How to Make Apple's Mac Pro Holes - <AUTHOR> http://saccade.com/blog/2019/06/how-to-make-apples-mac-pro-holes/ <comment><USER2> For a more practical take on the same problem here's a youtube video of somebody machining the holes on a CNC (and testing its performance as a cheese grater): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29YZqe9Cso](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29YZqe9Cso)

<comment><USER3> Do you think this is the process that Apple's manufacture uses?

Could they use an end mill the same size as the hole, instead of a smaller end mill that follows a circular path?

Could they have built a machine with many end mills, correctly spaced, to drill all holes in one shot?

<comment><USER4> But the holes are spherical, not cylindrical. How could you do that with an end mill the size of the hole?

<comment><USER5> With a ball end mill, theoretically.

Not that it's a good idea - you need to be able to actually evacuate material from the surface you're cutting, and milling is different than drilling in this respect. But I imagine you could come up with a very fast two step program using a cylindrical end mill for plunging/roughing and a relatively large ball end mill for finishing.

<comment><USER6> My understanding is that using a ball end mill to "drill out" a hemisphere while perpendicular to your surface will create very high forces that are bad for the tool. I'd imagine you could offset the tool axis and then achieve the same effect, but using a smaller tool might end up being easier.

Please note that I am far from even a beginner machinist.

<comment><USER5> Right, that's the idea I was trying to express. Don't expect anything good to happen if you try to plunge a ball end mill straight down into the material.

The thought was only that a large-radius ball would be able to approximate the sphere to within tolerance with larger stepover than a smaller tool. After bulk material removal with a more suitable cylindrical tool of course.

With a little bit of googling I discovered a different class of end mill called a circle segment tool, which could potentially make short work of the problem in a 5-axis machine:

[https://www.moldmakingtechnology.com/videos/circle- segment-t...](https://www.moldmakingtechnology.com/videos/circle-segment- tools-and-toolpaths-in-action)

Would love to see how Apple does it, but it's never happening.

I'm not really a machinist either, but let's not allow that to stop us from incorrecting each other on HN!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Thought this would be about the machining setup to make them, not the math of the CAD setup. To actually machine this, you would basically use a ball end mill (which has a roughly half-sphere end) and drill a bunch of offset holes according to the pattern outlined in this writeup.

<comment><USER8> A ball-end mill wouldn't be the best tool for this, they're meant more for 3d contouring. They've probably just used a normal endmill and interpolated each hole or used an appropriately sized drill. And at the volumes they're manufacturing, waterjet or laser-cutting (not as good for aluminum) are likely the method of choice.

<comment><USER9> A waterjet / laser cutter makes no sense as a way to cut a hemispherical hole.

It seems highly likely there is a ball end mill involved in getting the final smooth shape (maybe after roughing out the holes with a cylindrical tool). The main question is whether the ball is the same size as the hole, or a bit smaller (which would require it to move around in little spiral paths instead of just going in and out once).

<comment><USER10> Inspecting a finished product should answer this question?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> On the subject of Apple's hole-machining process, I recently noticed how tiny the light-grill holes are on the older wireless Apple keyboards: [https://i.imgur.com/l9n9Cp2.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/l9n9Cp2.jpg). Look at the ruler, marked in mm - the holes are less than .1mm in diameter. I was wondering how they did this, I guess a laser or plasma cutter is the only way?

<comment><USER12> Lasers. I think their technique is top-secret, because I don't see lights- through-metal on many other products.

[https://venturebeat.com/2011/11/04/apple-laser- manufacturing...](https://venturebeat.com/2011/11/04/apple-laser- manufacturing/)

<comment><USER13> Aren't lasers a standard method for cutting 2d work?

Perhaps they are using the same technique, but in a 3d setup.

Edit: found an interesting link: [https://www.twi-global.com/technical- knowledge/faqs/faq-what...](https://www.twi-global.com/technical- knowledge/faqs/faq-what-are-the-problems-with-laser-cutting-of-aluminium-and- how-do-i-overcome-them)

> The 'aluminium cutting system' which most modern equipment uses is actually > a way of protecting the laser rather than an innovative technique for > cutting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> In 7th grade wood shop in the early 90s I built this design into a wood box we had to make. I used a drill press with a plunge ball router bit, and set up the design to start about an inch in after the joins. The design looked great, box used 3/4 inch plywood, and was about 24" x 14" x 14". My shop teacher hated it, said it wasn't art class that it wouldn't be as sturdy. Anyway long story short, when I was about 4 years older someone sat on it and that was that. So yeah, was cool... wasn't as sturdy.

</comment><comment><USER15> And here's someone following though and making them: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29YZqe9Cso](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s29YZqe9Cso)

<comment><USER16> saw this recently, winston moy does very cool videos, make sure to check out his other projects!

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I have trypophobia. Cannot believe this is a new design style.

<comment><USER18> Circular patterns? Been a design style for the past 10+ years.

Tryophobia sounds like one of those "I have OCD" things because people are "so peculiar." I'm not discounting that folks may have a legitimate mental illness resulting from it, but that has to be an overwhelming minority of users.

<comment><USER19> I wouldn't exactly call it a "mental illness", but upon seeing such images I can feel my brain heating up in the same way as when I'm thinking of a difficult problem. My theory is that it's essentially overloading the edge detection (neural) circuitry, because the one thing that all such images have in common is they have plenty of circular edges, which are effectively edges in many directions simultaneously.

<comment><USER8> I have fairly pronounced trypophobia too. I was under the impression that the leading theory is an evolutionary one; that certain burrowing insects will lay eggs in the skin causing a pattern of holes and that our brains have been trained to read this and other parasites. Yours is certainly interesting, though anecdotally I can look at a very regular pattern of holes and not feel the effect. It only really "bugs" me with more irregular, organic patterns.

<comment><USER20> I get a mild disgust/nausea/skin-crawl reaction. I lean towards evolutionary theory: your lizard brain is telling you "don't touch/eat this parasite- infested item". The worst trigger for me was an image was a (photoshopped) picture of skin with holes, and some had maggots in them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Has someone figure out an explanation why these holes makes better air flow as suggested by Apple? It would have been easier if the metal holes were used heat sink. But I doubt they are, and those shape should only block airflow, and not improves it.

<comment> GuB-42 I tired doing a few calculations and by surface area alone, the pattern is about 55% unobstructed. That's better than the pattern from the original cheese grater, and given how terrible the trash can was, one hopes they did better this time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think there's a large concensus that this is made via milling but wouldn't ram EDM be the best method for a shape like this?

<comment> d-sc Maybe, but then the EDM tool will get used up. So then you have to figure out how to machine it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Are there thermal advantages to the design or is it just for looks?

<comment><USER24> I think there is some, but it couldn't be worth the cost. The marketing said there was 'more air than metal' which I thought was good marketing.

<comment><USER25> Maybe it does help reduce weight? Seriously the old cheese grater was absurd

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> One thing that copiers forgetnis to shave the edges so it is not jagged and slice up your fingers, I will bet the edges one the Mac are shaved

</comment><comment><USER27> The only thing I'm thinking of when seeing the Mac Pro's holes is that they must be a complete PITA to keep clean of dust.

</comment><comment><USER28> It is not exactly the radiator grille of a WW2 era Jeep - 9 slots stamped out of steel.

If you had to build your own computer and you had the choice of more RAM or a fancy hood ornament, what would you go for? I would be inclined to go for the former.

But it is not about that. If you go into a post production edit suite where they do fancy things then the clients have a fancy sofa with a well stocked fridge. Not a few plastic chairs and a cooler box. People hiring these services expect a certain amount of wow factor to know they have arrived.

Years ago the tech had a certain amount of power projection to it. If the box was big and purple with 'Silicon Graphics' written on the front of it then you knew the toys were the real deal. But, despite the fancy cases to these machines they were not fancy for the sake of it. They just exuded class, much like how a European hypercar just says something that a Toyota saloon fails to achieve despite having four wheels and an engine.

