Why You Don't "Fucking Love Science" - <AUTHOR> http://www.johnskylar.com/post/61507282912/why-you-dont-fucking-love-science

<comment><USER2> "I'm not trying to talk down to those professions; they're all vital and should be well-paid, but a postdoctoral scientist has tons of training, and that should come with a boost in salary."

But.. That's part of the reason why scientists aren't paid very much. By and large, their work is not vital, and by most people's admissions much of "basic science" won't amount to much - but you never know till 10, 50, 100 years down the line. Now. Let's say one out of ten basic science projects becomes relevant (an overestimate, if you ask me as a PhD biologist)... And let's say a postdoc gets paid 60,000. Then the cost of that postdoc corrected for "likelihood of usefulness" is 600,000.

The other part is that we are willing to work for beans.

edit: I just realized I'm a postdoc and I'm not getting paid nearly close to 60k.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'll just leave this right here (NSFW)...

[http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=youre_not_a_nerd](http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=youre_not_a_nerd)

<comment><USER4> what's nsfw there?

<comment><USER5> Maddox.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > a postdoctoral scientist has tons of training, and that should come with a > boost in salary

Labor theory of value? Just because you spent time acquiring skills doesn't mean that others value those skills enough to pay you for utilizing them.

<comment><USER7> The listed postdoc salary is the same for fields where you have very applicable skills that industry is very willing to pay you 6 figures for.

<comment><USER6> Ok? What's ultimately valuable then is the things you can do with those skills, not the skills themselves. If you take the same skills and do things with them that others care less about, you'll be paid less.

<comment><AUTHOR> > If you take the same skills and do things with them that others care less > about, you'll be paid less.

The point is that if even if you do exactly the same thing and are a post doctoral researcher in an industrial lab; you will earn more than what you would do with the same execution in academics.

<comment><USER6> If you're really doing the exact same thing, then why not just move to an industrial lab -- problem solved? Presumably there's a reason some people want to stay in academia, which seems to imply they're doing something different there?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's fairly obvious that the author knows next to nothing about military research, or even how much engineering goes into modern industry, defense or otherwise.

A lot more goes on than just "researching things that kill people." The Joint Strike Fighter, for example, is a sophisticated, state-of-the-art aeronautics platform. Advances discovered while working on it can end up applying to everything from advanced crypto to materials science to acoustics research.

Also, let's conveniently ignore the fact that defense research spending dwarfs the NASA budget by an order of magnitude, and has potential to be just as important to "science" as a whole.

<comment><USER9> Indeed, we won't know what advances defense spending will yields 50 to 100 years down the road. However, it is also true that we don't know what basic science research will yield 50 years to 100 years down the road, and I rather human spend money on space exploration rather than trying to find better way to kill things.

<comment><USER2> Would you feel better if you knew DARPA was spending money on pie in the sky ways of killing things if "things" was bacteria and viruses?

<comment><USER10> Maybe if "things" were mosquitos...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm getting a bit tired of articles that offer to explain science but don't mention falsifiability or reality testing.

> Science is people.

Spectacularly false. Science's primary obstacle, its single most important handicap, is people. In fact, the reason science exists at all is to compensate for how badly people test reality. Science is a kind of intellectual crutch so that people who cannot think, can at least assume a roughly upright posture in the world of ideas, maybe even stand "on the shoulders of giants".

I look forward to a time (in the far future) when what we call "science" will be a normal way to think about the world, rather than a special discipline representing a dramatic contrast to the majority of human behavior.

</comment><comment><USER12> The wikipedia article of the 23-4 year old girl who set up the facebook group that he's taking the piss out of:

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

she has a BSc, and most certainly _does_ understand that science is not just pretty/cool pictures - the site is just where she puts the ones she finds.

</comment><comment><USER13> This article is utter and complete bullshit.

First of all, data _is_ science just as much as people are, it's an arbitrary line to draw that puts people in science and data out of science. It's not a "side process", it's the critical piece. Computers can do science, but science can't happen without data.

Secondly, the "if you love it, support it" argument is also utter bullshit. I love rain, but I'm not actively seeding clouds because I'm not a huge fucking asshole who doesn't give a shit what impact my seeding might have on the environment. I also have to do other things with my time so when it does rain I can enjoy it. If I didn't work, and was therefore homeless, I'd enjoy rain a whole hell of a lot less.

Thirdly, people love more than one thing. I, for example, love woman's rights too, as well as net neutrality, the free market, and a number of other things. People who love science also love other things, and when we vote, we don't just consider one single issue (science funding). Oh, and by the fucking way, my country spends the most money by a _wide_ margin, on science funding [0].

So to sum, you might have a point if you want to talk about how little money researchers get paid. But don't play games with telling me what I like and don't like, because you have no fucking clue what you're talking about in that arena, and it just ruins any legitimate point you might have.

[0] - [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_research_a...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_research_and_development_spending)

<comment><USER11> > First of all, data is science just as much as people are ...

False choice. Science is neither data nor people, it's what we do with the data. Data by itself is nothing without a falsifiable theory that tries to explain the data.

How hard is it to say that science is disciplined reality-testing, and if reality disagrees with your theory, you must abandon the theory?

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> To each their own. I experienced the PhD-postdoc path. IMO...

\-- Science is the quest to understand how and why things work, and how to make 'em better (for engineering). Sure, some of it is "process", but not "process and people" (to me, though the people are good too).

\-- Academic science definitely has a profit motive: get money to do more science.

\-- Academic "workhorses" get paid $40k because they're either in training (grad student) or in a holding pattern (postdocs) and looking for the "right" long-term gig.

\-- Biological sciences have perverse career trajectories compared to others in STEM. I still can't believe that you need multiple 5-year postdocs to be (truly) eligible for faculty jobs. Probably some supply-demand things going on there.

\-- My gut tells me... People in science who bitch about others' motivations are just projecting their own unhappiness. You can love science and its beauty without committing your life to it.

</comment><comment><USER15> Or you could stop relying on the government -- who is broke, mind you -- to fund your livelihood.

<comment><USER7> The problem is that corporations simply aren't going to fund pure research.

Part of the role of government is to fund research that may not pay off for 20 years, or 50 years, or a century.

Corporations do indeed do a large amount of R&D, but it's much more focused, and needs to impact the bottom line on a much shorter timeframe (say ~5 years).

Because of this, there's a large amount of very important research that will never be funded by anything other than a quasi-governmental organization.

<comment><USER2> > corporations simply aren't going to fund pure research.

Not all corporations are for-profit.

> Part of the role of government is to fund research that may not pay off for > 20 years, or 50 years, or a century.

What? Can you point to me where it says that?

<comment><USER7> To be fair, I guess that's partly my political leanings showing through.

Who else will fund it, though?

As far as the non-profit angle, that's what I was implying by quasi in "quasi- governmental". I definitely could have worded that better, though.

<comment><USER2> there are plenty of non-profit, non-governmental scientific efforts. SETI (yes, it piggybacked on some government instruments) is the best well-known one. Peter Mitchell came up with the pure "basic-science" chemiosmotic theory, founded a nonprofit research institute (Glyn Research Ltd [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_D._Mitchell](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_D._Mitchell)) to prove and validate it. He subsequently won the nobel prize for his efforts.

HHMI also does this at its in-house Janelia Farms campus.

Not basic science, but Salk and Sabin developed the polio vaccines without much federal help (via march of dimes, a nonprofit) - and didn't even patent their vaccines.

Much basic science in the pre-1940 era was funded internally by the research institutes they were at.

And there are basic science foundations that get the patronage of industry, just because, they're so gosh derned nice, and some that do limited basic science on the side while doing applied that passes patents onto the for- profit (lucent/bell labs, Xerox PARC).

<comment><USER16> Bell Labs and PARC both are from a long-gone era where high tax rates meant the government would tax away high dividends or executive pay, which made empire building more appealing: [http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/07/24/xerox_parc_an...](http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/07/24/xerox_parc_and_bell_labs_brought_to_you_by_high_taxes.html)

<comment><USER2> All the same, I'd rather have a more distributed, private, independent basic science effort. But then again, I'm biased, as that's what my nonprofit is trying to do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> The big graph in the middle, which drives the argument that you're somebody's bitch for two decades as a postdoc before making it on your own is driven by NIH data. How is the situation for other fields of research & sources of funding?

Looking as the total US DoD budget, as they're winding down from 2 foreign wars is a non sequitur when talking about research funding. Just looking at federal R&D funding ( [http://www.proposalexponent.com/federalprofiles.html](http://www.proposalexponent.com/federalprofiles.html) ) things are going strong - even DoD funding is well above Cold War Levels.

Anecdotally, of the people I remember from grad school, most of them moved on from post-doc work after 3-4 years. While not the same as becoming PI for a large grant, there's a pretty big gap between 4 and 20 years.

While it's not a career that you'll get obscenely rich pursuing, it's nowhere near the level of lifelong poverty that the article is suggesting. Once you consider the excellent retirement benefits, work environment and unparalleled stability of a tenured position, it's a comfortable life. It's not for everyone but there's no reason to avoid it.

</comment><comment><USER18> My ex was career military. People in the military bitch constantly about the "low pay" while oblivious to the dollar value of a long list of benefits. I wonder how those high civilian salaries compare to the academic salaries if you figure out benefits. I am not seeing any reason to believe this is an apples to apples comparison.

<comment><USER7> My benefits (in terms of health care, pension, 401k, etc) in industry are _substantially_ better in industry than they would have been in academia. Industry has both better benefits and higher salary and shorter working hours.

Academia has flexibility and challenge (and politics, to be fair). Despite all of the downsides, I miss it.

<comment><USER18> Have an upvote, though I would say flexiblty and challenge are real benefits and it would be possible to calculate a dollar value for them if you knew the right data to look for.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> if you really love science, you'll donate out of your own pocket to science research nonprofits.

