How Patent Trolls Are A Tax On Innovation - <AUTHOR> http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/02/how-patent-trolls-are-a-tax-on-innovation.html

<comment><USER2> > Byron Scholls once told me that the Black Scholls Model isn't widely used > because it's right. It's right because it's widely used.

I think the quoter or the author meant: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myron_Scholes>

</comment><comment><USER3> What if there were a company that insured start-ups against patent trolls? The insurance would be set up in a way that gave the companies a large incentive to pursue the lawsuit fully, and to sue for expenses. For example, the insurance could cover legal costs of the defence suit and expenses lost, and also give a financial incentive to sue the troll for legal expenses (perhaps by matching some percent of any legal fees recovered from the troll).

The idea would be that a company with this insurance would not be a target for trolls, as long as the company made it known they had the insurance policy, because the trolls would realize that the company stands to gain by fighting the troll in court.

<comment><USER4> The problem is that any time a company trolls, they always have the risk of someone fighting in court. So a company having insurance won't really prevent them from trying.

<comment><USER3> The patent trolls know that the rational (in the game-theory sense of the word) decision for the victim company is to settle, because the cost of taking it to court (in both legal fees and lost time) exceed the cost of the settlement.

It's like an asymmetric game of chicken. Both players know that the troll has the advantage of having less to lose in a "collision" (a lawsuit), so the troll can count on the victim to "swerve" (settle). If the victim was able to eliminate the cost of a collision, and the troll knew that the cost of a collision to the victim company was eliminated, it would make more sense for the troll to swerve (drop the claim).

(More chicken strategies here: [http://mindyourdecisions.com/blog/2009/01/20/4-tips-for- winn...](http://mindyourdecisions.com/blog/2009/01/20/4-tips-for-winning-in-a- game-of-chicken/) . This strategy is most similar to #3.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think that the system has become broken enough that we can now say that the patent system in general has become a tax on innovation.

In its current implementation, it almost always favors the current (and largest) monopoly player, or the legal entity/corporation that _doesn't_ actually make anything but lawsuits.

A strange tragedy of the commons has developed where it makes good sense for any one startup to pay the extortion fee but its exactly the wrong thing to do for the good of the community because it simply funds and encourages more of the same.

<comment><USER6> It's the same prisoner's-dilemma situation referenced by Thomas Jefferson: "Millions for defense, not one cent for tribute."

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> On paying legal fees in frivolous cases:

I completely agree this would help in many situations. It isn't easy, though, to determine what constitutes as a baseless claim. Are all claims that seem to be just aggressive litigation deserving of costs? Or just ones from "patent trolls"? If so, what defines a "patent troll"? It isn't always easy to tell who deserves to be punished.

On "Use It Or Lose It":

This is not as easy at it seems. Right now, there are many incentives to file for a patent as soon as the invention has been reduced to practice. In fact, if the invention becomes disclosed, the inventor only has a year in order to secure his patent. This results in patents for technologies which are frequently at the prototype stage. This is a good thing - now, the technology has been described in a publication that is publicly accessible.

Imagine if there was a requirement to "use it" after it was patented... In many cases, that would be impossible: just because something is patented, does not mean it is manufacturable. Furthermore, it may not have a use in a commercial product right after it is patented... Although five years later, it could be an integral part of a product.

In short, requiring the invention to immediately "used" may appear to solve problems, but will probably open up a whole new set of problems.

</comment><comment><USER8> Note that Wilson's two solutions both have the "side effect" that companies need not pay for IP from outsiders. (The "can only sell to operating companies" proposal means that operating companies need not buy because the inventor can't do anything if they don't buy.)

<comment><USER9> You're forgetting that in any field that isn't controlled by a monopoly, every single competitor always wants more leverage over the other players.

<comment><USER8> You're forgetting the "honor among thieves" that is present in every line of work. For example, book publishers don't plagarize from each other.

They only use patents to shut down new competition.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Imagine a world where patents only last 3 years and all closed source code and research had to be made public in that time too.

We'd all have to innovate faster and more consistently to stay ahead of our competition.

We would probably have cured cancer, have infinitely more efficient fuel sources and be able to feed the world.

<comment><USER3> I think it depends on the industry. If patents only lasted 3 years, high tech may move faster because a 3 year advantage is enough incentive to innovate in an industry that moves fast anyway. I'm not so sure about pharmaceuticals though. 3 years isn't even enough to complete clinical trials, so the companies would effectively have no incentive to innovate at all.</comment></comment>


TuneTether - The Social Stereo - <AUTHOR> http://tunetether.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> I participated in Startup Weekend University of Washington this weekend. My team developed TuneTether - a working prototype of an app that lets friends play back music in real time simultaneously across any number of devices. We took out 2nd place and won bragging rights :)

We'll be looking at developing the prototype further and publishing a completed app soon.

Feedback and comments welcome!</comment>


You may not actually own your Bitcoin - <AUTHOR> https://theconversation.com/you-may-not-actually-own-your-bitcoin-legal-expert-107307 <comment><USER2> So, you own it until someone takes it from you, then good luck getting it back.

It's a bit of a worry.</comment>


Google Ends Google Video Uploads, Shutters Notebook, Catalog Search, Dodgeball & Jaiku - <AUTHOR> http://searchengineland.com/google-ends-google-video-uploads-shutters-notebook-catalog-search-dodgeball-jaiku-16166 <comment><USER2> _...as Google goes into the grim economic times predicted for 2009_

Note: predicted. Zappos did the same thing - they laid off people in advance because they expected things to get worse - and they even said that laying off the people cost them more money in severance that it saved in the first year.

Is this becoming a self fulfilling prophecy?

Are we predicting a downturn to the point that we are causing one?

<comment><USER3> Possibly, but all of the services Google cut were due to mistakes made in the past couple years.

I think the more likely explanation is that companies are using this "downturn" as an excuse to cut the crud without the bad publicity. The effect of this, more than likely, is that the downturn looks worse than it actually is.

<comment><USER4> _The effect of this, more than likely, is that the downturn looks worse than it actually is._

And, with oil below $40, can it really be called much of a downturn?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> I'll miss google video:

1: there was no maximum length

2: the size of the player window was larger (was the encoded res larger too?)

3: and you could download the uploaded video in it's original form.

Youtube can't/doesn't do any of these things.

And google engineers here? Can you add those three things to youtube? Oh, and can I use my google login on youtube?

<comment><USER5> I can use my Google Account on YouTube already. Try [https://www.google.com/accounts/ServiceLogin?service=youtube...](https://www.google.com/accounts/ServiceLogin?service=youtube&hl=en_GB&passive=true&skipll=true&continue=http%3A//www.youtube.com/signup%3Fhl%3Den_GB%26warned%3D%26nomobiletemp%3D1&);

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> While it's sad to see these products close, this strikes me as a long-overdue sign that Google does in fact follow the same laws of physics as everyone else.

</comment><comment><USER7> It will be interesting to see what changes AppEngine needs to run Jaiku.

I've got a few projects on AppEngine and having a code base that has Jaiku's feature set will be a huge resource for building all kinds of apps.

</comment><comment><USER8> Am I the only one who liked Google Notebook? With the Firefox addon it was a quick and easy way to make notes without having to have an external source of note taking.

Can anyone suggest a good alternative?

<comment><USER9> I will miss it too - lifehacker suggested evernote as an alternative...

<comment><USER8> Thanks, for some reason I can never remember that Lifehacker exists. Would save me a lot of time looking at stuff like this.

Edit: Unfortunately it looks like Evernote is less focused on text only notes, which make up a majority of my notes. The thumbnails are less useful than the first couple lines that Google Notebook shows. Plus, you have to explicitly click on the Edit button to change a note, which just seems like an extra step for no reason.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Just in time, there's a new application (SimplyBox) to replace Google Notebook.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=435133>

</comment><comment><USER10> Well, there goes my business plan.

</comment><comment><USER11> Other than Youtube, what Google acquisitions have worked out?

Anecdotally, companies seem to rot away after getting acquired by them.

Gogo talent acquisitions.

<comment><USER12> Picasa and Blogger haven't been total failures. Urchin has spawned the very widely used Google Analytics. Writely became Google Docs. Postini still operates and has significantly lower fees now.

Google does have a pretty bad history with some acquisitions, but some have worked.

<comment><USER13> And Keyhole to the list.</comment></comment></comment>


The Counter-Plagiarism Handbook - <AUTHOR> http://www.cjr.org/regret_the_error/the_counterplagiarism_handbook.php <comment><USER2> This article seems to make the claim that rewriting the work of others is somehow not plagiarism. Interesting.</comment>


Ask HN: Where can one find good screencasters? - <AUTHOR>

Just as the title asks - where can one find an individual or team that is awesome at creating screencasts? As a software guy, I typically have a plethora of designers I can access when I need for a project that I'm writing code for, and when I can't, there's a myriad of sites available with ready to go templates/logos and stuff I can typically modify myself. I'm finding it very difficult to find those with talent in creating quality screencasts to showcase a product I have built that I think would be best explained via an animated video.
The following screencasts are examples of the caliber of work I am looking and willing to pay for:
Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/screencast
Things for iPad: http://culturedcode.com/things/ipad/
Google TV: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/05/announcing-google-tv-tv-meets-web-web.html
Evernote: http://www.evernote.com/about/video/#OlOLXWvaIy0 <comment><USER2> You might look at <http://procasts.co.uk/>

I haven't tried them personally but one of the founders wrote an ebook called The Screencasting Handbook which I used to help me make a screen cast: <http://thescreencastinghandbook.com/>

</comment><comment><USER3> Hi. I am a web designer who has recently taken up video creation, particularly screencasts similar to the ones you noted.