I am not sure that Apple really hit the high notes of wow factor with this case design for the benefit of the clients. The case speaks more to the users than the clients. A veritable status symbol, but, then again, when it comes to bang per buck, it is more hood ornament than engine displacement.

Design is about efficiency of manufacture as well as how it looks. I look at this and I know that some robot spent a long time drilling the holes. It is hood ornament. One thing you want with vents is ease of cleaning. The design statement, if made in plastic as a pop-out panel could be popped out and given a scrub. In 2-3 years time with a layer of gunk inside how do you get this cleaned up? It gets a bit fiddly. And all for a hood ornament.

I think that it looks pretty but how do you put the thing in the machine room? They could have done a 19" rack variant with 'ears' rather than a cheese grater. Sure it has wheels for under the desk but I would prefer to press the power button on the front rather than wheel the box out first before getting to the button.

<comment><USER29> "Exudes class" is just marketing speak for "fancy for the sake of it".

<comment><USER30> "Fancy for the sake of it" works well when you're a designer and are trying to land a big contract with shallow marketing people.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Help with writing a job-seeking article for sydney - <AUTHOR>

Hi all,
I've been working a lot lately with a friend, helping with her job hunt as she has just finished her studies. I thought i'd write a blog article about it, as over the last few months we've tried a whole bunch of ideas, and was just wondering if anyone here would mind making a few suggestions?
When i finished writing it, i felt like there should be more to it, i feel like i've missed some important things, but i just can't put my finger on it for some reason.
Anyway here's the article:
http://splinter.com.au/how-to-get-a-programming-or-design-job-in-syd
Cheers all <comment><USER2> Hey, chubs -

Do you mind if I contact you offline about this? I'm planning a move to Sydney and am always interested in hearing more about the job market there. Your contact info isn't listed on your profile, although there is an e-mail link on the article. Is that address fine?

<comment><USER3> If you're interested in getting in touch with the startup scene, send me an email.</comment></comment>


How to Organize the Largest US Prison Strike Ever from Inside Prison - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/2016/09/endprisonslavery/ <comment><USER2> BOP (feds) is the worst of all the systems when it comes to having any kind of blog/fb/twitter or speaking to the media. A friend of mine once posted his prison band, and apparently they weren't supposed to have access to instruments so everybody in that picture was given 2 months adseg and my friend they moved around prison to prison repeatedly to keep him away from any mail. [https://www.thekindland.com/your-prison-blog-is-legal-but- it...](https://www.thekindland.com/your-prison-blog-is-legal-but-it-will-land- you-403)

State prisons vary where some don't care at all so long as you don't specifically call out guards by name, you're free to keep a blog and even criticize the warden but BOP, this is a big no.

There's some outliers to that article, many state prisons allow for min wage now such as Arizona where female inmates can work at a polling/telemarketing company and be paid the state minimum wage. The great thing about this is those inmates walk out with $10,000 or so saved up and have a chance to land on their feet instead of say, TDCJ who denies state prisoners any kind of income whatsoever.

<comment><USER3> If we really wanted to cut back on crime, paying prisoners a fair wage for their labor would be a huge step in that direction. Getting out of jail and being able to afford housing and food on your own allows you to establish independence. Vs the system we have now that drives you right back into the same situation you were in that most likely caused you to go to prison in the first place.

<comment><USER4> If you put a minimum wage that's significantly higher than the existing wage, then nobody'll employ prisoners.

Why do you think the market's price in this case is wrong or unfair?

<comment><USER5> There's a value to the employer to pay minimum wage, while having a "captive" (pun somewhat intended) employee base who doesn't suddenly quit and can't go get a better job due to unrealistic demands.

<comment><USER6> Seriously, prison work schemes are modern indentured servitude, or if you like, slavery. Slave is what you call a captive employee, right? The difference now is that the state subsidizes the scheme by feeding and housing the slaves, and taking care of security.

Paying a minimum wage is a start in the right direction, but ultimately the only moral endgame is abolishing forced labor and reducing the prison population drastically.

<comment><USER7> It's not just metaphorical slavery, it's literal. The Thirteenth Amendment allows for the enslavement of prisoners.

> Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime > whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the > United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> One of the things that was abhorrent to learn was that the 13th Amendment in the US, which bans slavery, explicitly allows slavery or forced labor of criminals.

We are still a country that explicitly allows slavery. Sadly, very rarely do I encounter people who understand (or seem to care) that this is the case.

<comment><USER9> You may want to call it "slavery", but most people would call it punishment for crimes.

<comment><USER10> The 13th amendment specifically calls it slavery:

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction."

[https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/13thamendment.htm...](https://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/13thamendment.html)

<comment><USER9> Did you just decide to ignore that whole "nor involuntary servitude" clause? Slavery is specifically a system in which people are property that can be bought and sold.

Either way, what it's called is irrelevant. I see nothing wrong with mandatory labor being part of a criminal sentence. It is part of repaying your debt to society.

<comment><USER11> Constitution says involuntary servitude AND slavery are both are allowed if someone is convicted, though. I actually wasn't aware of this and find it quite shocking that it explicitly allows slavery in that instance.

What it's called helps contextualize the history behind our laws, how they came to be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Pretty obvious that prisons exploit prisoners in unjustified ways to the benefit of private enterprises, fail to protect prisoners they are responsible for watching, etc.

_____

NYC spends $168,000 a year per prisoner according to the NY Times: [http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/nyregion/citys- annual-c...](http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/24/nyregion/citys-annual-cost- per-inmate-is-nearly-168000-study-says.html)

Why We Let Prison Rape Go On [http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/18/opinion/why-we-let- pris...](http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/18/opinion/why-we-let-prison-rape- go-on.html)

Abussive Phone Rates [https://www.prisonphonejustice.org](https://www.prisonphonejustice.org)

Etc.

<comment><USER13> There are no private prisons in New York State

<comment><USER12> Yes, that's correct, though it doesn't mean NY and NYC don't outsource/insource service at rates that're unreasonably by any measure either due to cost or failure to provide reasonable service.

For examples, funding for pensions assumes that the state will maintain a set population of prisoners - which to me seems at odds of what longer objectives should be.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Related: [https://www.rt.com/usa/358870-prison-protests-work- strike/](https://www.rt.com/usa/358870-prison-protests-work-strike/)</comment>


Former Fed Chair Paul Volcker: 'We're in a Hell of a Mess' (2018) - <AUTHOR> https://fortune.com/2018/10/23/former-fed-chair-paul-volcker-were-in-a-hell-of-a-mess/ <comment><USER2> This is a pretty misleading title in lots of ways. The title makes it seem as if he's commenting on the state of the economy. He's actually commenting on the state of politics.

<comment><USER3> I think he more than anyone knows how related the two are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> (2018)

<comment><USER5> True, but it hasn't gotten better...</comment></comment>


A 30M page library is heading to the moon to help preserve human civilization - <AUTHOR> https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/30-million-page-library-heading-moon-help-preserve-human-civilization-ncna977786 <comment><USER2> In 10 million years, why would we remember about any of these libraries they want to launch if we forgot the other knowledge? It's like dropping a well- protected USB with all our knowledge in the ocean with no method to locate it later, it will be buried and gone before we know it. I personally don't think we'll enter the "age of immortality" as the human race until we've spread our knowledge (and our civilization) further than just one set of discs on one moon around one planet around one star or one Tesla automobile orbiting around one star.

<comment><AUTHOR> I guess it's more the thought that counts. I'm not sure it would have been very practical even if the thing hadn't crashed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Where can I download a copy?</comment>


Angular 2 Series – Part 1: Working with Pipes - <AUTHOR> https://auth0.com/blog/2015/09/03/angular2-series-working-with-pipes/ <comment><USER2> The async pipe to do asynchronous binding is pretty sweet. I think (if I remember correctly) they tried to do something like this by default in Angular 1 (i.e. wait until promises resolve and then display the result), but then they took it out because it was causing other issues. If you did want all your bindings to by async in Angular 2, though, I wonder if there is a way to set a global configuration option or something. That way you don't need to include the | async with each binding.

