Meshroom: Open Source 3D Reconstruction Software (2018) [video] - <AUTHOR> https://alicevision.github.io/#meshroom <comment><USER2> Meshroom has been very fun to work with for what I can only refer to as "closed-shell" or fully convex shapes. I tried my damnedest to collect a good photogrammetry-based model of a flower, and the mesh fidelity I got from my 100 or so photos was pretty terrible... And I think probably because of the leafs and the bowl shape of the petals on top. If I had time, I probably would have separated the flower into distinct pieces (leafs, stem, top of flower) and do more assemblage in my 3D program with discretely generated meshes...

However, stones and plant bulbs came out great.

Edit: After some of the other links in this discussion, I definitely need to revisit this project! Some people have had great success with foliage and flowers it seems like.

<comment><USER3> I tried a wicker basket as a test mesh this week and had a great deal of trouble with the handles.

For closed objects though the results are probably better than I've found in commercial software.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Really cool, especially now that Autodesk's photogrammetry software is no longer available for free. I think this is a good example of academic/public research resulting in useful free software!

<comment><USER5> +1! There's such a wealth of computer vision approaches of practical value locked up in CVPR and other research papers that could be exposed this way to enthusiasts and semi-pro users

<comment><USER6> +1 to this comment

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> They link to the full Mikros showreel [1], implying that it's been used in a bunch of blockbusters already. But I couldn't find any information on how it's been used and in which projects, it would be cool to have more details on that. It's always interesting to see the film industry working with open source software, especially in cases like this where production companies are sponsoring development.

[1]: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBy1g7gbXCQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBy1g7gbXCQ)

<comment><USER8> > it's hard to tell how it's been used and in which projects

That's always the case in vfx. The best source is contemporaneous interviews directly with the people involved, which is sporadic and very rare. Most demo reels, even for big software packages, are incredibly misleading. Company A might have some partnership with a production studio, slap their name in the credits, use their work in the demo reel, but the output is junk so the artist scraps it and does it the "old fashioned way" from scratch. Or the software gets used in a very specific, tangential way like roughing something out or converting file formats back and forth.

VFX companies and software packages are trying to sell themselves for future work. So they tend to gloss over details and present themselves much better than they are in practice. After a show wraps, it's really difficult to get good information. The files on disk may not even open anymore and the artists have moved on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> My organization recently considered buying more licenses for photoscan/metashape ([https://www.agisoft.com/](https://www.agisoft.com/)) but it was too expensive. I'm curious as to how it compares (I'm not a user myself so can't judge), and I couldn't find wether this can run on a distributed GPU cluster. If that's the case I would love to push for replacing photoscan by this.

</comment><comment><USER10> A useful addition to that page would be a short summary of what "photogrammetry" is and a description of what this software does. It need only be a couple of sentences. Otherwise, looks very interesting.

<comment><USER11> Underlying photogrammetry library, [https://alicevision.github.io/](https://alicevision.github.io/), has more informative landing page.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Still CUDA only? Didn't see an answer to that in a few minutes of clicking around their site.

<comment><USER13> Seems like some of it is still CUDA-only, from the AliceVision INSTALL.md [0].

I have to wonder how AMD is letting NVIDIA win so big in academia, when their GPUs are actually quite competitive. I'm beginning to think that they have some management practice or culture which makes it difficult for them to retain software talent, otherwise I can't really understand how they always seem to have a glaring weakness somewhere that they're not addressing.

[0]: [https://github.com/alicevision/AliceVision/blob/develop/INST...](https://github.com/alicevision/AliceVision/blob/develop/INSTALL.md)

<comment><USER14> I don't think it's AMD's fault really, CUDA just as an insane amount of inertia in the space and there's a whole lot of incentive for anyone to do anything about it.

As much as I hate it I've been vendor locked to NV for years and as a result I don't really care anymore. I'll never buy a AMD card because I need to get work done and get paid. It sucks, but not enough for me to go through the pain of trying to work with the far far inferior OpenCL based software for rendering/photogrammetry etc. I don't even touch ML, but I assume the story is the same there.

What's the value proposition for writing software that works with OpenCL when your entire market already has NV cards? The price differential is tiny too, maybe if AMD came down like 30% for the equivalent computational power.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> btw: [https://www.reddit.com/r/photogrammetry/](https://www.reddit.com/r/photogrammetry/)

</comment><comment><USER16> so...are shiny black objects better scanned into 3d objects now?

</comment><comment><USER17> Another great free alternative is COLMAP ([https://demuc.de/colmap](https://demuc.de/colmap)).

And for those interested in doing this on mobile in real-time, we've just released a beta SDK ([https://abound.dev](https://abound.dev)) that lets you add real-time photogrammetry to any iOS app.

<comment><USER18> Considering this is a thread about open source software I feel like your self promotion of a proprietary service is out of place.

<comment><USER19> It's a thread about photogrammetry.

<comment><USER18> > Meshroom: Open-Source Photogrammetry Software</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Something small, every day (2013) - <AUTHOR> https://austinkleon.com/2013/12/29/something-small-every-day/ <comment><USER2> A corollary to this I include in my life is "Do your worst." I get stuck a lot creatively: this feature I'm building is too hard, this design in my head is too vague, my article idea sucks, my video isn't going to make sense, etc. What helps me break through that, is just put the crappiest version out on the page. No edits. Radical self-acceptance of whatever I put on the screen. Often the whole thing gets a huge refactor. Yesterday's architecture document I was working on started this way and I ended up throwing the entire first version out. But that crappy first version totally unblocked me to get something I'm now proud of.

<comment><USER3> I like this quote from Ira Glass:

 _Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, and I really wish somebody had told this to me.

All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But it's like there is this gap. For the first couple years that you're making stuff, what you're making isn't so good. It's not that great. It's trying to be good, it has ambition to be good, but it's not that good.

But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is good enough that you can tell that what you're making is kind of a disappointment to you. A lot of people never get past that phase. They quit.

Everybody I know who does interesting, creative work they went through years where they had really good taste and they could tell that what they were making wasn't as good as they wanted it to be. They knew it fell short. Everybody goes through that.

And if you are just starting out or if you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Do a huge volume of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week or every month you know you're going to finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you're going to catch up and close that gap. And the work you're making will be as good as your ambitions.

I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I've ever met. It takes awhile. It's gonna take you a while. It's normal to take a while. You just have to fight your way through that._

—Ira Glass

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Cognitive techniques to fight procrastination and to get control of your life and work are important. But if your problems are deeply emotional or spiritual or physical, the will-power will only get you so far.

My therapist says that will-power and small good decisions are like the starter motor. You can ignite it with will, with habits, schedules and what not. But your emotional life, and your deeper personality and your talent is your real engine and your fuel. You need to have that in working order, serviced regularly and filled up with energy. Or the battery of will will drain out fast.

<comment><USER5> > You need to have that in working order, serviced regularly and filled up > with energy.

How do you do this?

<comment><USER6> I'll venture that it's "the work" that's at the center of transformation, spirituality, self-actualization. Pick your modality: therapy, AA, fitness, yoga, meditation, many others.. anything that leads you to truth, awareness, empowerment, accountability.

You can find references to this in recovery, relationships ("Looking for [..], someone who's done the work..."), etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment> non-entity For me the problems is less of "how do I find the time for this" and more of "holy crap I have so much time yet so many things to do how do i optimize the in order in which to do them / decide which to do today / decide which will be better long term vs short term / pick out ones that are futile and should be let go".

The other problem I have in all sorts of things I do in life is getting compeltley halted, often at the beginning of a task,because of something small. Working on something hand on? Well shit, I dont have one specific tool I need. Well it will be a few days before I can have it shipped. Backlog it. Working on learning a new SDK? Oops the docs are 4 years out of date and theres no one in the IRC channel that cam get back to me in a timely manner. Backlog it. Bought a cool piece of retro equipment but csnt find any info about how it works on the internet, even after engaging on various forums? Backlog it. Trying to learn something but dont have the prerequisite knowledge? Backlog it.

All of those examples are real and have happened recently and combined with what I mentioned in the first paragraph ultimately just end up with men getting nothing done everyday, despite having loads of time.

</comment><comment><USER7> I really like this Jacob Riis quote that the NBA Spurs have posted in the locker room:

"When nothing seems to help, I go and look at a stonecutter hammering away at his rock perhaps a hundred times without as much as a crack showing in it. Yet at the hundred and first blow it will split in two, and I know it was not that blow that did it, but all that had gone before."

</comment><comment><USER8> I've published several scientific translations and my goal is basically one page of the original a day. Or if it has small text and multiple columns, one column might be a better choice. One page a day is manageable. Just doing a bit every day makes this seem much more tractable.

Here's probably the most popular one (by downloads) that I've translated:

[https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/76302](https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/76302)

Probably the largest things I've translated were about half of a Russian dissertation (76 pages) and a chapter of a German dissertation (50 pages). Either would have seemed beyond my capabilities if I hadn't taken them one page at a time.

Of course, there's more to translation than doing one page a day. I do one page a day for the rough draft. Editing a translation can take time (particularly to make the terminology consistent as automated translation tools don't always do that) and maybe I should also have a daily quota for that too.

Pro-tip: If you use exactly the same translated title as most people, Google Scholar will think that your translation is the one other people are citing when they use the translated title:

[https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=15045678099109134...](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cluster=15045678099109134247&hl=en&as_sdt=5,33&sciodt=0,33)

</comment><comment><USER9> Trollope used to religiously follow a similar motto: "Nulla dies sine linea" \- not a day without a line.