OK, that's a bit of a self-serving statement =)

</comment><comment><USER19> An engaging post but this one kind of lost me.

First, what does defense spending have to do with whether or not I love science, or how much money should be invested in science? That's like saying:

"You don't love bread. You spend half as much money on bread as you do on cheese." Huh?

Also, I was a bit annoyed by the argument that researchers deserve more money because they spent a lot of time acquiring their skills. If I take 10 years learning how to bake a cake, the cake is still only worth 5 or 10 bucks.

One could argue that researchers are paid too little based on the value they create because of some kind of market failure. That would certainly be an interesting read.

<comment><USER20> Your Cake metaphor breaks down because of your intuition and experience of cakes. If _everybody_ needs to study for 10 years to bake a cake, cakes would become are more expensive. If people are were willing to spend 5 bucks on a cake, baking would not be a lucrative carer and few people would pursue it. Politicians might then show concern about a cake talent crisis and fund programs to get girls more interested in baking at an earlier age, while cakes still cost 5 bucks a piece.

<comment><USER19> rincewind - not sure I understand your point.

"If everybody had to study for 10 years to bake a cake, cakes would become more expensive"

This is not exactly true unless the demand for cakes is perfectly inelastic, but I will admit that if the cost of becoming a cake supplier increases, total supply should decrease (all else equal), the result will be a higher equilibrium price. The point I was trying to make with the cake metaphor is simply that the price of x is not determined by the cost of the inputs, but by the value of the output.

The part of your comment that I don't understand is the bit about the government support. I don't really see how that relates to the cake metaphor. Am I missing something?

Also, you're describing a situation that can logically only arise in the context of market failure (this is interesting because I alluded to this in my first comment).

If people aren't willing to pay the higher cost of the cake because the benefit doesn't justify the cost, why would it make sense for the government to use tax money to intervene?

Short answer: it doesn't.

This only makes sense if the total benefit of cake > the cost of the cake, but there was some market inefficiency in the way.

You could certainly argue that this is the case with scientific research. In fact I personally would agree with this argument. But it has nothing to do with how long the scientist spent in school and what they "deserve" to earn based on that education.

I really want some cake now.

<comment><USER20> There are lots of programs to get girls more interested in science. The Government _is_ intervening. Careers in science do not pay well.

[http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/women-in- science](http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/women-in-science)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> IFLS promotes science by showing the data/results of science.

If you want to get someone interested in programming, do you start with telling them about variables and loops? No, you show them a game or something else cool that's been made via programming.

In a time when scientific work is severely under-appreciated and undervalued, why is the author trying to undermine a resource that is doing more to promote science than the whole school system combined?

<comment><USER2> >under-appreciated and undervalued

that's your opinion... I respectfully disagree.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> This starts off with the same mistake made by "why you're doing x wrong" or "everything you know about y is wrong:" Talking down to the entire population of the internet, i.e. anyone who might read your post.

Making uncharitable generalizations about people making uncharitable generalizations about science makes you statistically likely to be interpreted as a troll, and even if you aren't, you've earned that designation by failing to appeal to _any_ demographic or make any reasonably qualified statements.

</comment><comment><USER23> > Stop liking what I don't like!

Did this really need an essay?

I'll "fucking love" whatever I want and define it however I wish. How does this make you feel?

</comment><comment><USER24> Here's some science for the author: [http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/mind_brain/anger_management...](http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/mind_brain/anger_management/)

</comment><comment><USER5> > If you loved science, you'd be voting based on candidates who want to > increase funding for it. You'd be making it an issue that actually gets > debated in the media, that sees equal time with the wars we fight and the > bills we pay our aging workforce. These other things are priorities too, but > if you think that science comes after these things, you're dead wrong: > __science is the reason we've gotten so damned good at these things __.

...and the last part is what I think is the reason that there has developed a subculture of people who "fucking love science". They don't mean that they love the _scientific process_ _, but rather that they love_ the results that science is giving*. But of course, if there wasn't such a subculture, someone would make a blog post whining about how people aren't appreciative of the science that is the corner stone of modern civilization.

<comment><USER2> they may not even love the results that science is giving, they may love showing off that they "like" science as a status symbol or social signifier.

<comment><USER5> That might very well be the case. Of the friends of mine that like that page on Facebook, most of them are either involved (or have been involved) with science or technology.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: How would you go about finding a mentor? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Find someone who is better than you in your workplace and learn as much as you can

<comment><AUTHOR> this is the biggest downside of being a freelancer :(</comment></comment>


We're All Frauds - <AUTHOR> https://trackchanges.postlight.com/were-all-frauds-2fbd9b4440b6#.evbcgxrxv <comment><USER2> > Yep, no one knows what they're doing and we all kind of suck.

Don't tell that to the people the maintain the electric grid or the water system!! I need my lights on!

Someone once asked me if I had imposer syndrome, I reflexively burst out laughing. Whatever the opposite of that is, I've got it.

Don't get me wrong, I've gotten lucky as hell, but I had the skills ability and insight to take advantage of the good fortune. And if I didn't get that luck, I have no illusions that I'd still be a pauper (well, a prince in pauper's clothes :).

I guess these "don't worry, chill" posts help people with impostor syndrome, so that is fine, I just take objection to when they try to normalize it to everybody.</comment>


Show HN: SugarTeX – readable LaTeX language extension and transcompiler to LaTeX - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex <comment><USER2> Hi, this desperately needs examples of formulas (code and rendered) front and center. It's pretty hard to understand how this could be useful without that.

A comparison to UnicodeMath (which seems very similar and is an existing standard which already works in Latex) would also be useful.

<comment><USER3> 100% agree. But at least there is an example at the very end of the docs: [https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex/blob/master/sugartex....](https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex/blob/master/sugartex.md#sugartex- replacements-and-operators) I don't find it readable, but it is an extreme example - it would sell the concept better to start with simple, effortlessly superior cases.

I'm not sure about this whole concept of unicode. It is more readable for sure, but harder to write (to remember which unicode to use, and how to get it).

Perhaps surprisingly, java allows unicode identifiers etc, so I experimented with variables like _δx_ and _δt_ , and even _½i_ for PIC grids in CFG. It's cute, but I'm not really sure it's a good idea.

<comment><AUTHOR> My bad: I forget to tell about SugarTeX completions package for Atom. With it writing Unicode is lot faster and simple enough.

[https://atom.io/packages/sugartex- completions](https://atom.io/packages/sugartex-completions)

<comment><USER3> OK, so the whole system is: type in latex, becomes unicode text, finally rendered as symbols (e.g. in a pdf). Except that with that atom package, you needn't type the whole latex, because it autocompletes.

BTW what is that kind of completion called (i.e. where it doesn't just complete, but also replaces it with something else); and is something like that available for vim - or for rlwrap? (I searched, but "completion" brings up all the standard vim completion modes). _EDIT_ vim has "abbreviations", but the no built-in automcomplete mode for them (though you could also put them in a file, and have completion scan that file - or write your own).

A "desugarTeX" could transform an existing latex doc into a unicode version, which could still be used as a source document, via sugarTeX. Arguably, this desugarTeX is kinda sorta like an output format of latex (like pdf or dvi), except that it's also machine readable as latex input.

<comment><AUTHOR> Not really. With that package you can type in LaTeX. But it's inherited behavior.

I myself prefer type `\^:` to get vector superscript symbol, type `\^->` to get another vector superscript symbol. Type:.\rot`to get matrix superscript symbol. Type `\\-->` to get long arrow.

But yes, type `\\\\` to get broken vertical bar that's a new newline symbol, type `\&` to get small sing below that later again converts to `&`.

<comment><USER3> I think you started with something simple, but quickly found you needed to add features for it to work properly for you - and I'd guess it is more-or-less complete for your use-case now. The documentation is a reference for all the features. But it's difficult for a newcomer, to see the full complexity of the end-product, first.

Echoing the root of this thread, I think a tutorial would help, covering the simplest and most common features first (and the ones that work most neatly and elegantly). I'd suggest, for every example, have three parts, in the order a user would experience them:

      1. user-entered shortcut  e=mc\^2
      2. unicode appearing      e=mc²
      3. an image of pdf

I'd omit the actual latex from this _tute_ , because the user never actually sees it...

<comment><AUTHOR> Yep, this initially started as Pandoc filter that iterates over math elements and applies regex replacing. Then I switched to Panflute to iterate over math easier. And eventually added {, } counter with left, right and center regex patterns for binary math operators.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> SugarTeX is a more readable LaTeX language extension and transcompiler to LaTeX. Designed to be used instead of $formula$ insertions to Markdown.

I use Markdown with Python code blocks for document programming via [Pandoctools]([https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/pandoctools](https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/pandoctools)) (like R-Markdown).

Both Python and Markdown are very readable languages. Unfortunately LaTeX is not like this. So I wrote SugaTeX extension+transpiler that is highly readable. In order to achieve this it heavily uses Unicode so that SugarTeX install instructions even have recommended monospace font fallback chains.

[SugarTeX repo]([https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex](https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex)) with description.

Example of input to output conversion is at the end of [this PDF]([https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex/blob/master/sugartex....](https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex/blob/master/sugartex.pdf?raw=true)).

<comment><USER4> > Designed to be used instead of $formula$ insertions to Markdown.

What's the downside of having $formula$ blocks in Markdown?

<comment><USER5> ˎa/bˎ is easier to read than $\frac{a}{b}$.

<comment><USER6> Oddly, Knuth prefers ${a \over b}$. I think I agree, if only because it actually reads well.

An odd thing I found, was the once I learned how to verbalize many of the maths that I encountered, reading them became much easier. LaTeX actually helped a lot here, because most of the constructs have good readable macros to typeset them.