<comment><AUTHOR> My thoughts exactly on the global async!</comment></comment>


The Servers Are Burning - <AUTHOR> https://logicmag.io/05-the-servers-are-burning/ <comment> xyz-x Sometimes even a single person at a keyboard writes tests, even without large development teams.

</comment><comment><USER2> I still wonder (and hope not) if at some point we will build bridges the way we will build software. "Well yes, occasionally our bridges collapse, but statistically, the number of people that get across the bridge safely vastly outnumbers the amount of people that die in a spontaneous bridge collapse. Also we've gotten really fast at rebuilding them. So we don't see a problem."

<comment><USER3> except that OkCupid users won't normally die if the site is down for some hours, the worst thing that could happen is that they leave the platform. While I despise the practice of cowboy-style software dev, the upside is that you might get an advantage in a really competitive ground

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I was expecting it to finish with 'now we write tests' but it doesn't...

<comment><USER5> Given the ultimate success of the site can you argue with the CEO? It never had a reputation for unreliability the way Twitter had in its early days.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> I thought this was about a literal fire in a DC. It would have been a more interesting read than the classic and often told tale of 'dev makes one tiny, harmless change in prod without testing and trouble ensues.'</comment>


World Bank picks Commonwealth Bank for world's first blockchain bond - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/10/world-bank-picks-commonwealth-bank-for-worlds-first-blockchain-bond.html <comment><USER2> Is this really a world first given this [https://blogs.wsj.com/cfo/2017/07/12/daimler-uses- blockchain...](https://blogs.wsj.com/cfo/2017/07/12/daimler-uses-blockchain- to-issue-bonds/)

?

</comment><comment><USER3> oh no</comment>


How the Mighty Fall: A Primer on the Warning Signs - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/print/magazine/content/09_21/b4132026786379.htm

<comment><USER2> Reminds me of _The Innovator's Dilemma_ , but I think that applies only to specific product categories. The fortunes of many companies are tied to a family of products (e.g. Digital), and so the decline of that product category can cause the fall of the company.

The article is talking about companies that are so large that they become more like investors, whose job it is to allocate capital across different product categories. A skillful investor can then offset the tired against the vigorous to ride out the changes. But it seems to me that a company still needs to have some kind of mission and special expertise. This is why focusing on an abiding customer need appeals to me, instead of a specific technology or market. The need will always be there; if you keep on finding new and improved ways to solve, it you will always be providing something worthwhile. That is, if you organize yourself around _finding_ and _improving_ , not around a particular technology or market.

For example, Google's mission, to "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful" isn't tied to PageRank or even the internet. Whether this mission is more than PR, and whether they could make the leap in practice, hasn't yet been tested - though WolframAlpha might give them a workout.

</comment><comment><USER3> I often ask the question - what's the difference between Detroit in 1972 and Silicon Valley now? None!</comment>


Source code of the SLocker Android ransomware - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/fs0c1ety/SLocker <comment><USER2> Interesting. What is it's delivery method?

I can't quite google if it's something that exploits a hole or something that needs explicit user action.

<comment><AUTHOR> [http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security- intelligence/s...](http://blog.trendmicro.com/trendlabs-security- intelligence/slocker-mobile-ransomware-starts-mimicking-wannacry/)

<comment><AUTHOR> No particular exploit, it just encrypt the sdcard. All the source code is available on the github repo.

<comment><USER2> "just encrypt the sdcard" is what it does, not how it gets on the device. The github repo only contains the payload, not the delivery method.

Anyway, the article answers my question - "This ransomware disguises itself as game guides, video players, and so on in order to lure users into installing it.".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> There is more to find on that repo</comment>


Show HN: Buy and sell locally without going insane - <AUTHOR> http://goodsy.co/

<comment> xkcd-sucks 1\. Signing up without knowing ANYTHING about the service... nope.

2\. It rejects mailinator emails, but fortunately it doesn't reject other temporary email services :)

3\. It's not a signup for the service; it's just a mailing list. How disappointing. It doesn't even tell you any details about the service after you sign up.

All in all, I'm dissuaded from using it when it becomes available, and I'm glad I didn't sign up with my real email.

<comment><AUTHOR> Well, thanks for raising these issues.

1\. I admit the website is light on details. I guess the tagline and copy didn't entice you at all. Do you buy/sell things though services like craigslist? You just may not be the target demographic.

2\. I use mailchimp for the email signups. Youre welcome to use a temp email service if you like, but they might block some.

3\. the sign up form might might need a copy change: sign up for the waitlist.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hey HN, project creator here. Would love to get your thoughts! Cheers.

<comment><USER2> You're asking people to join the beta and give you their email address with a very minimal website. I'm not even sure which phone this supports, or whether there is a non-phone way to interact with this.

Can I browse items for sale via a website?

<comment><AUTHOR> At this point, web app (desktop/mobile) and possibly an ios app in the near future. You are completely right though, this info is missing from the homepage.</comment></comment></comment>


Hourly App Rankings - <AUTHOR> http://AppCastr.com I built this little hack over a week and was wondering if anyone thinks it's interesting. It's basically a ranking tracker for the appstore that generates a stock chart like graph based for each app. The differentiator over things like App Annie is that it updates every hour so you can see near realtime changes in the appstore rankings to uncover trends etc. Would love your feedback! <comment><USER2> This is useful. Stock charts for apps.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I'm glad you like it. If you have any questions for me, please let me know.</comment></comment>


Bitcoin, Energy, And The Future Of Money - simba-hiiipower https://medium.com/armchair-economics/183c2ad47b50 <comment><AUTHOR> If you want to hold assets as a store of value, go buy assets.

The desire for currency to have "intrinsic value" appears to be driven by the fear of a sudden collapse of currencies that exist only as a system of accounting (like the US dollar). Or the desire to have a store of value that never suffers deflation or inflation. We all want that, but most of us acknowledge that it is no more possible than a utopia.

You can't freeze the economic system. Whether you back your money with energy, cryptography, flowers, or seashells, you can never control all the other factors, and thus your currency will fluctate.

<comment><USER2> Up to a point, yes. But the whole point of money is that it serves as an intermediary for value, so that you don't need to do barter. If a currency is extremely volatile this function is diminished because when you immediately have to get rid of your money to hold some kind of stable value you get closer and closer to a barter system. In the limit where nobody wants to hold money and immediately wants to get rid of it you get a barter system.

For example if bitcoin is so volatile that every time people earn one they immediately want to buy X with it to make sure they hold their value, you might as well skip the bitcoin step and directly use X as a currency, especially since a bitcoin transaction isn't free. X could be stocks, bonds, gold, dollars, etc.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree 100%. One of the goals of a flexible money supply is to reduce the volatility of currency. As your economy grows, so should your money supply. This requires flexibility in money supply and tight analysis of the economy and money supply.

There is a separate argument surrounding currency debt. That is, current policy doesn't strictly regulate the money supply in a way that tracks economic growth. They use debt as a means to "create" growth. I won't pretend that this is some sort of foregone conclusion, but the whole debacle involving Reinhart and Rogoff and their Excel error dealt a serious blow to those who object to the theory that debt drives growth. Again, I'm not saying the case is closed, but right now, the debt-driven-growth folks are winning the debate.

When you fix your currency to a commodity or other non-controllable factor, you give up control of your money supply, which causes volatility of its own.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> This is a profoundly bad idea, and will likely never happen. The OP makes the assertion that quality of life is directly proportional to energy usage, so creating more energy is the primary way to grow an economy.

While this is true to a limited extend, do we really /want/ it to be true? Using energy as the measurement of an economy's size would naturally lead to economies across the globe investing in raw energy output, rather than other equally (or more) important areas of technological progress like making future infrastructure more energy-efficient. This wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that the sources of energy we most commonly turn to today, fossil fuels, are inherently limited and have huge negative externalities. We need to come up with a standard that convinces markets to grow the standard of living in a way that doesn't require increasing the energy supply. If we don't, we risk exacerbating the global environmental and resource crises.

