1) The investors want to control the content and under the CDA/DMCA definitions be publishers.

2) The belief that people are unwilling to pay for news.

Up until 2012, there were doubters that online subscription is the only bet the industry can make to persist. What the interested parties will absolutely never agree to is a system that they don't retain absolute control of the message with.

It is just my speculation now, but I believe they thought I wouldn't get an actual information exchange built without their resources and assistance. I did and now there is some panic because we are one break-out event away from changing the news industry forever. I say forever because people will see a different future and want that once they understand it.

After six months in open beta I know what needs to be done and it isn't pivoting. Mostly UI and colors with some feature polishing. This next iteration will polish the foundation of the nwzPaper system and then we will integrate the facilities to complete the incentive structure and adapt the article ranking as volume builds.

We will be doing some new licensing arrangements to balance the need for producers to earn something with the need for news information to be public, accessible, available and free.

As a developer, you should look at nwzPaper as a central locking agent in a distributed system.

<comment><USER36> dude you must be on good kush ...

<comment><USER35> That is legal in Colorado, but I abstain just to be safe!</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do you make a simple to-do list app in PHP? - <AUTHOR>

Hello HN,
I need your help. Too often, my to-do list grows out of control. So out of control that I haven't logged into Wunderlist in months because of fear. I have tried many to-do list apps out there, but the story always ends the same way.
I have figured out exactly what I need in a to-do list app, but none exist that do what I need to my knowledge.
So I want to build it. I don't want to make a full-blown app, I want only to make a small PHP script that does what I need. I do not want to work with databases, please.
The idea is this. A single page with a max number of 7 tasks that will automatically delete after 7 days with the option to save 1 task indefinitely. A max number because having to pick and choose my tasks is more like real life where I have to pick and choose my time. Other apps give me unlimited tasks to do in a finite amount of time. Automatic deletion because, if I didn't get it done in 7 days, it probably wasn't that important to me. If it was really, really important, then I can save one task for as long as I need.
Sketches of the general visual outline with annotations: http://ge.tt/9cLrqGD
I'm not looking to start a company with this idea, just trying to get my life and to-do list under control. I realize this isn't a support forum, but I chose to post this here because I thought a few of you on here might like the idea, maybe even enough to run with it yourself.
So here is where I need your help. I could really use a list of relevant things to look up: PHP functions, scripts that do parts of what I need that I could piece together, etc. I'm looking to make this as bare-bones as possible, no log-in, just something that is functional. I'm not asking you to write this for me, I just need a place to start.
Thank you, HN. After I finish this, I'd be happy to share the script with everyone here so maybe they, too, will no longer be slaves of their to-do list.
Thanks again.
-Benjamin <comment><USER2> These two examples use databases, but you should be able to easily set it up on pagodabox:(<http://www.pagodabox.com>) Pagodabox should be pretty simple for you to deploy live on a free instance.

[http://tutorialzine.com/2010/03/ajax-todo-list-jquery-php- my...](http://tutorialzine.com/2010/03/ajax-todo-list-jquery-php-mysql-css/)

<http://query7.com/php-jquery-todo-list-part-1>

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you, masonhensley. I really appreciate the advice. I think I will find the last link very helpful.</comment></comment>


Adaptive Rock Paper Scissors - <AUTHOR> http://iterationprojects.com/rps/

<comment><USER2> This is one of my projects. I made it a while ago. I'm glad you guys are enjoying it! It implements an approximation of this strategy: <http://www.ofb.net/~egnor/iocaine.html>

</comment><comment><USER3> I went 20-5-10. Interesting algorithms, I could see it's "strategy." 3 of my losses came from me picking scissors three times in a row. And then I correctly deduced it would guess that I would switch to rock and thus play paper, so I clicked scissors a fourth time.

Will be curious to see how the statistics play out.

Would also be better to randomize the order of Rock - Paper - Scissors links as it's given to the user.

<comment><USER2> Yes, randomizing the order of the links for the user each time would let the user press the first link every time and have an unbeatable strategy. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> They should try their AI on one of the rock-paper-scissor (rps) variants.

For example, this guy has developed rps-25 versus the traditional rps-3:

<http://www.umop.com/rps25.htm>

</comment><comment><USER5> "Against me, you've won 28 games, lost 14 games, and tied 18 games."

Is there an api that we can use to create our own rps decider to play against your site or other people?

<comment><USER4> You should be able to make requests of the form:

      http://iterationprojects.com/rps/?mode=p&id=<integer player id>&rps=<r,p, or s>&result=<t,w,l>&r=<random # between 0 and 100000>

where:

      r,p,s represent your rock, paper or scissors choice.
      t,w,l represents whether tie, win, or loss against previous prediction

The response will be like:

      Prediction: p I have played a total of 25751 games.  I've won 40.895% of those -- 33% would be chance

. (7537 ties, 10531 wins, 7683 losses.) strat1 (0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0) using prior

where the computers next move is charAt(12), in this case 'p':paper

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This one has been around for a long time: <http://chappie.stanford.edu/cgi- bin/roshambot>

</comment><comment><USER7> Nice.