<comment><USER7> Also, if you're interested in readable languages, there's the family of roff languages that might seem terse at first when coming from LaTeX but actually have a very enjoyable grammar. The LaTeX ecosystem is so great that I don't really miss roff but I do have nice memories of writing reports in roff a couple of years ago. More to the point I found it wonderful to write graphics in the roff pic sublanguage.

Edit: actually even more to the point is the eqn sublanguage which really competes with Knuth notation.

<comment><USER8> It's not a coincidence: in fact, eqn (the ACM paper by Kernighan and Cherry was published in 1975) predates the initial design of TeX (1977), and Knuth explicitly based the math notation in TeX on that of eqn. Initially, like eqn he had no backslashes, but quickly (before any code was written) changed it to one with backslashes.

He discuses these matters of syntax in his Gibbs lecture of of January 1978 ([https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.bams/1183544082](https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.bams/1183544082)): see Figure 3 on the top of page 344, where the notation of eqn is marked "Type B" ("developed at Bell Telephone Laboratories") and the third column is "Type T".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Standard LaTeX has worked just fine for like 35 years for the use cases it was intended: academic papers to write better looking mathematics and figures/citations, and heavyweight typesetting of things like books.

Not really sure why people are insistent on building on top of stuff - it's taking abstraction to a new level that imho is not needed - LaTex isn't particularly unreadable.

<comment><USER10> I'd say the problem isn't so much about readability but about ease of doing certain things. Case in point: non trivial tables, with multirows/multicols, newlines inside cells, and so on

<comment><USER11> But aren't hard things going to be hard to do?

There are things that, if you did them in a GUI, would be multiple steps down the tree of menus. It seems natural to me that they require multiple commands.

(Not that LaTeX is perfect, for sure. Admit I only glanced at this. But after trying a bunch of things that the author asserts are simplifiers, I've not found one that is as capable. All too often they make super simple things that are already simple, and then fall back to LaTeX for the rest.)

<comment> Ar-Curunir Debugging those tables is still a pain in the ass. I am certain that we there's a better way than today, where if you accidentally add or remove a newline your table breaks

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> As far as I can deduce, you're trying to incorporate LateX into .md using the Markdown Philosophy of "you should write something that's readable as plain text, without compilation, also". Is that basically right? If so it should probably be right at the top, because it's hard to tell right now.

The idea makes sense, though I'm not sure if it's... better. Do you expect people to input " ⃗E" and "⨌" as text? Or ... what? Do you type the TeX and then have Atom autocomplete it into the Unicode symbols?

<comment><AUTHOR> You are completely right. But I thought

``Both Python and Markdown are very readable languages. Unfortunately LaTeX is not like this. So I wrote SugaTeX extension+transpiler that is highly readable.``

means the same...

As about input. My bad: I forget to tell about SugarTeX completions package for Atom. There to write `` ⃗E`` you type ``\^->``(+E) this autocompletes to `` ⃗E``.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I would be interested to hear if this is a workflow that suits people that write mathematics papers or other complicated TeX documents. My TeX code is very macro heavy (I know some mathematicians who define almost everything through macros so that they can rewrite the paper quickly) and, as a result, I've never really seen the benefit of unicode mathematics.

To go one step further: I think writing Greek letters (or, for that matter, any Latin letter that does not have a standard mathematical meaning) is an anti-pattern in mathematical prose: I think it is much, much better to write \coercivenessSymbol than \gamma or the unicode variant for the same reasons I would not name a floating point number gamma.

<comment><AUTHOR> Looks like it already have been implemented: [https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/28033/133525](https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/28033/133525)

I mean having any macros name you want, even Unicode.

So you can even have \γ macros. But if you want to write \coercivenessSymbol (even on the blackboard) we cannot stop you - after all it gives you pleasure.

My conclusion about this feature: [https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex/issues/1](https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex/issues/1)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I do not understand what this is exactly, but I'm very interested! What is a LaTeX "extension" ? Is it a LaTeX package that will allow me to write my math directly in unicode ? That would be so cool!

Could you please clarify the documentation (add some context) so that it is understandable to LaTeX users? Especially to LaTeX users that will want to keep using their own editor, and do not want to touch Atom with a long stick...

<comment><AUTHOR> I meant extension in sence that it's a LaTeX language extension to it's superset.

There's no LaTeX package and I myself will not port it. SugarTeX is Pandoc/Markdown oriented project in the first place.

You can use it as a command line prepocess text filter though. It should work as long as you use ˎ or ˎˎ to define SugarTeX.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> The juice is at the very end of the README, where you can see the unicode markup (ignore HN-mangled newlines):

ˎˎ ˱∇ × [ ⃗B] - 1∕c ∂[ ⃗E]∕∂t ˳= 4π∕c [ ⃗j] ¦# ∇ ⋅ [ ⃗E]\ ˳= 4πρ ¦ ∇ × [ ⃗E] + 1∕c ∂[ ⃗B]∕∂t ˳= [ ⃗0] ¦ ∇ ⋅ [ ⃗B]\ ˳= 0 ˲ ,ˎˎ{#eq:max}

where ˎ[ ⃗B], [ ⃗E], [ ⃗j]: ℝ⁴ → ℝ³ˎ – vector functions of the form

ˎ(t,x,y,z) ↦ [ ⃗f](t,x,y,z), [ ⃗f] = (f_˹x˺, f_˹y˺, f_˹z˺)ˎ.

renders to:

$$ \begin{aligned}∇ × {\mathbf{B}} - \frac{1}{c} \frac{∂{\mathbf{E}}}{∂t} &= \frac{4π}{c} {\mathbf{j}}\ ∇ ⋅ {\mathbf{E}}\ &= 4πρ \ ∇ × {\mathbf{E}} + \frac{1}{c} \frac{∂{\mathbf{B}}}{∂t} &= {\mathbf{0}} \ ∇ ⋅ {\mathbf{B}}\ &= 0 \end{aligned} ,$${#eq:max}

where ${\mathbf{B}},,{\mathbf{E}},,{\mathbf{j}}:,ℝ^{4} → ℝ^{3}$ -- vector functions of the form $(t,x,y,z) ↦ {\mathbf{f}}(t,x,y,z),,{\mathbf{f}} = (f_{\mathrm{x}}, f_{\mathrm{y}}, f_{\mathrm{z}})$.

</comment><comment><USER16> Transcompiler !

As if 'transpiler' was not nails-on-the-board grating enough. 'Compiler' is a fine word and the right word.

Anyone knows who started this 'transpiler' nonsense. Seems very common in the javascript community but not sure if it was their 'innovation'.

</comment><comment><USER17> You should take one or two examples from sugartex.pdf and put it in the README (i.e. the SugarTex source and a screenshot of the rendered output).

<comment><AUTHOR> Examples of input to output conversion see in this PDF: [https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex/blob/master/examples/...](https://github.com/kiwi0fruit/sugartex/blob/master/examples/examples.pdf?raw=true)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> Although not the easier to read, I think LaTeX language is still OK. The downside of this approach is the difficulty to learn the new Unicode character and how to type them!

Just a couple of days ago I built a little editor to manipulate markdown, latex and even simple pictures thanks to the pspicture latex environment: [http://mathdown.novidee.com/96699b9ccd482d662cd3332c2a53db25](http://mathdown.novidee.com/96699b9ccd482d662cd3332c2a53db25) I am using marked, katex and Latex2JS.

</comment><comment><USER19> But isn't that what XSL-FO is for?

well, I thought it was funny.</comment>


Specifications that are lacking: HTTP as an example - <AUTHOR> http://michaelelliot.tumblr.com/post/5131800376/specifications-that-are-lacking-http-as-an-example

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm going to rewrite and "streamline" this whole article. Juice it up a bit, if you will.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Hrm. This is one of my first blog posts, and I feel like I made it too technical.</comment>


Show HN: Where should you live for your sleeping habits? - <AUTHOR> http://hackertimezone.com/

<comment><USER2> Very cool! And thanks for making it work without Javascript.

Apparently I have the sleep schedule of a person from Kenya.

<comment><AUTHOR> > Very cool! And thanks for making it work without Javascript.

Awesome, glad you liked it. Once I'd puzzled out the design, there wasn't really anywhere to use Javascript even if I'd wanted.

For something simple I much prefer page changes to AJAXifying every form, since you just rely on the browser loading indicators rather than implementing your own.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> fun.

"Welcome to Vladivostok!"</comment>


Why I'm Never Going Back to Penny Arcade Expo - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/underwire/2013/09/penny-arcade-expo-dickwolves/ <comment><USER2> I'm kind of torn... I've lost a child to SIDS, but I would not tell people that they can't make dead baby jokes at risk of revictimizing me. So many people have a pain point of some sort in their lives that if we go down that route there will be nothing left but PC-compatible sayings perfectly fit for a poster in corporate America.

But at the same time the _reaction_ to the controversy around the comic has been all types of screwed up by Gabe.

Right or wrong, people have made it clear that the dickwolves thing makes them feel physically uneasy (at best). Whether it's _right_ for people to feel that way is basically immaterial by this point; the argument was lost long ago, and Gabe is chasing after a train that is long departed.

So while I don't doubt that Gabe (and Tycho) do not _literally_ support people being raped, they have been told in no uncertain terms that is how many people _perceive_ support for "Dickwolves". Any further push for 'free speech' there must come as a package with instilling a culture of rape... again, even if that's not how they _mean_ for it to be perceived, that doesn't change the reality of how it _is_ being perceived.

I empathize with Gabe's greater point, but the fact is that he needs to start choosing different battles if he wants to win this 'war'. This particular battle was lost long ago.

<comment><USER3> So, did anyone actually read the comic? A slave is pleading to be rescued, and brings up that in addition to being a SLAVE he also gets raped.