<comment><USER4> "Using energy as the measurement of an economy's size would naturally lead to economies across the globe investing in raw energy output, rather than other equally (or more) important areas of technological progress like making future infrastructure more energy-efficient."

The first part is probably true, but surely if your currency is based on energy, you will probably spend a hell of a lot of effort on squeezing the most out of each dollar/joule?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Why? If you want to measure energy, measure energy. The point of currency is something else.

 _Currency/money is a data-structure for a kind of cooperation algorithm_. That is the way to understand it in an informational world. Note that money is not really about being a 'medium of exchange', a 'unit of account', 'store of value' -- those are tautological ways to look at it, they are its _particular_ forms of activity, the real purpose is cooperation (more) generally.

The radical thought is that we do not really want currencies. We want something more information-rich -- something made for our current information tech, rather than originated from cowry shells or whatever. Hardly anyone is thinking in this way though, disappointingly. Yet it is myopia: if you look around non-currency systems are beginning to evolve. What is reputation, or 'karma', are they currency? Not really. What are things like Flattr and Kickstarter, are they markets? Not really.

Start deliberately thinking beyond currency.

</comment><comment><USER6> I was thinking the other day about Bitcoin using proof of work (which uses energy), which makes it an energy proxy. It therefore seems to make little sense that one would pay for energy to be used with energy that has been used. Or is time arbitrage of energy something really useful?

<comment><USER7> The relationship between bitcoin and energy is not an equality. The energy cost of mining should approximately match the available reward, but that is because miners are adjusting their activity.

You wouldn't purchase my heating bills from me...

<comment><USER8> _The relationship between bitcoin and energy is not an equality._

Exactly, technology improvements can and do change the energy used.

<comment><USER9> Bitcoin has adaptable difficulty and it will always be very close to the most efficient way to mine them. The only way to decrease total energy is to crash the price of bitcoins or cartel. In both cases the system is already screwed anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> The very premise that the value of a "fuel" is in its energy content alone is wrong. We'd be quick to lower the value of a "dirty Joule" (eg coal) compared to a "clean Joule" (hydrogen). Also, some fuels are inherently much cheaper to extract than others (coal is so cheap, and hydrogen so expensive). These costs of extraction also change over time -- ten years ago some applications naturally called for liquid fossil fuels (heating oil, diesel, gasoline), but after the fracking revolution a new operation starting today would better and more cheaply use natural gas. Natural gas will continue to be cheaper for some industrial applications in some areas until deployed fuel-using industrial capital equipment and vehicles using natural gas increases to take advantage of the cheaper energy.

Other factors that affect the pricing of a "Joule": convenience of application (I can't burn coal in my car, I pay a premium for gasoline; gasoline won't get me to the moon, I pay a premium for rocket fuel); ease of refining the mined resource into finished product form; ease of transporting fuels from source to "refinery" to distribution to end user; we'll pay a premium for fuels with a reliable steady supply; outside risks, e.g., political unrest in the Middle East increasing production costs and risk.

The "joule" measure for the value of a fuel is flawed. We already have a great measure for the value of a fuel, it is the US$.

Also, as many point out, the energy required to create a bitcoin has little bearing on its value. Energy costs help determine the mining effort and technology put toward mining bitcoin, but the value of a BTC will fluctuate depending on other factors. The total energy required to manufacture, transport components of, and assemble a house, along with the "inherent" value of those materials, is less than the US$-denominated utility of that house. If I shock a turd with the same energy used to build the house, it doesn't have any value approaching that of the house unless I'm Andy Warhol.

<comment><USER11> those factors would be covered by the "utility" aspect.

"The energy supply defines how much productive work can be done, while the efficiency with which we use energy defines how much utility can be created from that energy supply (widgets per kilowatt-hour)."

the $ is driven by more factors such as FX, inflation, interest rates and therefore not a clean measure of energy value.

possibly the purest current value of energy today would be in energies futures markets?

<comment><USER12> Can you clarify what that digets per kilowatt-hour means? If I own 1 million Joules, then how is efficiency specified? Since 1 million Joules in oil has a different worth/value than 1 million Joules in hydrogen, I don't understand how one can trade Joules. The point of currency should be interchangeability.

If people don't actually own money as joules, but money as "widgets" or "joules of oil"+"joules of hydrogen".., then you can just abstract away the energy stuff.

I'm not impressed by the energy as currency concept. Money should reflect _all_ resources, including energy, human labour etc. Binding currency to something (like gold) doesn't seem to be useful.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Why this is ridiculous and in need of some very basic economics lessons:

1\. Hopefully the words "Monetary Policy" and "Fiscal Policy" ring a bell. The ability to control market fluctuations, let alone wield some level of political power as a government, lies heavily within a government's ability to utilize its money supply. Not all regulation/rule is evil - what would a programming language be without regulation/rules? Additionally, the great depression was more than proof at the need for some level of market regulation (John Keynes).

2\. Basing money on a fixed supply, IE FUCKING ENERGY (since it can't be created or destroyed), would imply that there is a fixed amount of wealth. That's called Mercantilism and it was disbanded by Adam Smith... and 1000s of other economists/governments/times/etc

3\. Bitcoin and friends decrease the transaction costs of money exchange (government regulation, forex, taxes). Money creates liquidity for the value you've created, and Bitcoin and friends makes that value more liquid -in certain ways- but it does not replace money.

4\. Stability. Knowing that there is an entity that will back their currency, filled with fail safes, etc. encourages proliferation of that currency. It's why most investments (forex wies) are done in US dollars. Thing such as bitcoin, do not have that type of security. (FDIC anyone?)

5\. Decentralization of currency often leads to destabilization of currency. If anyone can make it (and yes, it is far more likely someone will create a bitcoin instead of forging a US dollar), then the value in and of itself will drop.

6\. "But WallStreet and all the finance people are up in a yipyap about it!" That's because it's an investment - many people play the forex (foreign exchange market) because there is much profit to be made from arbitrating currencies.

7\. Inflation is needed - Milton Friedman has this at about 4% or so a year to keep up (check on that). Why? Try playing monopoly with 4 players with the set of cash they give you. Then try it with 10. There's not enough money to represent the players, therefore you need more. Inflation isn't always bad.

<comment><USER14> Since you advocate inflation, is it okay to distribute new money among everyone proportionally to their balances? If so, isn't it equivalent to mere change in denomination? (By the way, all bitcoins are divisible to 2000 trillion units.)

<comment><USER15> Price rigidity means the costs of goods does not adapt immediately to fluctuations in money supply (e.g. employment & rent contracts take time to be renegotiated, price changes take time to ripple through the supply chain, etc.), so it's not equivalent.

<comment><USER16> So, if our economy _were_ to be immediately influenced by inflation efforts (say wages and costs automatically tracked it to the day)... then what?

Though that's kind of crazy, it's far from a possibility. And, given the increasingly-global nature of business, anything like online sales could easily track this to the minute by watching exchange rates. It's definitely not there yet, but it almost seems inevitable given time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm trying to imagine the inflation that would result from reliable fusion technology. That said, currency that is destroyed as the backing energy is consumed is an interesting concept.

<comment><USER18> There'd be no use in printing vouchers for more energy than people have a use for. If more abundant energy means usage expands, that means the size of the economy is expanding, and the currency would simply be adjusting to fit. You only have inflation if the currency expands faster than the economy does.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> A similar idea I came up with a while back was to back a currency by carbon sequestered from the atmosphere. Anyone who absorbs atmospheric carbon in an auditable way would get vouchers denominated in tons CO2, and anyone who emits would submit those vouchers or pay a fee. Practically, the "emitters" would just be primary sources (coal mines, oil wells) who would pass the costs to the rest of us.

Fees paid could be distributed to citizens, making the whole thing work just like Hansen's fee-and-dividend, but adding an incentive to absorb carbon when it's more efficient to do that than to avoid emissions.

