OpenID Is Why I Hate The Internet - <AUTHOR> http://teddziuba.com/2008/09/openid-is-why-i-hate-the-inter.html

<comment><USER2> I had the same beef when I was getting into Stack Overflow. OpenID just complicates the signup process with little tangible benefit, solving a problem few users actually have. UI-wise, it feels little better than Microsoft requiring a Passport account only OpenID is even more complicated since you have many different providers to choose from. Maybe it'll be awesome in 5 years when users all understand what OpenID is about or after more sites design kick-ass UIs around it.

<comment><USER3> I don't see why it will ever be "awesome." Any system that lets you use the same password/username for every site is a recipe for disaster, I think. Well the key problems I see with this whole getup is

1) Phishing? 10x Easier if everyone used Open ID. Masquerade as a provider, phish happy.

2) If someone has their password stolen...there goes _every account they have_. Albeit, without open id, this is sadly often the case anyway. (Not for me, but for most people.)

3) How hard is it, really, to register for a freaking website? Name, address, mailinator email. Done, no hassle.

IF Open ID is to be useful, it has to be able to log people in with _extreme ease_ , otherwise the time-saved benefit of not entering these reg forms will be eradicated by the complexity of the system itself. And obviously...openid is NOT extremely easy. In fact, its quite the opposite. Even for a power user...unless you're signing up for many many many many accounts, its not helpful.

<comment><USER4> _I don't see why it will ever be "awesome."_

That's the translation of "maybe it will be awesome in five years". In web terms, five years is practically as far away as the heat death of the universe.

When we're trying to be polite, we geeks adopt the legendary phrasing techniques of the Japanese: We almost never use the word _no_. Instead we say "it's _really_ quite difficult".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Every time I see an OpenID site, I just type "<http://jrock.us>" and am instantly signed up. No username and password selection, no waiting for the retarded e-mail confirmation e-mail... I am instantly registered for any site by just typing a few letters. I am really unsure why people dislike OpenID. As a website user, my time is saved. As a website developer, my time is saved. I suppose if you never intend to use more than one website, OpenID is a waste of time. For everyone else...

I think this guy would dislike e-mail if Facebook messaging had been invented before it. "Everyone with their own domains? That's too confusing. How will we ever explain it? Everyone except me is too dumb to understand!"

(As an aside, why is everyone so obsessed with making things "easy" for "users" they've never met? People aren't as dumb as you expect. Make it work for yourself first -- at least it will be good for one person that way. Your unresearched assumptions are harmful.)

<comment><USER6> _People aren't as dumb as you expect._

You're right--they are about 10 times dumber. Have you been on Facebook or MySpace, or read YouTube comments lately?

<comment><USER7> What percentage of the internet using public is responsible for the type of youtube comments you're talking about? You can't take what is the worst display of human intelligence and hold it up as the standard or average with which you label everyone.

Even taking the youtube commenters I suspect, most of them, would be able to grasp openid if it stood between them and the next ROFLMAO-able video.

<comment><USER8> Second sentence is nice

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I spent most of yesterday implementing openid on a site I'm developing.

The problem is not the underlying mechanism but rather the way it's been presented on most sites. Remembering an openid url is counterintuitive for most people - you have to explain too much to all but the most technical users in order for them to know what's going on.

But now there has been some progress: Yahoo became an openid provider a while back, and they allow you to log in with their openid by simply entering "Yahoo.com," you don't even have to remember your openid URL.

I also used JanRain's ID Selector Javascript widget to make the signup form a little more intuitive:

<http://www.idselector.com/>

So really I think openid is getting much better as it matures and its developer community tweaks it and the tools around it. If Google and Microsoft fully get on board (which they are promising) I think it will see pretty widespread adoption.

<comment><USER10> Thanks for the idselector link. I'll be installing that on my site this weekend :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I don't quite understand this. I may not be using OpenID correctly, but when I ask my users to login, they just pop in their OpenID URI (that is, their username--that's what it's labeled as on my webapps, and that's what it is) and get auto-directed through their provider's auth system, showing up as simply a two-second redirect. When they don't have an OpenID URI yet, I send them over to a provider _I_ trust--right to their registration form--with the first part (their desired username) already filled in. How is this harder than normal registration? The only difference is that, when you aren't logged into the provider and you have to enter your password, it goes on the second login page, rather than the first. I don't even call it an "OpenID provider" in the FAQ, but a "security service." That's what it appears as to people: someone I've outsourced all the cryptography and password stuff to so _I_ don't have to be smart about it.

Those that know about OpenID can use their own providers, but those that don't _care_ won't have to think about it; they'll just use the one I pick (which is no worse than trusting me with their made-up-on-the-spot credentials, which is what they'd be doing otherwise anyways.) If they _start_ caring, they can make a new ID with a provider they choose--I fully allow for account URI changes; it's not that hard to implement. In fact, the whole OpenID set-up for me was two library calls (discounting the fact that I had to hack the library itself to add in Simple Registration support, so I could automatically set users' nicknames to their OpenID accounts' nicknames on each login. It's discountable because I submitted a patch, so no one else will have to worry about it.)

<comment><USER12> I see Ted's point by trying to read your post about OpenID, even I don't get it.

<comment><USER11> Well, I was coming at it from a developer's point of view. Here's a user story:

1\. I don't have an account with this site. They say that if I have an account with (any of these other OpenID-supporting sites), though, that that one would work instead. Neato, but I don't use any of those, so:

2\. I'll click on the register link here. Ah, here's a registration page. It doesn't have the site's logo on it, but they said that would happen--they've outsourced this part.

3\. Registered. They gave me a link, and said "just treat it as your username." OK; I'll try to remember it, then. "It'll also work on all those other sites we mentioned, and more every day." Neato again; I might check some of those out.

4\. I'm back on the site I started at, and I've already been logged in. They got my nickname right and everything.

(days pass)

5\. "You've been logged out of the site due to inactivity." Oh, well, what was my username again? That link thing? Oh, here it is in the autocomplete.

6\. Hey, it didn't ask me for my password! What the heck? I'm just logged in all of the sudden. I guess that's good, then.

(weeks pass)

7\. "You've been", "inactivity", blah blah blah. Autocomplete.

8\. Oh, I'm back on that site that did the registration. _They're_ asking me for my password. Makes sense--they're the only ones that I told that particular detail. Put that in...

9\. Ah, I'm back on track and logged in again. Nice.

<comment><USER13> Sorry but that's just way way way too confusing for most internet users.

They know how standard registration/login works. They have a browser that remembers passwords for them. They don't need OpenID.

<comment><USER5> How do you _know_ this is too confusing? Did you ask anyone? Did you do any research?

Why is this confusing but e-mail isn't? If I want to send and receive e-mail, I have to find my own provider. I also have to remember this weird string, "firstname.lastname@example.com". THAT'S TOO HARD FOR THE AVERAGE USER!!11!

<comment><USER13> I agree... For quite a lot of people email _IS_ too hard for them. Sometimes takes them quite a while to understand how it works. I'd say openID is orders of magnitude more complex and more worrying.

I tried using openID once. It directed me to google or yahoo or something to log in... So then I had to decide if it was _really_ google or yahoo, or if it was some phishing site.

It's a terrible idea, which is sure to fail. There is no compelling reason for people to use it.

<comment><USER5> How do you know you're really at news.yc when you log in?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I agree completely. OpenID is utterly flawed. If ever OpenID in its current form gains acceptance, I will eat my hat. And put the video of me eating it on YouTube.

OpenID is just a weak idea that needs a LOT and LOT of pushing to make it accepted. Look at the iPhone - nobody pushes you to use it, you see it, like it and use it.

With OpenID people have to be forced to use it, because it's cumbersome and does not offer any clear advantage.

Like I've said earlier, the real auth solution is the one where you simply stick your USB stick into a machine, type a 4 letter pin and everything on that machine is authenticated till you take it out.

A weak concept pushed by technologists and people who want to give talks and earn money off this technology.