There is nothing 'supporting rape' in the comic or the joke. Rape is used because it's literally the worst possible thing, that if even being a slave wasn't enough to make the hero care, maybe that would.

The joke is "The hero only cares about his quest, not the suffering of the victims". Slavery and rape were used because they were the two worst possible things the victims could be suffering from. How does anyone go from that to suggesting the artist is supporting rape?

<comment><USER4> Only a few people were hurt by the original Dickwolves comic, and I think a realistic apology for triggering bad feelings in sexual assault survivors would have made this a non-event. Like, "A number of people have written to express that they felt hurt or threatened by yesterday's strip. Please know that we had no intention of that. We wanted to express how incredulous it is that a game can use the threat of violence, death, enslavement, and implied rape as a motivation for a quest then cast aside those people you have ostensibly just been charged with helping. It was not our intention to hurt people in the real world by discussing this incongruity in games and we sincerely apologize to those of you who were hurt."

Boom, done, wouldn't have been an issue.

NOW, what happened after that was THIS strip: [http://www.penny- arcade.com/comic/2010/08/13](http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/08/13) An incredibly insincere apology which makes anyone reading question whether they have their heads screwed on straight. On top of that, they make a t-shirt for Team Dickwolves. Then Mike NEVER FUCKING LETS IT GO, for damn near three years.

Only extremely recently has he even expressed that he might have been handling these sorts of situations incorrectly and considers that he may be hurting people. Well, great buddy, but you've already screwed a lot of things up. It's gonna take a lot of work to undo the damage you've done and a bunch of people will never trust you regardless.

<comment><USER2> Even the second comic I can understand. The fact that they have to go out of their way to explain that no, they don't actually think raping people is OK is pretty distressing as it should have been plainly obvious from the first comic IMHO.

What I don't understand is why you'd then go and make a shirt, and bring it up again and again. What _good_ could possibly have come of that?

<comment><USER5> I doubt very many people thought the first joke was an exhortation or endorsement of rape. They were using it as an extreme, to skewer MMO morality. And I see what they were trying to do, but not long after that point it should've been obvious it didn't work.

So the second comic comes out and it's a straw man. "so you're saying we are pro-rape? that's absurd. look at how absurd you are." If you're trying to make people understand something, can you imagine how frustrating it must be to hear that for the eleventy-billionth time?

It's fair to call people on making light of rape. I also think it's fair to disagree, though I have a caveat: IMHO, given the quality of dialogue around the issue, most of the disagreement is reflexive and rooted around the perception of this as a niche issue, mostly germane to women (Patton Oswalt had a good bit about this).

In trying to evoke sympathy, people ask if you think it'd be OK to say such and such about your mother, sister, or daughter. An addendum which may (sadly) work better for some people could be: ask yourself if it would change your perception about, say, prison rape jokes if it happened to your father, brother, or son. Then imagine if someone's response to your feelings was to say "hey dummy I'm not pro-rape I just think rape jokes are funny." And so on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> From the Penny Arcade blog on this incident, specifically Gabriel:

[http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification](http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification)

"So let me start by saying I like the Dickwolves strip. I think it's a strong comic and I still think the joke is funny. Would we make that strip today? Knowing what we know now and seeing how it hurt people, no. We wouldn't. But at the time, it seemed pretty benign. With that said I absolutely regret everything we did after that comic. I regret the follow up strip, I regret making the merchandise, I regret pulling the merchandise and I regret being such an asshole on twitter to people who were upset. I don't think any of those things were good ideas. If we had just stopped with the strip and moved on, the Dickwolf never would have become what it is today. Which is a joke at the expense of rape victims or a symbol of the dismissal of people who have suffered a sexual assault. the comic itself obviously points out the absurd morality of the average MMO where you are actually forced to help some people and ignore others in the same situation. Oddly enough, the first comic by itself is exactly the opposite of what this whole thing has turned into."

<comment><USER7> His response to why he said pulling the merchandise was the mistake:

> In hindsight all this did was open the wound back up and bring on a whole > new wave of debate. Any action we took at the time just dug us deeper > regardless of what it was. What we needed to do was stop. just stop.

My guess would be he internally translated the message to mean "That we don't know about". Since he has previously said the whole incident was a mistake, he was probably thinking that this last bit was new to people.

And I think all the points of this blog post are why they have changed their stance on a lot of those things. They were reacting as if they were defending their free speech, and they weren't incorrect in isolation, the problem was they thus enabled other people to act out in more extreme ways. Finally when people got annoyed at them for starting the whole thing, they assumed it was for the initial strip (which was fine by most people's standards, which is why it is still up), rookie mistake, but probably one they took to heart.

<comment><USER2> > They were reacting as if they were defending their free speech, and they > weren't incorrect in isolation, the problem was they thus enabled other > people to act out in more extreme ways.

I think this was the real issue for Gabe, and I'm glad to see that he seems to realize that himself.

In essence, the dickwolves went off-message quickly, and what he thought he was defending against wasn't really the point of contention, and what he and Tycho were trying to say with the comic itself wasn't really what all of the comic's supporters had in mind.

I suspect this is what it might feel like to learn that a favorite shirt suddenly became a polarizing insignia within a gang battle you hadn't even known was active on the streets. The shirt means one thing to you but something completely different outside your front door.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Just from the last couple weeks, Penny Arcade has published jokes about violence against children and torture:

[http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/08/19](http://penny- arcade.com/comic/2013/08/19) [http://penny- arcade.com/comic/2013/08/12](http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2013/08/12)

If you don't think that's funny, I hear you. But the people who are all "I'm so open minded about offensive humor until he starts talking about dickwolves" ... I don't get it.

<comment><USER9> I found that comic you posted to be funny. I am a father and I abhor violence against children. If the comic really happened, that would be outrageous.

But it _isn 't real_, and it isn't trying to justify violence against children, nor is it making fun of victims of violence.

I suppose some will label me a sociopath for my opinion. Perhaps I am one and just do not realize it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Holy shit this article is so bad. Let's see here we've got

* taking quotes from troll accounts and implying those views are the same as Mike Krahuliks

* calling out Penny Arcade for failing to address an incident of sexual assault among enforcers (spoilers: the offender was quickly kicked out and banned from PAX, which isn't even mentioned in the article)

* implying that everyone who supports Mike makes rape and death threats

This is a great hit piece disguised as socially responsible commentary. Here's Mike's response for those interested in another side of the story [http://penny-arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification](http://penny- arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification)

There are far more viewpoints than the 2 extremes that seem to be outlined in this article, and I'm not defending either extreme. I think the original comic was funny if a little off color. I think the initial reaction to the comic was vitriolic and overblown. I think Mike's response to that vitriol was unprofessional and, as he put it "a massive AOE that hurt a lot of innocent people". That said, he's not a villain. Despite what people want to believe, Mike has owned up to his mistakes in the past (see his handling of the transphobic comments he made) and genuinely seems willing to learn from these experiences and be a better person. This whole controversy seems to be perpetuated by some very vocal minorities from opposite spectrums, each taking what the other extreme said and freaking out. Mike certainly didn't help the matter with his original comments, but people calling him a bigot and boycotting PAX are also (in my opinion) overreacting based on articles like this that get pageviews by fanning the fire.

<comment><USER5> Hang on, learning from experiences? They talked about how they would've _persisted_ with the offensive merchandise. How is greater insensitivity becoming a better person? I was happy to read his comments about trans stuff, but it seems to me that he's still a shoot first, ask questions later person. In fact what prompted the trans apology originally was _more_ deliberately incendiary commentary.

He's not a villain but I don't really see this as anything except a very slow process involving a cycle of deliberately offensive commentary followed by recrimination followed by apologies. It's just sad to see that in this case it seems he wasn't all that sorry after all. So what's next? Another "not sorry" response regarding trans folk?

I would restate the first point as follows: the trolls have the same view as Mike/Gabe. And that particular view is that, what, social censure is censorship? It's not an uncommon view among the angry (predominantly white) male gamer crowd. @teamrape is just one particularly good example of a bunch of people organizing behind this principle.

<comment><USER10> Did you see the Q&A? Did you read his follow up comments? He regretted everything that happened after the intial comic. You're also confusing "they" with "Mike".

Did you really see his reponse to the trans stuff as a "not sorry" response? Here are his responses, from the horses mouth [http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/06/19/twiiter-sucks-sometim...](http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/06/19/twiiter-sucks-sometimes) [http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/06/21/well-that-escalated-q...](http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/06/21/well-that-escalated-quickly) [http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/06/21/going-one-step-furthe...](http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/06/21/going-one-step-further) [http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/06/21/also6](http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/06/21/also6)

Yeah he's made mistakes. You can take his apologies as genuine and believe he wants to get better or you can think he's just playing lip service in order to save face. Having met the guy and talked to him several times, as well as listened to him on the podcasts/PA show/strip search, I believe it's the former.

<comment><USER5> See my reply to my own comment regarding the first point. (Not sure what HN best practice is on this one.)

Regarding the trans stuff: I did really read it, yes. For what it's worth, I've been reading Penny Arcade since 2000, and it's been in my RSS reader as long as I've used one. Did you any of what he said on Twitter?

The man's sincere in his contrition, but his shoot from the hip style without thinking about what other people think plus his penchant for lashing out is insane.

I don't think he's just paying lip service. I think he's probably a nice guy at heart. If you want my honest opinion, I think he's unaware of a lot of (dare I say it) privilege that he has, and reacts with hostility when called on it.

So again I am willing to take his trans apologies at face value. But it's part of a pattern, and maybe after stepping in it a few times, the guy could take at least a _little_ more care.

I don't think this makes him a villain, and I suspect he'd find this criticism fair, as he has explicitly discussed this in the past. I give him credit for being self-aware.

