Nintendo Videogame Characters Set to Hit the Big Screen - <AUTHOR> http://www.wsj.com/articles/nintendo-videogame-characters-set-to-hit-the-big-screen-1463375030 <comment><AUTHOR> Non paywall: [http://www.metelevision.com/nintendo-videogame-characters- se...](http://www.metelevision.com/nintendo-videogame-characters-set-to-hit- the-big-screen/)

 _edit_ I had to copy and paste the link to a new browser - apparently knowing the referrer the page will redirect to a blank page.</comment>


Google invests in cable from Australia to Singapore - <AUTHOR> https://blog.google/topics/google-cloud/google-invests-indigo-undersea-cable-improve-cloud-infrastructure-southeast-asia/ <comment><USER2> Interestingly this cable is being built by Subtel Partners (Press release: [http://subpartners.net/press/subpartners-Indigo-media- releas...](http://subpartners.net/press/subpartners-Indigo-media-release.pdf)) and was previously called APX (West & Central).

Superloop just bought Subtel Partners today as well: [https://www.itnews.com.au/news/superloop-acquires- subpartner...](https://www.itnews.com.au/news/superloop-acquires- subpartners-457369)

It's only being built with 2 fiber pairs, so should be fairly cheap. It's one of the first cables I've heard of to exclusively use spectrum sharing:

"The system will use a two-fibre pair 'open cable' design with spectrum sharing technology. Consortium members will have spectrum ownership providing the ability to independently take advantage of technology advancements and future upgrades as required."</comment>


Linux Laptop Experience - <AUTHOR> https://wesmckinney.com/blog/linux-laptop-experience/ <comment><USER2> > I hope to see Dell offer (if they are not planning to already) an upgrade > path to Ubuntu 20.04 LTS but can understand that supporting different > hardware editions on multiple Linux distributions can be a lot of work.

Ubuntu LTS -> LTS should be a minimum expectation. Otherwise upgrading laptops to keep up with _LTS_ distro releases is a worse situation than Win/macOS.</comment>


WindowManager.js: Emulating Destop Apps in JavaScript - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/dataminr/window-manager

<comment><AUTHOR> At DataMinr, we designed our web experience to feel like a native desktop application with multiple windows. Managing and messaging across windows can get messy very quickly In JavaScript. We created a library that lets you do this painlessly</comment>


Predicting Death for Better End-Of-Life Care - <AUTHOR> https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-human-os/biomedical/diagnostics/stanfords-ai-predicts-death-for-better-end-of-life-care <comment><USER2> I feel fortunate that I happened to check into HN today because this is an area where I have a lot of experience and I have made something similar (albeit much less advanced) that is currently in use by some physicians.

Quick background: I am an internal medicine physician, and my focus is hospital medicine, so I actually see a lot of cancer patients suffering from complications related to progression of their disease, treatment, and have lots of end-of-life discussions.

A couple years ago I had a case where I wished I had more data to drive me to make a prediction for a family who wanted to know when their loved one was going to die, and I felt like I didn't do a good job. I ended up contacting an oncologist Dr. David Hui who has done a lot of research into predicting end of life care.

There are dozens if not hundreds of "prognostic calculators" out there that different groups have made over the years to try and find which variables X, Y, Z, can be used to better predict how a patient with cancer A, B or C will do.

Most of them are not great and very specific. Some of them are general to all cancers, some are only for "advanced cancer" etc... So this isn't really a new idea, it's just that this is the first time someone has applied AI to it as far as I'm aware.

The problem is these calculators are all buried in journals and have different inputs. What we did was collate some of the best validated ones and make it easier to check multiple prognostic calculators at once, with the idea that you could get more of a range or gestalt on the patient and use that info to help guide further decisions.

In case anyone is interested the site is www.predictsurvival.com but it isn't for lay use so may not be of much interest to most here. I built it using Python and Flask and it's what I'm most proud of in my programming.

Anyways, I knew someone would eventually use AI to try and tackle this question. I'll read their paper later tonight and I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being far better than what I've done. I hope they make it open source.

I'd be happy to try and answer any questions people might have about medicine and end of life care

</comment><comment><USER3> Better end-of-life care isn't a technological problem.

When people have terminal cancer they are still usually advised or persuaded to take chemo and/or radiation, which royally destroy their bodies, as anyone who had a loved one go through treatment knows.

In the case of many late stage cancer cases it's generally known that the person is at the end of their life, yet the medical establishment still tends to focus on treatment rather than actual care. How does machine learning help the cultural problem?

<comment><USER4> > yet the medical establishment still tends to focus on treatment rather than > actual care

Have you actually talked to doctors about it? As in those who get the initial talk, not those who get patients already decided to try something? I know quite a few GPs and they often do a serious talk with people with cancer who want "everything possible done". Or with families who want that for their grandparents.

They try to discourage useless treatment as much as possible. Often by listing the side effects that are going to just decrease the quality of life even worse.

(Just in case: yes, there will be different doctors and different opinions. What I'm trying to say is generalising to medical establishment is not accurate and not helpful. Also I'm glad that if someone makes the decision to get treatment they can get it - it may be a really bad decision, but it's their decision.)

<comment><USER5> When my mom had terminal cancer, her GP told her she was out of options.

Then a nearby "cancer center" got a hold on her, I believe through one of the diagnostic partners she was using. Two weeks later she was in heavy chemo -- as an elderly person who had almost a zero chance to survive.

She ended up with MRSA and in intensive care in isolation. I lived far away and traveled to see her when I heard her condition gotten worse.

I'll never forget her GP walking in. My mom couldn't hear well. Her GP was both sad and angry. She didn't have any idea how she ended up in the ICU.

He explained to her again that all we had left was palliative care, perhaps hospice. I could tell this wasn't the first time he had had this talk. There had been many other patients.

When he left my mom looked at me and said "What'd he say?" So I sat next to her, took her hand, and explained that the doctors had done all they could for her and she would die soon.

I'll never forget that, either the talk or the look on that GP's face. We have a terribly broken system.