I dont have a portfolio yet, but I can do a trial project for you. That is, I will create a screencast (3-5 minutes) for you in 2-3 days, and you can pay me after you see the end result only if you like it.

Let me know what you think. My email is firstname.lastname@example.com. Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER4> Commoncrafts Demogirl

<comment><USER4> Forgot to mention Howcast

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I might be able to help you out - I co-founded TekPub and myself or one our other authors could handle whatever you are looking for. Drop me a line.

<comment><USER6> Don't know about you but I find Rob's screencast style really annoying. His jokes are not funny.

<comment><USER5> Since I started a company with him I think it's fair to assume I like his work. ;)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Can you email me some of the "plethora of designers"? I want do some logo/banner creation soon for my site.

See my profile for contact info.</comment>


FinCEN's new regulations are choking Bitcoin entrepreneurs - <AUTHOR> http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/fincen-regulations-choking-bitcoin-entrepreneurs-1058606-1.html

<comment><USER2> FinCEN's raison d'être is to choke out entrepeneurialsm in all financial areas: banking, money transfer, etc. But they're like the mentally ill nephew of the OECD's Financial Action Task Force...</comment>


Getting Drivers for Old Hardware Is Harder Than Ever - <AUTHOR> https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3a88z3/getting-drivers-for-old-hardware-is-harder-than-ever <comment><USER2> This isn't quite the same thing, but can I talk about something related?

For the past month, I've been on a bit of a quest to downgrade my my life to OS X 10.9 Mavericks, which came out in 2013. It's something I've wanted to do for years, for a variety of personal reasons, and it should be able to do everything I need.

My primary issue has not been software compatibility per se, but actually obtaining the software I need. The trial version of NetNewsWire 4 looks beautiful on my Mavericks install, but I can't buy a license key because BlackPixel no longer sells them. Ditto for Scapple, and Day One, and Parallels, and many others.

I had to hunt through the Internet Archive to find the last compatible versions of Intel Power Gadget and Kaleidoscope. I had to manually download and test each version to figure out where they dropped compatibility.

These are all fully offline apps, so there's no reason I shouldn't be able to buy and download old versions. I'm not asking for support or development time—I totally expect to be on my own—but please, developers, just give me a way to obtain what you previously created.

<comment><USER3> I've got an original iPad and an iPad Air (I think 2nd gen).

Both still have great battery life and screens are still responsive ... but I made the mistake of wiping both to give as gifts for some nieces in El Salvador, and you can't actually install anything on them anymore.

They come with Safari and the other baked-in Apple apps, but that's it. None of the most common apps in their store have versions available for the iOS version the devices are limited to.

What the hell am I supposed to do with two fully functional (hardware-wise) devices?

<comment><USER4> if you have an existing account that downloaded a particular app already, you can download the old version of an app. [https://support.apple.com/en- ca/HT201377](https://support.apple.com/en-ca/HT201377)

or you jailbreak...

<comment><USER2> Another tip:

If the same app is still available on the store, but the newest version isn't compatible with your old OS, you won't be able to buy the that app on your old OS.

 _However_ , if you can log into the same Apple account on a new OS, you can buy the app there (pressing "get" on a free app counts as buying for our purposes). Once purchased, you'll be able to install the last compatible version on your old device.

This also works on the Mac App Store.

Beware of situations where what's currently available on the store isn't actually the same app. If the developer released a new version as a separate app at one point, this process won't work.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I sympathize for folks wanting to run old hardware for nostalgia purposes. However, anything older than twenty years can typically be replaced by a low- end Rasberry PI and use a lot less electricity doing it.

The drop in the cost of hardware after 2k makes repurposing less useful then it was previously.

<comment><USER2> 1\. It's not just CPUs and GPUs. The article talks about trying to find drivers for a Webcam.

2\. Some of the BIOS's being removed by Intel are only six years old.

<comment><USER5> Sure, though those are affected by the drop in hardware costs too. Just checked Amazon, $27 for a 1080p webcam. That's probably cheaper and less stressful than an IT person burning an hour on a driver search with random results.

<comment><USER2> Yeah, but they'll harm the environment in the process. With processors, the environmental impact is probably a wash when you consider energy use, but that doesn't apply to other types of hardware.

It would also be nice if tracking down an old driver _didn 't_ require an hour of work...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Isn't this where Linux excels?

<comment><USER7> I scanned a document today with my Canon N607U from 1997 on Ubuntu 19.10.

I still remember when I plugged it in into a Ubuntu 8.04 laptop in 2009 and Ubuntu told me nothing about it. Trained by years of Windows and countless popups and notifications I assumed it didn't work. I even looked for Linux drivers then I tried the OS scanner program: the driver was already in the kernel and the scanner was working, no need to bother me with messages. I never had problems with anything else (printers, webcams, etc).

On the sad side, my laptop from 2006 is still working (actually it's resting in a drawer most of the time) but it can't use a kernel more recent than some old 3.x version because anything newer won't support its ATI X1600 graphic card. I should try to boot it from a 19.10 USB stick but I'm not confident that somebody bothered to readd support for something that was dropped along the way.

<comment><USER8> Can't guarantee it for laptops (unless it's something common like a Thinkpad T60), but I bet there's a free driver for the X1600 in 19.04. The proprietary ones from AMD have long been unsupported on the 1600 tho.

<comment><USER7> I googled and it seems that a patch has landed in 18.04

[https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1791312](https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1791312)

I'll give it a try. Thank you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wonder if this would help.

[https://web.archive.org/web/*/hardware%20drivers](https://web.archive.org/web/*/hardware%20drivers)

<comment><USER10> Well, it is literally in the article's first sentence.

</comment></comment><comment><USER2> Related HN discussion from a couple weeks ago: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21563309](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21563309)

</comment><comment><USER11> Quite a hostile move by Intel.

Just throw it on a separate archive domain, plaster the thing full of scary legal disclaimers and call it a day

</comment><comment><USER12> Can't you run the old OS in a VM and pass-through the connections you need?

<comment><USER13> I do this a lot (old test equipment) and have about a 50% success rate. There are many corners of ethernet, RS232, etc that aren't emulated very well by the virtual hardware. Timings, side-channels, and permissions are the major offenders. Permissions especially compound the problem because host security mechanisms intentionally override VM security mechanisms.

For instance, last weekend I had to figure out how to get RARP packets through the windows firewall, and even though I eventually got the setup working the complexity was not encapsulated by the virtual machine abstraction.</comment></comment>


Exploring strategies to decarbonize electricity - <AUTHOR> https://www.blog.google/topics/environment/exploring-strategies-decarbonize-electricity/ <comment><USER2> From the simulations website:

"A megawatt-hour of electricity is about the amount a household uses in a month."

That is the elephant in the room. Our household of three adults can comfortably live on about one sixth of that amount.

Who can tell me with a straight face that living comfortably on three times our electricity consumption is impossible, even in a harsher, less moderate climate? That alone would reduce US household consumption by 50%!

I applaud Google for coming up with this tool. I also hope it will open its eyes to the feasibility of changing people's consumption patterns.

<comment><USER3> A megawatt-hour is 1.38kW continuous consumption.

It's not hard to imagine how a household could use that. Two long how showers per day per person, air conditioning / heating, a pool heater, a fridge, another fridge in the garage, a deep freezer in the back room. Some people have multiple always-on PCs and screens.

And now we're expecting everyone to recharge their car at home too.

<comment><USER2> It's not difficult to imagine how a US household could use a MWh of electricity per month indeed. We know these are the facts.

Point is, it is possible to change those consumption patterns. Quoting from your example:

* heating: 67°F should be fine in winter. replace by natural gas where possible. invest in appropriate insulation and ventilation. Look at how much of northern Europe does it.

* air conditioning: use less and more recent airco. 76-77°F should be fine in summer.

* pool heater? just switch it off, or at the very least switch to a more efficient source of heating

* cut the second fridge in the garage, or at the very least, replace it with something efficient

* use an efficient freezer

* Check what machines have to be always on. Use something efficient for the things that really have to be always on.

I'm quite sure something along these lines would have cut more than 2/3 of the electricity consumption of this average American household.

It is physically possible to make these changes. I concede that it would not be easy to convince the people to actually make changes in this direction, but it can be done!

<comment><USER4> Or don't use AC altogether. Continuous AC always all-the-time is a very American thing.

<comment><USER5> I'd rather give up meat than AC, and I'm a meat lover. But I'm in the deep south, sure I'd give up AC in CO.

<comment><USER4> Makes sense for the South in summer months, sure. But in the USA as a whole, AC is used and abused even though there are solutions that involve building materials, behaviour and good habits that could make life livable. Temperatures get crazy high in Europe as well (40C or 105F is not uncommon in summer months in Spain or Italy and they do without AC). Using terra cotta, washing your floors, good use of shade, plants and trees, all that goes towards managing heat. Though the humidity in the southern US states does make it way more complicated, I'll give you that.

<comment><USER6> Not keeping shopping malls at freezing temps would help, too!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> How do we make renewables more competitive so that we can get our local utilities to invest in them?

A carbon fee and dividend. Price carbon at its true cost and let the market decide! There is important work being done by Citizen's Climate Lobby. CCL is incredibly effective, but we need the help of the creative minds and energies of HN. Check out citizensclimatelobby.org to get involved in your local chapter.