I chose as random as possible (for a human, we're bad at that) and I tied: "Against me, you've won 23 games, lost 23 games, and tied 21 games".

</comment><comment><USER8> My results: Against me, you've won 11 games, lost 0 games, and tied 9 games.

Maybe it´d make sense to add a slight random element to throw off intelligent human players? 10% chance of picking one completely randomly every time? It might lead to people who could break the system picking up patterns wrong.</comment>


Apple now makes more money from Macs than iPads - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2015/4/27/8505411/apple-revenue-mac-vs-ipad

<comment><USER2> "Post PC era"

</comment><comment><USER3> Because developers charge more on Macs app.

<comment><USER4> The article doesn't seem to count app income at all, just revenue (not profit!) from initial sales of the devices.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Is there any tool for testing a site's CSS specificity etc..? - <AUTHOR> ... so that you can get a break down of results like the ones shown here:
 http://www.csspurge.com <comment><USER2> I haven't seen a tool doing a break down yet.

You can find unused CSS with [https://github.com/giakki/uncss](https://github.com/giakki/uncss) and linters, e.g. [https://github.com/brigade/scss- lint/](https://github.com/brigade/scss-lint/), will analyze and warn if the complexity (number of levels etc) grows too big.

</comment><comment><USER3> [http://cssstats.com](http://cssstats.com)

<comment><AUTHOR> great, thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Clickable: [http://www.csspurge.com](http://www.csspurge.com)</comment>


Stock market is up ~10% since November, what's the deal? - <AUTHOR> Looking at the 1-year google finance default indexes the stock market more-or-less flatlined until November '16. Has anything about the economy fundamentally changed since then? Is this a product of speculation around the new president's agenda? <comment><USER2> Certainty. Before an election there is uncertainty and consequently an unknown risk. Elections remove the uncertainty irrespective of who wins what and make the risks more knowable. The business cycle reflects the elections. Rising stock markets are one form of business cycle expression when alternative investments are less attractive: e.g. if the money markets were returning 6% stock prices would probably be lower.

</comment><comment><USER3> It is probably speculation. There is a certain kind of rich person who likes to spend their money to make the Republicans look good. Often, for instance, prediction markets lean Republican because there are deep pocketed "investors" who don't mind losing money for their cause.</comment>


What to do during break from work? - <AUTHOR> What do you guys do when you have a break from work to give yourself an energy boost for the next session? <comment><USER2> Make tea. I like the ceremony of it. It's during these repeated actions that I let my mind wander and think about next tasks and new ideas.

</comment><comment><USER3> Are you talking about lunch break? Usually best to go for a walk or something. If I try to code my brain is f __*d (fried) later that day.

</comment><comment><USER4> I attempt to mediate using headspace, but if I don't feel in the mood for that, I go for a walk around the city. However, if I am feeling rather lazy, I sit at my desk eating and watching YouTube videos.

I am joining a new company on Monday and they have a gym so I think I might start lighting some weights and become a beef cake.

I guess it depends on my mood.

</comment><comment><USER5> I try to go for a walk every 50 mins, sometimes eat a snack or stretch a bit. But I don't have a system for it.

</comment><comment><USER6> Listening to some tunes, my dude.

</comment><comment><USER7> I used to take long walks on my breaks, scarf down my lunch just to have more time.

</comment><comment><USER8> I take a walk down to my local coffee shop and get an espresso

</comment><comment><USER9> Chit chat with co-workers about non-work/technology related topics. Football/sports, house, family, kids, politics etc etc.

</comment><comment><USER10> A 6 inch sub to refuel...a BK at lunch gives short term pleasure but post afternoon brain melt.

</comment><comment><USER11> Just started an office job, I go to the gym. Brilliant way of switching off from work.

</comment><comment><USER12> Anything except what you do at work. No pc, phone, sitting, indoors and so on.

</comment><comment><USER13> Caffeine and sugar.

</comment><comment><USER14> Walking

</comment><comment><USER15> Go up and down the stairs

</comment><comment><USER16> what i think i will do, i can never get done

</comment><comment><USER17> Go outside

</comment><comment><USER18> Sport

</comment><comment><USER19> walk</comment>


Facebook lifts cryptocurrency ban amid rumours of Coinbase takeover - <AUTHOR> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/facebook-cryptocurrency-ban-coinbase-bitcoin-exchange-a8418841.html <comment><USER2> I think this makes alot of sense. No real 800lb gorilla in the space yet.

Coinbase is big but they have nowhere near the money, legal reach, engineer head count, or infrastructure of a Microsoft, Facebook, google or Amazon.

if the rumors of Coinbase making loads of money are true then they make a great and vulnerable target. I mean Coinbase is the US leader in crypto but they don't really have any moat around them to prevent one of the big 5 from coming in and competing with them by slashing trading cost to almost zero.

Where would Coinbase be if trading commissions were gone.

That's got to be a "Netscape loosing all its Navigator revenue due to a free Internet explorer" type scary for Coinbase.