Maybe I can summarize it like this: it's strange to hear people (not necessarily you) intimate that a) he has nothing to apologize for because he's a flawed but nice guy, and b) he's apologized so stop with the criticism. We wouldn't be here in the first place if the guy maybe thought a little bit more about how he communicates. And neither of the above invalidates this as a jumping off point for a discussion about the widespread insensitivity/hostility in gamer culture when it comes to folks who aren't cis, hetero, white males.

<comment><USER10> Yup, I totally agree. And I don't think people should stop criticizing at all, I think it's a valuable thing to do and is part of bringing about the change we want to see. I just wish there was less overblown under-researched clickbaity criticism.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> An example of the great 21st century American power struggle: a fight to define who has been victimized more, and can therefore assume the mantle of moral authority.

edit: spelling

<comment><USER12> I don't read PA's critics as arguing from a position of having "been vicimized [sic]." Their status as survivors is incidental to their argument. I read the criticism as being about the lack of empathy of PA's authors for their audience. You could replace the critics' status with gender-minority, and you'll find a more recent incident where Gabe was unable to empathize with his audience (denying the existence of transgender). Some comedians bill themselves as jerks and carve out a niche for their audience, but Penny Arcade purports to provide laughs for all gamers.

While I am pleased that race-gender-sex-preference tensions are being discussed in public in the 21st century, but I find it highly questionable that this is a greater power struggle than the classic 20th century struggles of war and labor. Especially given that what is at stake here is mostly audience size and hurt feelings, compared to livelihood and physical anguish.

<comment><USER13> 40% of transgendered people have attempted suicide. Assault is pretty common. There is a lot of life at stake here.

<comment><USER12> I meant what is at stake in the victimization olympics framework that I was responding to. Downplaying violence against minorities was not intended.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Here's Gabe's response to the whole situation: [http://penny- arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification](http://penny- arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification)

<comment><USER15> I clicked that link expecting to regret it almost immediately. I was pleasantly surprised. This is the most reasonable I've seen Gabe or anyone associated with Penny Arcade be about the subject in the almost 3 years it's been dragging on. And on... And on...

<comment><USER2> Well I actually read PA myself and so I'm not surprised to see Gabe being reasonable the day or week after his mouth gets him in trouble.

I /was/ surprised to see him get in trouble over this though as I thought he had learned to stay far far away from it by now. Here's hoping he holds onto this lesson for real this time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> A week or two ago, a friend of mine mentioned going to PAX East and I was all for it. Now I'm not quite sure. I really think the quote by Rich Stevens in the article matches my feelings.

> I could get over the original comic if they'd just moved on or apologized, > but they had to make merchandise out of rape just to poke back at people and > then encourage fans to wear it to a convention that supposedly has pro-woman > policies.

While I hear PAX is quite the event and it sounds like a lot of fun, being in the industry I already get a front row view of how toxic the game community can be. Emphasis on "can", there's a lot of great people in it, but they get drowned out. But lately it's been seeming like PA is more of the same toxicity and I don't want to support that.

<comment><USER17> fwiw, penny arcade also banned booth babes and generally seem reasonably feminist

my guess is that Gabe was taken aback by the (imo over the top) attacks against him and that comic by feminist bloggers and is simply going to blind in this area from now on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> This whole thing was blown way out of proportion. Sure, the comic's creator reacted poorly to the complaints and should have just moved on to other things, but I can't say I have sympathy for the persons who read too much into the joke and thought they should try to turn their private outrage in a public issue.

I don't believe being offended is a valid reason for pulling down something (assuming the thing in question is legal). If we start vindicating loud, sensitive or manipulative people who try to remove content that doesn't please them, I think society is going to suffer as a result. More PC is never the solution. I can totally empathize with rape victims, it must have been a traumatic experience for them. But it should obvious to anyone that the comic was not promoting or encouraging rape at all and that the appropriate response if you didn't like it, was to ignore it. Humor is in the eye of the beholder. To give you an example, I knew an American guy who thought 9/11 jokes were incredibly offensive but had no qualms about mocking Haiti earthquake victims. Whether or not a joke is acceptable depends entirely on the audience. There is no moral code that stipulates in absolute terms what is funny and what isn't.

<comment><USER19> _If we start vindicating loud, sensitive or manipulative people who try to remove content that doesn 't please them, I think society is going to suffer as a result._

Actually, I think Mike Krahulik qualifies as loud, sensitive, and manipulative when he used his platform at his own conference to whine about people who embarrassed and annoyed him _three years ago_. Why bring it up again?

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Humor has no forbidden themes. Forbidding themes approachable in humour is a slippery slope we, as a society, should not wish to enter.

Uncomfortable themes that have been used in humour: death? Check. Religion? There's a whole subculture of it. Torture? Check. Disabilities? Of course. Dim-witts? Oh boy has it been used. War? The more war there is, the more it's mocked.

Why should rape be any different?

</comment><comment><USER21> I've never been to PAX, have little interest in comics, and had never heard this story before.

But if this is any way an accurate telling, then this whole thing is completely obscene. Rape jokes? Mocking people who object? _Merchandising_ rape jokes? What the hell is wrong with these people?

It is disquieting -- to the say the least -- how often rampant sexism shows up in the geek community. But this is so beyond the pale. Krahulik might be entitled to his rights as an artist, but no amount of pleading against censorship can ameliorate the fact that he has no ethical sense whatsoever.

Is there any appropriate response to this other than unqualified outrage?

<comment><USER22> I've never read Penny Arcade or been to PAX either, but reading this story, it seems to me as if a bunch of outraged people want the benefit from attending this guy's conference, but also want him to stop making art that doesn't agree exactly with their sensibilities.

To me, this seems like unnecessary policing of the worst sort. Yes, his art seems to be in poor taste and he sounds like an asshole -- please stop attending his convention and urge other people to do so.

I don't see any direct link between this and "rampant sexism in the geek community", unless I guess you expand 'geek' to include 'anyone who has ever drawn a comic'. It is a case of a particular _artist_ drawing something that some people think is horrible, but dunno if it calls for "unqualified outrage".

<comment><USER19> The geek connection is explained in the article. Penny Arcade is massively popular within the gaming community (because it's a comic strip about computer gamers), and the decisions to showcase your indie game (or not) at one of their conferences has a direct impact on sales.

 _I 've never read Penny Arcade_

Informing yourself before jumping to conclusions is more effective than arguing from ignorance. As with your question rape threats, you could perfectly easily use resources like Google and Wikipedia to get a handle on the issue.

<comment><USER22> FYI, the parent commenter had never read Penny Arcade either, hence we were interacting from a position of presumably equal information regarding it.

> Penny Arcade is massively popular within the gaming community (because it's > a comic strip about computer gamers), and the decisions to showcase your > indie game (or not) at one of their conferences has a direct impact on > sales.

Exactly. What his critics are essentially saying is, "We want him to stop making certain kinds of comic strips, but we also want to use his platform to sell our games." For an artist, that is ridiculous.

<comment><USER19> No they're not. The article is _titled_ 'why I'm never going back to PAX'; the author's position is that she's given up on it. She quotes and links to two other developers who already don't go or won't go there again for the same reason, and quotes a 4th person who says that not going is difficult because since PAX is the biggest end-user game conference, staying away impacts sales. Generalizing from that observation as you did is inaccurate and misleading.

Just because the other person is also uninformed on the subject doesn't mean you should skip reading the source article.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> My response to these types of people:

[http://gayandy.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/fingers_and_thumb...](http://gayandy.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/fingers_and_thumb_in_circle_downward_motion.jpeg)

Just ignore them and let them wallow in seething hatred of things that are obviously not meant to be taken offensively. Give me a break. I wish Penny Arcade _hadn't_ removed that merchandise. I mean what the f*ck?

</comment><comment><USER24> What politically-correct babies we've become. I'm sick of the outrage that happens when comedians make rape jokes or other "offensive" jokes. The Penny Arcade guys don't support rape. They made a joke. What's the issue?

Here's the late, great Patrice O'Neal on the matter: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjIuPSuYSOY](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fjIuPSuYSOY)

<comment><USER25> The problem is that they followed up. I have no problem with anyone being intentionally or unintentionally offensive.

I have offended more than a few people in my life and have been annoyed from stuff other say way more than once and it evens.

When you see you hurt someone unintentionally you apologize. It is not hard. And then you shut up. That's it. Don't try to wiggle your way out from the situation or save face. Don't spin it or use "PR".

I used the word hurt intentionally. Because there is whole class of people whose job it to be professionally offended. And they are better ignored or teased.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Why do these people assume that raped people want them putting on such a noisy rape-is-bad awareness show of "support"? How about advocating for changes that make rape less likely and, if possible, the social consequences to victims less severe? For example: more men than women in the U.S. are raped (though a woman not in prison does have more to fear, rationally).

Getting offended by crude humor is fine as a personal aesthetic choice. Drawing attention to it seems futile.

<comment><USER27> It's not the original comic that's at issue. It's Penny Arcade's _response_ to the criticism they've received about it.

It's not a "noisy rape-is-bad awareness show", it's protesting against a company that, quite literally, profited from a rape joke. And then said that they regretted not profiting from a rape joke.

As far as advocating against rape, that's what this is. Poking fun at people who've been raped contributes to rape culture. Rape culture contributes to the conspiracy of silence around sexual assault (i.e. "They're gonna make fun of me too").

It's not that all taboo topics are off-limits for humor. It's that PAX bills itself as a safe space except for those times when the creator of the property wore a shirt making fun of rape victims' fear.

<comment><USER28> > It's not that all taboo topics are off-limits for humor.

Unless it's rape, then even mentioning it is 'poking fun at people who've been raped,' right?

<comment><USER27> Nope. And, as a bonus, you're deliberately misinterpreting what I'm saying. Cool.