<comment><USER8> Can you buy clean energy from your utility? If you're in California PG&E has a program called Solar Choice where it attempts to offset your electrical consumption by building additional renewable capacity. So far it's only added about $2 or $3 to my bill. Many other utilities have similar programs.

<comment><USER9> At the risk of stating the obvious, if it's only added $2-3 to your bill, then it's only given the energy company $2-3 to build renewable capacity. That's not nearly enough to make any kind of meaningful impact in your carbon footprint (assuming you have somewhat average consumption).

<comment><USER8> I spend about $20-30/month on electricity, so it's about a 10% change. My electrical consumption is about as low as I think one can get it without going without things like refrigerators.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> There is an important omission here: battery technology. I'm not talking about tesla power walls - although they would go some way to smoothing the troughs for solar.

I'm talking about the 7.2 megawatt-hour sodium-sulfur battery systems that islands like Reunion adopt, or Japan's 34-MW, 245-MWh wind energy stabiliser.

Installing local generation systems and removing the burden on the national grid systems which lose so much energy to transmission will also have an impact that I think is not calculated here in the visualisation graph.... it can make up to 6-9% of a difference! This figure can be up to 20% in undeveloped countries.

...but I have not read the paper - maybe those effects are mentioned there

<comment><USER11> I'm starting to think it's a waste of time even pursuing battery storage on a large scale. Sometimes going low-tech is the better and cheaper way.

This tech looks _way_ more promising and it's already in use now:

Molten salt storage [https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new- concentrating...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new- concentrating-solar-tower-is-worth-its-salt-with-24-7-power/)

I have no idea the costs, but I'm sure if ramped up it could be cheaper.

<comment><USER12> Heliostat molten salt looks to be so promising for so many different applications. There is a looming water crisis that I think heliostat molten salt could help alleviate by using it for desalination.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> We'll probably always need electricity, so we need some solutions, but nothing compares with reducing consumption -- principally each person using less and having fewer people to use it. As in business, you don't only increase revenues to increase profitability. Often lowering costs is more effective.

Starting points include getting past the belief that happiness or society depends on electrical power as much as it does. We need some, but nowhere near what we're using.

Also accounting for costs that are currently externalized.

<comment><USER14> How about encouraging each community worldwide to plant more trees, thereby offsetting their carbon usage? I know the carbon gets released when the trees die or are burned but the tree biomass overall is what matters.

<comment><USER6> It's not enough to plant trees, you have to trap the carbon they gather somehow. Otherwise when the tree dies, the decomposition process throws all that carbon back in the atmosphere.

The early plants (billions of years ago) went through a few generations before other organisms evolved to feed on their carcasses, so they just ended up buried deep underground, trapping their carbon (and lowering the carbon concentration in the atmosphere) until we came along and decided to dig them up and burn them, throwing all that carbon in the air again.

<comment><USER15> >...went through a few generations before other organisms evolved to feed on their carcasses,

You might be understating the time frame here a little bit. Most estimates I have read said it took about 60 million years before evolved the ability to break down lignin.

[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mushroom- evolutio...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mushroom-evolution- breaks-down-lignin-slows-coal-formation/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Adding more nuclear makes energy cheaper and cleaner. Add more nuclear.

<comment><USER17> Cleaner, yes (arguably). But not cheaper - nuclear is very expensive!

The Google model suggests $2200/kW is the build price point at which all carbon emissions will be displaced.

To give an idea of the cost of nuclear, the UK is currently building it's first new nuclear station since the 1990s (Hinkley Point C), at an expected cost of £20.3b ($26.3b) for 3200 MWe capacity. That's $8230/kW - almost 4x more expensive than what's needed!

<comment><USER18> You're looking at capital cost. The plants last a very long time and have low operating costs, so the kWh cost is fairly low.

Playing around with Google's tool without changing any defaults, I'm able to get lower carbon emissions at the same cost by setting the nuclear level to the minimum demand, compared to using lots of wind/solar and filling up all the rest with gas.

<comment><USER17> _" You're looking at capital cost"_

Yes, as is the Google model. They suggest that if a 24/7 carbon-free energy source could be built at a capital cost of $2200/kW, then it would displace all carbon emissions within 27 years.

My point is that capital cost of nuclear is currently far above that level, which is why little nuclear is getting built (in most of the world) today.

Also, the operating cost of nuclear is high compared to most renewables! Particularly when you account for substantial end-of-life decommissioning costs, and the cost of secure waste storage far into the future.

(The decommissioning costs for the UK's MOX reactors is close to $100 billion)

<comment><USER18> Actually it's not, the model optimizes for the minimum overall LCOE (i.e. kWh cost).

Their paper's abstract does say: "DOSCOE shows that to cost-effectively remove the last 10-20% of fossil fuels requires a moderate price on carbon and either low-cost nuclear power or carbon capture and sequestration. Alternatively, a hypothetical zero-carbon source needs to have a net present cost less than $2200/kW (with a 100% capacity factor) to displace existing fossil-fuel plants."

<comment><USER17> _Actually it 's not, the model optimizes for the minimum overall LCOE (i.e. kWh cost)._

You're right. I meant that the Google _abstract_ : the $2200/kW figure referring to capital cost.

Interestingly, the UK has enormous potential for tidal lagoon energy. These developers claim that it would be the cheapest energy of all new UK power projects:

[http://www.tidallagoonpower.com/projects/swansea- bay/](http://www.tidallagoonpower.com/projects/swansea-bay/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'd love to see a tool like this for comparing Internal Combustion Engines to Battery Electric Vehicles.

By some previous calculations of mine, it looked like BEVs had 10k miles worth of CO2 baked into the batteries, but I honestly have no idea if that is correct or not.

<comment><USER20> That isn't improbable - half the emissions associated with an IC-engine car stem from its manufacture[1]. Of course, the battery should be recycled, so you'd hope that in the long run those numbers will come down.

1: [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living- blog/20...](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living- blog/2010/sep/23/carbon-footprint-new-car)

<comment><USER21> Lithium based rechargeables are unlikely to be recycled in the near-term. Doing so is hard, _and_ there are a variety of chemistries used, so you don't have the economies of scale like with lead-acid, where recycling one lead-acid battery is much liker recycling another.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> The study is interesting but actual deployment of any strategy is still out of Google's control, so I fear this tool will live as little more than an academic exercise, same as similar tools coming from academia, supernational organizations and biased lobbies. That said, Google is also actively investing in electricity generation and that kind of effort may come more useful, if pursued with determination, so we will see where they actually put their money, other than their mouth.

<comment><USER23> These tools are really compelling to me. I was dubious that a carbon tax would be sufficient to motivate substantial change, but it looks to me like a $40/ton carbon tax would drastically improve carbon emissions, and a $100/ton tax would virtually eliminate it.

I think as a way of exploring regulatory goals they're fascinating - very few situations does someone set up a simulation of the impact of a law and give laypeople knobs and buttons to play with to see how it would work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> It's something I thought about creating too, but it seems to miss a lot of variables, solar and wind is not constant during a year so it should be yearly not weekly, it seems USA specific it should be able to take solar or wind data per country there is massive variation of rate depending on the region, also consumption is geographic dependant.

And it crashes on my iPad after few seconds.

</comment><comment><USER25> Fundamental problem : Electricity is not sufficiently costly to induce people to figure out how to consume less.

</comment><comment><USER26> (Oh Googleers and your vast screens. I can't get both the controls and the readout in the same screen. :-( )

</comment><comment><USER27> One thing that people should look at is MOF or other solutions to do carbon capture at existing fossil fuel/coal plants. MOFs can be highly efficient at removing carbon output from these older plants.

Then the flue gases we currently emit can be re-used as reagents in algae bioreactors to produce biodiesel.

</comment><comment><USER28> Google could invest a bit more money in R&D. They sit on awesome pile of money and yet aren't a significant player in energy. Why? Not smart enough? Don't think so.

Oh, i forgot. Google is here to make money. They might write some blog posts about CO2, but will not use their leverage to change things. That would damage the bottom line.

Why is it that all the big companies are 100% driven by short term profits? Maybe our understanding of capitalism isn't so great after all. We need more responsibility.

<comment><USER29> Google has no competitive advantage in energy. No way to evaluate world class expertise. If I plowed a billion dollars into energy, I'd waste most of it, and they wouldn't do much better.

<comment><USER30> You'd waste it only in comparison with some hypothetical others spending a billion dollars in a hypothetical zero sum game where either they or you spend that, but not compared to not spending it at all or on stuff that makes the problem worse.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> Now if we could only find a solution to the difficult problem of massively powerful tech companies prying into our lives and selling what they discover for profit..

Oh, Hi Google!

</comment><comment><USER14> Does nuclear power also add heat to the Earth?

All forms of obtaining energy for use in machines have heat as a byproduct.

How long can we sustain that?

<comment><USER32> Earth's heat is in an equilibrium with the Sun and Space. If you add a heat generator, you will see that more heat is emitted out into space and the temperature does not increase much (and stays constant after a short increase). But if you change the equilibrium point (like by adding greenhouse gases), you'll see the temperature changing quite quickly.

<comment><USER14> How do the greenhouse gases change the equilibrium point while other mechanisms of increasing heat don't?

<comment><USER33> Greenhouse gases don't simply increase heat. They change the composition of the atmosphere. It's similar to the way adding salt or alcohol to water will change the freezing temperature of the water.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Setting the carbon tax level to the EPA's social cost of carbon seems to work out.

<comment><USER35> The carbon tax especially works out for the political class & bankers who would be entrusted to manage the funds & transfer the wealth. It also benefits the wealthy Tesla buying consumers at the expense of the poorer gasoline buying public. In the meantime, Al Gore has multiple houses & uses 34x more electricity than the average US household...