<comment><USER15> "stick your USB stick into a machine, type a 4 letter pin and everything on that machine is authenticated till you take it out."

This is doable now with client side certificates. No body supports getting user creds from client site certs though. Would they be easier to understand than OpenID? Would they be easier to understand than username and passwords?

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> OpenID and enterprise Single Sign-On counterparts like SiteMinder are trying to solve a problem that browser-based credential vaults have rendered largely obsolete.

<comment><USER4> Yep. I've said the same thing before: 1password for the Mac. You pay $35, once, and suddenly every site on the web supports auto-filling of gigantic automatically-generated strong passwords. You can stash your non-Web passwords in its lockbox, too.

There are occasional glitches and annoyances (my pet peeve is that so many of the sites in the world don't actually support long passwords containing symbols). But you can fix the problems, because it's pretty obvious what 1password is doing and the whole thing is right there on your machine.

I'm sure there are similar programs for Windows, though I can't recommend one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> My site uses OpenID, and I'm surprised at how many users actually do understand it.

It's especially true in the case of Yahoo users. All they have to do is type in "yahoo.com" and they're in. Try and explain to me how it's easier to remember a bunch of usernames and passwords than "yahoo.com"

And remember: There are no overarching guidelines on usernames and passwords, so the whole "use the same one every time" almost works...but not quite. One site requires a 6-letter password, another requires 9 with one uppercase letter and a number, while another has no requirements whatsoever. That crap gets frustrating as hell for me and there are several sites that I have to re- request my password every freaking time I go.

As more and more big sites come on as providers, like MySpace and Yahoo, it will only get better. I agree that there are issues with presenting and explaining it to users, but the underlying premise is a good one.

<comment><USER10> Note: We use OpenID _as an optional alternative_ to a regular username/password. To force users to use OpenID is pretty ridiculous.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> You can pry OpenID from my dead body. It moves user account controls back to the user. Want to delete an account? Delete access to the website rather than, usually, having to email the administrator. Want to only log in once to see what the website looks like? Click "Allow Once" instead of "Allow Forever."

<comment><USER10> I never thought about the delete access aspect. That's a good point.

Plus, since you never give a password, you don't have to worry about how they're storing it. Plain text in the database? passwords.txt file in the webroot? Doesn't matter because they don't have it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> _We have had a solution to this problem for decades: using the same God damned username and password for every website that needs them._

This is what I do...except that every once in a while, I try creating an account on a new site and discover that someone else has taken "sethg". Or the site has some rules about what characters are mandatory/forbidden in a password, and I can't use my default password. Or the site stores passwords in the clear and gets hacked, and I have to remember everywhere I used that default password and go change the password.

In the grand scheme of things this is only a minor irritation, but whenever I go to a site that I only expect to visit once every six months and discover that I have to create yet another site-specific account, I think, "I wish they supported OpenID."

</comment><comment><USER19> Amen! I totally get OpenID but it's yet another technology with no significant benefit to the average joe (or, rather, no benefit that outweighs the disadvantages). Like RSS, this remains one for the power users.

</comment><comment><USER20> Like Tedd Ziuba, I also didn't have an OpenID when joining Stack Overflow. Instead of becoming annoyed with OpenID (which, admittedly, I am), I became annoyed with Stack Overflow for requiring one.

What I did was register my own domain (callna.me) and install Drupal 6 with the OpenID Provider module. Instant OpenID.

Anyway, his post makes him sound like an idiot. It's a good thing comments are turned off on his post.

<comment><USER13> "What I did was register my own domain (callna.me) and install Drupal 6 with the OpenID Provider module. Instant OpenID."

So simple your grandma could do it eh?

<comment><USER20> You seem to be missing the point of both Tedd's post and my response. Tedd's point is that it's hard to understand OpenID and implement it. My point is that it's easy.

<comment><USER13> Well the overwhelming point is that for the average user, OpenID solves nothing, confuses them, and offers no benefit. It also does more harm than good IMHO opening the door to countless phishing attacks.

<comment><USER20> I agree with you there. 100%.

All public OpenID providers should be using valid SSL certificates. For some reason that is terribly, terribly wrong, some providers don't (like <https://alwaysknownas.com>, <https://openid4u.net> and <https://openid.es>).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Ted Dziuba is why I hate the Internet. I don't just mean that as a clever reply to the title. The Internet lets everyone be heard, instead of just the "qualified" people who used to get to publish their opinions in the print era. For the most part that's good, but there's a small group of writers who specialize in mean-spirited linkbait that makes me miss the editors who filtered everything in the old days.

<comment><USER22> "The Internet lets everyone be heard" => upmodded for truth. Everyone gets a soapbox and teh right to yell as loudly and as profanely as they like.

"instead of just the "qualified" people who used to get to publish their opinions in the print era" => upmodded for humour. Have you ever read anything in a newspaper owned by Conrad Black? Or anyone else, really? Print media may employ professional journalists.

But their "research" is flawed, they have a habit of regurgitating press releases from their advertisers and the political parties their owners support, and they pander to the prejudices of their readers.

Freedom of the press belongs to everyone who can afford a printing press. The internet is the cheapest, most unencumbered and uncensored printing press in history.

<comment><USER23> Which is what makes it both the most endearing and the most infuriating timesink ever.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> OpenID is not that hard to understand and will become even easier when more social sites become providers. The concept of your Facebook profile being your universal online identity is quite intuitive, especially to young people.

There is also a lack of best practices for consumers. When UI conventions are established and users become accustomed to them, it won't seem so confusing. Ideally, the creation of an OpenID associated "account" with a consumer would happen transparently the first time the OpenID is used, if it even needs to happen at all.

As for developers, OpenID may be more complicated to implement than conventional user/pass but it is also more uniform. Once there are _mature_ libraries for common platforms, programmers will save a lot of time versus implementing user/pass from scratch. (I would not consider many current ones to be mature). Anyway, I'm not so sure OpenID is more complicated than a _proper_ auth system with email verification and recovery.

</comment><comment><USER25> I wouldn't mind using OpenID if it actually worked. When I try to login to stackoverflow, it sometimes gives me the following error message ...

"Unable to login with your OpenID provider: The remote name could not be resolved: 'blog.lexoft.eu'"

And after some time it starts working again. I suspect this is a DNS problem, but using OpenID means a dependence on an external system over which you have no control.

So I like the concept, but a site like StackOverflow should give the option of using normal user accounts as a fallback.

<comment><USER26> using the internet means a dependence on an external system over which you have no control. OpenID is no less reliable in that regard than the internet in general.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Haha. I think Ted threw in that last part about using MD5 hashes in his password table just to piss off the people who were _really_ paying attention.

</comment><comment><USER13> OpenID and IPv6 seem to share the same problem really.

</comment><comment><USER28> This article seemed pretty weak. I didn't really see any arguments past his strongly emotional attitude towards OpenID.

<comment><USER29> Seemed pretty clear to me in how he explained the amount of extra effort he would have to expend as a user to get started with OpenID, and as a developer to support it. It's work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> <http://idcorner.org/2007/08/22/the-problems-with-openid/>

<comment><USER24> even as a non-expert, I can debunk most of those

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Wow. Someone who can curse a lot. Read the whole thing, and all I see is someone who's out of touch and can't express even their own vapid complaints in a logical or consistent manner.

<comment><USER32> I find that unlike most bloggers, Ted actually is pretty smart about what users like and don't like.

OpenID is cluttered. It takes longer to use it than it does to just reregister every single time. Even Clickpass doesn't speed things up. It's hailed as brilliant because it's open, but it's poorly implemented to a fault.

I argued in another thread that Facebook Connect was the technology to bet on. It's closed, but it actually offers a one-click login. The people in the comments thread, it seemed at the time, were evenly split into two camps: people who had used both and agreed, and people who disagreed because FConnect wasn't an open format.

Ted's swearing also comes across well to me (and, it would seem, to a lot of other people). I like that he gets worked up over this. It cuts out a lot of bullshit and sounds like he genuinely cares about the things he writes about.

<comment><USER27> Just curious, what's poorly implemented about Clickpass?