Good humor punches up. Making a shirt that makes rape victims uncomfortable is punching down. Easy, right?

<comment><USER29> I think his point is that the original joke was punching at video game heroes _(and the humans who play as them, the same people who are presumably the audience of the comic...)_ , not at rape victims.

What followed was obviously a bit less benign... but the _original_ joke was not "punching down".

(Also, the _quality_ of humor is pretty subjective, I don't think there is a productive conversation to be had there.)

<comment><USER27> Honestly, I thought the original comic was spot-on and loved it. The dickwolves thing didn't get past my rape joke barometer. Still doesn't.

Of course, I'm a mostly-white, cismale, upper-middle class programmer who's never been sexually assaulted so I'm skewered by all kinds of privilege here.

But I'm talking about PA's reactions, about what came after. So's the post on Wired. And it seemed clear to me that he was trying to bait me by throwing my words back at me without context without contributing to the discussion.

<comment><USER29> I don't disagree.

It seems to me that many people involved in this situation are purposely being imprecise to cause drama. Specifically there are two waves of people who got offended; the people who were offended by the comic, and the people who were offended by the reaction to the first wave. It _seems_ like people like mhurron are purposely conflating the two waves to cause strive, though it is possible it wasn't intentional.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> It's a 'rape' joke only insomuch as the word rape was used in the text. The comic doesn't encourage, make light of or invoke imagery of violence against women, so I humbly disagree that this is a reasonable example of sexism. If the word "sodomized" was used in place of the word "rape", the outrage would likely be non-existent.

For the record, I do believe sexism is a serious problem in our society, particularly in tech, but I disagree that the comic and the defense of it by its authors is sexist.

<comment><USER27> Again, almost none of the controversy stems from the comic itself. Most of it comes from PA's reaction to their critics' feedback.

<comment><USER30> Yeah, I keep hearing that, but just because some people _perceive_ sexism, doesn't mean that they deserve special treatment lest one be accused of sexism. Also, reports of threats from anonymous internet trolls is the common denominator of _every_ internet controversy, I can't take that seriously unless PA was encouraging users to send out hateful messages.

<comment><USER27> I'm not sure how to engage with you on this because I'm not sure what you're saying.

It sounds like you're saying, "PA shouldn't be blamed for the Internet trolls that are out there already all the time." Or maybe, "Threats against women are garden-variety Internet trolling and not motivated particularly by their gender." You seem to also be saying, "People only perceive sexism; it doesn't objectively exist."

I'll start by responding to all three and please correct me if I've misunderstood your points.

1\. I don't blame PA for hateful comments its community sent out to people asking them to apologize for a rape joke. I blame them for profiting off of it, for recognizing that this was happening and thinking that it might be a good idea to make money from it or make light of it by encapsulating the outrage as a shirt. While they weren't specifically saying, "Go out and threaten women with rape and death," they _were_ saying, "We don't think enough of their complaints to treat it seriously." I don't think it's out of line to see the thought process there: "PA _themselves_ were making light of it, so maybe this whole thing isn't that big a deal?"

2\. Sex-based threats against women (rape, specifically) are _of course_ different than similar threats against men. Just like the US judicial system makes distinctions between hate crimes and non-hate crimes, or distinguishes between pre-meditated murder and spur-of-the-moment murder, sex-based threats against women are treated specially. They are derived from circumstances of who they are and how they are perceived in culture, both things that an individual has no hope of changing. Of course any threatened class of people deserves special treatment for being threatened _for being in that class of people_.

3\. Sexism well and truly exists. I'm not going to try proving that to anyone else with access to Google.

<comment><USER30> _" Threats against women are garden-variety Internet trolling and not motivated particularly by their gender."_

I am not saying this. Of course sexist trolling is motivated by the gender of the victim, that's exactly how trolls operate, they deliberately attack pain points that are specific to their target and it is damaging whether they actually believe what they say or not. However, none of this is the fault of the comic authors.

 _You seem to also be saying, "People only perceive sexism; it doesn't objectively exist."_

I am not saying this. You clearly didn't read my entire post. Sexism is a real problem as I clearly stated in my OP. Stated another way: if reasonable individuals can agree that the comic is not sexist, then it follows that the perception of the comic as sexist is merely a perception that the authors don't have an ethical obligation to recognize.

 _I 'm not sure what you're saying._

I'm saying that PA authors shouldn't be held responsible for trolls harassing individuals they disagree with because there is a flavor of troll for every controversial topic and they will _always_ spout the most disgusting hateful thing imaginable for the target audience.

 _I blame them for profiting off of it_

Why? Do you blame the author of this post or any of other dozens of blogs that have profited off this controversy? If the comic wasn't sexist, I don't see the problem with selling merch based on the comic. Will some perceive "Dickwolf" merchandise as an attack on women? Yes, but that doesn't make it true.

 _they were saying, "We don't think enough of their complaints to treat it seriously."_

I don't think they are wrong for this. As I stated in my OP, the comic does not invoke imagery of violence against women unless you believe that the literary use of the word 'rape' is inherently sexist. If you _don 't_ believe that use of the term rape is inherently sexist, it follows that you might not take accusations of sexism seriously. You can't evaluate these two components of the story in a vacuum. Your argument boils down to "well, there isn't anything actually sexist about the comic, but dismissing accusations of the comic as sexist is sexist".

 _Sexism well and truly exists_

You're fighting against a straw-man.

<comment><USER27> Nope, totally read your post. And then deleted my rather angry response because you've got a couple of good points; sorry to straw man you there.

All of your examples start from the comic. The rest of the discussion starts with PA's response to their critics.

I agree that the comic isn't particularly sexist.

I disagree that PA isn't responsible for their community here. Even Krahulik himself thinks so[1]. When he says, on the one hand, "We have worked very hard to make PAX a safe place," and then, on the other hand, says he regrets not selling rape joke t-shirts that specifically were released to antagonize his critics (the ones he was making the safe place for). What's up with that?

I think the t-shirt was purposefully created to make fun of people who thought the original comic was a big deal. Do you disagree? It's not about whether the original comic was sexist (I never said that, nor did Wired).

I also think there's a clear difference between PA selling the shirt and Wired writing a reaction piece. Wired didn't post a big picture of a dickwolf and put ads on it. They're not profiting from a rape joke directly... like you would if you sold a picture of a dickwolf on a shirt.

We might be talking past each other?

[1]: [http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/09/04/some- clarification](http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification)

<comment><USER30> _All of your examples start from the comic. The rest of the discussion starts with PA 's response to their critics._

True, because I don't think it's logical to divorce the content of the comic from PA's reaction to criticisms of the comic. The content of the comic matters when evaluating the veracity of the criticism. If the criticisms are evaluated as invalid it reframes questionable actions like poking fun at critics and printing dickwolf t-shirts.

 _I agree that the comic isn 't particularly sexist._

It is not sexist in any way. If you disagree, please elaborate.

 _When he says, on the one hand, "We have worked very hard to make PAX a safe place," and then, on the other hand, says he regrets not selling rape joke t-shirts that specifically were released to antagonize his critics (the ones he was making the safe place for). What's up with that?_

PAX is an event that takes place in the real world in an environment (tech event) that has often seen women objectified and harassed; working to minimize objectification and harassment has no relationship to printing dickwolf t-shirts. Dickwolf t-shirts do not objectify women. Dickwolf t-shirts do not harass or encourage harassment of women. Women are not made unsafe by the comic or the selling of t-shirts based on the comic. Not all women agree that dickwolf shirts merit feeling threatened. If one feels threatened by a dickwolf t-shirt that's one's own prerogative. Yes, the t-shirts were designed to make fun of the critics but nothing is wrong with that if you disagree with the critic's assessment of the work.

 _I also think there 's a clear difference between PA selling the shirt and Wired writing a reaction piece. Wired didn't post a big picture of a dickwolf and put ads on it. They're not profiting from a rape joke directly_

Ok, I agree that selling shirts about the comic is not the same as linkbaiting for page-views, but my point is still the same; PA was "profiting from a rape joke" the moment the comic was posted, so if there is no problem profiting from the original comic, I fail to see why it's wrong to profit from the sale of t-shirts based on the comic. Either the comic is wrong and the merch is also wrong by extension or the comic is not wrong and the shirt is just a stupid shirt.

<comment><USER27> It's been a while and I don't know if you'll come back, but here goes...

 _It is not sexist in any way. If you disagree, please elaborate._

I know many women who don't find rape amusing. Most ugly rape jokes that I've seen (popular rape jokes? anyway...) are made by men.

 _The content of the comic matters when evaluating the veracity of the criticism._

This is our central disagreement, then. The original work could have been made in ignorance and been excusable. But some of Penny Arcade's own fans said, "Hey guys, can you not make light of the fact that some people _actually are_ raped to sleep every night?" And in the face of those revelations by real people they decided to have a laugh. Their own fans exposed some vulnerability by admitting these feelings and the PA guys stomped all over them. They're just being bullies.

Additionally, the content itself matters less than its audience's reactions. This isn't some lunatic fringe pulling meaning out of nowhere, this is a demographic of people that PA has largely tried to defend through their policies at PAX. Except here, where they made fun of them when they were down.

The fall-out from this stretched on for about a year. Krahulik, via Twitter, demeaned the concept of triggers and, basically, denied that what these people were feeling was real.

 _Dickwolf t-shirts do not harass or encourage harassment of women._

This statement makes no sense. When women respond to a rape joke by saying, "Please don't say that," and you print a t-shirt _in response to their criticism_ that depicts a (fantasy) rapist... how does that not encourage harassment? How does that follow in your thinking?

 _if you disagree with the critic 's assessment of the work_

Which Krahulik himself does not: [http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/09/04/some- clarification](http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification)

Here's Krahulik's own words from that page:

> I regret the follow up strip, I regret making the merchandise, I regret > pulling the merchandise and I regret being such an asshole on twitter to > people who were upset.