</comment><comment><USER19> This doesn't consider rarity and usefulness. Oil is a lot more useful than hydrogen. As oil becomes rare it will be worth more though it still has the same amount of energy (specific gravity).

<comment><USER20> True, though oil won't become rare for the foreseeable future (e.g. next 100 years) unless it is made so by force (i.e. government regulation).

The US has insanely massive oil reserves given the new fracking technology.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Whats the point, if you want to have your wealth in energy you can do so any time, energy is a currency by itself you can trade it, exchange it hold it etc. What difference does it make whether that piece of paper you use to buy bread is at the time of exchange backed by government that holds and taxes the economy producing energy ( and more ) or whether it's backed by some particular asset? ( or backed by nothing except false hopes of few amateur speculators like bitcoin )

</comment><comment><USER22> I'm sure if you read my previous comments, it's obvious I'm not an economist, but here goes:

All money has only the intrinsic value of your labor. That's it. Gold, Silver, U.S. Dollars, wooden coffee tokens, they all represent a claim on human labor. There is effectively an infinite supply of gold on earth(unfortunately most is believed to be in the molten core and no one is able to process it of seawater yet), the only reason it's reasonably valuable by itself is the labor input required to harvest it.

At some point, maybe robots will fix themselves and human labor will no longer be required, in which case the whole basis for a money system is going to disappear. However, that hasn't happened, and doesn't look to happen in the near future.

People should keep this in mind when thinking about money. Fluctuations in value in a currency leads to the arbitrage of labor. Currency itself has no value, it only represents value. Backing it with energy or some other resource, still simply links it to how much labor that energy source requires.

So far, there has been no perfect currency, and I doubt there ever will be. Bitcoin may solve some problems, but it doesn't solve all of them, and it's not clear it solves more problems than many other solutions. While some people may get rich from the arbitrage, not everyone can sit around trading 1's and 0's. Someone has to do the labor.

I'll reference Adam Smith again, who's theory was that Late Stage Capitalism would end in the destruction of the Capitalist State when the profits of finance were so high in proportion to the profits of labor, labor ceased. Right now the trading of bitcoins is much more profitable than selling stuff for bitcoins, so bitcoin has pretty much skipped the labor input part and gone straight to finance, so I still don't think it's addressed the main problem with currency, which is that people still think of currency as the value, not the labor it represents.

</comment><comment><USER23> This was my argument with a friend the other day, that a bitcoin is worth the amount of energy needed to create it.

The other point was that it is not important for a currency to be a long term store of value. It's only needed to facilitate transactions.

</comment><comment><USER24> we have an energy backed currency, its called the (petro)dollar.

<comment><USER17> That is just a count of US dollars used in currency transactions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> This reminds me of kilowatt cards[1].

[1] <http://www.kilowattcards.com/>

<comment><USER26> It appears that kilowatt cards are priced at "$3.50 or less", which removes the actual advantage of using energy as money. If they were really good for delivery of energy, this would incentivize people to move energy from places it's now cheap to places it's expensive. By removing the possibility for arbitrage they've destroyed most of the point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Why disable pinch zoom for iOS devices?</comment>


Don't live with a broken IDE - <AUTHOR> http://www.elfsternberg.com/2009/01/16/dont-live-with-a-broken-ide/

<comment><USER2> In general, tools are important. No good craftsman should put up with a bad tool. I've seen the amount of money that companies are willing to pay for tools for hardware designers and chip designers, and seen them still turn around and quibble about a few hundred bucks for a proper editor or IDE for the software developers who're going to make that piece of hardware or chip work. Pretty unbelievable.

</comment><comment><USER3> I completely agree. I wish eclipse didn't have so many issues. Europa was unstable, but had auto-complete, highlighting and indenting down, Ganymede is stable but has issues with highlighting, code sections, and auto-complete. Every so often I'll take a look around and find myself back at the mercy of eclipse. VIM is a nice break, but then I find myself missing some of the eclipse plug-ins and collaboration tools. Hopefully this endless cycle will be broken and eclipse will finally get it's act together, otherwise I'll give netbeans another go, then break to vim, and then crawl back to elipse. Sigh.

</comment><comment><USER4> I've used vi for 20 years now (gosh), and it's only in the last few weeks that I've actually started using it properly. One example is that I wanted to save in fewer keystrokes; like ZZ, but without quitting. I came up with this for my .vimrc:

      :map ZA <Esc>:w<CR>

I find the vim help very intimidating (with every possible feature and then some), but it turns out to be really simple to create your own commands. I also made ctrl-N go to the next file (ctrl-P for the previous file), because I do that a lot.

</comment><comment><USER5> If he was hacking ExtJS like he mentions in the article, it makes perfect sense. ExtJS forces you to have a good IDE. It has some of the most troubling code styles I've ever seen. (It is deeply nested Javascript.)

</comment><comment><USER6> I moved from emacs to eclipse, for python development, 3 years ago. Why? The nicely integrated subversion integration (subclipse), the SQLExplorer plugin, and PyDev. I only really use the editing features of pydev, I hardly ever go into debugging mode. I code everything these days using TDD and have eclipse set up to run nose (the test discovery script) on whatever is selected, be it a file or a directory. It also gives me code coverage.

I still love emacs but the future IMO is with eclipse.

<comment><USER7> I use eclipse when I need the debugger, and for certain code editing tasks (it understands Java code in a way that emacs doesn't... though I'm sure someone _could_ write elisp to solve it) and emacs when I want to impress my friends.

The way I view eclipse is that in general its pretty awesome when the plugin you're using is well developed and thought out. When the UI is nice, everything works great. When you're in mushier territory, emacs (and vi) are like text-editing power saws, they're pretty good at moving text around, but rarely understand the code, so the things you're used to working are pretty much always available.

<comment><USER6> Which direction do you see things going? I personally feel that more effort is being put into eclipse, hence it has a longer term future.

A big win for Eclipse is the ubiquity of an easily installed, strong, consistent virtual machine across OSes. Cygwin is a great achievement but too much like hard work. I'm compelled to use Windows in my day job, with no admin access, and being able to use the same development environment with my linux box at home is great.

<comment><USER7> Both.

If you do anything in Java, people will ask for Eclipse integration. Clearly the market has spoken in Java-world ;)

Emacs is good because people who are "good at Emacs" are good at text-editing in general. The tool is more general, but that means they can maintain the majority of their output speed in a new language, or a language where things like automated refactoring are tricky or impossible to reliably do (say, Ruby)

BTW: I'd say "easily installed, strong, consistent" applies more to text editors than IDEs. Emacs has a windows binary thats pretty reasonably sized, whereas Eclipse is in the hundred megabyte range and Visual Studio (insert chuckle here).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Just for the record, you can install most open-source software to your home directory using `./configure --prefix=$HOME/opt/' and updating your PATH appropriately.</comment>


Why Nobody should be making Web Apps - <AUTHOR> http://opensourceandhackystuff.blogspot.com/2011/12/nobody-should-be-making-web-apps.html

<comment><USER2> These arguments have been made ad nasium, and there is a simple reason that they are wrong. Software, for the most part is about money, either making it or saving it, the jury is no longer out as to whether web apps save money or not, it is a forgone conclusion that even with all the cruft, web application development is far cheaper than delivering to multiple platforms. An argument could be made for a cross platform environment like AIR but the momentum is behind web apps. The reality is there is no wrong or right in development, it is what we the developers make it, and the majority of developers like web apps because they deliver on the promise to target multiple platforms with a single code base. Web apps being wrong is a very subjective statement, they are right for a great deal of value to investment arguments and in the end those are factored into decisions about what to target with development dollars.</comment>


Computer Science Is Not a Science - <AUTHOR> http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2013/1/158757-computer-science-is-not-a-science/fulltext

<comment> dylan-m The author is correct. But comput _ing_ science sure is one. Yeah, I'm opening that can of worms. There's a reason biology isn't called "microscope science."

The author's mistake is thinking that computing science (incorrectly referred to as "computer science") is the same thing as software development, and that it is strictly concerned with the machines we commonly refer to as "computers" and the programming languages we use as tools. Whether that makes computing science more or less a science is another question, of course, (though I think the study of computing can be very rigorous). It's important to remember that these are very separate subjects.