<comment><USER6> Sorry to hear your family had this horrible experience.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Everyone from doctors to philosophers has been saying this for ages (literally). No healthcare provider, public or private, is likely to pick this up because people who are afraid of death will freak about about 'computer decides when you should die' and will get up a big enough moral panic to prevent any further discussion of the idea. Given that I think it's literally a waste of time and resources to program a computer to tell us what we already know.

Edit: by 'program a computer' I don't mean to put down the work of the Stanford team, which I'm sure is great, but rather to highlight the reductionist way it will play in public debate.

<comment><USER8> > people who are afraid of death

I am afraid to _live_ after a certain point of time. When you have no direct descendants or significant other, when your bucket list is done, what's the point of keeping a slowly failing mind alive in a more rapidly failing body? I don't want to grow old, I fail to see why I should and there's no law, not even Canada that would allow me to choose a peaceful ending date for my own. And they call this suicidal which I am not. I have my life planned and I know when I want to end it, more than a decade from now. Some people plan to travel the world when they retire, I just want not to live but I can't.

<comment><USER9> There is no law anywhere that can stop you from killing yourself, much less punish you afterward!

<comment><USER8> Neither there is one allowing assistance :/ I want to end in peace and dignity. Is that too much to ask? Apparently.

There is a lot of assistance available that leads you to extend your life beyond the point where you can keep your dignity but none where you can just ... bow out.

Whenever a trainer has asked what's my goal, my only answer was, I don't want to end up in a wheelchair in twenty years. My back already hurts a little pretty much constantly, I don't want to live long enough where it becomes unbearable and/or I can't even walk any more. Truly what's the point. And voicing these -- in my opinion entirely rational -- thoughts are almost taboo.

<comment><USER9> [https://www.deathwithdignity.org/learn/death-with-dignity- ac...](https://www.deathwithdignity.org/learn/death-with-dignity-acts/)

<comment><USER8> Every single assisted dying statute at this point requires you to be terminally ill. The Netherlands is on the path to waive this [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/13/netherlands- ma...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/13/netherlands-may-allow- assisted-dying-for-those-who-feel-life-is-complete) but only for the elderly. We will see what age they set but I feel like it'll be like 70 or something.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> this would be a really good application of AI in healthcare, but it needs to be considered in light of other predictive tools. a sr exec at a large health system said earlier this year that they evaluated a ton of AI tools for predicting death to inform end of life care, but none did materially better than simply asking physicians which of their patients they thought would die in 12-18 months. this AI may be better than the ones this exec studied of course

even if AI performs better, it would need to offer improvements significant enough to justify the cost of implementing it, which depending on what data it uses could be non-trivial

another unfortunate issue is that patient preference is only one consideration in determining how end of life care is managed. profitability is another concern. the same exec said that the health system only agreed to implement their improved end of life plan once they realized that it would be profitable to the system

</comment><comment><USER11> Having worked in this space - dialysis - sometimes it's better to let the patient gracefully decline versus degrading their quality of life with treatments that will not lengthen life and mage what time they have miserable. There's a few companies already using ML to predict when a patient is a candidate for hospice / palliative care. It's often cheaper, which is why it's kind of a taboo topic.

<comment><USER12> >> It's often cheaper, which is why it's kind of a taboo topic.

That's a very strange point. Sometimes people think the doctors want to do everything they can "to save you" just to run up the bill. With that thinking, patients and their families would want to "save money". OTOH one may also interpret saving money as giving up and be angry that the doctor would put a price on life. You just can't win. Ultimately people and physicians need to put aside all of that and be able to objectively assess the situation. That's really hard to do particularly for the patient and family - I have no idea what it's like from the doctors side, but we had one that had his eyes wide open but couldn't drive the point home enough for the soon-to-be widow to get it.

<comment><USER13> I feel like this AI is an attempt at making death marketable.

And I mean that seriously. I think you and eismcc are right, that it is taboo even when it is arguably the best option for the patient.

It would be difficult for a doctor to say "this multivariate optimization found a global maximum by stopping treatment" in a way that sounds ethical. But by attributing it to an AI that is mysterious enough to sound divine, the message might have a chance at being received.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Add deep learning and even boring old survival analysis can make headlines as "AI predicts Death". (Not bashing the paper here, just the reporting.)

Though I suppose making use of the large amount of unstructured health data is a good thing and something which classical statistical models which require relatively clean study data could have problems with.

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm not quite sure that doctors need AI to see the state of a terminally ill patient for what it is, but if the authority of a mystical-sounding blackbox helps them accept and act on that tough reality, that's fine by me.

<comment><USER16> There is a movie called Idiocracy which has some version of this. Pretty hilarious.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> If I am in the position of the patient, I would be horrified to hear an analysis tell me how much time I have left to live and how likely the death is. No matter what the system tells me I will still opt for whatever possible treatment in the case that the prognosis is wrong, or I fall in the ex. 10% chance of survival category.

I just can't picture the doctor saying "the AI says there is a 90% chance of dying in the next month" and me choosing to die in peace at home. I'll keep fighting and take my chances.

<comment><USER18> Good! Let's talk again when you're 70...

Regardless of what decisions you make, having more information (basically a statistical aggregate of similar cases) should be useful information, no?</comment></comment>


How to design Metro apps for Windows 8 - <AUTHOR> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/windows/apps/hh464920.aspx

<comment><USER2> AKA: how to design soulless, generic applications that all look exactly the same.</comment>


What I Learned Buying a Rug in Turkey - <AUTHOR> http://academicbiz.typepad.com/piloted/2007/01/what_i_learned_.html

<comment><USER2> _Look at the weave, this is how you can tell it is not machine made._

I hope he didn't believe that. Turkey is full of fake. People don't have a continuous relationship with the seller, so the seller focuses on selling something that _looks_ great. For fruit and vegetables, this isn't much of an issue (What You Taste Is What You Get), but I struggled to find a bike. All bells and whistle, no quality.

That's the positive side of megabrands and chain-stores, they have reputations and standards.

I was surprised by how social haggling was in Turkey. As far as I can tell, a lot of sellers do not lower the price because you're going to leave the transaction (i.e.: the rational way); they lower it because they want to feel good about themselves. Typically, college students get better prices that way. Foreigners can get either royally screwed, or offered a free meal at a restaurant. Turks want to think of themselves as being great hosts (and they are).