When you say _Women are not made unsafe by the comic of the selling of t-shirts based on the comic_ it tells me that you don't know what it is to feel unsafe or be a woman. I've read a lot of first-hand accounts of women saying they felt unsafe in a crowd of men cheering for rape.

I'm gonna put a lid of this one on my side. Thanks for the level-headed discussion, though, much appreciated -- especially because this shit makes me jump up and down.

<comment><USER30> _I know many women who don 't find rape amusing._

So what? How is that sexist? I know many black Americans who don't find slavery amusing, does that make the comic racist too? Of course not, because the comic contains absolutely nothing in the way of allusions to race from any conceivable interpretation, the same is true of sex.

 _Most ugly rape jokes that I 've seen (popular rape jokes? anyway...) are made by men._

Most popular comedians are men, whether you chalk that up to a sexist society or not, an individual's joke doesn't become sexist just because the joke is mostly made by men, I think it's pretty obvious that all sorts of clearly non- sexist jokes fall into the category of "mostly made by men". I think, at a _minimum_ , the intellectually honest way to judge a joke as sexist is if it's made at the expense of an individuals's sex (or at least makes _any_ mention of or allusion to sex without consideration for women as a protected class). Anyone can be raped, in fact, male prisoners being raped (as is the case in the comic) is a very common trope. The comic is just not sexist at all, period. Also, what's with the "ugly" qualifier? Are some "rape jokes" ugly and others not?

 _some of Penny Arcade 's own fans said, "Hey guys, can you not make light of the fact that some people actually are raped to sleep every night?" And in the face of those revelations by real people they decided to have a laugh._

That's pretty a revisionist version of events. A shit-storm of vitriol (on both sides) erupted over this comic, PA wasn't given a kind suggestion by the community, they were flamed as sexist rape culture purveyors straight out of the gate, they reacted by doubling down in defense of the comic, indeed poorly, but with earnest belief in the intellectual honesty of their argument: _nothing is wrong with the comic_.

 _Additionally, the content itself matters less than its audience 's reactions._

That makes zero sense. Facts matter, especially when people are whipped up into a frenzy over the supposed nature of the facts.

 _This isn 't some lunatic fringe pulling meaning out of nowhere_

The segment of the audience who didn't favor the comic are not a lunatic fringe, they're just totally wrong about the comic by all objective measure. They _were_ pulling meaning out of nowhere because we've already established that the comic in no way alludes to violence against women, period. The critics don't own the word rape.

 _Which Krahulik himself does not:[http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification](http://www.penny- arcade.com/2013/09/04/some-clarification) > I regret the follow up strip, I regret making the merchandise, I regret pulling the merchandise and I regret being such an asshole on twitter to people who were upset._

Yes, he regrets all those things (except the original comic), that doesn't mean he agrees with the critics (he clearly doesn't).

 _When you say Women are not made unsafe by the selling of t-shirts based on the comic it tells me that you don 't know what it is to feel unsafe or be a woman._

That's a considerably presumptuous and condescending statement. You'd feel pretty stupid right now if I told you that I actually _was_ a woman (i'm not), but just because I hold certain beliefs (i.e. "don't be a dickwolf" printed on a t-shirt is not threatening) you presume that I couldn't possibly know what it's like to be a woman because of course we should reasonably expect that a normal woman would feel threatened by a passive line of text ironed onto a shirt. I mean, look at the first comment on the article, a female rape survivor who ___gasp_ __doesn 't read any threatening connotation into dickwolves.

Once again, women are not made unsafe by the t-shirt. Wearing a t-shirt doesn't make one a rapist, it doesn't encourage rape, it doesn't support rape, neither the shirt nor the comic depict an assault of any kind, and women in particular have a dubious relationship to the comic in any capacity (since it was a white male prisoner who alluded to being raped by a Dickwolf)

 _I 've read a lot of first-hand accounts of women saying they felt unsafe in a crowd of men cheering for rape._

Yes, a crowd of men cheering for rape would be quite scary... except that never actually happened and you completely undermine your credibility when you repeat such falsehoods as truth. They cheered because they support the artist, the comic, and the perceived push-back against capitulation to pressure that pulling the merch represented. To say that those men cheered for rape is about as dishonest as it gets and it's that type of rhetoric that sends otherwise open-minded men into defense mode.

Anyway. Agree to disagree. Glad we kept it civil :).

<comment><USER27> Non-ugly rape joke from Louis CK: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4hNaFkbZYU](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4hNaFkbZYU)

And, yeah, great discussion man. You've got me thinking. ( =

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Totally agree. I'm not going to read Penny Arcade anymore, either. I don't support bullies.

</comment><comment><USER31> Incidentally, there was a significant transphobic incident with Krahulik on Twitter a month or two ago, as well. I didn't see much of it, since I'm not on top of game news, but what I was pointed to wasn't exactly good.

<comment><USER32> I saw those tweets, out of context, and they were bad. But the context is important. A 17-year-old boy decide he gets to use the girls' room now, that's a different context than a transwoman talking about almost getting beaten to death.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> The original joke didnt need an apology as it was clearly directed at the screwed up morality of games, ie rape only matters when it is part of a quest. Everything PA did after that was stupid and offensive.

</comment><comment><USER34> See also Patton Oswalt's reconsideration of rape jokes:

[http://www.pattonoswalt.com/index.cfm?page=spew&id=167](http://www.pattonoswalt.com/index.cfm?page=spew&id=167)

</comment><comment><USER35> It's really kind of sad that this sort of thing even needs to be explained to the tech culture. I can only hope that the apologists for Gabe grow up at some point; maybe when they have daughters of their own whose safety they have to look after.

It's never been about the original strip. It's always been about PA's reaction to their own community telling them that the strip was over the line. Rather than apologize, they made it personal, and set out to mock victims of rape.

It's not about free speech, and it never was. It's about what happens when a person who was picked on as a kid gets the power to bully back, even if he is clearly in the wrong.

If you have a community, you are responsible for setting the tone. That's your responsibility as a leader. Throwing gas on the fire by making merchandise, and still bringing this shit up 3 years later is not the way to be a leader.

Is Gabe responsible for his followers being assholes? No, not directly. But dredging up the dickwolves again isn't going to help matters at all. People are sheep, even the ones who think they are the smartest ones in the room.

Obviously, all the people arguing on behalf of PA showing zero maturity have never had a mother, sister, or daughter who have been raped. Otherwise they get over the intellectual arguments, and act like a human being.

All the other arguments excusing Gabe's unprovoked outburst are intellectual bullshit that no one cares about.

</comment><comment><USER36> This entire incident could be taught as a textbook example of what not to do in public relations. You have everything: a demonstrated lack of empathy, attacking the victim, continued engagement over a long period of time, over- the-top antagonizing behavior (t-shirts? really?).

Had he upset a more powerful and organized group and had the same response, PAX would be finished.

</comment><comment><USER37> If you're offended by words then you are taking life way too seriously. Especially when they're words in an internet comic, intended to be a joke.

The person that objects to the freedom to say whatever you want is the one being an asshole. The world isn't all sunshine and rainbows and no amount of denial or cognitive dissonance will change that.

Sticks and stones...

</comment><comment><USER38> I get that PA doesn't want to be seen as kowtowing to a mandate that they not push the boundaries of humor...but there were ways of handling this that are between the spectrum of being submissive and being "fuck you I do what I want"...and acknowledging that there is such a spectrum is not being a surrender monkey to the censors.

Similarly, I find it frustrating to see these debates devolve into "Well what, we can't ever mention rape except in serious legal cases, ever?" I don't have much to add, but here's what I think is a canonical example of how to include rape in humor, courtesy Louis CK:

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu9q4sM1vmc](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu9q4sM1vmc)

<comment><USER39> I don't see how rape victims would find Louis CK's example of rape humor acceptable. Rape victims probably dislike thinking about the subject at all. Is it that casting the victim in his joke as Hitler is somehow better than a nameless slave NPC in an MMO?

I think we are missing the elephant in the room in that a lot of people find rape jokes funny -- to the point of being profitable enough to sell merchandise. But there is a small minority that are incredibly offended when the topic of rape is even broached. Where do we strike balance in that spectrum you mentioned?

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> Seems like this post is being either flagged or modded into oblivion. (As of writing, 1h old, 44 points, and already in page 2).

</comment><comment><USER41> It's sad that enough people find this kind of humour enjoyable enough that they fill a conference.

<comment><USER42> To be fair to PAX attendees, at this point the only real relationship between PAX and Penny-Arcade is the name. PAX is very much a pan-gaming expo that _happens_ to be organized by PA.</comment></comment>


Why Zoom doesn't have product/market fit - <AUTHOR> https://usefyi.com/zoom-product-market-fit/ <comment><USER2> Very click baity headline. With revenue in the hundreds of millions and growth at near 100% it is the literal definition of product market fit.

<comment><USER3> My first response is that it is not a scientific survey in that the respondents are self-selected.

He might have a high fraction of people who understand that Zoom has no lock on the market; these folks will use whatever it is they are invited to. So long as they will tolerate Zoom, that is good enough. The real market is the person who buys the license. For instance students and teachers might not think about the administrator who bought a license for the whole school.

Would be fun to compare against competitors in depth.

I have a hunch that "chat" programs have been going sideways for a long time because market share is based on lock in. The platform rots because it is not competitive. At least until a new fad comes along.</comment></comment>


China's Tencent Trumps Apple in Businessweek's Tech-Growth Ranking - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/dec2010/tc20101213_284965.htm

<comment><USER2> The smaller the company, the easier it is to grow faster. Apple is 50x larger, if not more.</comment>


Confirmed: Mountain Lion sends some 64-bit Macs gently into that good night - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/apple/2012/07/confirmed-mountain-lion-sends-some-64-bit-macs-gently-into-that-good-night/ <comment><USER2> It's a shame (although not surprising) that Apple has never released a firmware update for the 2006/7 MPs to allow them to boot into the actual 64 bit kernel, as opposed to the 32 bit kernel's extended (4GB> RAM) mode.