Even if Coinbase is making money like crazy, you'd think they still have to seriously consider selling.

<comment><USER3> Hard to classify them as "vulnerable" given how successful they've been independently and they're privately held. I'd be "vulnerable" to the right eye-popping offer too, so don't bet on anything right now.

<comment><USER4> > _Hard to classify them as "vulnerable" given how successful they've been_

Coinbase's volumes have consistently fallen every month since December. January was less than December, February less than January, March less than February, _et cetera_. That, and their valuation, puts them at risk of having to (a) lay off lots of people or (b) do a down round.

[1] [https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/can- th...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/can-the-biggest- u-s-bitcoin-exchange-win-over-wall-street-1527418800)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So did they change their mind regarding cryptocurrency being 'frequently associated with misleading or deceptive promotional practices' or did they just decide they wanted to profit off of it again?

<comment><USER6> They realized their own business model is frequently associated with misleading or deceptive promotional practices, so there would be synergy in allowing cryptocurrency ads.

<comment><USER7> That is such snark for HN but I couldn't help but laugh.

Back in the day FB had a full on "roll out the red carpet" event for notable affiliate marketers, led by "Shoemoney" to figure out how they could better engage that market to bring the diet pill, cell phone ringtone subscription scams, and "advertorial" formats to the FB ad marketplace.

And it worked brilliantly for years - affiliates figured out how to napalm international countries with that scammy bullshit and in countries like Brazil the top ad categories for years were uintentional diet pills scam subscriptions fulfilled by makeshift international fullfillment centers.

FB let those gorillas into the house, looked the other way as much as they could, and slapped meaningless "bans" on accounts that were too hot to handle.

Then when they were all grown up and had "legit" ads to swap in they buried those relationships.

I respect FB as the money printing machine that it is, but their foundation was built on "deceptive promotional practices" and it's undeniably in their DNA.

<comment> Method-X Google did the exact same thing with AdWords back in the day. Doesn't make it right but I think it's worth mentioning.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Man, this would be wild. What products would come out of this acquisition?

Maybe they'd fully support crypto as a method of payment transfer to replace their Messenger Payments product. It's not clear if crypto would make their payments platform so much better that they'd get strong penetration, but in countries with underdeveloped payments platforms, I can imagine they'd get some good growth. It'd be very much in line with their vision of connecting everyone - enable payments between anyone in the world.

<comment><USER9> Would not be good for Western Union

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> FB has been very obviously investing in crypto currency stuff. David Marcus has been put in charge of this as it says in the article, and I take it he is an important person. Their recruiters were bugging the hell out of me for a while, which indicates they're more interested in using ledger tech in advertising (something I'm working on) than in exchanges, which in fact is along the lines of their core business needs.

I mean, when was the last time the Economist or Independent broke a Silicon Valley merger story? Pretty much never, AFAIK. The substance of the story is Marcus has coinbase connections, and that's about it.

I suppose there is the eternal Winkelvoss/Zuck rivalry, but if that's really at play here, well, lol.

</comment><comment><USER11> Hold on. How has Facebook had a ban on cryptocurrency adverts since January? Every day I see another false advert, with a fake Dragon's Den investment scenario, linking to a site mocked up to look like BBC news.

<comment><USER12> Legit crypto sites were banned because they respect rules, fake, scam was alive. It's the way all bans work.

<comment><USER13> I noticed a very substantial drop in scammy ICO ads on my Facebook account.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Ok, now this would be kind of wild. Is there any real substance to this acquisition rumor? It's one thing for Facebook to want that easy money from the adverts, but it's a whole different ball game to want to get into the crypto space like this. Why wouldn't they just roll out their own crypto?

<comment><USER15> Coinbase isn't a crypto currency

<comment><USER16> Coinbase invented Bitcoin yesterday

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm not into cryptocurrencies at all, but it doesn't seem like a good idea to couple Google/Facebook (e.g. nonexistent) levels of customer service with a banking/investing like product.

Though, it's not like the current crytocurrency exchanges are doing well on this front (the other day there was a post about how Coinbase support is terrible), but they're small and have niche brands.

I don't see why a company like Facebook would want to expose themselves to the costs of employing hundreds of customer service reps and/or the negative PR of people loosing lots of money or access to their accounts with no recourse.

<comment><USER18> coinbase already has horrendous customer support. I wrote up my experience and findings of others on twitter in this blog post in December [https://medium.com/@mseiler1/coinbase-support-is-non- existen...](https://medium.com/@mseiler1/coinbase-support-is-non-existent-and- its-a-big-problem-95f38bed7e2e)

<comment><USER17> > coinbase already has horrendous customer support.

Yeah, I'm aware of that. To fix it, Facebook would have to hire a bunch of people well-trained people to take customer calls, but that will be expensive and violate their user-as-product traditions. The "Facebook Coinbase support" group might also get tons of _regular Facebook_ support calls, because the number may be the _only way_ to reach a real human at Facebook when there's a problem. IIRC, the _Menlo Park Police_ get a fair number of FB support calls (e.g. "my account was stolen"), because there's no way to reach a human at Facebook.