[http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/02/exclusive-al-gores-home- de...](http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/02/exclusive-al-gores-home- devours-34-times-more-electricity-than-average-u-s-household/)

Also, don't plants breathe carbon? Wouldn't this imply that there would be a biological feedback loop (more carbon means more plant growth)?

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Not to be confused with decarbonating electricity.

 _edit_ aw [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14986447](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14986447)

</comment><comment><USER37> Electricity doesn't usually have carbon in it. It's more convenient to push electrons back and forth in a wire than it is to push carbon atoms back and forth.</comment>


Show HN: XCV – cut, copy and paste files with bash - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/busterc/xcv

<comment><USER2> Apologies ahead of time for grammar and spelling, I am on a phone.

This is a really cool idea, although you would you be willing to implement it using a file which would cache the cut/copy operations until a paste is done?

As it stands, whether you copy or cut the underlying operation is a cp. This means no matter what you pay the price of creating a copy of each file. There are a couple of ramifications of this, that I can think of at least. One, surprising labeling of files - selinux labels are dependent on how files are created. As such a move does not create new labels, where a copy does. Depending on what the operation is, the user might want to retain or remove the existing label. As it stands, the user cannot do the former. It is also possible that a file cannot be copied/moved to the home directory but to the destination directory only. Two, loss of filesystem move advantage. When you move a file within the same filesystem all that happens is a new link is created in the directory and the old one is deleted. This means the data of the file goes no where. Generally the "copy then delete" method is used between file systems. By doing this manually you cause this process to happen all the time. Worse, it is possible the SRC, HOME, and DST are all different file system, so this would cause three different copies.

However, if you implement a file within the HOME/.xcv directory which contains the source and the method of transfer you can make the transfer a direct source to destination affair.

Overall, I really like this project - could have saved a lot of time with it. Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm glad you like it, in its infancy it's already saved me a good bit of time! Your concerns make sense and I do want to eventually reconsider the paste processing; for now, for me it's sufficient but please do submit a pull request.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> It's interesting that this software is using NPM as package manager even if it's written in Shell itself.

</comment><comment><USER4> The copy/cut/paste paradigm is ubiquitous, but I've always thought that a better model would be mark/duplicate/move.

Where copy+paste is achievable by mark+duplicate and cut+paste by mark+move.

That way you don't have the danger of losing cut content if you forget to paste.

</comment><comment><USER5> Something like this would be less likely to accidentally delete files (copy copy paste just purges the list, not the actual files): [https://gist.github.com/fjolnir/e24f806e39a3776033d5](https://gist.github.com/fjolnir/e24f806e39a3776033d5)

</comment><comment><USER6> I wrote something similar sometime back: [https://github.com/ashisha/x-cut- copy-paste](https://github.com/ashisha/x-cut-copy-paste)

But the ability to list the files being copied is brilliant indeed.

</comment><comment><USER7> Cool project!

What about a syntax like:

      Copy all files recursively:

        xcv .

      Cut all files recursively:

        xcv -x .

      List all files which will be pasted:

        xcv -l

      Paste all copied files elsewhere:

        xcv -v /elsewhere

It's just that most people will want to do those things by default, and remembering "xcv c -R ." is a bit more mental effort than "xcv ." But maybe that's just a personal preference.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. You'll notice I listed some aliases: fsx, fsc, fsv, fsl. I'm not yet sure what most others will want, myself included, as defaults so I avoided baking in naive opinions. Fortunately aliases should allow us all to tweak accordingly. I appreciate the feedback and look forward to hearing from others.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> No one knows about xsel anymore?

<comment><USER9> I don't think you read this properly. This isn't about working with the X clipboard - it's about copying/moving files on the filesystem.</comment></comment>


New Attack Reported on Global Bank Network - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/13/business/dealbook/swift-global-bank-network-breach.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news <comment><USER2> > In both cases, the core messaging system of Swift was not breached; rather, > the criminals attacked the banks' connections to the Swift network. Each > bank is responsible for maintaining the security of its connection to Swift

I can't help but feel this system is fundamentally flawed. "It's not our fault. Or clients just aren't very secure."

</comment><comment><USER3> "the thieves used a form of malware that targeted a PDF reader that the bank used to confirm that payments had been made."

PDF reader! bank infosec is a joke</comment>


Spatio-temporal smoothing and EM estimation for massive remote-sensing data sets - <AUTHOR> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9892.2011.00732.x/abstract <comment><AUTHOR> PDF: [http://cyber.sci- hub.bz/MTAuMTExMS9qLjE0NjctOTg5Mi4yMDExLjAw...](http://cyber.sci- hub.bz/MTAuMTExMS9qLjE0NjctOTg5Mi4yMDExLjAwNzMyLng=/katzfuss2011.pdf)</comment>


Microsoft logged everyone's MSN IM conversations for a month - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.zdnet.com/emergingtech/?p=863 <comment><USER2> "Microsoft logged everyone's MSN IM conversations for 6 months"

This title is sensationalist and inaccurate. The article says that the dataset consists of one month of logging:

"'The compressed dataset occupies 4.5 terabytes, composed from 1 billion conversations per day (150 gigabytes) over one month of logging,' according to the researchers."

<comment><USER3> Furthmore, the data is _anonymous_ :

"We present a study of _anonymized data_ capturing a month of high-level communication activities within the whole of the Microsoft Messenger instant- messaging system."

<comment><USER4> How anonymous can your own voice be? Not very much, I don't think.

A checkbox on a survey can be anonymous, but my communication with other people would be impossible to record "anonymously." Remember all that flack Netflix got for releasing its "anonymous" records of people's movie-watching habits?

Just because my name is omitted doesn't make it morally unobjectionable to release the information without my consent, but a lot of huge companies have been doing this more and more often.

<comment><USER2> You shouldn't expect privacy when sending information to someone else's server.

Google records your searches, pg monitors voting, and TiVo knows what you're watching on TV.

The data associated with a user is valuable in improving the product and makes for interesting research. If you want anonymity, you have to explicitly try to be discreet.

<comment><USER4> When I use MSN, I'm sending data to the other person through the Microsoft tunnel; if they clone the data while it's going through the tunnel and save it for their own use, that's kind of a breach of my trust.

I don't expect them to NOT do this, but I still believe it's uncool.

Also, there's a huge difference between recording my personal conversations and recording my movies, searches, or voting habits.

<comment><USER5> _there's a huge difference between recording my personal conversations and recording my movies, searches, or voting habits._

It isn't a personal conversation if it's going through an intermediary.

<comment><USER4> Why not? I can have a personal conversation with someone else verbally over the air, but I can't have a personal conversation with someone else over bits?

<comment><USER5> You're not having a personal conversation with someone else over bits, you're having that conversation with someone else through an intermediary, specifically the hardware of your respective ISPs and any other third parties between whom the packets route. That isn't so much a personal conversation, as a very accurate game of Telephone.

As an aside, I apologize for not responding sooner, I did not know how to find my old posts.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I don't want Hacker News to start having sensationalist headlines...

</comment><comment><USER7> I suspect they logged the endpoints, not the contents of the conversations.

4.5 TB / (1 billion coversations/day * 30 days) = 165 bytes/conversation

That's enough for anonymized IDs, IPs, timestamps of start/finish (and probably individual messages in a many-message conversation) -- but not full transcripts or recorded voices.

</comment><comment><USER8> The inflection of the k-core graph at 20 is interesting. Rather than a fundamental property of human nature though, I'd speculate that this is the direct result of school class sizes.

</comment><comment><USER9> Ever see that scene in Bourne Ultimatum when someone says a non-typical- english word. Blackbriar..

If it's non-SSL, then it's plain text. C'mon - you college folks must have tried to sniff the Ethernet LAN (my college used switching as a deterrent)

<comment> a-priori Not a problem anymore with pervasive wi-fi. Go to the library or something and sniff away. Or, get fancy and use Ettercap.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> _All of our data was anonymized; we had no access to personally identifiable information. Also, we had no access to text of the messages exchanged or any other information that could be used to uniquely identify users._

</comment><comment><USER10> This article could of been way more interesting if the writer wanted it to. This was just like reading a press release.

I know its a known theory, but they just proved it with a massive network.</comment>


Peter Molyneux experiments, creates game with $77,000 one-of-a-kind DLC - <AUTHOR> http://www.geek.com/articles/games/molyneuxs-22cans-game-curiosity-has-77000-diamond-chisel-dlc-2012067/ <comment><USER2> If there's one rule in gaming it is: "Do not trust Peter Molyneux".

This guy is the biggest bullshitter in the gaming industry. A guy with such claims that the book "On bullshit" perfectly applies to what he says in many cases.

Again this thing looks so pretentious that it gives me nausea just listening to his... uh project I guess. It's the same nausea I feel when I try to listen to artist justifying their performance in "modern art".

Sorry to be so harsh.

<comment><USER3> How is he a bullshitter? He created Populous, Syndicate and Dungeon Keeper (and Magic Carpet!) - A pretty good record for a bullshitter. The guy is a legend.

Some of his ideas failed. So what. At least he tried.

What do we have now? Oh yeah, the latest Call of Duty shooter with absolutely horrible plot twists and dialogue. Yeah, a pool of true innovation.

I think Rogert Ebert had it right. Gaming is awfully trite. For every Shadow of Memories and Grim Fandango you have 1'000'000 rotten ideas.

<comment><USER4> False dichotomy there - there are plenty of innovative new IPs out there, not to mention that Molyneux also fell into the sequel trap in the end. I think it's fair to say that in recent times he has failed to deliver more than he has delivered.