</comment><comment><USER10> A well written reminder! The Slight Edge is a worthwhile read for those really looking to leverage this approach at scale over time.</comment>


Shouryya Ray solves 300-year-old mathematical riddle posed by Sir Isaac Newton  - <AUTHOR> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/german-teen-shouryya-ray-solves-300-year-old-mathematical-riddle-posed-by-sir-isaac-newton/story-e6frfkui-1226368490521

<comment><USER2> Does anyone have a link to the actual solution? It must be a pretty small equation. Searching around I am unable to find anything -- a testament to how useless Internet news is.

<comment><USER3> I found this discussion: [http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/u7551/teen_solves...](http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/u7551/teen_solves_newtons_300yearold_riddle_an/c4sxd91)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I wonder how many times this story can be posted in one day.</comment>


Chromebook can make a surprisingly sweet machine for a developer - <AUTHOR> http://pbrisbin.com/posts/chromebook <comment><USER2> I don't see the point in using a crippled operating system when it will prevent you from quickly editing a low res screen cast or editing an image in the GIMP. Machines in that price range have enough performance to do some of these tasks even if they're not optimal for them. If I'm on the move away from a bigger system I might still need to do it though, so not having that capacity just because of someone's "in the cloud" dream is silly.

It's already bad enough that Google maims some of the Nexus line by disabling tethering. Android is also inflexible in many ways regarding having a local easy to use file system etc. I personally can't wait to get off Android and onto Ubuntu mobile or Firefox OS.

<comment><USER3> As stated in the article, the "point" is to have the same functionality for a fraction of the cost. You can still run image editing software or whatever you'd run on your workstation using NX. That's somewhat inconvenient, but then it boots faster with no malware, and you are guaranteed nothing important is only stored locally. So it's a trade-off, not a "crippling" as you've put it. Some folks, like the author, barely notice a difference in quality yet save $1000, and that feels good.

<comment><USER2> I can get the same functionality in terms of hardware at the more or less same cost, certainly not $1000 more as you claim. A 1.7gighz ARM or the other versions aren't more powerful than a 1.6gighz or higher Atom processor at the same price point.

And I can run a real operating system on that hardware with no problems. My laptop boots in less than 10 seconds and I trust Ubuntu just as much as a Chromebook for security. If you are worried about the security of local files you can encrypt your drive, very simply in the last few versions of Ubuntu but I don't bother, if needs be.

None of the points you make in favour of the Chromebook are exclusive to it, what's exclusive to it though is you can't get access to the vast flexibility of a local system and have to go through NX.

That's all fine for people who only do back-end stuff, or Google if they want their employees to "dog food" living in the cloud, but for someone who wants to be able to do normal everyday things like edit images, test locally or any of the many other advantages of a flexible system it doesn't really cut it. If there were locally running JavaScript equivalents for image editing and everything else we'd be a bit closer to feature parity but I still wouldn't see the major attraction.

<comment><USER4> Can you link to this notebook you're talking about? I'd love a $200 notebook that's better than a Chromebook.

<comment><USER5> It's called a Chromebook with Ubuntu on it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Any cheap old laptop works just as well if not better if you just want to use ssh into another box!

I personaly snapped up a nice Asus netbook with built in 3g modem, wifi and bluetooth and cuts a lovely battery life.

But a nice cheap chromebook is probably the best option for most unless you can find a cheap netbook of comparable use.

Though ironicly none have beat my old psion 5mx (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psion_Series_5>) for battery life and that can do ssh as well, sadly though IRDA and serial are not the cutting edge comm's standards. Have been a few that come close, but just not jumped out at me.

That said I'm still awaiting for something of that form factor with some modern love.

That all said if Mr Linux Linus is happy with a chromebook as a dev machince, then they must be doing something right, though a Chrome pixel just for SSH would be fiscal perversion on my budget.

<comment><USER7> A cheap netbook of the same price will invariably be worse in some way, since the Windows license cost is included, so they've had to cut corners somewhere, and it might not show in the specs list, but in the build quality of the device, its thinness/lightness, the quality of the display, etc

<comment><USER8> Not necessarily. Dell sold Ubuntu laptops that cost more than the Windows one, because they made money by charging software companies to have their software bundled with Windows. There's also the issue of scale- a production run of Linux laptops would sell considerably less than Windows ones.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I say this on every Chromebook thread but I'll say it again because I see a lot of the same negativity as usual: the Samsung ARM Chromebook is f*cking awesome.

It's $250 so there's no argument about buying X or Y netbook instead, you can barely get anything with a keyboard that browses the internet for that price. Also for that price you get 2 (3?) years of 100GB on Google Drive and 12 Gogo WiFi passes, which together are already worth over $250. So you can throw the device in the trash and still come out on top. Now to the computer itself:

First, the battery life is awesome, 6.5 hours of solid use (WiFi model) and since it turns on from cold in ~7 seconds you can turn it off between sessions and not lose any power at all. If that's too long for you just close the lid, you'll lose about 1% per hour but everything resumes instantly when you open it (and I do mean INSTANTLY).

Second, the hardware is really excellent for the price. The keyboard is my favorite laptop keyboard out there (even against my MBP) and the trackpad is second only to Apple devices imo. It's the same weight/size as a MacBook Air but maybe 0.2" thicker. The only hardware downsides are the plastic chassis and the screen's somewhat bad viewing angles.

Third, it runs most of what you need right out of the box. I don't even have my in developer mode, you don't need that to use Google's Secure Shell and Remote Desktop Chrome extensions. It has an Offline version of Google Drive so you can keep your most important documents local and everything syncs when you're connected.

Fourth, it's stress-free. Because everything is synchronized to the cloud and the hardware is so cheap, you never have to worry about this thing. If it breaks (which it won't easily), just go to your nearest Best Buy, drop $250, and sign in with you Google account and you'll be back exactly where you left off (even down to the tabs you had open).

I really can't recommend this device more highly. It's definitely not the right device for full-time development but as a companion to a larger laptop or a desktop it's a perfect second machine and much more useful than an iPad or Transformer-style tablet (I've had both).

</comment><comment><USER10> I just don't understand this attempts to use shitty and cheap piece of hardware to do development. You are not coding for food, right? Why bother yourself trying to use something that will make you so counterproductive?

Need powerful something - get desktop.

Need something slim and sexy - get f __ __* macbookair

Need both - get pro

Need internet connection on the go - get nexus if you use tablet.

Oh don't need it -use tetering on your phone.

It is expensive - get Clear device

Yes, it will need more money than shitty chromebook, but you are making money with it, so it's worth _investing_ in your everyday companion a little.

What I'm missing?

<comment><USER11> I need my balls not to be cooked by the power-hungry processors.

I need a light shit because I walk with my backpack a lot.

I need the key layout on the keyboard not a pain in the ass.

I need my palm to be like little Fonzie. What Fonzie like? It's cool.

I need standard linux, because I don't care enough to learn about all the quirks of Apple.

I need to have a thing that is light, 3G-capable, has good key layout, cool, and I forget to mention, I'm cheap too. So ask me why do I need to spend 5 times as much for your Macbook again?

<comment><USER12> To be fair a Macbook is going to support Linux much better and longer term than the Chromebook.

Seen as it's an actual computer and all not a locked down Google product that needs to be rooted to install an OS in the first place.

<comment><USER11> Last time I tried installing Linux (/Ubuntu) on a Macbook it was a balls cooking experience with the combination of NVidia and Intel. Pure intel HD might be better, but why do I want to solve those problems in the first place?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I used one (running Fedora 17) for a couple of weeks as a light development machine, and wrote about it here:

[https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/some-thoughts- after-2-...](https://rwmj.wordpress.com/2013/01/16/some-thoughts- after-2-5-weeks-with-the-samsung-chromebook/#content)

Note I was using it for disconnected development on the road, not as a fancy ssh client as in the article.

The upshot is that it's not too bad as a development machine. But you definitely want to root it and put something other than ChromeOS on it. Fedora, Ubuntu and other regular Linux distros are available.

</comment><comment><USER14> I am not sure I actually see myself doing development on this hardware. Maybe it is due to the type of work I am doing now and the requirement of the sheer amount of data/services running locally. But I wouldn't mind using this essentially as an operating environment with a few tmux sessions open.

The more that I tinker with OpenStack and generally setting up virtualized services I am beginning to be sway towards never necessarily needing to buy a desktop machine again.

Up until a few months ago my machines sat around just to collect dust. But I see a future where a Chromebook style machine can easily connect to a VPN with an OpenStack cloud powering development. Its actually quite damn easy now if you invest the time.

The only reason I do not do this now is that I have been unable to find a machine with decent enough resolution and great battery life. But I've told myself that my next laptop (right now a 15 inch MacBook Pro) will be something significantly smaller.

I just hope that the retina displays catch up with the rest of the industry.

<comment><USER15> The Samsung Chromebooks get 6-7hours of battery life.

You aren't getting Retina/Pixel resolution with the cheap Chromebook, but my Series 5 is 1280 x 800, which is the same resolution as the 13" Macbook Pro's (pre-retina) were. This is quite decent considering the average 15.6" cheapo laptop runs 1366 x 768.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I'd be curious to hear more about installing chrooted Debian/Ubuntu to provide a full GNU userland locally. I'm still not quite sure what this would look like, or what the limitations might be.