I tried a few times to tell a merchant: I can get a better price elsewhere. Even if it was true, they didn't care.

We went to a high-end restaurant last week. 6 foreigners, some obviously older and well-off, and one Turkish girl. We sit, start eating, then want to order wine. She haggled. And won. I still don't get it. Presumably, the reputation of the restaurant was at stake. It'd be rationally selfish, but still. Foreigners are not coming back!

The requirement to haggle in so many situations has some unfortunate day-to- day consequences. Some Turks become used to lying under all circumstances. (though to be fair, I got some of my best relationships ever here)

Last anecdote: some cafe manager told me he has trouble finding personel. They pay an employee 1.50$ / hour (1$ if you're unexperienced, no joke) in my city. The price of a beer might be around 2.50$. The ratio is much worse than in the Western world, so I ask him, why don't you increase the pay? Nuh-uh, he said. Things don't work that way around here.

</comment><comment><USER3> I see this more of a lesson in persistence paying off, and understanding your client, their needs, how to predict and answer their questions, and behave to sell effectively (in this case usage of the environment) - things any entrepreneur in any business needs to know.

Yes, it is a social hack and manipulation to an extent (I don't agree with bringing the kids in etc., that is low), but these are the same lessons and issues found in most business (merchant wants as much as he can get, client is often reluctant to buy until they see the benefits to them, and in order to reach a deal there is often much bartering and negotiations to be had).

Are some of the people we meet and network with, especially in business conferences and trade-shows, any different? Are price negotiations between the companies we interact with any different?

Simply put, the rug sellers understand what they are selling, what people are willing to pay, and how to sell it to them, and these are things all people in _business_ should know. If win-win can be achieved (client thinks they are getting a bargain and seller is happy with sale price) then all the better. If you buy a rug, are happy with the rug, are happy with the price, what is the problem?

It is really market competition, and in many cases desperation, that is the root of the unethical behaviour. I do not agree with using pressure tactics, misleading "consultative" selling (was what he was teaching them about rugs true or was it tailored to his needs?), inferior goods supplied ("bait-and- switch"), or the multitude of other things that occur. But I see similar behaviour occurring in many high pressure environments, especially in the financial services sector (some stock brokers come to mind).

<comment><USER4> +1 to you sir. The author did not think that he was conned or purchased an inferior product or paid too much or even purchased something unnecessary. This is a success story of how to sell a luxury item that _both_ parties agree was an unnecessary item, with the customer being actually satisfied at the end.

The magic of the Turkish Carpet isn't about closing the sale, it's about the sale process accumulating in the fact that you feel good that you've made the purchase. The entire process was really all about the customer receiving attention, trivia, entertainment and respect -- these are all added values to the end product.

A lot of web apps are completely unnecessary : what can we learn from these guys to sell well made but unnecessary stuff?

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I must confess that I very much hate bargaining. I can't overcome the feeling that the other person tries to steal my money, and now I have to be careful and defend myself to reduce the damage. Then, I will end up with a stuff I don't really need.

Regarding the Turkey story, I just would not follow the man no matter what. I can't help, but persuasion doesn't work on me - the more other person tries to persuade me, the less likely I will buy anything.

<comment><USER6> Pretty much everything is open to bargaining, it's just a matter of whether it's worth your time. If you don't bargain, you are automatically allowing the other person to steal your money. You bet I bargained when I bought my house, when I bought my car.

I've seen bargaining even in department stores, a woman haggling down the price of Coach bags in Macy's by offering to buy several at once. She got the discount.

Just like you, I don't like being sold to, but I have no problem bargaining for something that I seek out myself. In Thailand and India I bargained for clothes, for my backpack, for cab fare, for souvenirs. It was not adversarial at all, and often both me and the merchant was having fun, trying to read each other's minds, pushing and retreating, biding our time. In a way it's kind of like dating =)

<comment><USER7> _In a way it's kind of like dating_

You mean, if you're not careful about how you do it, you might end up screwed and coming home with something that you didn't want? :)

(sorry, had to be said)

<comment><USER6> Of course. No risk, no reward. No guts, no glory.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I absolutely hate bargaining like this, and countries where you're hounded and hassled to buy things without price tags on. For me, it's an education on how not to do business. It's quite like spam email.

Unfortunately this system just doesn't work with me. I'm less likely to go in a shop with no price tags on, because then I know I'll have to ask the shopkeeper the price of everything. It's inefficient. I guess if you grow up with the haggling you develop strategies for coping maybe, but I'm _so_ glad to not be in a country where you have to deal with all that.

<comment><USER9> I agree that bargaining is inefficient for small transactions but it is the basis of business, everywhere in the world, regardless of whether or not there are price tags.

<comment><USER10> Ah yes, but that's thanks to the absence of information. And technology (internet especially) are filling in the missing info, and putting the middle men, a.k.a those who bargain, out of business.

The railroads did exactly the same thing with other middle men. In general, that is how markets become more efficient, by putting hagglers out of business.

<comment><USER9> Being informed improves your ability to bargain, it doesn't negate the need for bargaining.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I had some similar experiences in Morocco; going to a bargaining country is a great education. An example of the kind of social hack they use is that if they offer a tourist their hand, the tourist feels compelled to shake it. One guy used this trick, then used the beat of inaction to wrap a snake around my friend's neck. She was understandably startled, and while she was standing there confused, he pulled out some other snakes and draped them on her arms. It took about thirty seconds to disentangle her, at which point the man said "pay me".

This kind of trick can evoke some powerful negative emotions. A friend was somehow tricked into allowing a hawker to start tying an intricate string bracelet using his finger as the base. His finger was stuck in the knot, and the guy ignored my friend's requests to be let go. It ended with quite a lot of shouting.

<comment><USER12> _A friend was somehow tricked into allowing a hawker to start tying an intricate string bracelet using his finger as the base. His finger was stuck in the knot, and the guy ignored my friend's requests to be let go. It ended with quite a lot of shouting._

Oh yeah, some African guys in France tried that one on me. The best response I managed was to look 'em dead in the eye, and say "Sorry, I don't speak English". That'll confuse 'em for long enough to get away.