<comment><USER33> I think when he said "It's hailed as brilliant because it's open, but it's poorly implemented to a fault" he was talking about OpenID, not Clickpass specifically.

<comment><USER32> Yep. Poor choice of words on my part.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> What's Clickpass doing about OpenID these days? Nothing new on their blog in 2 months.</comment>


Tinder Autopilot – I wrote an open source Chrome extension to automate Tinder - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/autopilot-for-tinder/bfpgbjekakfijondlfloonhdkcjlhehg?hl=en <comment><USER2> What is the link to source code?

<comment><AUTHOR> [https://github.com/Geczy/tinder-autopilot/](https://github.com/Geczy/tinder- autopilot/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Amazing.</comment>


Air Couriers post 9-11: How they still operate - <AUTHOR> http://travel.stackexchange.com/q/20334/101

<comment><USER2> Intel was known many years ago for buying 2 first class seats on a plane for its validation chips for new runs from a fab. They put a person in one seat and a wafer carrier in the other. If you have something sufficiently valuable or important, the cost of a plane ticket just isn't that high.

If the thing you are shipping is so important that it needs to get somewhere so fast that you can't ship it overnight with FedEx, why would you put it in the hands of a stranger?

I think the arguments for this sort of business have changed in the last 12 years because shipping is very fast and not very expensive. Additionally, electronic document delivery and signing is not much more common than it was then.</comment>


Introducing Runnable JavaScript, CSS, and HTML Code Snippets - <AUTHOR> http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2014/09/introducing-runnable-javascript-css-and-html-code-snippets/?cb=1

<comment><USER2> Can't wait till this is done for C. Although choosing the compiler might be a problem.

<comment><AUTHOR> js codes are running in the browser. It's much earlier to implement than those running in the backend. But I agree that it's awesome if it's done for C ! Maybe we can begin from asm.js</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Should aspiring entrepreneurs to go to lots of events? - <AUTHOR>

Pitch-offs, networking, meetups, masterminds, Xathons etc etc.<p>Is this the path to success for an aspiring entrepreneur? <comment><USER2> No, at least based on what I've heard (I have not succeeded as an entrepreneur yet). Instead, find a problem that scratches a personal itch and is big enough to impact the country, or ideally the world. Then iterate in quick cycles, with customer feedback at each cycle. Eric Ries' 'The Lean Startup' is recommended by many. The meetups can help you get word out about your product, but so can social media, for a lot less.</comment>


Imba – 10 times faster than React - <AUTHOR> http://imba.io/home <comment><USER2> If I would switch coding React from vanilla JS I'd probably go with ClojureScript. So how is this different/better from ClojureScript and why I should use this instead?

Also 10x performance in what? Rendering? All-around code execution?

And how's state management done with Imba? Flux-based? Can I use any npm library straight out the box with Imba?

All in all I applaud your effort but it's super hard to compete against current frameworks without being mind-blowingly better. It looks neat but for me it's just too must trouble to even try. Maybe if it would be a full-stack framework with integrated Express-based backend with sane and easy state- management I'd give it a shot.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you guys measure productivity? - <AUTHOR>

Lines of code, goal setting, time spent, how? <comment><USER2> Measuring your own productivity for your own purposes: Not really much point; people tend to match their level of performance with their levels of desire and skill. Dollars earned is a lagging metric but it's probably the best one.

Measuring the productivity of others (say, your employees): Goals met versus goals set (by you), assuming you're realistic in measuring the median rate of goal achievement in a pool of available talent. That's pretty hard to get right, particularly when delays aren't always employee-related (servers go down, your supplier's software had a bug in it nobody noticed until your employee had to track it down).

Nobody much here is in the business of managing throngs of interchangeable laborers; you're usually lucky to have the talent you retain and are constantly trying to fill positions created by company growth and by turnover. Unless a coder really disappoints by any metric, you're not likely to fire a less-than-median performer because replacing them is so difficult, so a measurement of productivity tends not to be something you can do anything with.

A much more interesting question is how you can maximize productivity for both cases.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would recommend the ideas and techniques from this book -- Codermetrics.

It's software development centric but the idea is very interesting for measuring personal performance and productivity.

</comment><comment><USER4> Todo list primarily. Striking things off a piece of paper is oddly satisfying.

I basically break down my tasks into stuff that can be done in a few hours.</comment>


Desktop PCs aren't going anywhere because they're cheap (2011) - <AUTHOR> http://jakeseliger.com/2011/10/09/desktop-pcs-arent-going-anywhere-despite-the-growth-of-phones-and-tablets-because-theyre-cheap/ <comment><USER2> The high end tablets of 2011 were underpowered, the tablets and phones of 2015 really are something and the cheap-o tablets are pretty good too. PC's by their nature of being built of a handful of parts can only get so cheap while tablets being one integrated component can reach an all new level of cheapness.

Following the seven year rule I wouldn't be shocked if in 2018 tablets or large phones where a primary means by which most people consumed passive entertainment.</comment>


FBI gets access to Australian telco records - <AUTHOR> http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/fbi-gets-access-to-telstra-records-20130712-2pvl6.html

<comment><USER3> From the article:

"The contract was prompted by Telstra's undersea telecommunications joint venture called Reach. When it sought a cable licence from the US Federal Communications Commission, the DoJ and the FBI insisted on a binding security agreement.

"The contract does not authorise Telstra or law enforcement agencies to undertake surveillance. But under the deed, Telstra must preserve and 'have the ability to provide' wire and electronic communications involving any customers who make any form of communication with a point of contact in the US, as well as 'transactional data' and 'call associated data' relating to such communications."

. . . .

"The document was signed by Douglas Gration, a barrister who was then Telstra's company secretary and official liaison for law enforcement and national security agencies.

"He told the Herald he could not remember much about the agreement. 'Every country has a regime for that lawful interception,' he said. 'And Australia has got it as well.'"

This looks like a pattern of mutual agreements among governments that cooperate in routing and connecting cables for international telecommunications. The statement is NOT that every telephone call from Australia to another country is listened to, but that a data archive is maintained that might be accessible with court orders. Particularly significant is the statement that other countries ask for the same arrangement if a cable connects to or through that country.

</comment><comment><USER4> Just where does the reach of the FBI/NSA/other US agencies stop? Is nothing safe from them anymore?

<comment><USER5> When you're a global power and have no scruple, like the US, then there's nothing any country can do. Either they do exactly what the US agencies tell them, or they risk getting thrown out of trade agreements, financial treaties, diplomatic consequences, and in the end, the US will just do whatever it wants anyways, since they have military bases all around the world and enough power to monitor and spy as much as they want, international laws be damned.

<comment><AUTHOR> Even more than that, the US has most of the best military hardware on sale. If you want to be able to buy the weaponry to compete in todays world, you pretty much have to buy it from the US (or it's closest allies).

That's a very big stick right there.

<comment><USER6> >If you want to be able to buy the weaponry to compete in todays world,

If you'd said this twenty five years ago, it would make sense. But today? Who is the great menacing villain (other than the US)? What weapons do they have? There is no enemy other than our own warmongers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> As much as I object to Prism, the headline is a bit sensationalist - <USER2> implies (and as a customer of Telstra, this was my first reaction and immediate concern) that Telstra is handing over data from Australian retail customers. The article itself doesn't actually claim this. Albeit still concerning.

<comment><USER8> Considering that they still honour a Howard-era government contract even though they're now 89.1% privately owned, it's still quite unsettling news.</comment></comment>


Joe Hewitt's First Post-Facebook Web Gift: Inertial Scrolling For All - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/20/joe-hewitt-scrollability/ <comment><USER2> I've been using iScroll (<http://cubiq.org/iscroll>) and it works quite well. Works on the desktop too unlike Scrollability.

<comment><USER3> The script has been superseded by iScroll 4: <http://cubiq.org/iscroll-4>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Joe's photoblog, mentioned in the article as an example of inertial scrolling: <http://uponahill.com>.

<comment><USER5> Not sure why he calls it inertial scrolling. There's no "inertia" here. It's just pinning the background image as long as you are scrolling the text.