It is still possible to boot the 64 bit kernel and install ML by using a non- Apple bootloader (eg Chameleon), basically turning your Mac Pro into a 100% Apple hackintosh.

</comment><comment><USER3> Slightly OT, but did anyone else have any issue grokking the headline?

<comment><USER4> Let me recommend a poem to you. _Do not go gentle into that good night,_ by Dylan Thomas.

      Do not go gentle into that good night,
      Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
      Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

      Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
      Because their words had forked no lightning they
      Do not go gentle into that good night.

      Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
      Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
      Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

      Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
      And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
      Do not go gentle into that good night.

      Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
      Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
      Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

      And you, my father, there on the sad height,
      Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
      Do not go gentle into that good night.
      Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

<http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/175907>

Edit: woops, late to the party. That's what I get for leaving a page up for 20 minutes before commenting...

<comment><USER5> It's confusing because the computers aren't actually dying, they're just being left behind.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> OS fragmentation? Call MG!

I kid, but it's interesting to see a few warts in the Apple ecosystem. Nobody can argue that they don't make awesome products, but as they slip into the "mainstream" we're going to see that it's more and more difficult to maintain a flawless complexion.

First, they remove the "can't get a virus!" ad, now this, within weeks. Being unable to upgrade your OS is no minor quibble. "It just works" indeed.

<comment><USER7> Consistently, strategically EOL-ing/deprecating technologies, even through some painful transitions, is no small part of why Apple are in a good position today. There's no way they could've pushed the iPhone out the door in 2007 if they were obsessively keeping all of their Mac software compatible across Intel/PPC or providing support to OS9 users (not that those are completely meritless). The de-emphasis of backward compatibility has been a tactical advantage against Microsoft.

<comment><USER8> On the other end of the spectrum, I work with lab equipment that are more than 15 years old but still work great. The software which interfaces with it is old, but still works with Windows. Would such a thing be possible with Apple, or would Apple's insistence on upgrading every few years force the lab equipment to be replaced at significantly greater cost?

<comment><USER9> They're not gonna come and take your lab equipments away, you know... Leave them on OS X Lion for a century and you'll be okay. Just like many have left their lab computers on Windows XP for a decade.

As long as Lion gets security updates (2 years, minimum), there's absolutely no need for an upgrade. After that, you can just disconnect it from the Internet and use an stronger password.

<comment><USER10> Because using a stronger password somehow nullifies security holes in an OS?

<comment><USER9> Sorry, I said a stupid thing. You shouldn't comment when you're sleepy... I meant you can restrict remote access to them to be more safe (from trojans, etc), but somehow a stupid point about restricting "physical access" made its way into my comment and made it look ridiculous :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'd say six years of OS upgrades before being EOLed is a pretty good deal. That said, my primary machine at home is an 07 Macbook so I have a little bit of envy going on.

<comment><USER12> If you bought a 2008 Mac Mini, you are not so lucky. But how bad the effect of the new requirements is, remains to be seen. If Apple provides security updates for Snow Leopard and Lion for some years and if software remains compatible with those versions, it's not so bad.

<comment><USER13> Early 2008 MBP is ok for ML. I guess I was a bit lucky there since I got 64-bit EFI in it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I have a brand new MBP (Retina) and I won't be upgrading to ML anytime soon (even though I get a free copy). I'm still bitter at the Lion upgrade process. It was a nightmare for me. And at that time I considered Lion to be Apple's trash OS. It's gotten better, After like _8 major updates_. :)

Hell I tried to downgrade to SL, but that's not possible due to drivers.

Lesson learned. Also,I'm STILL being forced to download the OS from the App Store. I wouldn't mind that so much if the Store didn't have performance issues.

<comment><USER15> Welcome to every Mac OS upgrade I've ever encountered.

Although, I can't place the blame entirely on Apple. I find that for any consolidated release OS, a reformat is ALWAYS the way to go (after waiting a good long time for all the bugs to be ironed out). Hopefully one day Apple will drive the cost of their software down so much that they'll just go to rolling release.

<comment><USER16> Ok, setiously guys, what are you doing wrong?

I have updated 3 personal Macs to Lion. Some upgraded, some a clean install. Didnt have a problem with any of them.

What broke for you? Drivers for exotic hardware? (on that front, I use Wacom tablets, Midi controllers and external FW audio cards and had no probems with either in Lion).

On the other hand I refuse to install ANY haxie.

Seriously want to know what broke for you -- and I dont mean stuff like "I prefered old Expose better"....

<comment><USER17> I love me some Apple, but drama does occur. Off the top of my head:

\- silent DVD-ROM read errors causing perma-botched upgrades, even though everything should be CRCed and nothing throws any errors at any point along the way

\- pathologically long install stall-outs (40 minutes+)

\- pathologically slow performance at first restart, usually on older RAM- constrained machines trying to re-thumbnail everything

\- Significant keychain issues requiring creation of an entirely new keychain

\- Spotlight issues requiring a first or second re-index

\- Mail.app upgrades are quite problematic, especially when moving to V2 layout or accessing previously configured accounts

\- Now-missing JVMs causing significant problems during first boot

\- Lion download progress bars blowing some internal math and going for that 235905329052 gigabyte

The biggest hassle I think is exploding third-party software at first logon. Things like garbage rinter+scanner managers freaking out because drivers got moved around underneath them cause a flurry of popups that frustrate techs and freak out novices.

<comment><USER16> Of those, I've seen spotlight needing re-indexing after an upgrade. But it's something so minor and easily fixed that I don't even consider it a fault of the OS (actually, it could have as well been DESIGNED to do that, e.g to update the indexes to some new on-disk format).

Silent DVD errors, install stalls, keychain and Mail accounts missing sound like genuine bugs.

As for the rest,

> _\- pathologically slow performance at first restart, usually on older RAM- > constrained machines trying to re-thumbnail everything_

This doesn't sound like an OS bug, more like something to be expected.

> _\- Now-missing JVMs causing significant problems during first boot_

Sure, but what uses Java at boot?

The above and third party printer/scanner managers freaking out, sound like totally orthogonal issues to OS bugginess.

If anything, I would _expect_ to have to install new third party drivers with an major OS update.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> It's always such a double-edged sword -- slough off legacy support to enhance present hardware's experience; schlep a dated portion (in this case a 32bit portion) of a code base and be inclusive.

Apple has always pushed for letting go of the past in order to reach for the future. I mean, come-on, the original Apple Macs had no arrow keys...

</comment><comment><USER18> I was quite surprised that my now 5-year-old MacBook Pro will still be supported. Maybe it's time to fork out for that SSD upgrade and scrape one more year out of it after all.

<comment><USER19> I got a 7 years old desktop which will get updated to Win 8. I would be surprised if i would NOT be able to update....

<comment><USER20> I think that's what has left a lot of Windows Phone users completely surprised. Buy a top end Windows Phone right now and it won't work with WP8 in 5 months.

That said, I have an HTC Titan and don't really care.

[edit for typos]

<comment><USER21> They've obviously never had a Windows Mobile device before then. If you got a single update you were lucky.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Is there somewhere I can go to check if my Macbook is one of those? I have to start buttering up my boss if I need a new one. (Xcode updates sure force upgrades. I was just fine with Snow Leopard, except iOS 5.1 wouldn't build without the latest Xcode, which is Lion only. Grrr.) Now this.

<comment><USER13>
       iMac:~ Flow$ ioreg -l -p IODeviceTree | grep firmware-abi
           | |   "firmware-abi" = <"EFI64">
       iMac:~ Flow$

EFI64 means ok for ML.

<comment><USER23> And the reverse, not OK for ML, looks like this:

        % ioreg -l -p IODeviceTree | grep firmware-abi
            | |   "firmware-abi" = <"EFI32">

on an old (white polycarbonate) iMac.

<comment><USER13> As long as your CPU is 64-bit it seems one can use "hackintosh" techniques to run ML anyway.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> With this type behavior I'm really happy to only spend money in OEM hardware and be able to select what OS to install and when to upgrade.

<comment><USER25> This has nothing to do with hardware, this is an OS issue. You can still install Windows 8 or Linux on these machines.

<comment><USER24> You are right, but I would be not happy with these constraints after paying so much for Apple hardware.

<comment><USER24> Downvoted by Apple fans, lets see how many negative points I will be able to achieve...

<comment><USER17> Unfortunately your commentary was only valueless, so sit tight at 0. It takes actual work to make something properly inflammatory - you gotta earn the negative scores.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> While I'm typically excited for upgrades to anything (OS, Individual apps, etc) I really have no desire to upgrade to Mountain Lion.

</comment><comment><USER27> I see no reason to spend the money to replace my currently 3 year old MBP in the foreseeable future. Barring breakages, I will probably be using this thing in to 2015, even if it isn't getting OS updates by then. I wonder how long Apple keep stock of replacement batteries for older models.

<comment><USER17> Seven years, all models everywhere. Special considerations possible in the state of California.</comment></comment>


MIT Technology Review: Let's Destroy Bitcoin - <AUTHOR> https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610809/lets-destroy-bitcoin/ <comment><USER2> The whole point of Bitcoin is its decentralization. What is being described here is functionally equivalent to the current banking system, just "Blockchainey". Public ledgers also don't meet the secrecy requirements of many financial transactions, whereas the current banking system does. My guess is that during implementation of such a system, it would look less and less like this public ledger and more and more like a slightly spiffier ACH implementation.</comment>