<comment><USER3> I am not talking about "IPs", I'm taking about games. In the early days, game designers couldn't hide the shallowness of their creations with eye candy and bombastic soundtracks. Game mechanics reigned supreme.

23 years ago we had this: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTGneDh-SMY>

Now we have this: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7GVSx7yMaA>

All I'm saying is that you should give that guy some slack.

<comment><USER4> Again though, you're cherry picking a very innovative game from the past and a not very innovative game from the present. So what? There are plenty of games from 23 years ago that were utterly derivative, and there are plenty of games being made right now that are doing amazing new things.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "But then only the last chip of the cube will reveal what's inside, and only to the person who performs that last chip with their chisel."

So is this a one off game? Once the game ends, it sounds like it's over for good. So if someone spends $20-$30 on this, the game could end in the next few hours forever? Makes the prospect of the $77,000 pickaxe this seems insane. Plus I don't understand the idea of getting everyone to pool their money together to buy the pickaxe when only one person sees the ending.

<comment><USER6> It's clearly more of an art project than a game, or maybe a sociology experiment. I'd suggest the title of "curiosity" refers more to Peter's curiosity than those who play.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> God, do I hate Onswipe. On the mobile "optimized" site on this url the video and pictures are not shown, it is harder to use and frustratingly crashy.

<comment><USER8> Slate was one of the high profile OnSwipe adopters and they dropped it recently. It's only a matter of time before all website owners see the reduced traffic from tablets because of how terrible OnSwipe is and it dies the slow painful death it deserves.

Oh, and don't bother trying to get an answer out of them as to why their product is so terrible, crash prone and memory hungry. I've tried every possible forum, they won't respond to anything other than blind praise. What the hell is the point of participating in every form of social media known to man if you won't actually answer questions or help people with those accounts?

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> It says this wont be released for a few weeks. How hard would it be for a game dev to make this and release before them?

<comment><USER7> Depends what is in the black cube.

<comment><USER10> Presumably another black cube...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I'm assuming DLC is Downloadable content.

Am I understanding this correctly? You have to pay money to help someone else enjoy a "game"?

If people actually spend money on this they should start selling pet rocks again.

</comment><comment><USER12> Nice get-rich-quick-scheme for Molyneux.

<comment><USER13> He's already rich.</comment></comment>


Mozilla and I - <AUTHOR> http://archiville.org/2014/03/27/mozilla-and-i/

<comment><USER2> Did I read this argument right? Is everyone fired up for a guy that voted against some proposition that was against LGBT? Isn't it his right to vote how he pleases? Has he taken any direct action against someone in the LGBT community? Has he shown in the past that his views change the ways he treats people? So, I remember reading about something called the Red Scare that blackballed people because of their political views. Is that really the way the LGBT community wants to be viewed: Love us or we'll ruin your life? People don't see things the same way, and that's their right. People aren't required to see your same point of view. That is one of the great things about America, we can feel however we want. Once there was a time when his views were in the majority, and I think it's a shame that this is how people think it should be solved. If you want to change him, you should make him hate you and ruin his career. I'm not trolling, I'm just reading headlines, and I saw nowhere where this man did anything except vote his mind. Please correct me if I'm in the wrong.

<comment><USER3> > Isn't it his right to vote how he pleases?

Yes, that was his right, and no one has ever said differently. But freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences in the realm of public opinion. Funding Prop 8 had a direct negative impact on the LGBT community of California. To expect that community to have no reaction to his actions would be naive.

<comment><USER4> > _Yes, that was his right, and no one has ever said differently. But freedom > of speech is not freedom from consequences in the realm of public opinion._

Those consequences shouldn't include "losing your job" or "being treated differently at work", else there's no freedom of speech.

How would LGBT community liked it they could lose their jobs for being LGBT?

<comment> mkr-hn > _How would LGBT community liked it they could lose their jobs for being > LGBT?_

The fact that LGBT people can be fired without recourse is a central issue.

<comment><USER5> So let's make a law that LGBT people can't be fired at all? I personally know one straight person that claimed he is gay and sued the company that fired him for discrimination. And he won.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Worked in a cube next to Brendan many years ago, back before the lizard was free from the yolk of AOL. A blue E and an inflatable Lizard were exchanged as pranks. I was recently out of college. Brendan was an approachable, smart, and talented engineer. I didn't work on Javascript, but learned a few things from him during my tenure nonetheless.

I know Mozilla and it's drive for openness, embracing of diversity, etc. So that may be why it is special. The CEO role is definitely a very visible role.

That said, I wonder. If we knew the beliefs of and the organizations donated to of those any of us happen to be working for at a given time, how would that impact our day to day lives? Say someone who was very much anti-H1B/immigration visas, should they not work for Microsoft or Facebook, both of which have leaders that are very much for changes to the visa system? If you are quite liberal in your beliefs and you then end up working for someone that is a member of the tea party?

I realize the role mozilla plays (and it's charter), I know of Brendan's donation (for which I disagree).

I'm trying to understand is this particular issue specific to this organization and individual or is it something that we might see become broader?

<comment><USER7> That's one aspect of this I don't understand. Another is the idea that you can reduce a persons impact to one issue. The irony is that through his involvement in JavaScript and Mozilla, he has likely done more for the LGBT community than I have and I'm part of that community. Should I disregard that incidental impact because of the smaller, intentional impact coming from his personal life?

I admire Mozilla as a profoundly transparent and open culture. The CEO does set the tone so the conversation is completely justified but this isn't so much a conversation as it is picketing and posturing. I wouldn't want my legacy to be reduced to one of the many things I disagree with the world about. I would want people to see the full context of my impact, disagree with me where I went wrong, and respect our differences.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > _I can't walk away from these people nor the cause I share with them nor the > potential for Mozilla to once again be known as the champion to all but > neither can I continue to earn my living from Mozilla while it is seen to > exclude and alienate anyone._

Translation: I need the attention and the feeling I'm doing something great for a large cause, so I'm forcing it, even though nothing has been done to any Mozilla employee, just because we elected a CEO whose PERSONAL opinions on some certain civil rights differ than mine.

</comment><comment><USER8> You know, I'll get downvoted to hell and back for this.

If you read the Unabomber manifesto a few things strike you. One is obviously that the guy has a few screws loose as to how to resolve what he perceived as the problems of the world, another is when it comes to attacking the psychology of the protest movement he was bang on.

This is an example of exactly what he rants about - people over thinking and then making highly visible group based sacrifices with no reasonable endgame just to make everyone feel more solidarity but achieving absolutely nothing except making them all feel better.

Want to oust the CEO? Get in a group and walk into his office. Don't go on about it on the Internet.

<comment><USER9> Great post, I think you analyzed this very well.

I think it's unfortunate that he's donated money to fight against personal liberties. I don't think it is worth it to deny yourself contributions to Mozilla on this one fact alone.

There are many greater causes to throw yourself behind, and I'm somewhat disappointed I don't see the same vehemance for those

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> 52% of voters, just a hair over 7 million or 1 in 5 Californians, voted in favor of Proposition 8.

Each of those people contributed to the moral travesty of that constitutional amendment. Are we to deny them all the right to a career in the name of moral freedoms? In this perfect world, would removing 1/5th of California's working force be a net benefit to society?

Perhaps instead of vilifying a few of them, we should focus our efforts on repealing the amendment and securing a more ideal future that everyone can prosper in.

<comment><USER11> Those people voted privately. The CEO of Mozilla publicly contributed to the Prop 8 campaign. If any of those seven million people made it publicly known that they funded or voted for Prop 8, then they might have to live with the consequences of making that publicly known.

They won't have their careers denied at all.

<comment><USER12> So it's OK if they can get away with it?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> The author works for the Mozilla _Foundation_ on which Eich has always been a board member.

Eich was promoted to CEO of the _Corporation_ which is a for-profit subsidiary of the Foundation.

As far as I can tell Eich's promotion to CEO doesn't give him any more power or status within the Foundation than he already had. It seems like this person should have quit the Foundation when it was revealed one of their board members donated to Prop 8 years ago.

Does anyone know the political actions of the other Foundation board members? The CEO answers to the corporation's board of directors; does anyone know (or care) about their political actions?

</comment><comment><USER14> > I hope [Mozilla] will very soon find its way back to the core values that I > hold so dear.

The whole tone of this post (and that sentence in particular) makes it sound like this person sees some kind of systemic shift in Mozilla, which seems like a stretch.

Over the last few years Mozilla has been focusing on making the web be a platform for applications. This is so 100% spot-on with their mission statement -- it's like Mozilla has found their true purpose, and that is more than just creating applications than enable people to use the internet (Firefox, Thunderbird). Now they're doing more to make sure the web is a great platform for applications (asm.js, Firefox OS). I'm assuming that, as CTO, Brendan Eich had a lot to do with that. It would seem natural to pick him to be CEO. But now people are making it sound like Mozilla has lost it's way all of the sudden.

Obligatory disclaimer: I completely disagree with Eich's view on gay marriage. At the same time, I think he's very qualified to be CEO of Mozilla. Ousting him is not what will ultimately lead to LGBT acceptance. He does hold a stupid belief, but I don't think that means he should be "shunned" and not allowed to contribute to (or exist in) the web community, where he has proven to be a passionate innovator. I've found that I don't like allowing myself to be polarized towards everyone in some group, even if it's justifiable to dislike them.