Which, incidentally, is a pretty stupid idea. Look at his photoblog -- to scroll past a photo which has a very short text block, you have to scroll until little text block disappears off the page. It's pretty silly, and goes against the idea of the _purpose_ of scrolling, which is to navigate past information that does not fit within the viewable area of your device/window.

For a truly innovative scrolling concept, take a look at <http://bloom.io/>. (Give it some time to load all its assets. The effect isn't activated until it has everything.)

<comment><USER6> The goal here is not to be "truly innovative", but to emulate scrolling behavior which should ideally be performed by mobile WebKit, but isn't. But I must have done a good job since you only notice the background image being pinned, and not the fact that (at least on an iPad) the entire page is being scrolled with JavaScript. Also, try scrolling horizontally.

<comment><USER5> I wasn't commenting on the technical underpinnings -- I'm sure it solves an implementation problem well, but as a user, the fact that the entire page is being scrolled with JavaScript does not matter. I was commenting on the user interface, which does not make sense to me.

There are essentially two use cases here, conflated into one experience. The first use case is when a photo has a long body text which needs to be scrolled. Clearly, your scrolling mechanism solves that problem, although I was unnerved by the fact that it does not visually indicate how long the scrolled text was (something traditionally solved with a scroll bar).

Unfortunately, this same UI solution is forced upon the second use case, when the photo has a short body text which does _not_ need to be scrolled. In this case, your system provides scrolling even when it's not needed; moving the tiny text box up or down does offer anything in terms of functionality. It merely delays the scrolling, and forces me to swipe several times to get anywhere.

As for the horizontal scrolling, it does not integrate well with the text box. The text box disappears (abruptly and confusingly) when you side-swipe. Then it appears again (equally abruptly) if you touch the screen. And here's where it gets super weird:

If you side-swipe, and then swipe down (as in, "I'm done with looking at this series of photos, now I'd like to navigate downwards to the _next_ series of photos", the text box appears (again, abruptly) and hijacks the scrolling mechanism. The text box wasn't there when I _decided_ to start scrolling, but it appears and then forces me to scroll the box. Sorry, that's just bad UI design.

These UI issues exist because you've conflated _text scrolling_ with _photo navigation_. It would be a lot nicer if the text box stayed in place, always. When the text exceeds the boundaries of the box, provide a scrollbar to let the box scroll.

Finally: The reason I used the phrase "truly innovative" is because your scrolling mechanism apparently tries to innovate something, by introducing a new kind of UI for photo navigation, something I think it fails to do. I was merely comparing it to something that actually works.

<comment><USER6> When you scroll horizontally, you're indicating that you want to see more photos, so naturally the text should disappear. When you scroll vertically again, you're indicating that you want to move to the next post, so naturally the text should appear again. You're free to scroll horizontally or vertically at any time, and the result is pretty consistent if you do. What you call "forcing the user" I call "making educated guesses about the user's intentions".

<comment><USER5> No. You're _misguessing_ the user's intentions.

Look, scrolling needs to have a _purpose_. Either (a) it's because you want to read more text than is visible, or (2) it's because you want to view more photos that are not currently visible. It's never both at the same time, in your case, simply because multiple photos cannot exist on the same screen as an overflowing text box.

In the case where no text box is being shown, the intention (1) does not exist, because there is nothing to scroll. So when viewing photo A1 (being the first photo in series A), by sliding horizontally I am expressing the intention: "Let me view photo A2". When viewing photo A2, which does show any text box yet, by sliding vertically I am expressing the intention: "Let me view photo B1".

There is no text box yet. Therefore, by scrolling down the app cannot possible perceive my action as intending to scroll the text. And yet your app decides that's what it means, and shows the text box out of the blue. It's simple causality. If vertical scrolling is to fullfill the intention "Let me view more text than is currently on screen", then the text box _needs_ to be visible _at all times_. Simple as that.

Your scrolling thing is still equally broken for the other reason I stated in the previous comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I don't get this. From <http://joehewitt.github.com/scrollability/>: "Native scrolling for mobile web apps... or at least the closest thing to it!" How does my Android phone lack "native scrolling" and what does that mean?

<comment><USER8> On iPhone, scrolling in an app, and a web page/app, are different in terms of speed and inertia. There's been several attempts to emulate the "native" scroll response via javascript so that web apps can more seamlessly replace alternatives.

<comment><USER9> _> ... so that web apps can more seamlessly replace alternatives._

One native feature down (at least until Apple evolves it again), countless pile of more features to go. This is a losing battle.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The animation is glitchy on an iPad 1, and it doesn't feel anything like the native UIScrollView's paging support. It's sort of acceptable enough for a web page, but it's not a replacement for a native UIScrollView.

</comment><comment><USER10> This is how overflow:scroll should have worked on iOS a long time ago.

At the moment you have to mash two fingers in a webpage and scrape the content across that page. (Not sure if this is updated in iOS5?)

<comment><USER11> It is. Overflow:scroll works with one finger, but it's often very slow and laggy (like two finger) and has no inertial scroll. Maybe they'll fix it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> This has already been covered here and _only_ works in iOS whereas other solutions have worked on more platforms...

<comment><USER6> It will work on Android as soon as I get some Android devices to test with. It should currently "work" on Android, but probably not well.

<comment><USER13> I tried it on a Honeycomb tablet, works pretty smoothly, but "not for ios5" notification shows up for some reason.</comment></comment></comment>


Automatic Tor Nginx v1.00 - <AUTHOR> https://gitlab.com/worldofmatthew/automatic-tor-nginx <comment><AUTHOR> New Updates:

Added iptables to block outgoing port 80 and 443 to avoid leaks (port 8080 used for hidden service was already set to 127.0.0.1).

Shortened code to removing redundant parts of the script.

removed OpenSSL install.</comment>


Quartzy (YC S11) Scores $1.2M To Help Life Scientists Stay Organized - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2012/02/23/quartzy-scores-1-2m-to-help-life-scientists-stay-organized/

<comment><USER2> Random piece of feedback, in case it's useful (I'm guessing that the Quartzy guys will read this): My father is a professor of chemistry, but wasn't interested in Quartzy because "the university already has software which keeps track of all our inventories". Apparently the health and safety people decided a few years ago that there must be central records of all chemical inventories in case there's a fire or other disaster.

... and they're paying a lot of money for this. So if you're looking for an area to expand, you might like to consider going after the "we'll help you keep track of the labs which report to you" market rather than just the "we'll help you keep track of your own lab" market.

<comment><AUTHOR> thanks! We discovered that labs on Quartzy are already on their own using the reporting mechanisms for exactly this purpose. Here is a quote from our testimonial page (<http://www.quartzy.com/testimonial/>): _Quartzy is ideal for keeping an up-to-date chemical inventory (required by most Lab Safety Compliance Offices) and helping my labmates know what is at their fingertips while planning their experiments._ Lab Manager, Tufts University

<comment><USER2> I'm not sure that's exactly the same thing. I interpreted that quote to mean that _one lab_ at Tufts was using Quartzy to keep an up-to-date inventory; what I'm talking about is a university mandating a particular platform which _all_ its labs must use -- because that platform is convenient for the administration, not because it's necessarily convenient for the individual labs.

<comment><USER3> Yeah -- a lot of places use ChemTracker

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm not a scientist, and this is perhaps irrelevant to this thread, but since Jayzee is here, I just wanted to say how much I admire the charming video they've had on their site. Not to be negative, but it's not the most artistic or beautiful explanatory video out there, but that's why I like it; it's the embodiment of the Lean Startup approach, and how you don't have to have to spend loads and be a master at that particular craft to put something out there to explain your product. For the longest time I was unsure if I should make my own or pay for someone to do it (not sure what you guys did but I assume it wasn't one of those $10,000 videos a lot of "starups" have.) but seeing this gave me inspiration and the realization that this isn't some blockbuster movie, it's supposed to explain the product--and well, you got me moving and learning animation and some other neat skills in my spare time--and you showed me a great lesson...so thanks!