The alternative is the leave things as terrible as they are, but that will just be another avenue for anti-Facebook scandal stories.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> From Chris Dixon's of a16z post [1] (Coinbase's largest investor) at the launch of a16z crypto:

"We are long-term, patient investors. We've been investing in crypto assets for 5+ years. We've never sold any of those investments, and don't plan to any time soon. We structured the a16z crypto fund to be able to hold investments for 10+ years."

Makes this all sound like speculation

[1] [https://a16zcrypto.com/2018/06/introducing-a16z-crypto/](https://a16zcrypto.com/2018/06/introducing-a16z-crypto/)

<comment><USER20> Or could be a negotiating tactic on price. Or they didn't expect a big offer as they wrote this.

As investors, everything is for sale. They aren't going to stick to the 10 year plan half way through if billions are put on the table.

<comment><USER19> One of the founders was my college roommate. Without quoting anyone, Coinbase is not selling anytime soon. At best, it might be a round of financing.

<comment><USER21> As they say in the midst of an M&A process "Always tell your old roommate what you're doing".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I realize that with Coinbase's rumored financial success, this might be a sound investment... but I really do hope that their intention is not to use the Facebook platform to push crypto. Hawking their user's data is taking it far enough.

(Just to be clear, this isn't specifically about or against crypto, this is about them promoting _any_ asset to unqualified investors.)

<comment><USER23> Why else would they acquire them?

<comment><USER22> They could acquire them purely as an investment that generates returns. A dividend, or whatever.

<comment><USER23> That seems very unlikely, and would have a high opportunity cost. Seems like some sort of payments platform is what they would be thinking with this hypothetical acquisition.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Coinbase selling out to Facebook would be in my opinion the same as Coinbase not believing in the future of cryptocurrencies. Why would the founder sell when this company could be worth much more if cryptocurrencies become mainstream? The founder could become the equivalent of a modern J.P Morgan.

</comment><comment><USER25> I mean, what's stopping Facebook from introducing FaceCoin tommorrow as a virtual currency like any of the other in-game currencies only offer to buy real things with it. None of the market-dominating things need Coinbase or anything crypto related. If they buy, it's purely tapping a hot market.

Keep in mind, once the dust settles, cryptocurrency is probably going to settle into two buckets: utility and security. Facebook definitively does not want to be involved in the latter.

<comment><USER26> > what's stopping Facebook from introducing FaceCoin tommorrow

The same thing that's stopping them from building a rocket ship or a Facebook- branded pocket knife. _Why_ would they do it?

Either this theoretical coin gives Facebook some advantage -- i.e. the ability to mint new coins at a whim, or an ICO that gives them a bunch of capital -- in which case that will make it unappealing to large swathes of users compared to fiat or existing cryptocurrencies, or exposes them to possible regulatory risk in exchange for capital, which they can easily raise through normal capital markets. Or it gives them no advantage, so ... why do it?

Purchasing a company like Coinbase doesn't seem to make sense to me in terms of aligned business goals, but my experience with M&A people is that it doesn't really matter -- they get rewarded based on perceived dollar value and execution, rather than whether their actions benefit the company. In the end nothing would surprise me here, but a priori acquiring a growing company at a perceived discount to its discounted future value is a good use of cash, even if only seen as an investment.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I feel like:

1) FB only turned back on ads so that they could get better data on how people market crypto projects (for their own blockchain team) 2) Added revenue 3) The article is very, very speculative; one could argue it's about as speculative as one of these vaporware token sales claiming they have a partnership with some major brand, and 20%+ of the copy is dedicated to building the hypothetical value of such a partnership.

Maybe someone made up the rumor as some last-ditch effort to make the price not go down

</comment><comment><USER28> Just spitballing here, but I could imagine that each of the twos weak spots (Facebook: declining user growth, fake profiles, need of income via engagement etc vs. <insert-coin-here>: bad usability, trustworthiness, small-scale markets, no vendor acceptance etc), could be ripe for great synergies with such a merger.

</comment><comment><USER29> I seem to recall that a prominent litecoin developer was working for Facebook and he sold all his coins to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. There was a lot of speculation about what this meant when it happened.

<comment><USER30> He worked for Google and was a Director of Engineering at Coinbase.

<comment><USER29> Your comment drove me to find a link... Charlie Lee, who works for Facebook

[https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-21/why-charlie-lee- so...](https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-21/why-charlie-lee-sold-his- litecoin)

<comment><USER30> Where does it say that he works for Facebook?

Charlie Lee is a Managing Director of the Litecoin Foundation.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> who said CB was on sale? They are not even letting any more VC investment.

<comment><USER32> Everything is for sale as long as the offer is good enough.

<comment><USER33> It's the old joke "we've established what you are, now we are now just negotiating the price".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Anyone else seeing something weird with the scrolling and layout in this article? The big black bar at the top covers about half the page.

</comment><comment><USER35> "Banning" an entire industry from buying ads was a stupid thing to do to begin with.