<comment><USER13> in the uk, kids will come up to you with puppy-dog eyes and just hold out their hands. i was at a bus stop and a 10-year-old in _designer_ clothes came up to me. i laughed and told him i wasn't giving money to someone dressed in nicer clothes than i was. he didn't budge. then i told him i didn't have any cash on me (all i had was traveler's checks at that point, plus bus fare). he didn't budge. finally, i reached in my pocket and pulled out all the change i had--probably about 20p. i dropped it in his hand and said, "ok ok, you got me." he looked at the money with disdain, dropped it on the ground, and put his hand out again. by that time, the bus had arrived, so i was able to end the interaction, but talk about persistence (stupidity? stubbornness? many words apply.). i sometimes wonder how long he would have stood there had the bus not arrived when it did.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> There is also perceptual contrast. By explaining that the rug is worth $3000, it makes $1100 look very cheap.

</comment><comment><USER15> Turkey is nice, been a few times. You really need to become immune from this kind of thing, or at least play them at their own game. If they say 100 euros, you say 20 and agree on 40. Seriously - they are there to rip you off and would sell anything for any price if they thought they had got you to pay more than you first wanted to. :)

<comment><USER16> In India I once hailed an auto rickshaw and had him take me about half a kilometer in the rain. I asked him in American-accented English what the fare was, and he said 200 rupees. I started yelling at him in perfect Bengali that I wasn't born yesterday even though I am a foreigner, and that I spend a lot of time in India. He countered with an offer of 10 rupees, and I gave him 20 because I was laughing so hard. The sad thing is I know that the 200 rupees must work on some people.

<comment><USER17> It would probably work on me. What is that.. like $4?

<comment><USER16> $5.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> If you are interested in some light reading on the topic of influence and negotiation, I definitely recommend reading the book that the author references. It's titled Influence: The psychology of persuasion by Robert Cialdini.

While the principles discussed are pretty simple (they were all named in the article), Cialdini explains them very well. They are immediately applicable and will definitely be useful for anyone needing to influence/manage other people.

</comment><comment><USER19> I quickly tire of this kind of bargaining, particularly because most sellers' 'friendliness' invariably turns to anything between indifference and hostility as soon as they understand that you are wise to their game and they will not make the tourist premium off of you. On more than one occasion in Turkey, sellers have abused me just because I refused to budge from a price I knew was reasonable (which I had gotten in other shops).

At least this is true for tourist destinations. I've had more enjoyable experiences off the beaten tourist path in South East Asia. Generally though, in the long run it grows tiring to have to spend twenty minutes negotiating every time you go in a shop.

</comment><comment><USER20> The book mentioned by Cialdini was one of my favorite reads of last year. It just melts away and before you know it; you finished it.

<comment><USER21> By the end, have you bought 3 more books, the training tapes, and a lifetime subscription to his newsletter?

<comment><USER12> I read the same book. It was compulsory for a management class I was doing.

A lot of people rave about how great it is, but personally I couldn't quite overcome the niggling voice of shame in the back of my head that said "You're reading a self-help book".

I felt dirty afterwards, and I stored the book in a drawer rather than on my bookshelf. It's probably not really a bad book, though.

<comment><USER6> Why feel shame at reading a book which improves your skills? Would you feel shame after reading a startup self-help book such as "Getting Real"?

<comment><USER22> I think it's a techie thing. I took a course at work about influence and negotiation and the reaction of some people I was talking to (a few scientists) was "oh, you're taking that class on manipulating people!" complete with rolled eyeballs. Actually of all the classes I've taken at work, that was one of the most useful.

<comment><USER6> The answer to that is obviously: Yes, I prefer to know when and how I'm being manipulated, rather than walk around being blind to my strings being pulled.

I've come across the same reaction amongst my techie friends as well. I don't understand why so many smart people have such a big blindspot about this issue.

<comment><USER22> Sigh! There is a huge difference between manipulating someone and negotiating to get what you want. The first implies control, generally without their consent. The latter is all about understanding their needs (which are often emotional and may require asking probing questions, reading body language, making that person comfortable etc) and finding out how you can come to a consensus that satisfies both parties.

The problem I was alluding to is that technical people seem to think that using anything other than cold, hard facts to come to terms is "manipulative." And quite simply, the world doesn't work that way.

[edit] Now that I re-read your reply, I think I took it completely the wrong way :-) Sorry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> The book he mentions explains why Facebook and social networking sites work as well as they do. Have you ever wondered why Facebook never invites you to be friends with someone, its always "Your friend thinks you might know.." Just the tiny change from saying "You might know..." to "Your friend thinks you might know..." makes a huge difference. I encourage anyone to read the book, because it has huge implications for marketing and start-ups. It explains a lot of why things work the way they do, why people like Apple, why people are encouraged to buy, or discouraged. Its a dry read, but invaluable.

It will even tell you how to monetize Twitter... :)

</comment><comment><USER24> My friend had a similar experience in india. I wonder how the same kind of soft well approach could be applied to startups? Perhaps by making sure you provide value for people with no pressure to buy? The methodology sure seems to work.

<comment><USER25> I think application of this into a startup is all about interaction. How can a company passionately (read: more then just newsletter drips) interact with their users after they have signed up for the freeby but maybe aren't quite ready to pay? Even with the "free plan with hopes of people upgrading to pay" model so popular these days, conversion rates still seem too low to me. Users sign up for the freeby but then instead of diving into an engaged relationship with the company, too often those users are "off the hook" from courting... they have already shown interest, now wow them into converting.

Reciprocation is covered with the company providing the free trial or the free shipping. In startups, "Social proof", "Liking", "Authority", and "Scarcity" are all more-or-less defined by the userbase and market the company is in. That leaves us with "Commitment and consistency" as the magical 'weapon of influence'. So what is that exactly? I think it comes back to providing your users with an excellent product, excellent service, and make them feel like they are part of the family. From a different model, I think Zappos does an excellent job of this. To loyal Zappos customers, using the service is a no- brainer - at every turn the company makes users feel catered to, and in turn the users will continue to shop and feel confident that the relationship will work like it always has in the past.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> You really have to visit one of these places to understand the whole setup. They most certainly will try to rip you off and will use every trick in the book to do so.