Hope things continue to go well.

<comment><AUTHOR> wow, thanks! Adam's friend made the video and his wife gave the voice-over so it has an all 'in-the-house' production!:)

I feel that for a non-consumer product like ours, where design is not the make or break difference, a video like the one that we have is more than sufficient to let people know more about the product.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I reached out to Quartzy just after launch since we operate in the same space and can say they are class act.

I'm unsure how many founders take a 30 min phone call on a couple of HN exchanges, but they did (thanks again).

</comment><comment><USER6> A lot of startups seem to be raising seed rounds in the $1.1M-$1.3M range (a cursory HN search turned up seven in the past few months, links below).

What kind of valuations are they getting? Anybody willing to post anonymously (or otherwise)?

Gumroad $1.1M <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3568962>

Curebit $1.2M <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3520175>

RJMetrics $1.2M <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3419670>

Ginzametrics $1.3M <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3239636>

Zoomingo $1.3M <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3235490>

Tealium $1.1M <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3447834>

Cloudability $1.1M <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3395361>

<comment><AUTHOR> Quite a few startups that I know are doing a rolling close ... So the early investors get a better valuation for coming in early without asking the perennial, 'Who else is in the deal' question. Investors who come in later pay a premium since the startup has been derisked (at least from a fund-raising perspective)... So I think often there isn't a single valuation for these rounds.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm a computational life scientist, so I'm not exactly in the target user group, but I will say that I consider LabGuru's (<http://www.labguru.com/>) research project tracking to be a killer feature that Quartzy lacks at this point.

Keep up the good work though, I've yet to see anything close to my dream CMS for science labs.

</comment><comment><USER8> "YC just funds consumer web apps", heh.

</comment><comment><USER9> I'm really curious because this is not the typical YC investment. I wonder what is the kind of reasoning pg goes through, perhaps this is an exercise in customer development?

</comment><comment><USER10> Great job Quartzy. It's wonderful to see more startups join the movement to accelerate science!</comment>


How Apple is sabotaging an open standard for digital books - <AUTHOR> http://www.zdnet.com/blog/bott/how-apple-is-sabotaging-an-open-standard-for-digital-books/4378

<comment><USER2> We have one so far.

Let's see how many comments we can get explaining why this was bad when Microsoft did it with IE but just fine when Apple does it with iBooks.

Bonus points if you somehow spin embrace-extend-destroy as a good thing by conflating what's good for the users with what's good for Apple and its shareholders.

<comment><USER3> I still don't understand how they are getting away with the 'agency model' for ebooks. With those deals, no one but apple can make money selling ebooks in a native app on an iphone/ipad.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Most companies are using the open standards of the web and using them to build their own closed standards. Apple isn't the only one, Amazon et al are as guilty as everyone around. Hardware lock-in from the previous decade has now moved to content lock-in on the Internet.

</comment><comment><USER5> This is a false dilemma. Authors don't have to use iBooks software to author ebooks and users don't have to use iBooks to read ebooks on the iPad (and they probably don't because it's really buggy). Problem solved.</comment>


There Is No "Next Smartphone" [pdf] - <AUTHOR> https://key2.bluematrix.com/docs/pdf/570bbc5f-526e-482f-90ac-c6ff2fd9fb29.pdf <comment> tony-allan I have always been surprised by unexpected developments so arguments along the lines of "The smartphone is a singular event in compute platform history that is unlikely to repeat." seems reasonable but I wouldn't like to bet money on it in 5 or 10 years time.</comment>


Clowns to the Left, Jokers to the Right: On the Actual Ideology of the US Press - <AUTHOR> http://journalism.nyu.edu/pubzone/weblogs/pressthink/2010/06/14/ideology_press.html <comment><USER2> I enjoyed this essay, but the author makes unnecessary divisions. Many on the "extremes" have expressed all the positions he describes, to some extent. These aren't really incompatible frameworks, unless they're taken as dogmatic.

For instance, a person might believe all of the following:

1\. Media companies serve their owners, just like any other company. To a rough first approximation, this will predict what the product will look like. Along with the fact that advertisers are the main customers.

2\. Journalists often show a liberal bias, and this shows up in their work. "Liberal" here means what someone like Bill Gates might believe in. This allows them to define the bounds of the left.

3\. There exist "High Broderists" who purport to define a moderate center -- halfway in between the two parties.

4\. The press uses little tactics like "he-said-she-said journalism" and "the sphere of deviance."

</comment><comment><USER3> "It's very simple": journalists mainly do what they think will make them look good in front of other journalists. The author did a good job of elaborating on that, though.

This is an instance of a very broad and very underappreciated pattern in society. Replace "journalists" with "women" in that sentence, or with "university professors", and it's just as true.

</comment><comment><USER4> >Clowns to the Left of Me, Jokers to the Right

Strangely I was under impression it was other way around.

<comment><USER5> It's a lyric from the classic rock song "Stuck in the Middle with You."</comment></comment>


T1 is a language for constrained environments, embedded systems with little RAM - <AUTHOR> https://t1lang.github.io/ <comment><USER2> From the slides:

T0 is a Forth-like language used to implement the handshake parser and the X.509 validation engine.

      • Compiled to threaded code
      • Uses two custom stacks (data & system stack) of
        limited size (128 bytes each)
      • Runs in a flat, small interpreter loop that can be
        stopped and restarted at will
      • Instructions are a single byte each (token threading)
      • Compiler is written in C# and performs some
        static analysis (maximum stack usage)

T1: Evolution of T0 with extra features:

      • Memory-safe
      • Optional dynamic memory allocation (controlled) with GC
      • Rich type system (including generics)
      • OOP support
      • Namespaces and modules</comment>


China says experimental spaceship operating normally - <AUTHOR> https://phys.org/news/2020-05-china-experimental-spaceship.html <comment><USER2> The one that burned up on re-entry...?

> China is working on a permanent orbiting station after being excluded from > the International Space Station, largely because of U.S. objections.

This is such bullshit Chinese propaganda. I worked at NASA when China joined the human-spaceflight club. They never asked to join the ISS program. We inquired, unofficially, what sort of participation they might want to have if the ISS treaty were renegotiated. They blew it off.

</comment><comment><USER3> Check out the previously tracked position on the capsule, rocket booster and inflatable test module here: [https://space- search.io/?search=cospar%2020027](https://space- search.io/?search=cospar%2020027)</comment>


How to do Multiple Inheritance in C# - <AUTHOR> http://mrbool.com/how-to-do-multiple-inheritance-in-c/26426

<comment><USER3> There's a reason they didn't add multiple inheritance to the language - <USER2> creates more confusion than its worth. I've yet to see a good use case for it. Pls stick to using interfaces.</comment>


Svxlink: Advanced repeater controller and Echolink software for Linux - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/sm0svx/svxlink <comment><USER2> For non-hams reading this and wondering what it on earth it is, it's essentially an open source implementation of Echolink, a internet-connected network of amateur VHF/UHF repeaters. Normally when you transmit to an amateur radio repeater, the repeater re-transmits your audio on a different frequency so that it can be heard by a wider coverage area than your radio could be.

Echolink has (at least) four main functions:

1\. It allows repeater owners to link two or more repeaters together over the Internet so that a transmission into one repeater results in a transmission _out_ of multiple repeaters, effectively giving your transmission wider coverage, or coverage in multiple geographical locations.

2\. The Echolink clients allow licensed amateur radio operators to receive and transmit on VHF/UHF repeaters around the world from their desktop or mobile devices.

3\. The Echolink server allows amateur radio operators to turn their own radios into internet-connected nodes so that they can access them away from home, or allow others to use their radios over the Echolink network.

4\. The Echolink network has topic-specific conference rooms that hams can join with their client. Or, repeater owners can temporarily have their repeater join a conference room. For example, there is almost certainly one or more dedicated to the hurricane events happening in the southern US right now.

The "official" Echolink client and server software is closed-source, this is an open source implementation.