<comment><USER36> Like cigarette bans?

<comment><USER37> I am all for cigarette advertising bans, and I wish that alcohol advertising was treated the same way.

(I do not smoke, but I do drink.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> There is 0% chance FB can buy coinbase.

Coinbase won't sell. They've built an all time level team and are absolutely raking in $$$.

This is dumb.

<comment><USER36> You lack imagination. If Facebook offers Coinbase tomorrow 100 billion dollars, they won't sell?

<comment><USER39> That depends.. 100B in cash, Facebook stock, or crypto-currencies? :D

<comment><USER40> Well, there isn't such thing as 100B in cryptocurrency, so definitely not in crypto. (It would be very hard/impossible to acquire that amount right now).

This brings us to an interesting thought. Cryptocurrency transaction values have been steady growing, starting from pizzas to alpaca socks and now it's even possible to settle multi million dollar transactions. In the the future we'll probably see larger, billion dollar plus aquisitions settled in cryptocurrency, why not? For that to happen though, their marketcaps will need to rise significantly from what they are now, at least to multi trillion dollar levels.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Elon Musk Changes Twitter Location to Austin, Suggesting New Texas Gigafactory - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1224926442527563776 <comment><USER2> In the focus on Trump's rambling comments about Musk at Davos, it seems like this little tidbit was often missed:

"He's gonna be building a very big plant in the United States, he has to. Because we help him, so he has to help us."

<comment><AUTHOR> Ah, interesting.

Either way this might push the stock over $1000 tomorrow. Wild week.

<comment><USER2> Seems like a calculated move to press the short squeeze at a moment of extreme volatility.

If Elon Musk wanted to do the most to advance the Tesla mission, he would issue stock at these prices and raise capital to shore up the company's finances. Instead, he's trying to burn the last few Tesla shorts with any margin left in their account.</comment></comment></comment>


Some visa holders (including H and B) can become citizens by joining US military - walsh-cloonagh

The US Department of Defense is authorized to enlist immigrants with medical or language skills through September 30, 2016 and provide a fast track to citizenship.
They would become citizens within months and could begin the process of sponsoring their spouses and parents for permanent residence straightaway.
This may be of interest to some of the many thousands of technology workers on H or L visas that don't have a path to stay in the United States, but would like to.
A majority of these visa holders are from India and several Indian languages are on the list.
Speakers of the following languages are eligible for the program:
Albanian, Amharic, Arabic, Azerbaijani, Bengali, Bulgarian, Burmese, Cebuano, Cambodian-Khmer, Chinese, Czech, French (with citizenship from an African Country), Georgian, Haitian Creole, Hausa, Hindi, Hungarian, Igbo, Indonesian, Kashmiri, Korean, Kurdish, Lao, Malay, Malayalam, Moro (Tausug/Maranao/Maguindanao), Nepalese, Pashto, Persian Dari, Persian Farsi, Polish, Portuguese, Punjabi, Russian, Sindhi, Serbo-Croatian, Singhalese, Somali, Swahili, Tagalog, Tajik, Tamil, Thai, Turkish, Turkmen, Ukrainian, Urdu (with citizenship from Pakistan or Afghanistan), Uzbek, Yoruba
Link to Department of Defense fact sheet: http://www.defense.gov/news/mavni-fact-sheet.pdf
Link to Army program, which accepted over 1000: http://www.goarmy.com/benefits/additional-incentives/mavni.html
Link to Air Force Special Forces program, which only accepted 2 recently: http://www.afsoc.af.mil/Units/AirForceSpecialOperationsAirWarfareCenter/USAFSOS/MAVNI.aspx <comment><AUTHOR> I'm in the Army. I've met a few people who enlisted through the MAVNI program and they are very outstanding Americans.

One guy I met, had two masters degrees (this is crazy for someone who's enlisted), one in CS and another in engineering. Most of the people I met coming in through MAVNI already had good English, like you mentioned if they do not...

Another guy was from Mexico and barely had a grasp of English. Graduates of basic training who have this issue get sent to Texas to attend a language school, though.

</comment><comment><USER2> You no longer can say that it's hard to emigrate to the USA: you just need to enlist, give up your freedom and possibly your morals! Grrreat deal.

<comment><USER3> And fluently speak the language of your homeland, which the US deems a high security risk and of particular need to have defense personnel with knowledge thereof...

<comment> walsh-cloonagh Czech, Polish, Hungarian and Turkish are on the list: the languages of NATO allies

The languages of other many US allies are on the list as well.