<comment><USER17> Crouton is awesome—you get a chrooted Ubuntu accessible via crosh. You have CLI access with `sudo enter-chroot` and can launch XFCE4 with `sudo startxfce4`.

I never use XFCE, but if you do, you can seamlessly toggle between ChromeOS and XFCE with a keyboard shortcut (e.g. a YouTube video playing in ChromeOS remains playing if you switch to XFCE).

<comment><USER12> Can you not replace ChromeOS completely?

Seems a bit of a hacky mess if not TBH

<comment><USER17> Crouton is actually a breeze to use. While the crouton script itself might have a few hacks under-the-hood, the end result is quite slick. Everything just installs under `/usr/local/chroots'. Removing one of your potentially many chrooted installs is just an `rm -rf'.

I prefer keeping ChromeOS primary and just opening a crosh window to expose one of these chroots (a browser and terminal is similar to my work environment on a Mac). Granted, XFCE can act weird if you choose to launch it, but I've never needed that functionality.

If you do want to completely replace ChromeOS, there's Chrubuntu.

<comment><USER12> Crouton is interesting and I can see why people would like it. It's just I couldn't invest long term in something that requires effort on Googles part to support as they could drop support at any point.

Haven't heard of Chrubuntu I'll definitely check that out thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Dropping down to dev mode to get access to ssh is overkill. I suggest [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/secure- shell/pnhec...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/secure- shell/pnhechapfaindjhompbnflcldabbghjo?utm_source=chrome-ntp-icon) which lets you run SSH as a normal Chrome extension.

<comment><USER19> You can just ssh via crosh without having to install anything extra. ssh in crosh does not require developer mode to be on.

<comment><USER17> Also, last I checked, Secure Shell relies on an NaCl plugin incompatible with the Samsung ARM Chromebook.

<comment><USER20> ARM support for Secure Shell was released in 0.8.8 in December.

<comment><USER17> I picked up a Samsung ARM Chromebook two weeks ago, installed both the latest Secure Shell and the Development version. Neither worked :-/

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> I have a chroot'ed Samsung Intel Chromebook that makes an OK development machine for small projects using Eclipse/Java/H2/Jetty. If I fully rooted it the extra ram would make the machine a bit more useful.

<https://github.com/dnschneid/crouton/wiki/>

<comment><USER15> crouton runs surprisingly well. I've noticed a few hiccups though - I still can't get my trackpad to work smoothly on my original Series 5.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> >> Right out of the box, things work quite well. The Secure Shell browser extension can give you an xterm-compliant terminal directly in a browser tab. >> Be sure to install the Crosh Window browser extension. It allows you to pull the browser-tab terminal out into its own window. Without it, many important key bindings will be swallowed by the browser.

Or just buy a new laptop, delete Windows and install Ubuntu and have a real machine with real software, not browser based similarities.

edits: fixing my brain's desire to misspell buy.

<comment><USER23> Can you (or any of the others making this same argument) explain to the rest of us why one bunch of bits running in environment a is 'real' and another bunch running in environment b is 'fake' (or 'unreal', or 'toy', or whatever disparaging term you care to use)? Last time I looked, JavaScript IS turing- complete.

<comment><USER22> I can't speak for others, when I was a kid, computers were powerful machines locked away and operated by seemingly mythical people. When I started reading about them I realized quickly there's nothing mythical, magical or mysterious about them at all. Then I wondered why isn't this power available to anyone, to everyone? It dawned on me in a flash, power and control.

I keep the cloud at an arm's distance, those computing resources are not owned or controlled by me. The cloud, given full control like a ChromeBook, takes all of the control away from me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> With Nitrous.io (previously action.io) <https://www.nitrous.io/#aio> any device with a large enough screen and a modern web browser makes an excellent dev machine. Been using it for the past several weeks. For web apps, it's the future. Basically no configuration and you get a linux environment that is similar to most production environments.

</comment><comment><USER25> This is the $250 ARM Chromebook he is writing about BTW.

</comment><comment><USER26> I'm so tempted to get one of these. With the shell plugin, I have access to my very high-powered servers, and Chrome comes with a nice development environment. Besides that, it's cheap and light -- a perfect roadkit.

The only problem I see is the keyboard. I _hate_ typing on netbook keyboards. I don't even like the keyboard on the Macbook Air.

Maybe I'd get used to it after awhile?

<comment><USER9> I love the keyboard on my Chomebook however it's very similar to a Macbook Pro keyboard (which is similar to Macbook Air)

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> What I want is a Chromebook that can use a Nexus 10 (or two), or Nexus 7 as an additional display.

<comment><USER28> Not quite the same thing, but you can get a Bluetooth keyboard for your Nexus 10.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> It's a sweet machine because you're able to use ssh ... using a special "developer" boot option? Come on people.

<comment><USER20> SSH does not require a "special developer boot option". You install the SecureShell chrome extension and you're done.

<comment><USER30> It's actually included on the ARM Chromebook now, I was able to launch it in Best Buy after search for the instructions on my phone (it's Ctrl-Alt-T).

The author is referring to launching normal ssh instead of the version included in cros shell which has a weird runtime configuration menu (much like ftp) and some limitations.

You do need dev mode to start bash even as a non-privileged user unfortunately.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Chromebook Pixel is $1,300. For that amount of money you can get a really really nice laptop. It won't have a super-high-res screen, but it will have a proper high-end i7 CPU, 16GB of RAM, 500GB SSD, video card enough to play modern games, etc.

I don't know about you, but performance matters for me. I don't want to wait twice as long for a DB to import, or a SQL query to run.

</comment><comment><USER12> > sweet

Is a massive exaggeration</comment>


Skype 6.0  - <AUTHOR> http://vimeo.com/25374704 <comment><USER2> This would be very unusable for me. It would be a giant step backwards, even from 5.0.

\- I need full names. I don't care about avatars \- Those group icons are very ugly \- This just looks like a giant mess (<http://www.flickr.com/photos/41766815@N00/5866118912/>)</comment>


YC S16 Batch - <AUTHOR> what can be expected tomorrow ? <comment><USER2> As usual, few companies will be invited for the face to face interview. Some will be rejected without any explanation.

Business as usual.

<comment><AUTHOR> So - in your experience is it like a blanket email? ie. everyone receives the same email whether it's yes or no?

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Just got a rejection email. Would it be too much to ask to have YC show us their internal commentary ?</comment>


Hey.com vs. Fastmail. A Review - <AUTHOR> https://codepatterns.org/2020/7/15/hey-vs-fastmail <comment><USER2> After watching the 36 minute video on Hey, I signed up for a trial and forwarded my email to it.

I already pay for ProtonMail and FastMail, both excellent products. I honestly don't know how I will feel about Hey after using it for a week or two, but I must say that there are a lot of good ideas.

They are really product and software artists.

</comment><comment><USER3> I signed up for the HEY trial and then ended up a paying customer after it ended. We'll see how I feel after the first year. I am just forwarding my email to it from a G Suite account so luckily there was no migration process involved and I am only emailing a few close friends/family. If I end up not liking it then I will have an easy move back to G Suite.

</comment><comment><USER4> HEY - Review and Redesign [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hey-review-redesign- marko-bij...](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/hey-review-redesign-marko- bijelic)

</comment><comment><USER5> >...then our servers proxy the images, so all the sender can know is details about our hosts and nothing about you.

Other than the most important bit of information, that you saw the email. They also get to know when you saw it.

</comment><comment><USER6> Off-topic ...

I have not tried Hey.com yet and respect the author for the comparison of the two email platforms, but here's two points:

1). Fastmail has custom domains to the nth degree (I have 20+ domains there, not certain how many Hey is planning to support and if they're willing to handle replies from each)

2). Gmail or Yahoo seem to be a more appropriate review in these early days

Just my 2 cents ;)

<comment><USER7> >> I have 20+ domains there

can you expand on this? Are all domains under a single "user" account? the Fastmail web site is rather unclear about multiple domains and multiple addresses per domain. thx

<comment><USER8> Yes, you just add new domains in the settings. It's incredibly powerful. For each domain you can have seemingly unlimited addresses, either mapped to your main user account or as a forwarder. If you want multiple accounts (ie. different users logging into to individual accounts) for a domain then you have to pay for each.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The best feature Hey.com has is to filter out messages by sender quickly. I'm setting up more filters in GMails again after watching the hey.com video, but it takes a lot of time (and many steps) to set up a filter to move all emails sent by somebody to a specific label.</comment>


Boeing Patents Laser Nuclear Fusion Jet Engine - <AUTHOR> http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/energy/nuclear/boeing-patents-laser-nuclear-fusion-jet-engine

<comment><USER2> Patents are only good for 20 years, right? It seems very hard to believe that this could be used before expiration - what is the point of patenting now?</comment>


Inconsistent behavior in PHP7, bug? - <AUTHOR> https://3v4l.org/GjEEA <comment><AUTHOR> Am I overlooking something here? See also: [https://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/3snpdl/php_7_floating_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/PHP/comments/3snpdl/php_7_floating_point_precision_output/)</comment>


Silicon Valley Cafeterias Whet Appetite of IRS - <AUTHOR> http://online.wsj.com/articles/silicon-valley-cafeterias-whet-appetite-of-irs-1409612488

<comment><USER2> I actually agree with the IRS that gourmet free food should be a taxable fringe benefit.

The food at Google was awesome, but I would not have minded paying a fair income tax on it. Fair is fair.