My favorite is this one: You pick a cheapish looking rug and they tell you you have "champagne tastes" and say it is very expensive (even though it is worth nowhere NEAR the price they ask). I remember my uncle replied to these men with, "No... I think I just have beer tastes".

That being said I _highly_ recommend visiting the country as it is beautiful and just loaded with history going back to Roman times.

</comment><comment><USER27> Good sales people are worth their weight in gold. I've thought about taking a course in sales, just for the social engineering skills that can be picked up.

</comment><comment><USER28> Great article. I wonder if rug merchants will have to adapt now that their tactics are getting wider exposure?

<comment><USER29> Why would they? It's not about what's new, it's about what's effective. And these tactics have been effective for thousands of years. Of course, they're more effective with tourists who haven't been exposed to this sort of bargaining before, and have been trained to smile, nod, and pay whenever someone tells them a price. Still, this sort of salesmanship is -- and will always be -- effective. Why? Because it's personal, and it's relatively enjoyable for both parties if done properly.

In fact, it's only fairly recently that this sort of haggling has stopped being the way you did all your shopping (at least in the Western world.) Probably until the late 1900s, you walked into a store and expected to haggle with the owner over the price of the items that you bought.

<comment><USER28> Yes, but for thousands of years there hasn't been an Internet with bloggers detailing this sort of thing for the rest of the world. :)

I was commenting less on the haggling aspect and more on the team-based shill/forced-reciprocity system.

<comment><USER4> Knowing what it is when you see it does not make you immune to social engineering. The author knew right away what they were doing, but it still worked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Very similar to: [http://onstartups.com/home/tabid/3339/bid/1415/5-Startup- Sal...](http://onstartups.com/home/tabid/3339/bid/1415/5-Startup-Sales-Tips- From-Turkish-Rug-Dealers.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER31> Along the same lines, I've found www.changingminds.org to be the mother of all sites for techniques on convincing people to do what you want them to do.

</comment><comment><USER32> I own three copies of Cialdini's Influence, one for myself and two to loan out.

</comment><comment><USER33> reminds me of dr seuss's "green eggs and ham"...

</comment><comment><USER34> Somehow the story sounds fake..

Would Turkish people really know English that well? Would they be able to communicate like that?

</comment><comment><USER35> sigh! why the upvotes? How is this HN worthy?

<comment><USER36> because its interesting, has to do with negotiation and the psychology of bargaining.

<comment><USER35> actually this example in the rug essay is not a good one.

If you want to understand & use negotiation, read Shell's _"Bargaining for Advantage"_ : <http://www.amazon.com/dp/0143036971/>

<comment><USER36> the negotiation in the example isn't good, but looking back on his purchase in retrospect he admits that and identifies the reasons he ended up purchasing the rug.

on a side note, "Getting to Yes" is also another good book on negotiation.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Career of Mountaineer Fred Beckey - <AUTHOR> https://lithub.com/jon-krakauer-on-the-incredible-career-of-mountaineer-fred-beckey/ <comment><USER3> I saw him once in the early 2010s in Vertical World's Redmond location, but I didn't realize it at the time. Just some old guy in a harness feeling the holds in the bouldering area. We kept to ourselves.

Later, one of the employees told a story about how he met Beckey at the counter one time. Beckey had asked if he could climb, and the employee told him the rate for a day pass, not realizing who it was.

"I'm Fred," Beckey volunteered in frustrated amazement.

"Fred who?"

"Fred Beckey."

He waved him in to climb for free, of course.

</comment><comment><USER4> Fred Beckey really was an absolute legend in the world of mountaineering - <USER2> was known worldwide as the original climbing bum, and one of the world's finest alpinists - right up there with the likes of Walter Bonatti.

This is a reprint of an old article. Fred Beckey died in 2017 at the age of 94!

</comment><comment><USER5> Met him once at a backcountry lodge. I'm not a climber, but was on a long hiking trip and he was staying the night about to approach a climb. We were just like "who's the old guy" (he was mid 80's at the time) and wound up having dinner with him and a bunch of others. I only know a bit about him but it was inspiring seeing someone living like that even into old age.</comment>


Most of population need to get coronavirus to achieve herd immunity - <AUTHOR> https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-millions-of-britons-will-need-to-contract-covid-19-for-herd-immunity-11956793 <comment><USER2> > 60% of people will need to become infected

Meh, most likely 40-70% will get it anyway and then they'll be able to say "eh, it just went as we planned"</comment>


UI7Kit: Add one-line to enable iOS7 flat-style in previous versions (iOS5+) - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/youknowone/UI7Kit

<comment><AUTHOR> Is there anyone who is interesting implement iOS7 UI in previous versions of iOS?

I am working for this project from last week. With weekend work, basic components are available now. There still are many missing components and details. Working for them continuously. Thanks ;)

</comment><comment><USER2> It should not be called "UI7Kit"

UI is a reserved prefix by apple

YKOUI7KIT or U7IKit would be more appropriate

<comment><AUTHOR> I thought Apple recommends 3-digits prefix and 'UI7' can be one. Is it weird?

<comment><USER2> While I get what you're going for, I don't think it works out that way</comment></comment></comment>


Porting Smarty to Twig with PEGs - <AUTHOR> http://developers.freshbooks.com/blog/view/Porting_Smarty_to_Twig_with_PEGs/

<comment><USER2> I'm not an expert on parsing, but I used PEG.js recently and found it a lot of fun to work with - a good way for a parsing noob to learn, or if you just need something with a little more rigor than regular expressions.

In the future I'd like to use a PEG with an additional tokenization step, as the parser generated from a pure top-down approach will give fairly useless error messages when you have a typo deep in a nested expression, and I think that could be mitigated if I could point those errors out during tokenization.