You need to have an amateur radio license to sign up for an account on the Echolink network, because anything you transmit into the network might go out over the airwaves somewhere and you need a license and call sign to do that.

</comment><comment><USER3> I wonder how common is EchoLink among other newer protocols like C4FM? How hard is it to spin up a low-power repeater with this and save a few thousand dollars on a dedicated box? Would that run afoul of FCC code in the US?

Separately, it's nice to see Ham Radio on the front page. Amateur Radio and hacking share the same goals, although monetization is less prevalent among radio guys. Maybe there's lots of HAMs here and we don't talk about it?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm a ham myself. EchoLink is still considered one of the most reliable VOIP in my opinion because being it's analog at its input and output. The downside of it is, it's entirely made for windows OS. This come svxlink to the rescue for linux guys. C4FM is one of the branded protocols out there; d-star, dmr, P25 etc. If you don't have the radio to do this protocol, you're out of the game.

SVXLINK is just a controller running on a raspberry pi, you still need to connect a radio for its rx and tx. I'm using low power chinese-made ht to it, and it act as my personal repeater at home.

<comment><USER4> One thing that's become quite common here in the UK is multimode networks - bridging gateways for C4FM, D*, DMR and analogue into a single network 'room' \- [CQ-UK]([https://www.cq-uk.co.uk/](https://www.cq-uk.co.uk/)) and [hubnet]([https://hubnetwork.uk/](https://hubnetwork.uk/)) are examples.

These use software like SVXLink, [Allstar]([https://www.allstarlink.org/](https://www.allstarlink.org/)) and [XLX Reflector]([https://github.com/LX3JL/xlxd](https://github.com/LX3JL/xlxd)) with AMBE hardware at the server to handle transcoding between the proprietary networks.

It's all pretty cool!

<comment><USER4> ... oh great none of my markdown worked :D

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Nice! I'll need to check this out, I've been running an EchoLink proxy for years now but client software for Linux never really existed.

<comment><AUTHOR> Wonder if you can share a private proxy that I could use? I'm been using VPN port forwarding service to tackle echolink port 5198 and 5199 requirement.

<comment><USER5> Shoot me an email: email@example.com — the proxy I run now is public and in the list they publish but I should be able to run another beside it on a different port.

<comment><AUTHOR> I just shoot you an email. Thanks in advance!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Always nice to see ham radio on the front page!

<comment><AUTHOR> Indeed!</comment></comment>


When is MongoDB the Right Tool for the Job? - <AUTHOR> http://daemon.co.za/2014/04/when-is-mongodb-the-right-tool

<comment><AUTHOR> I've asked this a couple of places before, but basically I am trying to mentor some people in Node.js, and I am trying to figure out why I should teach them MongoDB.

You only hear about the bad things, but I really want to know about the good things. So i can make a more balanced decision about it.</comment>


Presenting a genomic encyclopedia of bacteria (and archaea) - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2009/12/presenting-a-genomic-encyclopedia-of-bacteria-and-archaea.ars?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

<comment><AUTHOR> It's interesting to note that Nature is releasing this paper under a creative commons licence. (<http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature08656>)

One of the authors is a big proponent of open access science. The genomic sequences are also available from a public repository.</comment>


Jeri Ellsworth's vision for growing AR with an HMD she first created at Valve - <AUTHOR> https://nwn.blogs.com/nwn/2019/09/jeri-ellsworth-tilt-5-ar-hmd-valve.html <comment><USER2> For anyone who hasn't heard about this, it's a really cool approach to AR where the glasses project the image onto a retro-reflective surface, instead of onto the lens or the user's eye.

The kickstarter was a huge success anyway, fully funded in around 24 hours or so.

I really like the "AR somwhere" concept - i.e. let's make it work really well in a limited context instead of making something that works badly everywhere.

I'd like to see more detail on projecting above the gameboard, and what happens when there isn't room for that. My understanding is that it can make stuff appear above the board as long as it's below the line from the viewer's eye to the opposite edge of the board. But if it's taller than that, does it get clipped, or squished etc.?</comment>


There Isn't a Single Down Stock in the S&P over Last 10 Weeks - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-08/there-isn-t-a-single-down-stock-in-the-s-p-over-last-10-weeks <comment><USER2> While this might be true, their value is lower now than it would have been had the market not crashed.

</comment><comment><USER3> This shows how out of touch with reality the "marktes" are.</comment>


Long Life Vehicle - <AUTHOR> https://postalmuseum.si.edu/collections/object-spotlight/llv.html <comment><USER2> My father was a postal delivery worker for some 35+ years (with a law degree, LOL) and I distinctly recall him loving his "LLV". He maybe took it a bit too seriously, but I also recall him occasionally getting "new" test vehicles and hating them compared to his trusty LLV (and it makes me chuckle to recall him often saying 'LLV' out loud & quite proudly; we just thought he was geeky, even if technically accurate).

He absolutely loved these vehicles though. The only consistent complaint he had was their winter performance -- they would get stuck extremely easily, and my recollection was that he'd have to be "pulled out" 1-3 times during most winters.

We were in the midwest, so typically somewhat moderate winters (perhaps a bit less so 20-30 years ago now), but just a bit of snow or ice and they could get hung up pretty easily. I recall the wheels being tiny, and the tires tending towards the bald side, so maybe was preventable but nonetheless they would quite quickly send someone to pull LLVs out any time they got hung up!

Edit -- They also have an incredibly distinct 'whir' sound when in reverse; it's truly unmistakable and 20+ years later I can still identify one by that sound. My father's route included our neighborhood so he'd have a "cookie break" when he dropped our mail off & take his lunch at home, too; the unique reverse sound was an instant giveaway that the LLV was backing into the driveway. Good memories. :)

<comment><USER3> Why did your father become a postal delivery worker if he had a law degree? Its a rather personal question so please don't feel like you have to answer, but it seems like a non-traditional career path.

<comment><USER2> It's a good question, and one that I probably asked him on many multiple occasions. His answer was always multi-pronged, but the main points were approximately (in order of importance, as I perceived it):

1) Law = Higher stress career.

2) Office vs Outdoors; he loved being outdoors every day, especially loved talking to people -- most everyone on his route knew him by name and he strongly believed in [perhaps incorrectly, as things have changed dramatically] in mail carriers being very 'customer/service oriented'. He loved talking to people, he'd bring mail up to elder-aged peoples homes every day and talk to them for a few minutes, etc. Perhaps a bit Mayberry-esque, even. ;)

3) Moral reasons; a general dislike of bureaucracy (though plenty of that at USPS, and more towards end of his career, which we heard about over dinner ~nightly!); generally a preference for meritocracy (his 'sorting speed' was N times faster than the 'baseline', he would tell us); an extreme disdain for "schmoozing" for lack of a better term.

He never even took the bar exam, which actually surprises me a bit even today. As a young teenager I found it borderline insane, selfishly of course -- I can remember thinking "we'd be in the nicer neighborhood if Dad would just go be a lawyer!", and I remember wondering if my grandfather was upset by it but I was a bit surprised to not really get the impression that it was an issue.

He also had owned & sold a bar in his 30s, had the only home we lived in my entire life paid off in his ~50s, the USPS insurance & pension plans were great, and we lived quite frugally -- so he was comfortable, he carried our own route so he was home 2x each day, the rotating schedule was nice to get Saturdays off occasionally, and he was off work by ~3-4PM every day (except near holiday times when they'd have 20ft of mail and tons of parcels). I actually believe he initially began carrying mail just as a summer job while in college, and then probably kept at it simply because it was fulfilling for him.

He retired a bit early, with >2 years of PTO & Sick Leave time saved up; proceeded to get hip replacement surgery almost immediately -- likely somewhat attributable to walking up/down ~100 flights of stairs each for a nearby apartment complex on his route.

Unfortunately he passed away just 6 weeks after retiring. The funeral procession had ~50 (ish) LLVs in it, and I think he'd have liked it. It made me smile, on what was an otherwise cold day both literally & figuratively speaking. :)

I miss his advice tremendously, he was a very smart person and I often reflect on his decision to become a mailman, despite having a law degree. I have but a [honors!] GED, though more philosophically sometimes I wonder if more succinct & 'adventurous' job -- and a more frugal lifestyle -- might be more fulfilling. I respected his decision though, and as I've aged I definitely feel that I better understand it, as well.