</comment><comment><USER3> "In another sign of a new focus on the issue, the IRS and U.S. Treasury Department last week included taxation of "employer-provided meals" in their annual list of top tax priorities for the fiscal year ending next June."

IRS has nothing else to do... May be they can look for the destroyed/missed emails instead?

</comment><comment><USER4> A WSJ article that is pay walled and has no comments is on the HN second page, approaching HN front page. Something is wrong with this.

<comment><USER5> What specifically is wrong? Are there too many paying WSJ supscribers on HN?

<comment><USER4> It really destroys the UX of HN. Support the WSJ if you would like and browse the articles on that site. Don't submit them to a site where one expects to be able to read the article that is linked to. In this case the valleywag blog spam summary of this article is more useful because I can actually read it.</comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Backa – Gain feedback on your startup ideas - <AUTHOR> http://www.backa.co

<comment><USER2> > _Why can I only sign in with Twitter? Twitter hosts some of the most > established Tech Founders & Startups in the world. Wouldn't you want to be > on the right platform?_

Like Product Hunt itself, this does not help disprove the belief that Silicon Valley is an echo chamber of "thought leaders."

<comment><AUTHOR> I live in Plymouth, UK.

<comment><USER3> If you ask a question like "Wouldn't you want to be on the right platform?", people will answer the question.

I don't know the tone of voice you were going for with the text, but it stirs ugly emotions in me.

You should remove "Why can I only sign in with Twitter?" as the text following it ("What is the Twitter integration?") is much more informative.

The site looks great though and it's an interesting idea - congratulations on shipping

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This is useful if your target audience is exactly the kind of person who reads PH and other .co/.io sites. If your target audience is anything else, this is a waste of time.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think if you receive feedback from a number of people, you'll get a pretty good consensus for what people like. This may help you create something better for when you go find your target audience.

<comment><USER2> This is flat out wrong.

Gathered feedback is _only_ useful if you get a large amount of feedback _and, most importantly_ , if you get _diverse_ feedback from people with different backgrounds, experiences, and opinions (I.e from people who likely would not use such a service.), otherwise you get the echo chamber as mentioned above. Therein lies the paradox.

<comment><USER5> Yeah, I've gotten some negative feedback from people when my site gets posted to techy sites about it not being mobile friendly.

Though it is on my agenda to work on, I have moved it down the list because most people who browse my site are professional office designers and architects who have explained that they browse at work on desktops and laptops.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Pronounced 'baka'? Like the Japanese word for idiot?

<comment><USER7> Don't know about that, but backa is the swedish word for "to back up" something and also the action of reversing, say, a car... :)

<comment><USER8> It also means "To support".</comment></comment></comment>


The only growth metric that matters - <AUTHOR> https://mobiledevmemo.com/the-only-growth-metric-that-matters/ <comment><AUTHOR> I'm of a believer in that there's no global north-star metric, but if you were to pick one, looking at retention in this way isn't a bad place to start.</comment>


Cleaner, more elegant, and wrong - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2004/04/22/118161.aspx

<comment><USER2> This is a good example of the maxim that everything should be "as simple as possible, but no simpler" (Einstein).

Sometimes identifying where things have become too simple is difficult.</comment>


Samsung warns customers that Smart TVs are always listening (2015) - <AUTHOR> http://theweek.com/speedreads/538379/samsung-warns-customers-not-discuss-personal-information-front-smart-tvs <comment><USER2> That's why I bought myself a dumb TV, and added smart features using a Raspberry Pi connected to it by HDMI. The TV has no internet connection available.

<comment><USER3> You could just buy a smart tv and don't connect it to the internet. And have a Raspberry Pi on it. That way you can control everything yourself.

<comment><USER4> If we're to think of this from an economist's perspective, then you would want to get an equivalent television without the voice command feature, and it would be cheaper.

<comment><USER5> When many smart tv's display adverts and commercial apps, you could argue that the smart feature is subsidising the TV.

<comment><USER4> Good point.

The point I was trying to make was that from a market efficiency perspective, this kind of thing should not be a problem.

So it might be more expensive to remove the feature altogether, including the advertising revenue it would generate. Such is the cost of privacy, apparently.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Why would you need voice search in a TV though... I can't understand ... I don't understand which everyone is going nuts for IOT either!? Why do I want a web browser on my fridge really

<comment><AUTHOR> To be honest, I really can't wait until my fridge tells me that I'm out of eggs. I hate going to the supermarket and forgetting what's in there.

<comment><USER7> It's an odd problem. My partner insists on keeping a shopping list. But mostly I remember what we have in the fridge and store cupboard, as I frequently cook. I don't actually forget that many items when shopping. Toothpaste I don't keep in the fridge. Being able to have a quick glance remotely could help, but I'd probably then abandon trying to remember, and it would probably take me longer. My partner recently tried a little stretch of buying online and collecting from the store. But for me, it took all the fun out of shopping. I actually enjoy strutting the supermarket - and some domestic tasks. My partner likes certainty. I like mixing things up a little.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> But Samsung said that it only happens when you issue a vocal command, not that the TV is always listening. I have a Samsung smart TV and you have to press a button to use a voice command so it may not always listen to you as is stated in the article. And they share the information to a third part not to sell it but for the voice recognition task.

</comment><comment><USER9> The word "telescreen" comes to mind.

Then again, cell phones are more ubiquitous and close at hand, and are also always listening ...

</comment><comment><USER10> The only answer is to disassemble every new TV, and disconnect the microphones and cameras.

Perhaps I can make a business out of this service.

<comment><USER11> Why not just spend your money on a TV without mic and camera? My lg smart tv have neither.

<comment><USER10> I presume sometime in the not too distant future, all TV's will have cameras and mics.

<comment><USER12> I noticed that TVs nowadays come with an HDMI connector for their video (and audio) input. Could a computer monitor with speakers serve in place of the TV?

I suppose that leaves the problem of not having a remote control for the 'TV'. However, if the inputs are from a cable-tv box or a media-box, they should have their own remote controls anyway.

Is there some simple reason to avoid doing this, which I overlook because of my ignorance?

<comment><USER13> > Is there some simple reason to avoid doing this

50"\+ computer monitors are rare (at least where I live).

<comment><USER14> Go for a projector then, that works pretty well for us.

Old games filling the whole wall is pretty jarring at first, but surprisingly you also get used to that.

<comment><USER15> Projectors have gotten _much_ cheaper in the past few years (I used to look in awe at some of the incredible creations on the now-defunct lumenlabs forum at the DIY creations people would build because of the high projector cost back about 10 years ago). You can buy a very capable 1080p projector for €450-500 or so. You can build a high quality DIY screen if you're so inclined too. It's a bitch to setup, and you have to hide the power and HDMI cables somehow, but the experience is unbeatable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Looks like there is a small difference as voice search and voice activation.

I own smart tv (Sony) that has microphone on the remote which you can only use at Youtube search bar (then light lit on the remote when microphone is active), and I believe it's quite nifty as typing via remote is PITA.

On the other hand I don't know voice activation features on smart TVs. Do you tell your TV to "turn on" or "change channel", which is not practical IMHO.

It makes sense that personal assistants (amazon echo, apple siri, google whatever) listen all the time as you use trigger words to activate them but it's so useless for TVs.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Looks like Vizio got fined for doing something similar recently. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- switch/wp/2017/02/06...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the- switch/wp/2017/02/06/these-smart-tvs-were-apparently-spying-on-their- owners/?utm_term=.240cc62be8b2)

</comment><comment><USER17> This is really old news, and actually, the text in the link was pretty much inspired by the one from Huffington Post from 2015 - [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/09/your-samsung-tv- is-...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/09/your-samsung-tv-is-spying-on- you_n_6647762.html)

<comment><USER18> I agree that it is old news. Orwell's "1984" with its scary concepts of mass control and indoctrination is even older. Whenever I read about those TVs I have to think about how dehumanizing the outcome of the dystopian story was, and how we slowly - but decisively - move into the accepting such privacy and rights intrusions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> This is from 2015

<comment><USER20> well yes, the year is in the title of the post.

<comment><AUTHOR> I added it after...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> i don't mind cameras, you can just stick tape over them (until they will be build behind the display which will take few more years), microphones are worse, is there some easy way how to disable or mute them without disassembling TV and voiding warranty?

</comment><comment><USER22> > up votes

> has an apple tv

it is the same thing.

</comment><comment><USER23> Don't own a TV, especially a Samsung, fixed...</comment>


From Pony Express to Amazon Drone: The History of Delivering Packages - <AUTHOR> http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/from-pony-express-to-amazon-drone-the-strange-history-of-delivering-packages

<comment><USER2> In the same vein, I read this recently - [http://www.amazon.com/The-Victorian- Internet-Remarkable-Nine...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Victorian-Internet- Remarkable-Nineteenth/dp/162040592X)

It covers the history of the telegraph and the changes that came with it. Lot of good historical perspective with regard to communication over large distances.</comment>


The Umbrella Reinvented - brown-dragon http://www.kazbrella.com/ <comment><AUTHOR> Anyone looking at the landing page and wondering whether the umbrella is "a joke or not", "what the design is" or thinking it's "highly suspect" etc., I agree with you but the videos on the video tab at the top right are far more informative.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BLYLrdOXe8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BLYLrdOXe8) has examples of the umbrella unfurling and the motivations behind the design.

<comment> brown-dragon Agreed. I initially felt the website was nice enough but it seems to be putting off some people.