So, this program is at least not entirely a Bay of Pigs style plot

<comment><USER4> Yeah, the list seems to include a lot of languages that seem more likely to be motivated by potential need for US military to be cooperating with forces speaking those languages than languages associated with threat populations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Some stuff (TL; DR) from the linked DoD fact sheet:

\- The applicant must have been in valid, legal status, for the last 2 years (no need to have been in the same status during those 2 years);

\- Must not have had any single absence from the US longer than 90 days during those two years;

\- Must commit to at least 4 years of Active Duty service.</comment>


Two Stage Tether to Orbit Launch System – Space Elevator Conference 2012 - <AUTHOR> http://electrictakeoff.com/archives/718

<comment><USER2> This is totally awesome! The lower stage can be built with available materials and bootstrap the development of the orbital part by making existing aircraft launches so much cheaper that air freight could compete with ground transportation costs.</comment>


Warner Bros. Flags Its Own Website as a Piracy Portal - <AUTHOR> https://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-flags-website-piracy-portal-160904/ <comment><USER2> Many long years ago now in a past life, I was a network security guy for a big research university. Overall, that was a pretty fun job: universities make for a target rich environment. The downside was we that we were responsible for handling DMCA complaints to the university (this was a relatively new law and p2p sharing was just starting to become mainstream).

We'd take the complaint, check the netflow logs to verify that the IP in question really was running file sharing software at the same time, turn off the Ethernet port, report them to the Dean of Students, turn them back on after the deans talked to them, etc., etc.

My boss at the time was sick of doing the RIAA's dirty work for them (back then the RIAA was way more vigorous about enforcement than the MPAA. I don't remember why). So he decided that we were going to make a web site to give step-by-step instructions with screenshots to show how to disable file uploading in every p2p client available. We didn't care what the kids were downloading because the DMCA complaints only came in from uploads.

So fast-forward a year or so and the site is pretty popular. We'd get asked by at least one or two other universities a week if they could copy our instructions locally for their students. Being a university, of course we would encourage it and only ask for attribution for the copyrighted text and images.

Every now and then, I'd Google around and see who was using our instructions, and one day I noticed a .com show up in the results, which was unusual. I don't remember what the name of the site was, but it was some site trying to convince people that copyright infringement is bad and the music industry really are the good guys, etc. I know for sure we didn't get any requests from anyone like that, so I did some digging.

The site didn't have a DMCA contact listed (as required), so it took some serious digging to find out who really owned the site. As I'm sure you've guessed by now, it was owned and operated by none other than the Recording Industry Association of America. They had stolen the entire site, text, screenshots and all, removed our copyright information, and rebranded the pages, claiming the work as their own.

I dug through my email to find the most recent takedown notice they had sent us, changed all the names to reflect the current situation and fired it off to the RIAA's General Counsel. About 10m later, I got a phone call from a very concerned attorney. I genuinely couldn't stop laughing as he was talking, so I referred the matter to our attorneys and thought no more of it.

It sucks to know that your career has peaked so early. It's all been downhill from there.

<comment><USER3> "back then the RIAA was way more vigorous about enforcement than the MPAA. I don't remember why"

Because sharing music took off faster than sharing videos due to different bandwidth requirements?</comment></comment>


Last Year I Graduated College and Launched a Startup - <AUTHOR> http://blog.jasonshah.org/post/23611548670/last-year-i-graduated-college-and-launched-a-startup <comment><USER2> I read this looking for a "unique personal story" which the title suggested, unfortunately I mostly found "boiler-plate advice".

edit: Some insightful comments though:

\- "The first year after graduating from college is a uniquely challenging time.", I definitely struggled with this out of college. Still sometimes I envy those years and times surrounded by friends.

\- "[look for] unique personal stories vs. giving condescending boiler-plate advice.", I hadn't been able to put into words what I hate about some talks and what I like about others, but this sums it up nicely.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ouch. Sorry that was your experience with this post. I'm currently drafting a more detailed account with more color that you might find more up your alley.

<comment><USER2> My response was probably a little harsher than it should've been. I still found the advise an interesting read, just very disappointed not to find the story. Looking forward to your next post.

<comment><USER3> You were not harsh. It really was a boiler plate article. The title of the post did not match what I thought the article would contain (a unique personal story).

It is good feedback for the author. Don't be afraid to be honest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Although your unique story would have been more interesting, I definitely agree with a lot of what you said.

I graduated college June 4 of last year, and have gone through a couple ideas already. I put serious effort into 2, one being an e-commerce startup I hope to launch this summer. I've definitely had to re-evaluate how much my time is worth over the past year, and that is one of the most important pieces of advice I give to my friends just graduating now.

I planned on working for ~6 months to pay down some debt (credit cards and student loans) and save some money to move to the city (NYC or SF). Ended up getting a great job teaching the computer class at an elementary school and running a staff development program for about 30 elementary school teachers. Its an hourly job, no salary, but I definitely end up working more than 40 hours each week. I'm so drained after dealing with young kids all day that it's incredibly hard to put in more work on a startup.

I really am only able to do it due to two things: first, thank god for breaks, vacation time my first year, and being a school days only employee. Second, finding a great co-founder that keeps me motivated and focused (and also happens to be my significant other - not always a great choice, but for us it's amazing... our third date turned into a three hour long brainstorming session for the e-commerce project I mentioned above).