</comment><comment><USER15> I do not think that this sort of behavior reflects well on LGBT community as a whole. This is like a devoted Christian employee leaving Microsoft because Satya Nadella is a polytheist pagan and has been donating his money to institutions that support paganism and idolatry. It only goes to show that some people who talk of need for equal treatment for all but themselves are unable to tolerate diversity of thoughts.

Mozilla employees have total right to leave their job for whatever reason they want but if I had to hire them in my company I will think thrice.

This kind of knee jerk reactions would make hiring LGBT people more riskier and hence affect the whole LGBT community. In my opinion it is very irrational for an employee to judge his boss by what he chooses to do with his spare cash and time after office hours. What matters is whether he is a competent leader within organization or not.

<comment><USER16> It would be like Satya donating money towards restricting the rights of Christians. Like, say, the right to marry whoever you want.

<comment><USER17> Exactly! Some people state that they "do not think that this sort of behavior reflects well on LGBT community as a whole," but if a CEO were to financially support the promotion of legislation that would prevent Christians from marrying, _millions_ of Christians would flip out.</comment></comment></comment>


Land-value tax: Why Henry George had a point - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2015/04/land-value-tax <comment><USER2> There's an ongoing discussion in Poland about land-value tax. The problem here is that such tax is seen as a form of asset forfeiture. Why? Because of the communist times legacy.

In 1970s and 1980s there were a lot of apartments built by communist government, most of which were given to average citizens either for free, or for some insignificant amount of money. Now almost 40 years passed and we ended up with millions of people still living in those apartments, which they got back then, or inherited.

Now, especially after Poland joined EU, market price of those apartments skyrocketed, while owners income levels stayed pretty low. So, if government introduced land-value tax most of those people would not be able to afford paying it, effectively forcing them to sell their apartments.

I don't know how such tax would work in different setting, but here in Poland only visible effect would be rich people taking over properties for discount prices.

<comment><USER3> If the value of the apartment is high, then it wouldn't be sold for a discount price, would it?

The value might be affected by the tax, I suppose, but the person buying it would be affected by that too when they came to sell.

Land value tax is based on the premise that if you are land-rich, you should also be "more productive" to earn the right to keep the land.

Final point; apartment buildings generally have a lower land value than you might expect given the sale price (see my other comment), with a small square footage spread over many apartments in high-rise, the tax may well be less than you expect (i.e. much of the value may be in the rebuild cost.)

<comment><USER4> If the people who currently own the apartments have to sell because they are unable to afford the taxes then they would be in a poor bargaining position - they would pay for their "desire" for immediacy. Those who purchase the apartments would, therefore, be paying below the market rate (defining the market rate based solely on people's desires, without including their financial position).

<comment><USER3> Immediacy is a problem, yes. That's why at the start of a LVT people must be allowed a grace period of a couple of years to pay. Some argue for deferring such taxes until the property is sold or inherited, but that could lead to even worse situations like the one described.

<comment><USER4> Mightn't the deferral of tax payments until newly-taxed properties are sold or inherited remove (or at least reduce) the time correlation, thus improving the market position of the sellers?

Avoiding any adjustment in ownership patterns seems impossible to achieve without strong legislation, but attempting to provide adequate compensation through the market (rather than the government) seems like it might work? (question mark because I really have no idea...)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> There was an interesting post around this very topic related to Eve Online in the last couple of years.

[http://gamasutra.com/blogs/RaminShokrizade/20130405/189984/H...](http://gamasutra.com/blogs/RaminShokrizade/20130405/189984/How_I_Used_EVE_Online_to_Predict_the_Great_Recession.php)

What was interesting was that the poster found that factories in game were highly underutilized, and after convincing Eve Online to raise rents, he found that the factories tended to change hands be much more productive.

<comment><AUTHOR> Eve Online continues to surprise me as a place of social economic experiments.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Makes sense, but hard to implement.

Switzerland taxes the Eigenmietwert (self-renting value) of properties. If live in a self-owned flat, the amount you could have earned by letting the flat to someone else is taxable income. This makes sense in economic theory, but it is not very popular.

<comment><USER7> It's pretty trivial to get round though, give people an exemption on the primary residence. That way, the vast majority are unaffected yet those that invest in land are.

In the UK the system is already quite a bit like this. When I sell a BTL property I need to pay Capitial Gains, but not for my primary residence. Sure, it allows some loopholes, but it'll probably save you a lot of votes too.

<comment><AUTHOR> > Sure, it allows some loopholes, but it'll probably save you a lot of votes > too.

Alas, yes. Not only loopholes, but favours homeowners, who are already among the better off, over the real poor.

<comment><USER7> Indeed it does.

However as you move away from owning being an investment, the same homeowner based wealth will deteriorate and you'd likely own where it's convenient rather than trying to make money.

I don't think that's a terrible situation if your goal is to take the teeth out of the property market, rather than trying to destroy wealth in general.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> In the States we have property taxes, and it doesn't lead to utopia. Instead, when times are tough it drives small business out-of-business and people out of their homes, and only further enriches the wealthy who snatch up the foreclosures on the cheap.

<comment><USER3> Property tax != land value tax. Properties in foreclosure may well have very low land value.

<comment><USER9> no, in the US at any rate property taxes are scaled exactly by land value. Usual scheme is 1% or so of assessed value, which is typically recalculated yearly. Some states have "homestead" exemptions where the first, say, $150,000 of value on a primary residence is exempt from tax. There are also (at least in California) special assessments for a fire or water district that are put on top of the yearly property tax, usually because of state laws that limit the rate at which assessed value can be increased or super-majority provisions for altering property tax rates, and so on.

<comment><USER3> Land value being the value of the land less the rebuild cost of any structures? That is the definition I was using. House prices are the wrong metric.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "the Nobel-prize winner Joseph Stiglitz [...] argued in a recent paper that land and housing, rather than the distribution of income and productive capital, are the key to a fairer economy."

Link: [https://www.nber.org/papers/w21192](https://www.nber.org/papers/w21192)

</comment><comment><USER11> isn't that forcing people to develop land that we might not want to see developed? like coastal areas, islands etc.

That would mean a big crust of hostels/wealthy houses along the coasts and gradually seeing normal people live when you go further inland. It's already occurring, but I don't think that's a trend we should reinforce, and the State is has the power to meddle to prevent the market power from doing very bad stuff.

<comment><USER12> You'd have to reduce the tax in areas like that. You can probably justify this by saying that land in an area where development is restricted isn't worth as much as land elsewhere.

<comment><AUTHOR> If the tax is proportional to land value, and the development restrictions imposed make prices drop, than the reduction in tax is automatic.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Article written from small-country perspective, it appears, for which case it seems to make sense. But try to explain to farmer who owns a ranch in the middle of nowhere in Texas that he should be paying for roads mostly used to bring goods from other states to Houston/Austin/San Antonio.

<comment><USER14> The land value of a ranch in the middle of nowhere would likely be very low - it'd also be reasonable for him to receive a stipend for the use of the road (cancelling out the tax?)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Why does no one ever talk about implementing a usury tax?

<comment><USER3> ??

Lending money is a (in the UK highly regulated) business venture, subject to all sorts of taxes.

Buying land and sitting on it for decades is not.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> This enthusiasm for taxation doesn't really motivate me to renew my subscription to the economist. There is something fundamentally wrong with taxing an absence of income. The French socialist party had a similar idea, they wanted to tax homeowners who occupy their property based on what rental income they would get if they were renting it out.

In London the primary cause of the housing crisis isn't unused lands. It is a combination:

1\. very restrictive planning, which doesn't allow to build up except in a few limited spots. We end up with this absurd outcome of 3 storey houses everywhere and skyscrappers in 3 or 4 areas. Instead London would be much better off allowing to build 10 storey buildings everywhere.

2\. Terrible infrastructure choices made decades ago which are now impossible to reverse. London has kept the narrow streets from XIX even when it had an opportunity to plan a better urbanism after the war. And the tunnels in the tube are too narrow to support the current traffic.

More taxes isn't really going to change any of that.

<comment><USER16> The skyscrapers do seem a bit out of place in London, but I wonder if that's just a temporary issue. I remember reading that there were similar objections to the Eiffel Tower in Paris around the time when it was built. Perhaps they only look out of place because you remember what it was like before, or perhaps they'll always stick out.

Are there limits placed on the heights of buildings in residential areas of London?

As for narrow streets, I'm glad they kept them. Compared to some other big cities London feels more 'human friendly' (for want of a better term), wide streets can make a place feel more car focused, less a place that feels like a destination and more somewhere you travel through to get to where you want to be. Dedicated bike lanes are the only changes worth making IMO, but you can create that by working with the existing roads so long as you reduce the demand for cars. It seems that the London Underground has been increasing in capacity over the past 10 years or so, hopefully that will continue.

<comment><USER17> Tall buildings are not all bad.

Dublin has had strong restrictions on building height since the 1960s. An argument for this was to maintain the character of the city, although the destruction of many Georgian buildings was allowed by planners, on spurious health and safety grounds.

The worst effects of the policy were felt during and after the boom of the early 2000s, when accommodation was built further and further out from the city, leading to sprawl, and a commuter belt that stretched 100 kilometres in all directions, which put immense pressure on transport infrastructure. With so much construction, this represents in hindsight a missed opportunity to create more liveable centres or hubs in the style of London or other large cities.

Allowing taller structures for residential purposes in central city areas, would have improved Dublin's liveability. Instead, there is now a critical housing crisis that no one seems to know how to solve.