The video for their kickstarter campaign was also very interesting: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmvoU9cRzn4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmvoU9cRzn4)

According to their kickstarter page they are funded and starting manufacturing soon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> Looks like a Japanese design firm tried something similar back in 2013 called the unbrella, still shipping for about $90 ([http://h-concept.jp/fs/hshop/c/unbrella](http://h-concept.jp/fs/hshop/c/unbrella)).

English press story at [http://www.damngeeky.com/2013/12/11/16246/unbrella- solves-th...](http://www.damngeeky.com/2013/12/11/16246/unbrella-solves-the- wet-umbrella-problem-with-its-reverse-folding.html)

Minor marketing fail that while the Kazbrella solves the 'brush against other people's pants' problem, it doesn't solve the 'drip water on the floor problem', yet the promotional video implies it will.

<comment><USER3> For what it's worth, I preferred watching the Japanese teaser video[0] much more than Kazbrella's video[1]. It was clear and honest, while Kazbrella's video feels like an infomercial with poor acting.

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phdeprKdVwU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phdeprKdVwU) [1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BLYLrdOXe8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BLYLrdOXe8)

<comment><USER4> yeah, i agree that the Kazbrella is too showing off. and the mechanism is not that much innovative.

the normal double fold umbrella (not sure how it is called) has similar mechanism, the difference is that it double folds which makes the folded umbrella smaller.

[https://www.google.it/search?q=double+fold+umbrella&source=l...](https://www.google.it/search?q=double+fold+umbrella&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=hiqIVcmfAeK_ygOm7Zh4&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1680&bih=897)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> From the comments there seems to be negative sentiment towards this product. I believe it is a great endeavor and I would have funded the prototype and development entirely. The reason is not so much that it could be much more efficient than the current one, but that someone thinks he can improve something that most people have thought to be the solution for so many years. It takes guts, and observation to ask "is this the best we can do?"

<comment><USER6> We could also try using square wheels again... just to make sure we didn't miss anything the first invention-cycle.

There's a reason the umbrella has stayed practically the same all these years...

<comment><USER7> One thing that has changed between earlier umbrella designs and now is that high-precision manufacturing is now cheaper.

My main problem with this umbrella design is just that it's longer than I like. I prefer compact umbrellas.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> From the page:

"KAZbrella is a symbol of inventive thinking. A design unchanged for 3000 years is turned inside out. "

Uh, no, that is factually incorrect!

There are one-hinge umbrellas which are the traditional kind. There are three- hinge umbrellas which are the highly compact kind. And now they've "invented" a two-hinge umbrella. Color me unimpressed.

[https://www.google.com/search?q=three+hinge+umbrella](https://www.google.com/search?q=three+hinge+umbrella)

I don't know exactly when the three hinge compact umbrella was invented, but they have existed for as long as I can remember. So that puts them at least 20-30 years old. And the technology isn't terribly complicated, though it does rely on fairly small diameter tubes with very thin walls. It wouldn't surprise me too much to learn that three hinge umbrellas were 100 years old or more.

So while they may have been the first people to make a two-hinge umbrella they were certainly not the first to improve on the single hinge design.

</comment><comment><USER9> Great, now someone please invent an umbrella that works in and doesn't destroy itself in a moderate wind.

<comment><USER10> [https://www.senz.com/en](https://www.senz.com/en)

I own a couple of them, they work amazingly well. You can even use them on a bike with heavy wind.

<comment><USER11> Neat. Clicked around, found a video of testing to 133 km/h at the bottom of this page: [https://www.senz.com/en/senz6/](https://www.senz.com/en/senz6/)

<comment><USER12> ... a.k.a. around 82 mph!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Water is trapped inside so basically this umbrella is a cup. All the water spread on its surface will be at the bottom of it after half an hour on a bus / metro train. Be careful when you get out and open it. You better turn it upside down and empty it.

Apart from that, it seems to be more convenient to open and close in a crowded environment (metro stairs in rush hour) than the traditional design.

<comment><USER14> No. When you carry it the "cup" is upside down and it won't collect water.

<comment><USER15> That seems like the natural way to carry it, but if you do this then you don't solve the "I'm dripping water everywhere" issue (the video implies this design addresses this).

So you can choose: either carry it the traditional way (hold the handle, with the umbrella pointed at the ground) which allows the "cup" pour all the water down onto the floor, or hold it "upside down" so the "cup" doesn't spill out.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> It's nice that people are still trying to make improvements on old solutions to old problems, but I don't think I'll be buying this one.

I already solved my problems with umbrellas by buying a wide-brimmed hat instead. It reduced my needs for both sunglasses and umbrellas, and does not need to be stowed or carried.

In any case, my greatest problem with traditional umbrella design is inversion due to wind, not trying to enter a vehicle with it or the fact that it gets wet. Those problems have all been solved (separately) anyway. Inversion is mitigated by venting the canopy. Entering a vehicle is improved by one-handed, spring-assisted collapse levers in the handle. Its inherent wetness can be mitigated by hydrophobic fabric as the canopy. If the water does not stick, the dripping issue is solved by one shake before entering the dry space.

None of these problems seem to be helped much by making the canopy collapse in the opposite direction. I remain concerned that an inversion due to wind might not just be inconvenient, but that it will also damage the structure of this new product, or even force it to collapse instead of just invert its canopy.

</comment><comment><USER17> My problem with the umbrella is that it is symmetric. If I hold it with my left hand, my right part becomes exposed, and vice versa. If I try to protect my backpack from getting wet, my front side get wet.

</comment><comment><USER18> You really, really, need to add some more links to the bottom of your home page content.

I scrolled up and down multiple times looking for something along the lines of 'find out more'.

When I refound the learn more button, it just scrolled me down.

I was about to leave the site, and just noticed the tiny navigation in the upper right.

If your sell is Innovation, you need to prove it.

</comment><comment><USER19> Someone elses umbrella is soaking my trousers and the solution for me is to buy a reversed umbrella?

Maybe the idea is nice but I don't think this is how you should promote your product.

<comment><USER12> Why not? People buy deodorant.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> When there's any hint of rain, I carry (and wear, if needed), a lightweight raincoat made from a breathable fabric. This means that when I am not wearing it I can fold it over my arm and not have to battle through a busy street, or on public transport with a stick-like thing.

<comment><USER21> Me, too. I really don't like umbrellas and wonder why people don't use rain jackets more often. I enjoy the feeling of rain falling on me and I get to stay completely dry. Umbrellas only can do so much, especially if you're carrying things or have a large backpack (which contains a folded up cover for itself). Rain with wind, forget it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> How come we can't buy a $20 chinese version yet?

I remember seeing this over a year ago being rejected in BBC's show Dragons' Den.

<comment><USER23> I've seen variations on this every few years. It must be one of the more common backyard-inventor things.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Seems like you trade one problem for maybe a slightly lesser one... if the inside is wet, you still have to open it in the rain and thusly getting the dry side wet (but maybe not as wet).

</comment><comment><USER25> Here is another design. The "air umbrella": [1]

[1] [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1243275397/air- umbrella](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1243275397/air-umbrella)

<comment><USER26> I've looked up more information about this project. It's interesting for its novelty and for its ambition to bring the tech closer to mundane life, but currently "the minds behind the project say there will be three different options for the air umbrella [...] the difference between them is the length and battery life which at maximum is thirty minutes"¹ - that's not much to make it practical for everyone, not to mention its (battery) weight.

¹ [https://youtu.be/K6eyND08tu0?t=48](https://youtu.be/K6eyND08tu0?t=48)

<comment><USER25> Thirty minutes would be perfect for my daily 20 min walk to work. Also, it would be nice if it could double as a USB battery pack to charge a phone, for instance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Back in 2006 I watched "American Inventor" Sheryl McDonald had a similar product as this KAZbrella but better. not only was it an "upsidedown" umbrella but when you collapsed the umbrella it was surrounded by a cover so no water would spill on you. here is a post that summarizes one episode that inludes her, I have been unable to find video of the show: [http://www.fansofrealitytv.com/forums/official- articles/5379...](http://www.fansofrealitytv.com/forums/official- articles/53790-american-inventor-4-20-recap-ed-ventures-stupidity.html)

</comment><comment><USER28> It seems funny but smart at the same time. I wanna know more about the wind resistance, however. I realize this might not be the design goal, but how does it compare with Senz, for example?

<comment><USER29> Funny, but impractical, IMO.

Takes more room (envision this in either a car, a bus, or a train), cumbersome to carry (you basically have to hold it up your shoulder, parasol-style, which means it will catch wind even if it doesn't rain), and the in/underside of the canopy will be wet by the time you deploy it.

(Opinion formed on basis of the front page. Didn't watch a video)

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> On a side note, I think that for products like this to be successful, they need to open source the design and the hardware. Yes, there will be the chinese knock-offs if I want to buy a cheap one, but those never have the desired quality that I desire.

By having it as a proprietary products, the product is relegated to a niche market, that too in a Umbrella market where people would be reluctant to shift from the time-tested design.

</comment><comment><USER31> Previously on HN:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9437364](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9437364)

</comment><comment><USER32> I can't figure out if this is a joke or not.

<comment><USER33> Not a joke. There's videos. Looks quite cool actually.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> I swear by these [https://www.bluntumbrellas.com](https://www.bluntumbrellas.com)

</comment><comment><USER35> The market will ultimately decide, but I presumed most people were happy with their old fashioned umbrellas.