While I see things working out great in the future, and I'm definitely getting a lot out of my current job (I definitely want to do an education focused startup, and I feel like this age group is impossible to learn about without working with them directly), it is very hard to manage work / life balance when it's really work (day job) / work (startup) / life balance. Getting into a routine, finding sufficient motivation and willpower, and realizing how valuable time is at this point in life is important before even thinking about being able to reasonably work on your own projects or startup.

</comment><comment><USER5> First time I read the post, I found it to be a bit boler-plate. But then I re- read it, while thinking about the person who posted it.

You just graduated college. You havent lived that much. Still you had the guts to go out and get what you want. Due to the fact that your experience is limited, you can't seem to say anything us old-schoolers haven't heard or said before.

But you have something better than advice to talk about. You have the unique perspective of being a young twenty-something business person. Talk about that. Let us see the world through your eyes. Your frustrations, pains, and achievements. Tell us how you are sharpening your newly minted skills.

I wish you the very best of luck.

</comment><comment><USER6> That "class is over, and now is the time to learn" is sick!

I just posted a similar story... but from the point of view of a current College undergrad:

<http://blog.dillonhess.com/2012/dillons-summer-code/>

</comment><comment><USER7> "You will accumulate life debt the more you try to bullshit your way through. The embarrassment you think you will experience is nothing compared to outsized intellectual and experiential debt."

This is a true gem. Thanks for reminding me of that.

<comment><USER8> I wish I understood what that sentence is supposed to mean. "Life debt"? It seems to be in code, or shorthand, or jibberish.

<comment><USER7> The way I understand it, it means missed days, opportunities and chances. Every day you try to trick the system (meaning life), it teaches you by taking away a day from you. Now it can take that day in a good way (you learnt something) or it can take that day in a bad way (you wasted a valuable 24 hours of your life that you'll never get back).

<comment><USER8> Sounds fine, but -- to me -- like many of the other points in the piece, it applies equally both before and after graduation from college. I think a lot of college kids fool themselves into thinking what they do during college doesn't matter; they'll start anew and turn over a new leaf when they graduate and "adult life begins". It doesn't work, those sorts of rationalizations are similar to New Year's Resolutions, which also don't work. Adult life doesn't start with a blank slate after college graduation; college kids are already living their lives and, to use the author's own term, amassing their own life debt.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> great post Jason!

</comment><comment><USER10> Enjoyed the post, Jason.

Along your comment of life after college being a uniquely challenging time, I wrote this post a few weeks back that seems relevant - [http://zackshapiro.com/post/22010015010/9-things-i-wish- some...](http://zackshapiro.com/post/22010015010/9-things-i-wish-someone-had- told-me-about-life-after)

I don't mean to take away any attention from your article, just thought it would be some good, direct advice for recent college grads.</comment>


Facebook Connect all.js broken for lots of people. - <AUTHOR> https://developers.facebook.com/bugs/375287419165107/

<comment><USER2> Apropos of [http://bijansabet.com/post/16980728547/why-facebook- connect-...](http://bijansabet.com/post/16980728547/why-facebook-connect- shouldnt-be-your-only-sign-in).

Tying your entire authentication strategy to Facebook Connect or other external authentication system is becoming a major liability to the Internet in my opinion. When all.js is broken, so is much (too much) of the Internet now.

</comment><comment><USER3> "work fast and break things." with "things" being.. the entire internet.

</comment><comment><USER4> This is the working ticket: <https://developers.facebook.com/bugs/203275643103137>

</comment><comment><USER5> Using <http://connect.beta.facebook.net/en_US/all.js> is a temporary option.

</comment><comment><USER6> Cache poisoning?</comment>


Twitter account reposting everything Trump tweets, suspended within 3 days - <AUTHOR> https://mashable.com/article/twitter-donald-trump-suspend-tweets-policy-violence/ <comment><USER2> I wish we would all collectively agree not to use Twitter or consider it an inappropriate place for such communication. I don't know how Twitter became a serious enough platform for public figures to post on, but to me it still feels equivalent to posting on your niche video game forum or MySpace. I can't take anything seriously if they post it on Twitter.

<comment><USER3> Twitter has always been a refuge of the small minded and the most superficial aspects of our society. Couple that with raging narcissism, dog-whistle politics, racism, and you have a weaponized platform. This is the dark side of the tech. /u The light side is that it allows almost real-time reporting of current events, crowdsorcing, and sentiment feedback to allow for responsible action by people who pay attention.

<comment><USER4> Surely Twitter is both, just like every other platform?

<comment><USER5> I'm not sure it is. Twitter is short form by design. Most issues are complex. I would suggest that short form dissertation on complex issues is pointless at best and more often than not simply stokes conflict.

Have Twitter (and Facebook) provided valuable information to the world? Sure. Have they also harmed democracies? I think it's fairly obvious they have.

Oh shoot, turns out it's a complex issue...

<comment><USER6> The quality of conversation on facebook is not higher than twitter, just more verbose. Twitter's short form is not the cause for its deficiencies, the low threshold for reaching a wide audience is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I mean, Twitter have explicitly said in the past that they won't suspend national leaders for breaking the rules, so this is entirely consistent with this policy, as the reposter isn't a national leader.