<comment><USER16> What do you think of the ideas in this video:

[http://youtu.be/Hy4QjmKzF1c](http://youtu.be/Hy4QjmKzF1c)

I believe it captures most of what is important in making a livable city that people enjoy living in.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Blockchain: The New Technology of Trust - <AUTHOR> http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/pages/blockchain/ <comment><USER2> What a finger marathon. That would have been much more usable (and even more creditable coming from Goldman Sachs) if it were a single-page article.

</comment><comment><USER3> Barely usable on my iPhone 6. Effects are fun and stuff but give the user a link to a plain HTML version of your article. [http://deathtobullshit.com](http://deathtobullshit.com)

</comment><comment><USER4> Amazing website, it amazes me what is possible with WebGL these days... although it's a little disorienting as you scroll into the horizon, and it did freeze up my chrome tab when I tried to skip some sections

</comment><comment><USER5> My finger got a workout from the endless scrolling. Good information. My finger needs therapy now.

</comment><comment><USER6> the discover-by-scroll fidelity is so high that I want to die.

still pretty</comment>


With H-1B under threat, Alphabet ramps up immigration lobbying - <AUTHOR> https://qz.com/969280/with-h-1b-under-threat-alphabet-is-the-only-big-tech-company-to-ramp-up-immigration-lobbying/ <comment><USER2> They have also started offering applicants the option of placement in Canada and EU.

</comment><comment><USER3> Bad optics. H-1B is mostly used by Indian outsourcing companies to help hold down wages and implement age discrimination against US workers. Why not let them do their dirty work?</comment>


Ask HN: What do you wish your non-technical co-founders knew how to do? - <AUTHOR>

My co-founder, who was the technical genius of the duo, left our company awhile back and I've needed to trial-by-fire learn a bunch of new things to help with product development, make scaling/environment decisions, and help troubleshoot support requests. I've also realized these skills are important so as not to perpetually annoy my technical employees and contractors with idiotic requests (not to mention wasting money.)<p>Short of straight up coding, what, technically, do you wish your favorite non-technical cofounder knew how to do to help you function better in your job or let you focus on the most important things. For example:<p>* deciphering production logs<p>* proficiency in vi or another editor<p>* rails console or similar<p>* reading a postfix or sendmail log<p>* basic git commands, reading commits<p>* analytics and testing<p>* enough HTML/CSS/JS to make content edits on a corporate homepage<p>* decipher server/application alerts to understand what's a real issue, what isn't <comment><USER2> I don't need them to do technical things on the product, although the ability to update website copy would be nice.

The #1 thing is the willingness to learn to pull your own analytics and reports. This can be really time consuming when the business side doesn't adequately define their information needs and a report needs to be iterated several times.

Another irritant is version control. NewDeck-v16-StevesEdit.ppt is a nightmare and really slows things down.

I don't want them to be good at my job, I want them to be good at theirs.

</comment><comment><USER3> I would suggest you start with analytics and testing. This way you can test everything and use GA (or whatever) to gain insight into your app/sites usage.

If you wanna really geek out, try to learn HTML+CSS and build some mocks.

Logs? After you review a prod log and notice a bug or exception, you create a bug and assign it to a developer. I guess this could be helpful. But that dev will probably review the same log and do some tests to find a root cause then go fix it. I feel the same for any log review or server/app alerts. Unless you know the code, its simply one interpretation.

Editors? I'm not sure this will help out much.

Git? I think that anything git related will eventually lead you to code.

Testing + Analytics, imo, should be your sweet spot for now.

Good luck.

<comment><AUTHOR> I think the reason I began trying to understand production logs and bug alerts was more of a calming mechanism than anything else. The developers get the same alerts and are already reviewing the logs, but by me understanding them I rarely need to ask if it's anything to worry about, etc. So it's not really me trying to help them with anything, it's more about knowing when to be worried vs. not, say if a client is launching their site on our platform tomorrow and I see some New Relic error come through at 2am the night before.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Why would you do that?You are a non-technical co-founder.You have other priorities.You just need a basic understanding of how things work but you don't need to dive into the technical realm.

I am a developer but even I have to admit that some or must of us are too cocky these days, thinking we can do everything by ourselves.That is pure crap.Most devs fail to have a huge impact in the industry as entrepreneurs.That's where you guys come in.Don't think you are useless.You need both parts to make it work.

Contrary to the popular belief a non-tech can be a breaker in a company if he is "that type of guy" with an excellent, CLEAR vision.Yet those are rare indeed.

<comment><USER5> I just had to fix a hacked website, turns out it was severely overdue for a Wordpress update (which fixed it). My admin explanations did explain how to update it, but I was still called on to do it. I'd hope a cofounder would update Wordpress before calling me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Business data analysis.

Any serious product will have a bunch of metrics and analytics - on usage, on customers, on finances; but if the non-tech people can do their own reports and analysis from the core data, then it saves a lot of time in coding, and allows the business guys much faster reaction time as they can get the answer they want right now instead of waiting a day for a custom report to be "requirementsdiscussedunderstood", built, checked and deployed.

And I've seen finance gals/guys do such analysis in excel that it would take weeks to do them as well in the data analytics code.

</comment><comment><USER7> I think this depends a lot on the team you've got. If you don't have a technical co-founder or CTO type that's in charge of overseeing the technical side of your business, then you'll be well served to familiarize yourself with some of this stuff. Having insight into the technical side of things can help you to better understand the state of your business. You'll also gain an understanding and appreciation for what your tech guys are dealing with, which can use to better manage them.

Keeping an eye on your code repository (reading commit messages) is a worthwhile exercise. Some of it might be over your head if you aren't a developer, but perusing a bit will help you understand the state of your application. You shouldn't need to learn git to do this - GitHub or whichever service you're using will have a web-based interface for you to browse.

Echoing what others have said, business analytics is a big one. Understanding how to make the most of things like Google Analytics, MixPanel, etc can be very worthwhile. Integrating these into your application is a job that will fall on your developers, but deciding what to track and interpreting the results is something you can/should handle.

Should you learn vi or go digging through logs? It's probably not the best use of your time, but if you're truly curious then I say go for it.

</comment><comment><USER8> I heard the reverse of this question a week ago at a lunch. Starting to think that in a lot of cases, this might be a symptom of other issues (communication etc), because it sounds like each side is reaching outside of their "killer app skills", which may not be the best use of each person's time. Not always, but mostly, the goalie should goal-tend and the striker should strike.

</comment><comment><USER9> Non-technical co-founders should take care of the business side of the start- up equation - marketing/sales/PR/community building/fundraising/etc.

</comment><comment><USER10> +1 on the Analytics and testing side, but what is truely important is that you build a good mental model of the product from a high-level, technical point of view. You don't need to know the nitty-gritty details of implementation, but you do need to know how the varios components of the product work together.

</comment><comment><USER11> They need to know how to run A/B tests on the product site. This requires some technical knowledge, but nothing a good hacker cannot setup properly. _This_ ability will allow the business co-founder to be able to grow the business much faster.</comment>


What are N26 bank up to? - <AUTHOR> https://www.revk.uk/2019/03/what-are-n26-bank-up-to.html <comment><USER2> This isn't a bank I had heard of, so I guess they're very new, or just not very popular (for a reason?).

The banking sector is ripe for disruption, but I don't think you can get away with moving fast and breaking things.

<comment><USER3> In Germany, they are advertising everywhere. Are you stateside?

<comment><USER2> No UK. And the post seems to be UK based.</comment></comment></comment>


"We need a scientific, non-religious approach." -Crichton on Environmentalism - <AUTHOR> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv9OSxTy1aU

<comment><AUTHOR> I think the video is worth a watch - he starts by discussing how anthropologists think of religion, and goes into how that gets in the way of sensible policymaking.

He talks about the state of National Parks where there's very little conflict in what they're supposed to be for, and yet we still don't do a good job with them, so we're still quite far from understanding what to do in places with more complex sets of tradeoffs, like cities. I enjoyed it thoroughly, got me thinking.</comment>


Why Facebook Keeps Beating Every Rival: It's the Network, of Course - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/19/technology/facebook-snapchat-instagram-innovation.html <comment><USER2> This is a good start, but I think there could be a lot more thought given to how we should think about monopolies in the context of markets where networks effects are crucial to the business value (aka. Facebook and Google most obviously, arguably Amazon, Apple), because one logical conclusion is that in a market where network effects are a major factor, the biggest network should be best positioned to provide the most value and therefore (assuming it doesn't actively eff things up on other fronts) should continue to grow until it dominates the market...which seems to pretty much be what happened, and it makes pretty good sense for the most part. in these cases, it actually seems BAD to break these networks apart, since their scale is arguably one of its primary values to the customer - this doesn't mean of course that they can't abuse their monopoly powers (I think they probably do to some degree and will continue to), but interesting to think that the traditional "break up monopolies" impulse doesn't make as much sense. this leads me to think it will just be more consumer-protection-related regulation (under the banner of consumer privacy, or maybe even public health, given all the "social media addiction" thought pieces out there these days ha).