<comment><USER36> I live in the UK, so I have some experience of rain and using umbrellas. I like the idea of arriving home and not getting the floor soaking wet. However, most of the problems it describes are not problems I experience. My umbrella problems:

* Walking in the wind - when it's blustery, I get blown all over the place. Even if the umbrella is strong enough to withstand the wind, it's difficult to walk with one.

* I frequently lose my umbrella, which is why I wouldn't pay more than £5 for one. I often leave it on public transport or at someone's house. At work, people also have a tendency to 'borrow' my umbrella permanently.

* If I'm walking anything more than a mile, holding an umbrella the whole way can be annoying, but I don't want to be an uber-nerd with an umbrella attached to my head. I want something that does the job of an umbrella for the price of an umbrella but looks like a hat or coat.

Failing that, I'll stick with a £5 umbrella from the supermarket.

<comment><USER16> The things that do the job of an umbrella while looking like a hat or coat are actually just hats and coats.

A quality cowboy hat, sou'wester, or fedora (an actual fedora, not a fashion- accessory trilby masquerading as one) made of water-resistant fur-felt, oilskin, or leather, and a prairie duster, slicker, poncho, or trench coat, made from similarly waterproofed materials, cover just about every use case where umbrellas fail.

The umbrella is actually not much use except when you are just walking from one sheltered area to another, and don't need to actually _do_ anything in the rain. For that, I can ignore all of the minor problems with cheap umbrellas, because I consider them as semi-disposable convenience items.

If I ever thought I needed a truly fine-quality umbrella, I'd spend that money on a nice hat instead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Is this spam? If I were to guess, this looks like some marketer trying to make a product go viral. But I looked at the poster's history, though, and brown- dragon doesn't seem to be a shill.

Am I missing something here? Are people actually excited about a minor change to the design of an umbrella?

<comment><USER38> I would not call it a minor change. Umbrella design hasn't changed for centuries and it always had the same problems. This design fixes them, so I, for one, welcome it with open hands and I'm happy it reached HN, because I wouldn't learn about it otherwise (sadly the Kickstarter campaign ended so I have to wait until they open for the rest of people).

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Checkout the bluetooth-enabled umbrella: [http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/keralas-umbrella- innova...](http://www.thenewsminute.com/article/keralas-umbrella-innovation- one-which-connects-your-mobile-phone)

</comment><comment><USER40> Solves a non-problem.

<comment><USER41> Yeah, kinda my thought too. Pretty much everything they cite as advantageous with the design also has drawbacks that the traditional umbrella doesn't. Here are some advantages they demonstrate and where that "advantage" leads to other possible issues:

Getting in an out of a car, staying dry. A) not as big of a problem as they show, but also B) if could do similar bad acting of me getting out of a car trying to open up the kazbrella and being annoyed that in poking the umbrella out of the car I got the supposed-to-be-dry-side wet and now it's dripping on me.

Won't drip water inside? No, it won't if you hold it upside down. But now you're carrying a pool of water with you. Careful opening it. And the umbrella will be even worse at drying in tight quarters when you can't open it up.

Dry side is on outside so it doesn't get things wet. They show somebody placing it on seating. Yep, now that pool of water is spilling in some direction. Also, if you do have the umbrella outside and it suddenly starts to rain, the side that's supposed to remain dry is the one getting wet until you get the thing opened up.

It was probably a fun project to design, but I don't think it's as useful as they want you to think it is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> The description on the front page is badly in need of editing -- word choice is awkward and stilted. The template you've used looks really unpolished for a product page.

</comment><comment><USER43> [https://www.senz.com/en/](https://www.senz.com/en/) not tried one!

</comment><comment><USER44> I have never heard of getting drench by a folded umbrella..lol. A solution in need of a problem

<comment><USER45> When I lived in NYC and it rained the subway car floors would have streams of water running in them.. I can't say I remember my pant legs getting soaked by someone else's umbrella mainly because they were already soaked walking to the subway because of the wind.

I mean it seems like a nice design and it does suck getting into a car with an umbrella.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Uh, I think I have something like this . . .

</comment><comment><USER47> Men should only use an umbrella in a heavy rain, never in a sprinkle.

</comment><comment><USER48> The landing page doesn't communicate features, in particular, why this design is better than the old one - or even what the design _is_. This makes the whole thing highly suspect. It's hard to get enthusiastic about something who's utility is, at best, marginally better than what already exists.

I mean, if you want to improve the umbrella, you could make one with a highly reflective inner surface that doubles as a solar oven. Maybe even a solar oven on the top surface that works on sunny days, so you can keep the sun off you _and_ cook food, at the same time. Or, I like umbrellas that have useful information printed on them, like subway maps. Or, how about a hollow handle made of clear material that lets you measure how much it's raining. Or maybe an umbrella on a gimbal, so that if it's windy some of the energy can be absorbed by angular momentum.

<comment><USER6> > No Gimmicks

I don't like gimmicks.

> Pure Engineering

I do like engineering.

> The KAZbrella is an evolution of the conventional umbrella.

OK, tell me more.

> Through many years of research and engineering we have redesigned the > mechanics of the umbrella whilst maintaining the familiar umbrella look.

I'm on the hook...

> The KAZbrella is a patented reverse folding umbrella.

And... letdown. It's an umbrella that folds the other way...

Sure, maybe the outside of it while folded won't "press up against your leg, soaking your trousers and bag and drips on the already wet floor", but this means the water stays trapped on the inside of the folded creases, leading to mildew and a musty smell, and the rest still "drips on the already wet floor".

I don't see this thing taking the world by storm anytime soon.

<comment><USER49> Why would the water be trapped? You still store the umbrella upside down. And lots of people already use mini umbrellas with similar folds in them.

<comment><USER6> When you close your umbrella and put the strap around it (like when you are on the bus or train, or at the office or home for the night), water is still on it and must evaporate. It takes time. But with a reversed umbrella, the water will be on the inside, not exposed to the open air.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Music Theory for Musicians and Normal People - <AUTHOR> http://tobyrush.com/theorypages/index.html <comment><USER3> It piqued my interest from the cached thumbnails, and I was able to find a mirror of the complete set:

[http://academic.udayton.edu/tobyrush/theorypages/complete.pd...](http://academic.udayton.edu/tobyrush/theorypages/complete.pdf)

It's licensed under Creative Commons BY-NC-ND, and Toby W. Rush is the author. Great resources by the way, better and more concise than a lot of theory info for beginners (bordering on intermediate, if you are able to get to some of the more advanced scales, structure and basic part-writing/voice leading at the end).

<comment><USER4> Hey, thanks for the nice hug, everyone! It's been a fun night. :)

I updated the mirror that ewoodrich referenced; what was up there before was a slightly older version. The new one has a few more pages in it and a few typos fixed here and there.

I've also swapped out the page on my site with a redirect to the mirror, since my web hosting service has rebooted the server twice now. The mirror is on my faculty web space at work, so we'll let them worry about it now! :)

No worries, though. Glad you all are finding the materials useful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Based on my own experience, I find the No. 1 obstacle in learning music theory is the difficulty, _in the early stage of learning_, to practice the knowledge to gain a real sense of how the stuff is used and why.

Take computer programming as an example. After 15 minutes of HTML lesson, a newbie can already look at her creation in a browser and the html file on hard disk, and have fun tweaking it (My home page, remember the days?). An hour of Java lesson can result in several variations of "Hello World!" programs, created by the student. Basically, people can put their hands on the knowledge and use it to produce somewhat useful/tangible stuff.

Not so much when learning music theory. After enduring the bombardment of names/concepts/terms/maths and other stuff for quite a while, I don't have the slightest idea where I can practice in using them to analyze or write some music.

I wish there is a lecture in the format of "One hundred songs for one hundred music concepts". The songs should be stupidly simple (children's songs, simple pops, short classical pieces, etc.). Each lesson concentrates on only _one_ concept appeared in the piece, explains what it is, how it is used, why it is used in that way, and how its application makes nice sound, etc. Basically, show me the _effect_ for each concept in a simple real world setting. Then more importantly, give me exercises to write a few bars of music using this concept, no matter how bad my writings are, as long as I am applying the new knowledge.

<comment><USER6> You're wrong about categories of analogy, but I don't blame you - <USER2> are a pretty slippery slopes. In particular, you're most likely conflating these because of the implementation detail - you _write_ HTML, so _writing_ music is an analogy. Not really - _writing_ HTML is closer to _performing_ music.

You can teach almost everyone to perform "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" on piano or "Smoke on the Water" on guitar within 15 minutes, both of which are de facto "Hello world!" equivalents to many aspiring musicians.

EDIT: Removed attempt at drawing a HTML/music analogy which could be closer to truth. It is really fruitless endeavour, makes no sense.

<comment><USER5> I disagree. The rendering engine of the browser is the performer who looks at my script(HTML/CSS/JS) and produce the final result for the visitors to the web page. Writing HTML is not closer to performing music, but actually closer to composing music, if you will.

Also, I think although knowing theory would help you play a song with an instrument, it's not required, is it? More likely knowing music theory is for understanding/appreciation of the composition/structure of the music. So no, playing "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" on an instrument is NOT equivalent to writing "Hello world!" program. On the other hand, composing a super simple but complete song is closer to writing a "Hello world!" (or a Fibonacci series) program.