<comment><USER3> > as the parser generated from a pure top-down approach will give fairly > useless error messages when you have a typo deep in a nested expression,

Errors in general are a hard part of PEG to solve. What you really want to do is save the "most correct" failed descent as you iterate across a rule. Usually they define it as the "deepest" failed subexpression. If your implementation doesn't implement error preservation like this, it's time to add it. :)

I don't think tokenization would really help here, and the preference by most PEGs to not have a separate class of token expressions is often cited as one of the major strengths of PEGs.</comment></comment>


Tenn Spends millions to stop P2P while laying off teachers - <AUTHOR> http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/11/tennessee-adopt.html

<comment><USER2> In the future, everyone will be in jail for piracy.</comment>


Amazon's War On The House Of Otto, Germany's $18 Billion Family - <AUTHOR> http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamtanner/2014/03/05/amazons-war-on-germanys-18-billion-patriarch <comment><USER2> If you see how Hermes Group, an Otto owned logistics company, (sub-)subcontractors have to handle their daily work load at (often below) minimum wage pay, often with their private cars, it's hard to believe he's that serious about running a morally superior business for any other reason than getting good PR.

DHL is not golden either but Hermes is just bad in every aspect. As a private customer in Germany I would try to avoid getting stuff shipped to me through Hermes by all means possible, since you never know who delivers your stuff (high fluctuation of sub-sub contractors) the delivery experience ranges from unacceptable to slightly above sub-par.

[http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/tv/ard-film-ueber- lohndumping-d...](http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/tv/ard-film-ueber-lohndumping- die-paketboten-und-der-milliardaer-a-778200.html) [German]

[http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=ht...](http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fkultur%2Ftv%2Fard- film-ueber-lohndumping-die-paketboten-und-der-milliardaer-a-778200.html) [Google translate]

<comment><USER3> I agree. I think, today's Otto Group is not morally superior to Amazon's business at all, at least judged by their Hermes business. At least, I can not see any viable differences.

What totally pisses me off is, the aura of "charity" that Otto is surrounding around himself. He also got a high German medal (the so called "Große Verdienstkreuz mit Stern") for his charities. With examples like these, German high medals become the same value as the "Nobel Peace Prize" that is given to some of the worst persons that have lived.

I now understand, why some people strictly refuse to be dishonored by such prizes.

<comment><USER4> What winners of the Nobel Peace Prize have been the "worst persons that have lived"?

<comment><USER5> All of the leaders of countries involved in any kind of war during their ruling would certainly meet the criteria. If Yaser Arafat and Barack Obama deserved the Nobel Peace Prize, I guess now it's time for Vladimir Putin to make the list complete?

<comment><USER4> Really? That's all the criteria for "worst persons to have ever lived"? That's a pretty low bar and seems like it would qualify pretty much every head of state ever.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What isn't mentioned in that article is that two other high profile German mail order companies ("Quelle" and "Neckermann") declared bankruptcy over the last couple of years and were mostly liquidated, because their business models had become unsustainable. Otto so far is the last of those former giants standing and probably profiting from the death of its direct competition.

An acquaintance of mine actually works for Otto and he told me several things. First of all, in the heads of many people at that company the catalogue is still the main driver of revenue. Online is more or less an afterthought. This is also reflected in their average customer who is older and less educated than the average Amazon customer. Secondly, their IT is ancient by Silicon Valley standards. Orders, for instance, are allegedly only processed once at night by batch job, because their infrastructure doesn't support anything else.

All in all, my money is on Amazon and Zalando (basically an Amazon clone supported by the infamous Samwer brothers) who will soon run circles around Otto if they don't catch up fast which isn't an easy thing to do with a slow behemoth of a company like that.

<comment><USER7> I ordered recently a chair from Otto and was mostly surprised that I couldn't use a credit card. Instead they send an invoice a few days after delivery.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> (This was nearly impossible to read on mobile)

        Michael Otto's family has been as omnipresent in German
        postwar retail as Wal-Mart, Sears and Target have in the
        U.S. So what does this 70-year-old patriarch of this $18
        billion clan most want to talk about? A factory in
        Bangladesh.

        With gusto he describes how he and Nobel Peace Prize-
        winner Muhammad Yunus hatched a plan to build a humane
        clothing factory, where all profits would go back into the
        community for schools and hospitals. At best, the Otto
        Group would recoup its initial investment. Immediately
        they faced red tape. Electricity would take five years.
        Officials wanted bribes. Otto refused to base a social
        business on a corrupt footing and walked away. "It's
        unbelievable," says Otto, pounding on his wooden desk in
        his corner office in Hamburg, Germany. "You would think
        the government must be happy somebody is building such a
        company and leaving the money in the country."

        ...

[http://notehub.org/2014/3/12/httpwwwforbescomsitesadamtanner...](http://notehub.org/2014/3/12/httpwwwforbescomsitesadamtanner20140305a)

<comment><USER9> Corruption is more cause than effect of poverty.

<comment><USER10> Poverty is a tool, leveraged by the corrupt.

<comment><USER11> How? I'm corrupt, and their are scavengers rummaging through the alley that runs behind the office. How do I leverage this poverty to make some sweet green? I've watched them dig through the trash, and they don't have anything, and they are just collecting bottles and cans for recycling. How do I profit from this?

<comment><USER12> Assuming that they are poor though otherwise functional (capable of work), then in order to make money from them you take advantage of them, knowing that poor people desperate for money to support their families will put up with more shit.

Have a "recycling" company and need somebody to man one of the electronics burning pits? Get one of those poor guys in they alley to do it. What are his other options?

You may need to bribe others to get away with this, but if those people are also relatively poor, the bribes should be affordable.

<comment><USER9> My preferred way to make money from poverty is that tiny investments can produce huge returns. There are also high search costs.

If you can find poor people who are really smart and haven't been permanently damaged by their experience (i.e. internalized failure, still believe success is possible, etc.), you can find some really amazing employees, partners, etc. People for whom "find a place to stay in California for a few weeks while looking for a job" is basically impossible.

<comment><USER12> That certainly works too, but I don't think you need to be corrupt to go that route.

<comment><USER9> Oh, my argument is that corruption (by other people) causes innocent/good people to be poor, and then other people who are self-interested (at least) and potentially altruistic can help those poor people.