<comment><USER4> Passing away only six weeks after retiring... man...

<comment><USER5> When your old a decrease in physical activity can be very bad for your overall health.

Many people live into old age being very active for their age, suffer some minor injury that leaves them bedridden simply because of age then their health declines and they die shortly thereafter. Ask anyone who works in a nursing home and they'll have plenty of stories of 90yr old ladies who were walking a mile a day until they fell and then wound up in the nursing home and died there.

Sounds like the person you're replying to's father got hip surgery right after retiring. I wouldn'd be surprised if the recovery was what killed him.

<comment><USER2> A heart attack ~10 years prior to death, had otherwise been in relatively good health though a little bit overweight.

I agree though and think you're generally correct; his route required a decent bit of walking/stairs and probably kept him in much better shape.

He became ill about 6wk post-op and passed the night before Valentines Day; an ice storm had just come through and the power was out at his house. Was quite sudden & unexpected, he had been doing well, walking & I'd been taking him to some of his follow-ups. He'd even left me a message on my "voicemail" (answering machine, hah) a few hours prior to passing -- jokingly chastising me for calling him the night before in the middle of 'the' IU college basketball game ("How dare you call me in the middle of...!" hah). Sadly, I've lost the recording since then. =)

An autopsy later revealed, from memory, something like 80-90% calcification of vessels within his heart. Is almost 15 years ago now, and probably only really come to grips with his passing in the last 5 years or so -- I wouldn't wish the experience on anyone, and definitely not something you want to go through as a young 'adult'.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> as an automotive mechanic by trade, these little suckers have always had a place in my heart. Bless the fleet teams that keep them running! the LLV is powered by one of these: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Duke_engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Duke_engine)

technically its a pontiac engine, but its powered a ton of stuff including the 92 Chevy Lumina. parts for this engine are almost free, and you wont find a cheaper fleet vehicle other than maybe Crown Victoria.

Mileage...people are complaining about 10mpg but forget to mention this is a V4 and geared at the mission to haul 1 ton of cargo. coming from the shop floor of our diesel engine repair building, 10mpg for a 4 cylinder iron block mail truck is _good._ freight trucks are often lucky to see 6.

Your lumina engine however is geared much more respectably and will see 18-22 city/highway.

<comment><USER7> >> V4 and geared at the mission to haul 1 ton of cargo

I'm sure you made an honest mistake, but a V4 is very rare - the Duke was an inline-4.

I had one in a 1984 Fiero, and even in a small car like that it was lacking in power. Not that it didn't have bigger problems, like _catching the damn car on fire_ , which they recalled them for.

Somehow that engine ended up in the even larger Firebird/Camaro...

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> If you're willing to do the maintenance, vehicles can last forever. Most cars will last a very long time if you keep up with the lubrication maintenance.

But the mail trucks are perfect candidates for replacement with electrics.

<comment><USER9> Question from somebody who does not know jack about automobiles: would electric vehicles last longer? Tesla was boasting its powertrain's longevity and it got me wondering if that was normally a limiting factor to a vehicle's lifespan and whether electric vehicles were better off. I mean, I'm guessing you've gotta replace the battery a fair few times, but are they as promising as they sound for longevity?

<comment><USER10> Honestly from my perspective as an ex-gearhead, older cars die from engine failure but newer cars just tend to wear out (assuming maintenance). The whole suspension starts to go (shocks, springs, ball joints, rubber bushings everywhere) and body welds, door joints, etc start to crack and sag. All of this is fixable, but at too high a cost. Thus electric cars won't really help this, to my eyes.

Although, it's very possibly a legacy of planned obsolescence (the good cost- saving kind) where the engine would last 200k so the rest of the car was only made to last 200k as well. Perhaps as engines start to last far longer, the rest of the car will be built to match.

<comment><USER11> > Although, it's very possibly a legacy of planned obsolescence (the good > cost-saving kind) where the engine would last 200k so the rest of the car > was only made to last 200k as well.

I think this is the answer. If a critical component of the car only lasts X miles, then building any other piece to last more than X miles is pure waste. As counterintuitive (and annoying) as it might seem, having all the parts of the car fail around the same time actually indicates that it was engineered perfectly.

<comment><USER12> A very fun poem on the theme by Oliver Wendell Holmes (the father of the famed American jurist): [http://holyjoe.org/poetry/holmes1.htm](http://holyjoe.org/poetry/holmes1.htm)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> > the FFV is a more fuel efficient vehicle, operating on a combination of > unleaded gas and ethanol

Gasahol is not "more fuel efficient". It is a corn lobby subsidy that delivers less MPG than straight gas due to the lower energy density.

<comment><USER5> I agree, it's misleading marketing speak lobbyist crap

That said on a multi year timescale ethanol is far more efficient in terms of carbon output per joule since much of the carbon released was captured when the corn was grown so the only net carbon output is from the fossil fuel portion of the fuel. It's similiar to the argument for why heating with wood is better for the environment in the long term.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> With the amount of stop and go, these things are begging for at _least_ a hybrid power train. I've heard they're very uncomfortable inside during summer temps.

Also, long live the Iron Duke!

</comment><comment><USER15> Those little trucklings are durable as heck. A few months ago I saw one bounding across the desert scrubland between two remote ranches knocking tumbleweeds out of its way like it was channeling a monster truck.

Amusing a heck to me. Probably not to anyone on the receiving end of a package marked "Fragile."

<comment><USER16> Your description reminds me of our FedEx guy here on dirt/sand roads near Joshua Tree National Park.

He drives one of the smaller box trucks, from the sound of it I assume it's a gas V8. It's always towards the end of the day and he's clearly in a hurry to finish his final deliveries in an empty truck and it's like seeing a FedEx truck compete in a rally race. I can hear him coming a mile away with the taps wide open, and the thing is fishtailing and bouncing all over the place blasting across the desert at 80+ MPH.

None of the locals I've seen, not even the guys on ATVs, sustain the FedEx guy's pace.

<comment><USER5> >None of the locals I've seen, not even the guys on ATVs, sustain the FedEx guy's pace.

Fedex driver probably doesn't own the truck.

<comment><USER15> _Not the 18yo who launches his Ranger over the train tracks berm._

Do NOT do this! Also, if you try to crash through a snowbank in a Ranger. You do not get a majestic slow-motion explosion of beautiful snow like in the TV commercials. You get a missing bumper that you have to dig out from under your now-stuck Ranger.

Yes, I speak from experience on both.

<comment><USER17> Employee of mine did this to my Jeep Grand Cherokee while I lived in Canada. Of course not only did he not get the majestic slow-motion explosion of beautiful snow, he got the concrete barrier buried in snowbank for free. That was an expensive joy ride in the parking lot, years later I would still find damage related to that accident (Dana 44 cracked right down the middle...). Fortunately him and his gf were ok.

<comment><USER5> In the employees defense it was a POS aluminum D44...

<comment><USER17> Haha :) Happy New Year!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I've recently learned that Russian LiAZ 677 aka "cattle truck," which I rode almost daily through most of the 2000s, is already considered "retro"―because it was in production since '63 till '94.

It's quite jarring to see what was recently your daily ride, in a procession together with buses from the 50s.

<comment><USER19> To be fair when I rode LiAZ in 1980s they were already considered long in the tooth.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> One thing that is not mentioned is the actual mileage of the vehicles in use is only 10 miles per gallon. Also rural carriers seem to be mostly now to be private vehicles sometimes with the magnetic sticker on the side indicating a postal service vehicle.

<comment><USER21> The mileage probably has more to do with the use than the design, no?

Starting a vehicle, driving it 30 ft to the next mailbox, the repeating hundreds of times a day probably kills mileage for any vehicle.