<comment><USER7> CSS is probably a better analogy for performing music. You generally keep the same content, but presentation is important.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This isn't "music theory" (although almost everyone thinks it is). This is "music jargon and notation systems". A _theory_ is something that explains an observed phenomenon. This jargon and notation stuff doesn't explain music, it just guides you through the jargon and notation.

I have a music degree and learned all this stuff and a lot more. This presentation is an _excellent_ , _high-quality_ overview of this non-theory junk.

It's extremely culturally-biased and, again, offers no real theoretical explanation.

If you want _real_ understanding of music in a _useful_ way for real people, I recommend Bob Snyder's book "Music and Memory: An Introduction" which was actually written to teach creative artistic people about how music _actually_ works rather than how aristocratic European music notation works.

For some other perspectives, check out [http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/htmlRT/contents.html](http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/htmlRT/contents.html) and [http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/ttss.html](http://sethares.engr.wisc.edu/ttss.html) (normally I wouldn't push these on average folks, although they are _superb_ but the HN crowd should be fine with them)

<comment><USER9> I'm not sure how parent became the top comment, but "music theory" is absolutely appropriate here. This terminology is commonly accepted by musicians, educators, and practitioners. OP's link could say "western music theory", but that seems unnecessary given the audience.

Secondly, why would you call this junk? This is actually very useful for people learning to play, and for those who want to understand the basics of harmony and rhythm.

What you are talking about is typically called "music perception theory", "music cognition", or "music psychology".

<comment><USER10> Knowing how to spell doesn't make you a writer. I think the parent is trying to explain that there's a cultural bias and inscrutability with respect to how music theory is taught. Does learning a notation system make one a theorist? One can be a western musician in, say, a jazz tradition, understand theory, have theories and play music and have never used the system of notation explained in the otherwise awesome comic.

<comment><USER11> The poster above is trying to one-up the OP. Of course a notational cheat sheet is not the same thing as a rigorous intellectual foundation, but the phrase 'music theory' is the most common term to describe the traditional notation and grammar for the western music corpus _by a mile_. That's what most people want when they search for 'music theory'. It's not a good use of the word 'theory' but the context within which it is embedded is widely familiar.

 _One can be a western musician in, say, a jazz tradition, understand theory, have theories and play music and have never used the system of notation explained in the otherwise awesome comic._

True, but it's pretty unlikely. Most people who play music pick some up theory (in the sense of this submission) along the way if only so they can have meaningful conversations with other musicians.

<comment><USER8> > That's what most people want when they search for 'music theory'.

I think most people are actually thinking, "I want to understand music more." when they search for "music theory", and instead of learning deeper understanding about the nature of music, they are taught about notation traditions. Then, most people decide they do _not_ especially care about "music theory" anymore. The folks who continue are those who like studying notation patterns.

<comment><USER11> We're going to disagreee about this. I do get where you're coming from and I actually don't care for musical notation; I can read it but I can't sight-read to play so studying notes on a staff involves a lot of painfully keyboard pecking (or occasional cheat transpositions into a DAW) followed by a bunch of more fluid experimentation with the musical elements I played so badly, and it's during this experimental phase that I may or may not learn something.

Like you I'd much rather read text about the psychology of musical perception and the _why_ of music. I disliked the notation drills etc. when I had piano lessons as a kid, but as I never had a natural ear for chords or harmony (and thus frequently found myself wanting to improvise things but without a good understanding of how to go about it) I came back to the theoretical stuff as an adult, and ended up getting interested in other musical traditions like Arabic and Indian styles as well as the western one (though I don't want to oversell my knowledge or skills here). Different traditions use different schemes but they all have some way to codify things, because unless you stay within a single tradition or are blessed with an eidetic memory chances are you'll need to note things down at some point.

Where I'm disagreeing with you is on the terminologyl I hold that when people search for 'music theory' it's because they want to be conversant with other people on the basics, even if they just want the bare minimum of how to distinguish between major and minor, construct a few basic chords, or read/write a melody outside of a piano roll. It's unfortunate that the label 'music theory' has become associated with this basic stuff; it's as if we used 'literature' to refer to basic spelling, grammar, and vocabulary and used some other term to describe the actual study of artistic writing - but that's how it is.

<comment><USER12> _It 's unfortunate that the label 'music theory' has become associated with this basic stuff_

Only in the way that the label mathematics has become associated with arithmetic. The stuff here is what you need to know in order to get started analyzing music of the common practice period (you'd need set theory to talk about the pitch content of most music after 1900). But when people get doctorates in music theory, they are not stil studying the circle of fifths. They use these concepts to describe music in order to come to some understanding of how and why it is structured.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I would love to see a version of this with European (/rest of the world?) terminology. E.g. Crotchet, quaver, minim instead of quarter note, eigth note, half note etc.

</comment><comment><USER14> I recall once seeing a link on HN for music theory for physicists and engineers, but I didn't bookmark the URI at the time - anyone recall this, and how to find it?

<comment><USER15> this perhaps? [http://arxiv.org/html/1202.4212v1](http://arxiv.org/html/1202.4212v1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> To those of you claiming either that "this is not a theory of music" or "yes, this is exactly what people mean when they say music theory," you are both right and both wrong.

The content of these cheat sheets describes what a music major learns in the first semester or two of music theory classes. But there are people who get PhD's in music theory. What do you think they study for all those years? It's not this.

Saying this is music theory is like saying arithmetic is math. It's not wrong, exactly, but it's leaving out a lot. People spend the first 12 years or more of their math education learning the notation, learning formulas, at least partly because you need to know that stuff in order to do any real math (we'll leave the discussion of whether this is the optimal pedagogy for another day, shall we?). You could say, "but people googling math want to understand _why_ 2+2=4," but if you don't know that 2+2=4, there's not much point in trying to learn why. You could also say that what people learned in high school is what most people call math, but we all know that what people learn in high school math doesn't have much to do with what real mathematicians do.

"Real music theory" uses the contents of these cheat sheets (and many, many other things) to describe pieces of music and to try to understand things like: why did this composer choose the notes and rhythms they did? What can we use to justify the subjective observation that a composer or time period had a unified music style? What are the assumptions of musical language that govern musical composition without necessarily being known to the composers? Why does this collection of notes have meaning? What is that meaning? What does the content of this music tell us about how it should be performed?

The best of my music theory classes tried to keep a clear line from what we were learning to the kinds of questions above. The worst classes we spent a lot of time doing worksheets with the musical equivalent of times tables and algebraic equations, ad nauseam.

\---

I'd also like to note that the things that appear under the aegis of introductory music theory are a strange hybrid of techniques, reflecting the multiple purposes of music theory for theorists, musicologists, composers, and practitioners. So you get things that don't help much with analysis, like species counterpoint (probably a useful exercise for composers, and maybe for musicologists since it is really a historical curiosity, but not really useful for anyone else) or realising figured bass (really only necessary if you're going to be performing baroque music in period style on a keyboard instrument).

You could again say similar things about high school math of course.

<comment><USER8> I appreciate your attempt at balance, but I still fundamentally disagree. Math is universal. The arithmetic and other math basics we learn in grade school is both (A) not very culturally-biased and (B) often not taught well.

There is _so_ much cultural baggage and assumption in the notation-focused "music theory" that is _not_ present in mathematics. When we talk about numbers of things in math, there's no doubt we're describing something objective about reality external to culture. There indeed exists two apples or four apples. The concept of "four notes" is rarely objectively valid because almost everything in music is subjective.

"Music theory" basics are much more analogous to the elementary-school versions of linguistic grammar. And most elementary teachers' understanding of grammar is actually full of claims that are wrong, even though there's something to the gist of it. When we go to "English" class, we expect to learn about English and don't think our lessons apply to all languages. We should similarly not teach one particular language of music and call the lessons "music" without qualification. We should further recognize that grade-school definitions of nouns and verbs do not all hold up under scrutiny.

When "music theory" of the sort here is taught _well_ , it is about as valid and useful as grade-school pedantic, prescriptivist, grammar — the sort that treats minority dialects as "bad grammar". Insisting on music theory being this notation-jargon from classical Europe is like saying that African- American dialects have poor grammar, when actually there are careful and consistent implicit rules in those dialects that sometimes carry useful meaning that standard American English doesn't even have a way to achieve.

<comment><USER12> I actually don't think we completely disagree here.

First, I definitely didn't intend the parallels with math to extend any further than the problems of perception with regard to how they are taught versus how they are practiced by scholars. Music theory is an art-related discipline and very much culturally inflected.

And this makes sense. Most music theory (in the West at least?) does focus on Western classical music, in large part because Western music has a literate tradition (see Taruskin) that most other musical traditions lack, which allows us to treat the compositions themselves as texts/objects more easily than other musics.

Even within Western music, we tend to use style- (read culture-) specific analytical tools. It doesn't make sense to use harmonic analysis for Stravinsky, and it doesn't make sense to look for twelve-tone rows in Mozart. In general we use a combination of language that composers used and thought with (so for Mozart, think keys and counterpoint) and techniques that arose from observing the style after the fact (in this case, for instance, sonata form, or Schenkerian analysis).

All of these techniques are culturally biased because, as you've pointed out several times, music is psychological, and therefore rooted in culture. Meanwhile, it makes sense to analyze, for instance, Indian classical music using rhythmic modes.