<comment><USER2> Being rigorous does not mean that something is a science. In the case of computing science, it is (in my opinion) clearly a branch of mathematics.

<comment><USER3> Corollary: CS doesn't need to be a science

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I suppose to make a claim that something isn't "x", "x" needs to be well- defined and agreed on by all. The central points of what constitutes science aren't widely debated, but maybe the more nuanced points are.

For me, I think the most powerful definition of science is this: science is the capability of prediction. If you can accurately predict something that happens at a future time or in a different place, then that's all I need to consider it science. Of course, the more powerful your prediction, the better the science it is. Predicting the stock market based on a hunch then is very poor science.

So does computer science make predictions about reality? Yes, it does. There's many algorithms describing things that _will_ happen when run, and curiously enough, we can test these by writing a program! We can even easily reproduce these programs for other people to run.

To give an example of the more scientific nature of CS, the study of quantum computing is almost solely in the domain of computer scientists and physicists. Scott Aaronson, for example, is a computer science who has many interesting things to say about it (<http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/>).

Now, the application of computer science degrees to something like a startup may be more of an engineering task. You're not necessarily predicted anything new; you're taking what has already been discovered and developing a practical application of it. I'm still somewhat conflicted as to whether I consider software engineering to be in the same category as traditional engineering disciplines; I suppose "engineering" isn't so concrete a word as "science", so your answers will vary a lot by person.

<comment><USER5> " If you can accurately predict something that happens at a future time or in a different place, then that's all I need to consider it science."

That's an extraordinarily vast definition. I think it's so vast as to be not just "an opinion I disagree with" but something I'd happily label "incorrect".

I can read some words on a piece of paper, put that paper down, and then predict what words will be written on it if I pick it up again and read it again. To call that science is, to my mind, incorrect.

I could likewise write down a sequence of numbers on that piece of paper, and predict what they will be when I read it again. Still not science.

I could save space by writing in a mathematical notation the rules for generating that sequence of numbers and again, I can predict what those numbers will be in the future when I expand that notation and get the sequence back.

I could save myself the hassle of deriving the sequence on paper by having a machine do it for me. What I've now made is a deterministic, predictable future event that is no more than what I described above. It's not science.</comment></comment>


Test your document's readability - <AUTHOR> http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word-help/test-your-document-s-readability-HP010148506.aspx

<comment><USER2> Placing a metric on something I thought of as subjective is definitely interesting...</comment>


At last, a law to stop almost anyone from doing almost anything - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/06/law-to-stop-eveyone-everything <comment> jon-wood I do voluntary work with the sort of kids this law has been designed to target - the ones who walk around a council estate causing trouble, because there's nowhere for them to go but home, where they can look forward to crowded houses and parents who are high.

There are two approaches to dealing with that problem. The first is laws like this, which allow the police to prosecute them simply for walking the streets in a group, and set them up for life with a criminal record. That will inevitably lead to worse crimes in the future as they find themselves unable to work because of that record.

Alternatively the government could stop cutting funding for organisations that try to provide a place where they can go and be children without causing others trouble. Youth centres are shutting down due to a lack of funding - <USER2> one I volunteer at only functions because its funded by a local church, and even then it only just scrapes by.

Honestly, I don't really know where I'm going with this, other than needing to rant about the fucked up approach this government is taking with their "Big Society", carefully focused on making sure the poor are criminalised, and the rich don't have to worry about supporting them.

<comment><USER4> "..the sort of kids this law has been designed to target - the ones who walk around a council estate causing trouble, because there's nowhere for them to go but home, where they can look forward to crowded houses and parents who are high."

I've long been of the opinion that poor parenting (and/or an abdication of responsibility on the part of the parents) is a major contributing factor to teenage delinquency.

What are your thoughts, based on your experience of working with these kids?

<comment><USER5> I've long been of the opinion that poor patenting (and/or an abdication of responsibility on the part of the parents) is a major contributing factor to an awful lot of society's ills...

<comment><USER6> Anyone who thinks parenting practices -other than the most extreme- shape behavior should think twice and look at the evidence. The blank slate by Steven Pinker might be a good starting point.

There's plenty of evidence that the effects of parenting are generally smaller than we would like them to be, again with a few exceptions.

<comment><USER7> Except that what many of us here would consider extreme are actually pretty common. Estimates for the prevalence of domestic violence and sexual abuse are difficult to measure accurately, but are conservatively > 10% in the population at large and much higher in the deprived communities which will be targeted by these laws.

<comment><USER8> Having spent significant time of my youth in a bad neighbourhood (with awesome, stable parents though), and having spent much of my later life with people on the edges of society, I can confirm this. It's reached a point where I'm shocked to _not_ eventually hear some awful stories about childhood of these people.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> We can watch a similar thing unfolding in Hamburg at the moment. Following a demonstration that ended up in street fights and an alleged attack on a police station, large parts of the central districts were declared a "Gefahrenzone" (danger zone) where the police has special rights to check persons and deny them entry into that area. This is a special provision in Hamburgs police law that allows the police itself to declare such a zone with very little judical oversight. AFAIK this is the first time this has happened on a large scale, it's interesting to watch events unfold.

<comment><USER10> Sounds just like the UK:

[http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/mar/23/police- terrorism-p...](http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/mar/23/police-terrorism- protest-g20-law)

 _" It is being misused because the police have the power to impose a blanket area, where any police officer can search anyone without reason for suspicion on the basis that a senior police officer has thought that there might be terrorist activity or terrorists operating in the area."_

<comment><USER11> That article dates from 2009, but section 44 of the Terrorism Act, which allowed for stop-and-search without suspicion, was suspended following a 2010 ruling by the ECHR that it violated Article 8. In various developments since that suspension, it doesn't look like anything as sweeping as the previous powers will be coming back any time soon.

<comment><USER12> Well, not until the current government manages to abolish or abandon the ECHR, something they've consistently and publicly stated they want to do.

<comment><USER11> To be fair, the political leaders are damned whatever they do on this issue now.

On the one hand, we have the principled argument of H. L. Mencken, "The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all."

On the other hand, we have had a few very high profile cases recently where it's hard to see how even a generous interpretation of proper human rights safeguards should protect someone, yet that person has won legal battles time after time in court using technicalities and weasel words. In most cases, those victories are ultimately won in the European Court after failing in all national courts here in the UK. And these are the ones that make the headlines and force politicians to react.

What is easy to forget when looking at the latter cases is how often the European Court has also told a current UK administration it had gone too far, often in granting sweeping powers to police forces and security services in recent years. A majority of voters might have agreed with those decisions if they were pointed out, but the related stories aren't always front page material.

In short, I suspect a lot of the talk about getting rid of ECHR and the Human Rights Acts is populist politics. No political party is seriously proposing getting rid of those without at least introducing some other form of human rights legislation instead, but then at least they've done something. I'm guessing that being the politician who didn't do anything after stories about Abu Hamza not being deported have been on the front page of the Daily Mail for years is probably not a good way to win your next election.

<comment><USER12> The facts of some of those high profile cases were... not exactly as the press portrayed them. For example, there was one high profile case where a murderer couldn't be deported to, I think, Italy because of the Human Rights Act. What the press didn't mention is that he was pretty solidly English - he'd lived in the country since the age of 5, and didn't speak Italian or know anyone there - but even though morally he was firmly our responsibility and not Italy's, the Government tried to foist him on Italy through a legal technicality. The human rights laws just provided a way for the courts to ignore their legal weaseling and come to the only reasonable conclusion.

<comment><USER11> _The facts of some of those high profile cases were... not exactly as the press portrayed them._

Indeed. Unfortunately, politicians are often compelled to respond to the portrayal of what is happening, as presented in the media, as well as to what is actually happening. When the press distorts these cases just for the print equivalent of linkbait titles, it does have undesirable consequences for the debate as a whole.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Four paragraphs of lamentations about exclusion, inequality, sanitization, poor, young, etc. before any hard facts and seven before the actual topic is brushed. Oh, and no sources or references for the events he describes.