Although generally my preferred form of helping would involve the corrupt people and some rope; much more efficient.

<comment><USER13> I think the Chinese govt. is roughly on the same page as you re rope, though I don't know how much of that is actually just a weapon to be wielded against opponents. I wonder how well that's been working at reducing corruption.

<comment><USER9> Unless it's all a shame, a lot of what the central Chinese government does seems great for China and neutral to good for everyone in the world. Most of the stupidity in China seems to come from provincial or local governments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I wonder how much of Otto's benevolence is being played up in the article (discouraging weekend working, tolerance of gigantic strategic failures). If he truly does what he's saying, it sounds like a very pleasant and productive place to work.

<comment><USER3> I do not agree with Otto's benevolence. I think it is just show. When you see what he is doing with his Hermes business, he is not benevolent at all but throws many people even deeper into despair.

There was also a documentary about his life-ruining business but the big "benefactor" just found covering slogans to disguise what it is really about: To rip people off. When his other businesses work the same, than it is a big benevolence show. Of course the German government bought the show (why not, our politicians are of the same kind!).

<comment><USER15> You cannot compare Hermes with the rest of the group. Hermes' working conditions are a result of the logistic market. And that is quite different from the conditions you find in retail. I worked for Otto in Hamburg and i can say that the benelovence is not just show.

<comment><USER3> I also strongly disagree with the (white-washing) statement, that the working conditions at Hermes are purely a result of the logistic market!

There are other logistic companies that still have far better working conditions. So it is possible.

The whole construction of Hermes is made this way, that the conditions of the workers are bad and Hermes itself can wash their hands of it. Even the small companies in between this "chain of irresponsibility" are complaining of bad conditions and many go bankrupt for Otto's billions.

<comment><USER15> I did not say that Otto is innocent in this case. Most of the bad press is a result of Hermes' overdependence of contractors, who often have contractors themselves. Of course, each link in the chain of contractors is obligated to make profit from the already low shipping price. DHL has this problem too (see the small "On behalf of" at the logo). Even though, DHL has another history (Deutsche Post) and therefore some advantages. The logistic companies are working on this. As a result you find more and more pickup shops. It is even discussed to make door-to-door delivery a premium service, so less delivery wo/men are needed and prices for direct shipping can be raised. The standard service will then be to pickup shops or automated packet stations only. Of course, this can be prevented if customers would accept higher shippings costs...

<comment><USER3> My critics of this system goes just in this direction. The construction is _on purpose_ in a way, that responsibility is disconnected from Hermes and the pressure is made so that the contractors themselves are forced to create bad working conditions.

There are also contractors that admitted that they had to cheat the tax system to stay afloat. Many have gone bankrupt and the people involved are often left without social security. That's all inside the "System Hermes".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Moral of the story is - people like their goods to be cheap, quickly delivered, and convenient to order. Amazon encompasses all of that and it seems that Otto's companies do not. I applaud his effort to put people ahead of profits, but unless he changes his business model amazon will continue to eclipse his empire.

<comment><USER17> Counterpoint: Perhaps government should enact regulation to lift the floor to prevent a race to the bottom. Amazon warehouses shouldn't become the sweatshops of tomorrow.

Governments exist to protect their citizens, not their businesses.

<comment><USER18> "Amazon warehouses shouldn't become the sweatshops of tomorrow"

They already are...

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25034598](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25034598)

[http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03k5kzp/Panorama_Amazo...](http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03k5kzp/Panorama_Amazon_The_Truth_Behind_the_Click/)

[http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/01/week- amazo...](http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/01/week-amazon- insider-feature-treatment-employees-work)

<comment><USER17> I'm aware. I have more faith in the German government protecting its citizens compared to the US government.

<comment><USER11> Based on what? The Otto Group is battling unions in Hermes, like Amazon is battling unions in their warehouses. Is there any difference at all?

I know Europe like to view US as a big monster to scare kids: you better behave or big mean US will eat you!

But is there anything objective that the German gov't is going to help anyone anymore than the US gov't? Maybe healhcare?

<comment><USER17> > But is there anything objective that the German gov't is going to help > anyone anymore than the US gov't? Maybe healhcare?

A substantial social safety net? Sane workplace hours and practices?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> _The Otto Group's sales are up 17% in Germany since the recession, while Amazon's have doubled since 2010._

Huh? This comparison confused me. I wonder why the author didn't use the same years? What was the baseline?

<comment><USER20> I read it as 2010 being the baseline for both, with "since the recession" meaning 2010.

But it's fairly ambiguous. It could mean any number of things.

It could also be that the numbers for the Otto Group aren't public for whatever reason.

<comment><USER21> I edited the story. We had to write it this way bc Otto reports a fiscal year that ends in February. Amazon's fiscal year is the calendar year. So it wasn't exact comparison and we had to fudge.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Did the guy (Otto) pay for front-cover or did Forbes randomly picked up a _successful billionaire_ who _made up himself_ in the period of the _German economic miracle_?

I mean, there's nothing attractive to this story: Amazon is bad on workers and Otto is good, won't get you far. Especially in the Anglo-saxon world.

</comment><comment><USER23> "War" sounds so much less boring than "competing".

I can't help but hear a sentiment like "We deserve perpetual success, dammit!"

</comment><comment><USER24> Fascinating story of the growth of a giant. I wish they hadn't glossed over the early growth of the company and how it grew during the Cold War and the divide in Europe. Anyone know any more about that part?

<comment><USER25> I know that Quelle, one of their competitors, got products manufactured in east Germany.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Awww look at the poor landed nobility. Boohoo.

</comment><comment><USER27> There's such a strong negative connotation to "burning out" in the article. If an employee puts in a solid 2-3 years and delivers great results for a company, "burns out", and then moves on to a new role or company, is that really that bad?

The company (in this case, Amazon) got great results from its employee, the employee had a good experience (and can leverage it to get a promotion, internally or externally).

I guess it depends on what employees are looking for in their career - to be the best they can be, or live a laid back lifestyle.