</comment><comment><USER8> This is just rage-bait content farm blog spam. Yes, it's a poor experiment because bots only retweeting aren't allowed anyway. Yes, obviously the president is held to a different standard. Yes, even Twitter says as much (which just made POTUS and co even angrier). Yes, everyone upvoting this already knew that.

<comment><USER9> he's not retweeting, he's reposting.

this is a different experiment: what if a regular person would be posting content with the same language as Donald Trump?

the answe is, such person would see his twitter account suspended within three days.

what can we extrapolate from this? maybe that twitter is whitelisting Tump from its automatic content moderating bots/filters.

<comment><USER10> Right, but we also know that because Twitter says that. They are clear that world leaders are held to a different standard then the general public because Twitter's view is it is in the public's interest. You can disagree with this, but it is not a secret.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Is there really any news here? Twitter has already and on multiple occasions specified that political leader's tweets, including trump, fall under a public interest exception

<comment><USER12> I'd imagine that the data on which tweets are contrary to Twitters own policy - and are only up for public interest - would be fairly interesting

Twitter should try and make this a bit more visible in general.

<comment><USER7> That's what they did with the note on Trump's tweet that upset him so much.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Everyone is hating on Twitter and I'm here enjoying the tweets from friends, developers and opsec.

But seriously, having a good experience with Twitter is not hard I think. Follow and interact with people who post interesting or funny stuff and unfollow/block/mute political posters.

</comment><comment><USER14> Possibly falls foul of Twitter's ToS in less obvious ways?

Authenticity:

Platform manipulation and spam: You may not use Twitter's services in a manner intended to artificially amplify or suppress information or engage in behavior that manipulates or disrupts people's experience on Twitter.

Impersonation: You may not impersonate individuals, groups, or organizations in a manner that is intended to or does mislead, confuse, or deceive others.

<comment><USER9> > Impersonation: You may not impersonate individuals, groups, or organizations > in a manner that is intended to or does mislead, confuse, or deceive others.

the person doin this experiment was very clear about not being the real donald trump.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Has anyone else deactivated Twitter of late?

<comment><USER16> I unfollowed everyone a while ago, and have recently only re-followed the police departments in my neighborhood, because of my proximity to certain events.

I've kept the Twitter app on my iPad but not my iPhone, mostly to follow certain trending topics in my downtime.

I don't miss it a whole lot, and I've upped my RSS feed count reading.

But mostly I want to stop consuming as much as I am consuming right now.

Read some books this last weekend... it was a far better use of my time, and a much better outcome for my mood.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> It most likely got suspended because of an extremely large number of people reporting it. He created the account so people will report it!

Also, Twitter stated that publicly elected national leaders tweets don't get removed, because the people they lead, for better or worse, need to see what they're saying. I, for one, want to know what my President says. This doesn't mean I like it.

<comment><USER18> > This account will tweet what the President tweets. Let's see if it gets > suspended for violating twitters TOS. Follow along with this social > experiment. Report any tweets that violate the rules. Thank you

So the owner of the account just baited people to report posts. I don't see anything newsworthy here.

<comment><USER17> You and I know that. But Hacker News disagrees.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Isn't it clear that Trump has violated the TOS several times by now, but who's going to ban the president?

They added the 'Public interests exception' rule for a reason.

<comment><USER20> We understand the need for strict scrutiny in 1A restrictions. No trolling by yelling "Fire!" in a crowded non-combusting, crowded theater.

So the question of whether the 'Public interests exception' should apply for a website where any reasonable user knows the content is dodgy on its best day.

<comment><USER21> Stop SAYING this! Goodness HN has stopped caring about facts.

This ruling was not upheld. Please stop using this example, HN.

<comment><USER20> What specific case, then? I come here to learn. Please educate.

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

<comment><USER22> Schenk v US was partially overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio.

We've come around, though, as Holmes' line of reasoning is very common today.

Some details in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater)

<comment><USER23> To add some more commentary: [https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its- tim...](https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/11/its-time-to-stop- using-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/)

Shouting "fire" in a crowded theater is protected by the 1A as long as it passes the Brandenburg Test of "imminent lawless action".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Twitter needs to be regulated as a publisher if they insist on curating viewpoints and censoring opinions they don't like.

<comment><USER25> I've seen versions of this take over the last few days and I'm curious what the actual stance is.

Is the belief that Twitter shouldn't have any rules against violence speech, or that those rules shouldn't apply to the president? Or is the belief that the president hasn't violated those rules, but if he did the rules should still apply to him?

<comment><USER22> What does any of that have to do with curating viewpoints?

<comment><USER25> I'm interpreting "censoring opinions they don't like" to be a reference to Twitter blocking likes/retweets on a Trump tweet for violating the TOS on violence. I'm asking what OP's positive stance on that is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> > _Let's see if it gets suspended for violating twitters TOS._

How is this a story? A user called "suspendthepres" posted the presidents tweets and encouraged like-minded individuals to report them... gets banned?</comment>