One thing I've found super interesting/impressive about Snap is that it didn't try to outcompete FB in terms of sheer network size for its usage stickiness, and instead turned smaller, tighter and more private networks into a differentiator, while at the same time providing advertisers/brands with a competitively massive audience - not an easy thing to identify, much less execute on. TBD if that differentiator is enough to keep them alive vs. FB's more traditional network-effect-driven advantage, which will be hard to beat on its own terms. I think Snap's success will depend a lot on its ability to avoid being tempted to play that game (see: Twitter!).

random other thought: this all also reminds me that Mark Zuckerberg has not made a peep about wanting FB to be thought of as a "utility" in a long time (or maybe he has and I just missed it...but couldn't find any recent mentions), probably in part because they are now a lot more at risk than ever before of being regulated like one (see this talk from 2013: [https://techcrunch.com/2013/09/18/facebook-doesnt-want-to- be...](https://techcrunch.com/2013/09/18/facebook-doesnt-want-to-be...)). Also kind of funny to hear him talk about "we don't want FB to be cool" too, because now it seems like FB very much wants to be cool again now that Snap has become cool and has threatening user counts.</comment>


Show HN: Watch UX experts help startups [video series] - <AUTHOR> http://ExposeUX.com <comment><USER2> Awesome show!</comment>


Tinywm, a window manager in 50 lines of C - <AUTHOR> http://incise.org/tinywm.html <comment><USER2> You know, succinctness is not something I look for in C code. Unless you're artificially going for obfuscation; I think 50 lines is barely enough to check arguments, open descriptors, test results, setup signal handlers and sit tightly on a loop. You will need at least another 50-500 just to implement ICCC.

<comment><USER3> Agreed, but speaking as someone who has only done patchy X programming, it's still nice to have a stub of a window manager with notes about the absolute basics. I've used a fork of dwm for a while, but a typical comment from its source is, "To understand everything else, start reading main()." That's not terribly helpful when you're just starting out.

Look at how many windowmanagers are based on aewm, too.

<comment><USER2> Stumpwm is in CL and you can read it. And while googling a second ago, I found this <http://tronche.com/gui/x/gwm/html-manual/>

Lispy window manager; gonna chase down the author's page and see if this gave birth to any research papers.

<comment><USER3> I've read through parts of Ratpoison, aewm, Awesome, XMonad, Blackbox, and other WMs over the years. Short source like this can be very helpful in other ways, though - seeing a very simple Scheme interpreter or minimal webserver in Python (or whatever) can make previously "hard" things more approachable. The "hey, you can do this too" energy or big picture insight from overly-simple- but-still-functional code can be just as helpful as deep references sometimes.

As WMs go, I've had an itch for a while to write a skeleton WM in C with hooks to script it in Lua. dwm continues to work _just well enough_ for me, though, and I've already got too many projects. One of these days... (And no, Awesome and XMonad don't do it for me.)

Also, for anybody doing any kind of exploratory X WM programming, it's _incredibly_ helpful to use a nested X server such as Xnest (<http://www.xfree86.org/4.0/Xnest.1.html>) for debugging. Something like this should work:

       #!/bin/sh
       # -ac allows connections
       Xnest -ac :1 &

Then you can say e.g. "xeyes -display :1" to run things inside it.

<comment><USER4> Thank you for the heads up with the -ac. Did not now about that. I agree that xnest or similiar is very useable in all kinds of situations.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Is this link working for anyone else? I'm getting a 503.

<comment><USER6> Works for me.</comment></comment>


Show HN: Gilded – Add a Cover Charge for Unsolicited Email - <AUTHOR> https://www.gilded.club

<comment><USER2> "Your current rate is: $1.00.

Senders will be charged $1.33 per email, and you'll receive $0.70 per email."

The pricing/return is confusing. So my rate is $1USD but i only get $0.70? Oh so you must charge them $1USD and i get 70% like google play/apple. Oh wait no you charge them $1.33?

Makes it hard to understand why i put in $1...

<comment><AUTHOR> Totally understandable. The $0.33 in this scenario includes payment processing fees which we pass along to the sender. After fees, the gross rate is $1.00 and you net 70% of the gross.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I actually really like this concept except for one important detail--the name. "Gilded" sounds elitist. Please don't make people hate me even more than they already will when someone I forgot to add to my VIP list starts getting asked to pay for the privilege of emailing my "gilded" account.

The name here is obv. more important to users than with other apps because it's embedded into the email address. I'd even rather have a nonsensical name than something that makes me sound elitist.

<comment><AUTHOR> Glad you like it! Definitely hear you on "Gilded" sounding elitist. We are working on our messaging to convey that anyone can sign up for the service. We don't want to come off pretentious in any way, since we want to empower all email users to fight back against spammers.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Seems like a great way to have a public-facing email without worrying about useless spam.

</comment><comment><USER5> Man, you guys really took the fake testimonial to the next level.

<comment><USER6> Heh, yeah. That was actually an inside joke--- those are the real names of two of our colleagues that work near us, and they are _real_ quotes from them. :-)

But yeah, you're right they create the wrong impression. Removing now...

<comment><USER7> Noooo!!!!!! That was the best part of the landing page!!!!!!!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> How much does this cost to use?

<comment><AUTHOR> This is totally free for users. You can set your rate and senders to your @gilded.club account have to pay you.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Review my startup, CrowdLustro - <AUTHOR> Hey Everyone,
This is my first time submitting anything here but I just launched a site that aggregates investment crowdfunding deals and allows investors to write and share reports.
https://crowdlustro.com/
I have been interested in investment crowdfunding since the JOBS Act. My problem was that the search process involved with these crowdfunding investments is tedious because the deals are spread across multiple platforms that all require account logins. There is also a lack of info on these investments outside of the company pitch and the offering statement.
The site allows for a streamlined search process of crowdfunding investments across the major U.S. portals. It also allows for investors to write and share reports on deals to help shed some light on these investments.
I would greatly appreciate any feedback HN can provide about all aspects of the site.
Dave <comment><USER2> This looks fantastic!

Why do you think investors will take the time to write and publish reports for other investors? Part of the equity crowdfunding allure, compared to direct angel investing or syndicates, is the reduced burden of diligence since most of these websites - MicroVentures, Republic, and others individually vet and DD startups and make this info available to investors.

Congrats on launching! I actually run a VC-founder discord server and I would love for you to join and share your experience building Crowd Lustro! [http://discord.me/thetwitchvc](http://discord.me/thetwitchvc)</comment>


Ask HN: An idea on how to create curated news site? - <AUTHOR> I'm curating news on a specific topic for my own use and thought to share it with the world. The topic is divided by countries.
I'm looking for a simple way to show the news links in a curated way, so it will be easy for me to track and update and for the visitors to find what they want.
I've thought about a Github repo like the Awesome X for languages, but it seems more complicated given the division by countries. Any ideas/examples? Thx! <comment><USER2> Why not use reddit? You can create subreddit with only you as "approved submitter" and use "countries" as flair (one can select by flair).

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting idea! Thanks</comment></comment>


History of FOMO and JOMO - <AUTHOR> https://www.bsoundarya.com/part-i-fomo-to-jomo%e2%80%8a-%e2%80%8abuilding-a-second-brain/ <comment><AUTHOR> History of how we came to generate so much information, and what we can do about it.</comment>


Are bread riots coming to America? - <AUTHOR> https://theweek.com/articles/931090/are-bread-riots-coming-america <comment><USER2> It is an anecdote but the NPR's Indicator did a recent interview of a woman who had been relying on the supplemental unemployment via CARES: [https://www.npr.org/2020/08/13/902342278/when-600-goes- away](https://www.npr.org/2020/08/13/902342278/when-600-goes-away)

I think it was important journalism to hear an individual voice that is overwhelmed by a seemingly hopeless situation where the economic engines of their work is suddenly and completely stopped and then the lifeline that was helping them get through is removed as well.

</comment><comment><USER3> I think we've moved towards a more self-sustaining perch of survival. Lack of something have generally spurred American's to innovate, and increase self reliance. Perhaps it's time all learned to bake bread?

<comment><USER4> Or perhaps cake?</comment></comment>


Are there Empowering vs. Enslaving softwares? - <AUTHOR>

Do apps/software enslave or empower? I feel there is some difference but struggling to convince myself. <comment><USER2> I thought the question was more open-ended than just IDEs. Clearly there is consumer software designed to be addictive, and other software designed to create things which can empower a user to do more than they could without the software. Propietary vs. open-source isn't the issue so much as whether the core idea behind the software is to serve the user or to capture them.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, it is open ended. What are your examples of such differences?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> You should really look into the works of Richard Stallman (RMS). He's done a lot of work into showing and promoting free software as it empowers, rather than restricts the user as proprietary software does.

[https://stallman.org/](https://stallman.org/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Free and open-source software is empowering [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open- source_software](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_and_open-source_software)

<comment><AUTHOR> I was thinking in the same line. Emacs seems to be empowering while the Visual Studio, though is really good IDE, is kind of enslaving. More you use, more dependent on it. In other words, open source seems to be heuristic while closed source seems to provide set of instructions to perform certain tasks.

<comment><USER5> This is totally true. There are a ton of things to criticize about VS, but I keep coming back to it because the autocomplete is _perfect._ It's so good! [0]

Doing this in Emacs, etc, is possible. But it requires hours and hours of setup and maintenance. Whenever somebody tries to solve this issue by making "prepacked" Emacs config with batteries included (e.g. Prelude), people criticize it for causing compatibility issues and not training people to understand Emacs.[1]

Guess what? I'm a hacker, not an IDE pilot. If I want to hack on my Emacs build, I want the ability to do so. But it shouldn't be anathema to use OSS configs you don't understand at the lowest level, because not everyone's goal needs to be knowing their IDE like he back of their hand. Getting people to accept this has the potential to push FOSS tools to the forefront of enterprise and the mainstream. Despite what you might think from the insular posts on HN, most coders don't use Vim and Emacs, or even the more "responsible" IDE.

[1] I wonder if this is because of the API features of Roslyn. I don't use C# enough to have studies the compiler, but I've heard it's an amazing piece of engineering.

[0] s/emacs/vim if you like, it applies just as well.</comment></comment></comment>