<comment><USER22> Unless that vehicle is a hybrid. Hybrids' mileage goes way up for start/stop unless it requires a complete cool down.

No reason today the fleet shouldn't be mainly hybrid or EV.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> They're all probably little Ships of Theseus by now.

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

</comment><comment><USER24> Grumman became informally known as the Grumman Iron Works for its rugged airplanes.

<comment><USER15> I find that interesting because every time I hear "Grumman" I think of the big brouhaha in the 1980's in New York City. The MTA ordered dozens? hundreds? of new "flexible buses" from Grumman and within months they all cracked down the middle. There was a transit shortage while the buses were sent out to Long Island to be repaired.

It was a very long time ago, and Google fails me right now, so I'm not sure what the exact problem was, or what exactly a "flexible bus" meant. The only thing I can think of is that was the term of the day for articulated bus.

<comment><USER25> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flxible_Metro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flxible_Metro)

<comment><USER15> Thanks for that. Here's the relevant paragraph:

 _The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), in whose buses where the first cracked A-frame problem was noticed in early December 1980 at their Ulmer Park Depot, yanked its NYC Transit Authority fleet for the first time in 1980 (a separate batch for MSBA was built with the problem rectified the next year) and sued Grumman. This lawsuit would result in a settlement to fix all 870 buses built until that time (2,656 examples in all), along with an early termination of the build contract where the final 200 buses of the order were transferred to General Motors._

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Other examples:

While I couldn't find a source quickly, I'd guess the typical brown UPS truck is a custom design, as are their newer, electric(?) variants?

German Post/DHL couldn't get the car industry to make them an affordable electric delivery vehicle, so they bought an electric vehicle startup out of RWTH Aachen and made their own (now also starting to sell these to others, although I think they're teaming up with Ford to produce more of them)

<comment><USER27> NZ Post use these things (Paxster), and I always laugh my ass off when they're scooting past.

[https://www.nzpost.co.nz/about-us/sustainability/electric- ve...](https://www.nzpost.co.nz/about-us/sustainability/electric-vehicles- powering-deliveries)

<comment><USER28> I really don't like the idea of a 200kg powered vehicle on the pavements. Have there been pedestrian objections?

In the UK postmen have a large 'pram' that they push on the pavements and which are often found bicycle-chained to lamps whilst the postie visits a cul de sac.

<comment><USER29> I think those "prams" have a battery assist, although they're presumably limited to walking pace.

In Copenhagen, the postmen ride electric cargo bicycles [1], but mostly on the cycle paths. As with most bicycles, they just lock the rear wheel to the frame[2] if it's left for a while.

[1] [https://www.dreamstime.com/editorial-photo-postnord- copenhag...](https://www.dreamstime.com/editorial-photo-postnord-copenhagen- denmark-nd-november-mail-man-delivery-bike-photo-francis-joseph-dean- deanpictures-image79872961)

[2] [https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/54206/how-to- lo...](https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/54206/how-to-lock-up-a- bike-with-a-rear-wheel-lock)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> 1966 Volvo P1800 belonging to Irv Gordon of Long Island, NY. Gordon claimed the Guinness World Record back in 2014 when he'd posted 3.04 million miles.

[https://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/going-the- distance-7-...](https://www.cheatsheet.com/automobiles/going-the- distance-7-cars-that-have-gone-1m-miles.html/)

</comment><comment><USER31> "Until the 1980s, when postal officials looked to buy new vehicles for the service, they combed through existing models for one that best fit their needs."

Bit too young to have a clear memory, but I thought they were usually jeeps?

Or maybe this was because there were alot of surplus jeeps in those days since the jeep was still heavily used in the military?

<comment><USER32> Not surplus Jeep stock as much as surplus capacity for building more Jeeps. IIRC most of the USPS Jeeps were right hand drive.

<comment><USER33> Yep. Mail Jeeps (DJs) are somewhat collectible these days.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> I was puzzled for an instant as to why on earth would they be RHD, until I realised that this enables the driver to deliver mail without having to get out in the street and walk around the vehicle, thus being both safer and more efficient.

</comment><comment><USER35> Interesting video with a hypothetical redesign of the trucks: [https://youtu.be/6oDVsf29tyk](https://youtu.be/6oDVsf29tyk)

<comment><USER36> It's interesting how they list problems with gas mileage and fire safety in the previous model, and they conclude that a redesign is needed to correct the flaws, and then proceed to start off with adding features like replaceable cargo area, additional doors and airbags.

I stopped watching when they recommended integrating tablets as something that should increase longevity.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> I see one of these everyday during my lunch but I never connected the dots that these were likely special made and are likely very old.

I will look at it differently during my lunch today.

</comment><comment><USER5> It's kind of hilarious to see a bunch of upscale tech workers singing the praise of the LLV when they would otherwise deride the vehicle it's built on.

If you went on /r/cars and said "I'm thinking of buying an '80s S10 with the 4cyl" you'd have people calling you crazy. They you say "but I'm going to put small tires on it and give it 4.10 gears so that the rear end doesn't spew parts and the transmission lives a long time" and they'd call you an idiot.

Somehow a special purpose truck body makes it more acceptable.

It goes to show you how much context/framing matter.

</comment><comment><USER38> Awesome. It's good to hear of government spending that results in long service life, lessons learned, and value for the taxpayer.

</comment><comment><USER39> In Upstate New York our postal workers prefer asian small cars to official Post Office truck because they handle better in the snow.

</comment><comment><USER40> very interesting read. US Postal service had some rigorous requirements and these trucks are definitely an engineering feat. Here in Canada, the Canada Post trucks are similar looking too.

<comment><USER41> According to wikipedia, it is the same vehicle. It looks like we've chosen a different replacement than USPS, though.

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

<comment><USER42> We don't need to worry so much about the "not American" thing. The Transit is a proven, off-the-shelf product... but while Ford, it's European. That's not going to fly south of the border.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> This appears to be based on an earlier British design [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postman_Pat](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postman_Pat)

Edit: With tongue firmly in cheek of course.

</comment><comment><USER44> I see Dodge Promasters replacing some of these in Austin, Texas.

<comment><USER45> Same with Portland, Oregon

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Do these ever get sold off to the public?

<comment><USER47> Yes, here was one: [https://www.govdeals.com/?fa=Main.Item&itemid=6463&acctid=35...](https://www.govdeals.com/?fa=Main.Item&itemid=6463&acctid=357#media)

Doesn't look like any are listed at the moment.

<comment><USER46> Wow they are cheap!!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> offtopic: Love how it have a youtube embed from youtube-nocookie.com, yet i can see 1 cookie attempt for youtube-nocookie.com, 10 cookies for google.com, 3 for www.google.com

</comment><comment> black-tea Why are they right-hand drive?

<comment><USER49> So you can put mail a mailbox without getting out from behind the wheel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> Good job in 1980s. They have probably already considered the replacements and I think it will be a difficult choice. It is probably too early to switch to electric vehicles. I think (without any real info) they should shoot for investigating electric vehicles in 3 years. In 3 years the cost benefits will have conclusively gone to EVs, but just as important Congress and conservatives should be okay with with one of those newfangled "gasless carriages".

<comment><USER51> Most postal delivery in somewhat urban environment is a prime case for electric vehicles: low mileage per day, lots of stop and go, low average and low top speed combine with a central spot where vehicles can be charged for extended periods.

It's not a coincidence that DHL is operating a large electric fleet.</comment></comment>


Reverse Engineering Firmware Primer (2012) - <AUTHOR> https://wiki.securityweekly.com/Reverse_Engineering_Firmware_Primer <comment><USER2> > Some more greps that are useful:

        strings -8 40 | grep password
        strings -8 40 | grep backdoor
        strings -8 40 | grep "\<html

The saddest part of this article is probably how often these greps will return results.

</comment><comment><USER3> The cpio archive might be a initramfs, rather than the final root fs.</comment>


Show HN: The Startup Calculator – Find out how profitable your startup will be - <AUTHOR> https://startupcalculator.co/ <comment><USER2> This is so cool! I really like it. Will save for future projects :)</comment>