 _Asbos have been granted which forbid the carrying of condoms by a prostitute, homeless alcoholics from possessing alcohol in a public place, a soup kitchen from giving food to the poor, a young man from walking down any road other than his own_

OK, it's not a news article but there are blogs much better than this.

Apart from people who already know what he's writing about and agree with him, who would want to read this piece of pure mood affiliation? No wonder they're in the red.

EDIT: This [https://www.liberty-human- rights.org.uk/pdfs/policy13/libert...](https://www.liberty-human- rights.org.uk/pdfs/policy13/liberty-s-briefing-on-the-draft-anti-social- behaviour-bill-feb-2013-.pdf) [pdf] is supposedly the source, according to the "fully referenced" version on his website. The word 'soup' is not used there at all.

I will not shed one tear for a profession that cannot master a hyperlink.

<comment><USER14> > Oh, and no sources or references for the events he describes.

Did you see this part?

> A fully referenced version of this article can be found at monbiot.com

<comment><USER15> Strange he doesn't link directly to the article: [http://www.monbiot.com/2014/01/06/dead- zone/](http://www.monbiot.com/2014/01/06/dead-zone/)

Imagine reading this article in a few months, then this article would have been buried further down on monbiot.com

(Perhaps he is not permitted directly to the article from the Guardian's website.)

<comment><USER16> Generally the guardian doesn't include links to the authors site as these are published online exactly like they are in the newspaper.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The same exists in Belgium for about a year or so where it's called a "GAS boete" (Gemeentelijke administratieve sanctie ~= muncipial administrative sanction).

They have been the subject of a lot of dismay among people because they're often used for the wrong thing.

Some stupid reasons to get a GAS fine are _:

\- Eating a sandwich on the porch of a church

\- Posting negative comments about the police on a news website

\- Kids can't play football when the pidgeon herders (? - NL: duivenmelker) are managing their pidgeons.

\- sitting on the back part of a bench

\- Putting garbage from your car in to a public trash can. (yes, IN TO the trash can, not next to it) It was seen as illegal dumping of trash (NL: sluikstorten)

_Source: [http://www.knack.be/nieuws/belgie/top-100-van-de- absurdste-g...](http://www.knack.be/nieuws/belgie/top-100-van-de-absurdste- gas-boetes-een-klucht-zonder-weerga/article-opinion-120656.html)

<comment><USER18> "duivenmelker" in English (at least British English) would be "pigeon fancier".

[http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/pigeon-...](http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/pigeon- fancier)

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

<comment><USER19> To a German ear it sounds like pigeon milker...

I actually don't fancy this sport or hobby. You just have to pay attention the "feral" pigeons running about in the cities. Many of them have exactly one crippled leg, where their band originally was. After the pigeon doesn't return home, this thing cuts into the leg over time and in a slow and painful process the leg falls off...

<comment><USER8> pigeon milker would be the translation in Dutch, but perhaps it has a special meaning in Flemish...

<comment><USER18> "Pigeon milk" does exist: it is a type of crop milk, the regurgitated lining that parent birds feed to their young.

But "pigeon milker" as pigeon fancier instead is a copy of the Dutch word for nightjar ("geitenmelker"), according to NL Wikipedia:

[https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duivenmelk](https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duivenmelk)

Nightjars were known once as goatsuckers in English because it was believed they sucked milk from goats.

So it seems it is just a play on words. I am not Dutch, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> He lays this at Norman Baker's feet, who has only been in the job a few months (although he has apparently defended the new law).

As a fellow Lib Dem I'm thoroughly ashamed that this is getting anywhere with us in the government, and I've tweeted him (Baker) to challenge his position - his account looks like a bog standard politician's announcement feed, no interactions with other accounts save the odd retweet, so I don't expect he'll respond (if he does fast enough for an edit, I'll link to it here).

ASBOs have been awful - I remember hearing about a case my dad sat on (he's a magistrate) where a homeless guy, who had been seriously assaulted, was up on charges of breaching his no-swearing ASBO for his reaction to the police ignoring him while he sat their bleeding! Very unpleasant laws used to attack the vulnerable, and they're making them even more wide-ranging. I am fuming!

<comment><USER21> Maybe this law is so far along because the only challenges it receives are unanswered tweets.

Try calling his office instead. It is a thousand times more effective.

<comment><USER20> If I don't get a response, I will write a letter! I know how this works.

<comment><USER21> Yeah, but calling is the most effective means of being heard (short of appearing in person). Call bandwidth < letter bandwidth < tweet bandwidth.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> How many people are afraid to walk down a dark alley at night? That's a freedom we should have but plenty of people are forced to get a taxi or stay home because of a real fear of being robbed. I live in a city where it is safe, even for young women alone and I'm amazed when I remember what a restricted life it was in more dangerous, yet more "free" cities. If someone demands money from you in a deserted street, do you have the courage to refuse? If not then you need something, perhaps not these poorly defined laws begging to be abused, but something to protect you from those subtle threats that constantly erode your quality of life.

<comment><USER23> When kids were breaking into our power box and shutting off the power, trying to enter the house after I walked in the door (meaning I learned to be very, very quick in locking the door), and finally threw a brick through our window, the cops greeted my complaints with "what did you do to provoke them?"

(truthfully, I think my existing was the provocation. We signed a new lease somewhere else 2 days after the brick)

None of these laws are going to fix the problem which I think lies more with policing and with community than with not having enough laws.

<comment> jon-wood All of those are criminal offences in their own right though - while clearly inept in your situation, the police don't require new powers to arrest someone for entering your house without permission, throwing bricks through windows, or vandalising power supplies.

<comment><USER23> I completely agree.

I know it's easier for the gov to publish new laws than it is to actually figure out what the underlying problem is and tackle that.

I think it's quite rare that the underlying problem is "not enough laws"

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'm wondering: where is the new George Orwell? Why aren't all writers writing about this? Clearly we need a new 1984, because we didn't learn anything from the original.

<comment><USER25> I doubt a book would make much difference. Something with more mass appeal, like a movie or TV show maybe. But it's still a long shot IMHO.

Or you know, we could vote those people out of office. We keep bashing those clueless politicians but we did put them here in the first place. We don't even have the excuse of dictatorship.

This tendency around these parts to look for technical solutions (tor, bitcoin, etc...) for political problems is very saddening.

Assuming most of the readers of HN come from democratic countries, we shouldn't have to fear our government. No amount of openSSL will fix that problem.

<comment><USER26> > Or you know, we could vote those people out of office. We keep bashing those > clueless politicians but we did put them here in the first place. We don't > even have the excuse of dictatorship.

Yeah, but do you really think Labour would be any better? Both parties seem so scared of the Mail and the Telegraph that they'll do anything to look tough on crime. Thinking about it, is this the inevitable result of an aging population?

<comment><USER24> The problem with the UK is that it now has 3 major conservative parties.

But aren't there smaller parties you can vote for? And if there aren't any, surely you can start a new party? Find enough people who agree with you.

<comment><USER27> The US would barely call any of our conservative parties right wing, so it's a matter of perspective on this stuff.

<comment><USER24> Well, I'm not in the US. I'm Dutch, and from my perspective, you've got 3 conservative parties. Blair killed what used to be Labour.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Sadly Britain does have a problem in some communities with ingrained, persistent and extremely damaging anti-social behaviour.

<comment><USER29> Would there be a bigger picture, showing us, how these behaviour comes into being? How it could be addressed or prevented in other ways? "Ingrained" seems to indicated, that you feel (yes, it's an emotion , not an established fact) there is no help anyway, so lets get rid of them. Society, after all, does not exists. It's you or them?

In the light of the recent complaints on this blog about homeless people in SF: maybe there is a completely surprising "disruption" lurking, if you do not address this subject with a "we" mindset.

<comment><USER30> Put posters into stident halls of residence giving accurate information about how much people drink.