So, coming around to your analogy with elementary school grammar education, I think you're right that there is a prescriptivist parallel here -- learning that parallel fifths are not allowed, or that the second theme in a sonata always modulates to the dominant, or even that there always is a second theme in sonata, all of these do not accurately describe all music, or even all Western music of the common practice period. They are artifacts of the particular techniques being used. The original description of the sonata came into being around the same time as prescriptivist grammar (and has had a great deal of improvement since then -- read Rosen if you haven't already). Species counterpoint and Bach-style chorale harmonizing came about to describe specific styles, and to be used as exercises for composition students in the 18th-19th Centuries. The fact that those two things in particular (which I think are the most grievous examples of what you're talking about) are still included in music theory education is possibly counterproductive, especially since they are treated as sets of rules, rather than as historical examples of the composition pedagogy that the Western classical composers themselves were subjected to. Teaching Fux as anything other than "this is how Mozart and Beethoven learned to write counterpoint" is silly.

So that's the prescriptivist parts. However, where we disagree is that I think there's still a lot here that's useful for _descriptive_ purposes. It's difficult to talk about classical music within its cultural-intellectual context, which I think is necessary, without these tools. You can argue that any interval can be dissonant with the right timbre, but if those timbres are rarely used in the repertoire you're describing, it's not much use is it? The 18th and 19th Century composers thought about dissonance a certain way, and if you're analyzing their work as art objects (cultural objects) rather than physical objects, you have to at least take that into account.

<comment><USER16> The problem I have with trying to casually learn music theory is that I cannot separate what is "real" and what is "syntax". For example, I can trivially see that "beaming" is entirely syntactic, but the difference between 3/4 time and 6/8 time is far more confusing.

Music notation just seems really really suboptimal for actually understanding music (music software uses totally different notations/interfaces for a reason), and all music theory seems obsessed with it.

<comment><USER12> In fact, beaming makes the difference between 3/4 and 6/8 clear. But even if it didn't, you can't divorce the cultural object from it's notation. Once you're trained, traditional music notation is pretty optimal for reading music for performance, and you have to remember that that is the purpose of music notation. All alternative notation systems I've seen fail this simple test: once I've learned this, would I be able to play music I've never seen before reasonably well the first time? I've never seen anything that works as well as traditional music notation for that.

Meanwhile, music theorists are "obsessed" with notation only insofar as the music they study is written using that notation. You seem to have skipped my previous comments -- music theory, even at this basic level, has little to do with notation. You read it as notation obsessed only because you're not thoroughly enough steeped in the notation. Reading and writing music notation is as natural to a musician as writing in English is to you. It would be strange and counterproductive to insist on using nontraditional notation when every musician who plays the repertoire you're studying already reads the standard notation, and all the repertoire you're studying is written in it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Nobody has mentioned hooktheory.com yet. If you're interested in why some music sounds good, check it out.

<comment><USER18> I'll second this even though I only checked out the site once a bit back. I'm still quite the newb at this stuff but it got a great response on the EDM production subreddit.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Down for me. Here's a wayback machine cached version: [https://web.archive.org/web/20140226025639/http://tobyrush.c...](https://web.archive.org/web/20140226025639/http://tobyrush.com/theorypages/index.html)

</comment><comment><USER20> It appears that the site is somewhat image-heavy, hence the downtime. There are ~50 pages of content, each presented as an image link to a PDF.

[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tobyrus...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tobyrush.com/theorypages/index.html)

<comment><USER21> This successfully gives you links that fail. I was hopeful that Google caches the PDFs, so that the links might not fail (with a bit of finagling) but apparently the cached PDFs are modified to be unreadable. :(

[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tobyrus...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:tobyrush.com/theorypages/pdf/0102pitchnotation.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I'm surprised nobody mentioned that terrible font... Any chance you could fix it?

</comment><comment><USER23> Hacker News hug of death? I am new to guitar and was excited to see what this was.

<comment><USER24> You might want to just learn tablature for the time being, unless you're thinking of doing classical guitar.

Not to say _don 't_ read them of course; you can read what you like, just that tab is what you'll be using I would have thought.

<comment><USER25> Guitar professional here.

It's good to keep the limitations of tabs in mind. The're really useful, but they don't represent music nearly half as much as conventional music notation. They represent finger movements instead.

<comment><USER26> The funny thing is that standard notation is quite poor for the guitar because it has no notion of finger movements- all sorts of annotations are dumped into scores - numbers for fingers, circled numbers for strings, roman numerals for frets, empty noteheads for natural harmonics, and who knows what for artificial harmonics and friends.

I don't think its possible to reproduce a piece from only tabs (without having heard it) while standard notation makes sight reading unnecessarily hard.

<comment> squeaky-clean I feel like I'm repeating myself too much in this thread, haha, but only because it seems like no one is acknowledging that you can combine both forms very easily and produce very clear results. You just replace the staff notation with tabs, but keep everything else.

I took a quick screenshot to show an example[1]. I think here you can tell very easily what fingerings to play, what the note duration is, and when you should sustain notes over others. The difference between slurs, slides and whammy bar bends (The V symbol you see next to notes like in meas 3), muting notes is an x, yadda, yadda. I'll stop going on about tabs now.

[1] [http://i.imgur.com/yog4v5n.png](http://i.imgur.com/yog4v5n.png)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> > The augmentation dot is a dot placed to the right of a notehead. Though > small, this dot wields some _serious power_ : it changes the length of the > note by _150%_. In other words, it makes the note half again as long.

Oops.

Very nifty and fun though.

Woof!

</comment><comment><USER28> I would like to recommend :

Music Theory For Computer Musicians.

</comment><comment><USER29> I appreciate the style of presentation, but why do we still pretend this is "music" theory? Most of this is completely useless for anyone who is interested in understanding music that wasn't written by people in powdered wigs.

For some actually useful music theory, I can recommend the goldmine that is Ethan Hein's blog: [http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/category/music/music- theory/](http://www.ethanhein.com/wp/category/music/music-theory/)

<comment><USER30> Listen to techno, house and tribal, and you hear Koyaanisqatsi, 18 Musicians, and the work of Glass, Reich, and Riley.

Listen to Glass, Reich, and Riley - and you hear the deconstruction of symphonic structure.

Listen to Beethoven's symphonies and you hear the struggle of form from Mozart's classical era construction to what would become Beethoven's pure romanticism.

Listen to the interplay of an Alberti Bass and melody in Mozart's Piano Sonatas, and you hear the beauty in the evolution of counterpoint as written by Bach, Scarlatti, and their band of powdered wigs.

Listen to Bach and Scarlatti, and you hear the echoes of Gregorian Chant and the Diabolus in Musica (and why Black Sabbath sounds like Black Sabbath.)

Those who forget the past are doomed to be Miley Cyrus.

<comment><USER31> Suppose I am listening to Les Claypool's bass work. What olden stuff am I hearing?

<comment><USER30> Listen to Les, and hear the technique and round sound of Jaco Pastorius. (or at least I do.)

Listen to Portrait of Tracy (or any great harmonic jazz) and you hear the same open chord structures of Impressionist works like Debussy's Preludes or Ravel's Valse Nobles.

Listen to the impressionists and you go many places...

Ravel and Debussy's piano music is barely one step removed from jazz. Makes sense, because the early jazz greats lived and played around the same time. There's a famous picture of Ravel at a birthday party when he was in his 50s, with George Gershwin standing beside him. The early 1900s was an amazing time in music... classical was mixing with early jazz was mixing with vaudeville was mixing with the first stirrings of delta blues was mixing with gospel was mixing with african folks songs...

(I can do this all night... ;)</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Where do you buy logos? - <AUTHOR>

I have a product idea and even a basic logo idea, but where do you buy a quality logo? <comment><USER2> Sorry can't help. I come up with my own. Perhaps seek a designer to help. Someone else mentioned 99designs but in my single experience, it was very poor even with constant feedback. And many used seemingly generic designs that look like they pull them from templates somewhere else and merely made modifications.

</comment><comment><USER3> <http://99designs.com>

<comment><USER4> If you're serious about your business, I would advice against contest sites such as 99designs. I sometimes participate in there out of pure boredom and to be honest I wouldn't buy my own logos. The problem with these sites is quality. The logo is the face of your business, you need a designer that's going to dedicate time and effort; a designer who cares about your business and understands branding concepts and design best practices, not just how to create a pretty logo. Logos don't have to be pretty, they have to be memorable and adaptable, that's the key.

You see, on speculative sites like that, where 99% of designers don't have a chance to win, people don't put any thought or effort into their work (including me) because for most of them it's not worth it. Most logos on 99designs are cliche, not print ready, and most of the time plain bad.

On these sites you have to think about players, not designers. Like Poker, the more players there are the less chances of winning you have, therefore you feel less confident, bet small and don't risk. Hardcore players will exploit all the known tricks and cliches to impress clients and win a contest. But what most clients don't understand, from my experience, is that a logo doesn't have to please them, it has to please their target audience.

If you want to build a successful image for your business, find a designer that you can trust and talk to. Go online, look for designer's portfolios, contact them to get a quote and go from there. Also understand that when hiring a freelance designer it's not "work for hire", it's a collaboration, and that's what those sites can't offer, and will never be able to.

<comment><USER5> That is true... but there are designers who don't have better ways to make money out there so I wouldn't necessarily discount these sites completely. He would probably have better luck looking for local designers first, someone with which he can build a rapport.

<comment><USER4> I agree that for designers in some parts of the world 99designs is very profitable but IMO the time the client wastes on filtering hundreds of bad logos would be better invested in working with a designer and improving upon a concept following a more rigorous and interactive process. In this case less is more.</comment></comment></comment></comment>