Early research suggests that some people drink lots because they think that's the norm and it's what everyone else is drinking.

When someone ends up in a&e for alcohol related stuff a note is taken of who sold them alcohol. This allows us to aee if any particular clubs need to work on harm reduction.

Change minimum pricing for alcohol, and prevent special offers for alcohol. This would have minimal impact on most people, but would help reduce binge drinking.

Have better training for gps and gp nurses. Most people drinking too much are not serious enough for specialst drug and alcohol rehab, and primary care is a more appropriate setting for them.

Urban design and planning can set expectations - early experiments show that clubbers leaving a premises are quieter with good planning of te environment.

Sensible enforcement of existing laws.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> It is good that finally there will be sufficient powers and less efforts required for the police to finally restore the order in the post apocalyptic crime ridden wasteland that is UK /s

</comment><comment><USER32> _Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable._ (JFK)

Not sure what they are so affraid of?

<comment><USER10> This week the British public is being told to be afraid of Romanians and Bulgarians:

[http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/03/romanians- and...](http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/03/romanians-and- bulgarians-in-the-uk-react-to-immigration-furore)

<comment><USER33> Or otherwise they are being (fakely?) welcomed

[http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21591865-open- letter-c...](http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21591865-open-letter- citizens-bulgaria-and-romania-youre-welcome)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> It blows my mind that this is possible in a country like the UK. Surely such a law would be considered unconstitutional in the US?

Of course I also didn't think we were quite so far along the path to a complete surveillance state in the US until Snowden's revelations.

<comment><USER11> _It blows my mind that this is possible in a country like the UK._

It remains to be seen whether it really is, and if so, for how long.

Remember, this is basically all being done because ASBOs have been a failure by almost any metric you can imagine. They were always controversial on civil liberties grounds. They became a badge of honour, or perhaps I should say an achievement to be unlocked, for many of the very people whose behaviour they were supposed to moderate. They were widely ignored by those supposedly constrained by them. And they didn't get a free ride when they were inevitably challenged in court, either.

<comment><USER35> They were also challenged by the courts so parliament is basically remaking them in their original form again.

Given that criminal barristers are protesting poor working conditions right now I think the government might want to think about making enemies in the legal profession.

Ha, who am I kidding. This government thinks they're above everything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Question: have things always been like this in the past few decades? Have we always gated off our poor, and passed laws to harass them? How can we change it, and will we ever? I honestly am asking, not rhetorical.

<comment><USER35> The Vagrancy Act was passed in 1824.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> people would be able to organize protests? it looks more like a "manifestation censorship"... this is the established power controlling what people can and cannot in public spaces in a spooky way.. this is ridiculous..

sorry to tell you that but.. you are no longer in a democracy in UK.. because you dont control anything anymore

Is not politicians that should control people, but people that should control politicians

</comment><comment><USER38> > Advertisers, who cause plenty of nuisance and annoyance, have nothing to > fear;

Why not? Can I not pursue an IPNA against these parasites?

</comment><comment><USER39> Although the article is pretty lame, it seems to me that the UK is turning out more and to resemble 1984.

</comment><comment><USER40> The Manifesto Club is a strong campaigning organisation against this kind of regulation - [http://www.manifestoclub.com/](http://www.manifestoclub.com/)

</comment><comment><USER41> I'm not sure if ASBOs are perfect, but for anyone that has had to share a street with (for want of a better word) complete arsehole neighbours, I should imagine they are a god send.

<comment><USER42> Can you elaborate an example where the neighbour is not violating any laws or bylaws, and needs a tailored law against them?

Best I can come up with off the top of my head is a restraining order, when there's obvious potential for very damaging acts, but no crime has been committed yet, or for parole type scenarios.

<comment><USER41> TBH, I don't know enough of the law to provide an example. There may well be laws that would cover the case, but the ASBOs seem to be the preferred instrument by councils or whoever. If I was the person suffering the harrassment/noise pollution/whatever, I wouldn't really care what legal instrument was used.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Hm, the United Queendom's people should revoke those laws as incompatible with their constitution.

Oh wait. They don't have one ...

</comment><comment><USER43> As history repeatedly told us, such laws will result in strong oppositions and extremism. Even Russians finally got it.)

</comment><comment><USER44> _opera lovers hogging the pavements_

Monbiot has really lost the plot this time.

<comment><USER45> I found that apt. I enjoy opera and ballet. If you stand outside the coliseum 15 minutes before an ENO performance, you will see - most surely - <USER3> lovers hogging the pavements. I cannot imagine for one moment a PC handing out a citation to a single one of them. Teens waiting to get into a show in camden however, I can see these being handed out like take away flyers. (sorry for the bad analogy)

<comment><USER44> When opera lovers start looting shops, then the police _will_ start handing out citations. You seem to think it's unfair that a group with no history of causing trouble should be treated differently from one that has. And yes I have been both a teenage goth in Camden and in the queue at the ROH to see Turandot (among others).

<comment><USER20> Treating a group differently because a similar group was trouble in the past is no way to run a police service!

If it's a bunch of people affiliated with a political ideology (e.g. EDL marches, occupy) then you might have a point since they're voluntarily associating - but profiling based on age, race, what type of entertainment they're queuing for, that is unjustifiable! think of the number of false positives....

<comment><USER44> The existence of football hooligans would tend to disprove that. Also punks. You can actually very easily correlate "trouble" with "preferred entertainment".

<comment><USER20> Punk was political, specifically anarchist - argument void.

I didn't say you can't correlate it, I said you can't treat them all like criminals by default - only a small fraction of football fans are violent, similarly teenagers.

A law that effectively bans people queuing up to watch football is the same level of crazy as banning teenagers from queuing up for goth metal.

<comment><USER44> Political, specifically Fascist I think you mean. There is a big overlap with punks, football hooligans and BNP/Combat 18. Ever heard of Skrewdriver? Where does the law ban people from standing in queues?

<comment><USER20> Your initial comment referenced the possibility of people being given an order for "clogging up the pavement", whether protesting, queuing for the opera, etc - that is what I've been referencing.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Aeron: Efficient reliable UDP unicast, UDP multicast, and IPC message transport - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/real-logic/Aeron <comment><USER2> A _fantastic_ library. We switched Onyx Platform www.onyxplatform.org over to it from Netty, and it was a lot easier to write than the netty messaging layer that we had, which required a lot of tuning and thought to get right.

I learned a lot by reading the code, and it generally forces you to use good patterns that changed how I thought how to build a messaging layer.

</comment><comment><USER3> The author Martin Thompson is one of those rare breed of developers who understands the sheer inner workings and the effects of his programs from the source to processor.

[http://mechanical-sympathy.blogspot.com/](http://mechanical- sympathy.blogspot.com/)

<comment><USER4> This breed so not exactly rare as it includes every system programmer at its bare minimum.

<comment><USER5> I'm sure this is a logical fallacy but if that were true, wouldn't the quality of software on consumer routers be much better?

<comment><USER6> I imagine a systems programmer would not consider user-facing applications as their program especially if they had no hand in writing these user-facing applications. In my imagination, a systems programmer abstracts out application programming and just blocks it out.

Personally, I think in abstractions as well. I don't spend a lot of time thinking about fetch, execute, decode, ... when I write my line of business applications. I probably should but as I pound out lines after lines of garbage, I could be a lot more conscientious but I tell myself my code runs on top of other people's code (and really I am not that great of a programmer anyway so I should focus on my part of the code rather than the platform which I can't change anyways).

[https://www.cs.umd.edu/class/sum2003/cmsc311/Notes/CompOrg/f...](https://www.cs.umd.edu/class/sum2003/cmsc311/Notes/CompOrg/fetchDecode.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> src: [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/mechanical- sympathy](https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/mechanical-sympathy)

</comment><comment><USER7> written in Java? not effected by heap-growth and GC latency?

<comment><USER8> The driver does not allocate in the main message flow so GC does not factor in. Also the driver can run out of process and not be impacted by client processes.</comment></comment>