 _edit_ agree with the comments... this is a too simplified black/white comment. completely agree that finding the right balance between work/non-work on an individual basis is important.

<comment><USER28> "I guess it depends on what employees are looking for in their career - to be the best they can be, or live a laid back lifestyle."

You're not being the best when you burn out. You're killing yourself and your productivity with it. We have decades of research concluding that productivity falls when you're overworked.

"The company (in this case, Amazon) got great results from its employee, the employee had a good experience"

The employee does not have a good experience when they're working themselves to exhaustion.

"If an employee puts in a solid 2-3 years and delivers great results for a company, "burns out", and then moves on to a new role or company, is that really that bad?"

Yes, because companies shouldn't have to work their employees to the bone to extract value from them. A long time ago, we decided that it's cruel, and created labor laws. Where have you been?

<comment><USER29> >Yes, because companies shouldn't have to work their employees to the bone to extract value from them. A long time ago, we decided that it's cruel, and created labor laws. Where have you been?

Who is 'we'? You're wearing clothes and using a computer and probably exclusively using products that were made in nation-states that have virtually no labor laws. Where were you when globalization happened?

Regardless of moralizing in Western countries, you have decided it is not cruel to work employees to the bone and discard them when they break. You decided that when you bought the shirt you're wearing and the computer you're using.

Whether or not the status quo is right is one question; but you are wrong about what it is.

<comment><USER28> My comment was about the west. It's tragic that such poor working conditions exist in developing nations. But that should not excuse western companies when they over work their employees, as the original commenter implied.

<comment><USER29> Why not? Are people in the west somehow worth more than people in "developing nations"? (Besides their dollar value, obviously.)

If you're willing to condemn a Honduran to sweatshops, but not an American, that says something about you in more than one way.

<comment><USER28> I'm not willing to condemn a Honduran or anyone to sweatshops.

You seem to want to bring sweatshops to America to make things fair.

How bout we try to just end sweatshops instead.

<comment><USER29> So what clothes do you wear?

<comment><USER28> thrift store, motherfucker.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Dyson 360 Eye Robot Released - <AUTHOR> http://www.dyson.com/vacuum-cleaners/robot/dyson-360-eye.aspx <comment><USER2> Awfully pricy, but I'm tempted. I've been through 3 generations of Roombas. They didn't work that well, but I'm a gadget freak.

This one seems more like a serious "vacuum cleaner" and not just a carpet- sweeper like the roomba.</comment>


BlackBerry 10 is a failure that won't be able to compete, company source says - <AUTHOR> http://www.bgr.com/2011/12/22/blackberry-10-is-a-failure-that-wont-be-able-to-compete-company-source-says/

<comment><USER2> As a Playbook owner running OS 2, and a software developer, I agree that there isn't room for a fourth ecosystem of 'native' apps written especially for BB devices.

__Blackberry should stop running to where the ball is, and start running to where it's going to be__

What I would like is the ability to run web apps as proper apps. Ie: make Playbook the best way to consume web apps out there.

\- Apple's trying to push native apps that are iOS exclusive.

\- Android is from Google, a Java shop.

Both require web developers to shoehorn apps onto them via Titanium or PhoneGap.

\- Awesome HTML5 support. PB OS 2 currently has (308 in html5test as of last night)

\- Left/right gestures swapping web app windows like PB OS 2 currently swaps between desktop-style apps. No desktop-style tabs.

\- Use the high resolution icons on my site, rather than snapshots of the UI.

\- Focus on webworks as the primary SDK, ditch Air & Java/Android completely.

If you wrapped up the mobile gmail this way, it'd be as seamless as a 'native' app and a better experience than competing tablets.

<comment><USER3> Any other specific things that would make web application better or specifically what would you use if it was there?

One thing I am proud of is the addition of inspector built in. Turning on inspector, browsing to my web apps on the device and on my desktop having the full webkit inspector is very handy for debugging stuff you can't debug on the desktop such as touch events. One of those features that as soon as you have you can never go back. [http://www.berryreview.com/2011/04/15/hot-webkit-web- inspect...](http://www.berryreview.com/2011/04/15/hot-webkit-web-inspector-on- the-blackberry-playbook-for-web-developers/)

<comment><USER4> We got some advice from RIM on how to run this inspector, and it's been quite useful to improve our compatibility with the Playbook and especially the 2.0 OS.

That said, there are drawbacks to the Playbook that are hard to ignore and make it hard to recommend as a development target from the viewpoint of a "webkit developer" (oddball term, but there you have it.. :) ).

They feel quite a bit more sluggish than even the iPad1, which is fairly old hardware now. It would be encouraging if at least one non-Apple Webkit hardware+OS implementation out there actually managed to do CSS3 animations even half as smooth as the iPad2. I'm optimistic this is going to happen, but I don't think the Playbook has it right now. One thing I've liked about the Playbook and WebKit implementation is that we're mostly seeing what we interpret as "correct" behavior (aside from some Touch events interpretation, but we just received some help with RIM on that with the touch-mode setting). In comparison, the Samsung Galaxy Tab exhibits crazy smearing and other rendering errors when performing -webkit-transform. Our reference for correctness is Mobile Safari, though it has quite a few fun rendering bugs as well (iOS 5 actually introduced a couple new ones).

I'm not trying to be funny, but one thing that seriously inhibits productive web development on the Playbook is its power button and battery characteristics. Sometimes we literally cannot figure out how to get our Playbook to turn on -- the power button on these things has to be seen and felt to be believed. Sometimes you'll press the power button and it won't come on, and will suddenly spring to life 7 to 10 minutes later while sitting abandoned on your desk. Weird stuff...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> _Bad products, horrible software_

That seems strongly overstated. I don't use a BlackBerry, but nothing about RIM's products strikes me as bad or horrible. They are, at worst, uninspired products in a market with much stronger competitors.

I get the strong feeling that many in tech _want_ RIM to crash and burn as spectacularly as possible - I can swear there's a lot of schadenfreude in all these articles, and I can't figure out why there's so much anger towards RIM. It seems counterproductive, I would much rather see them sticking around and becoming a strong competitor.

<comment><USER6> You said it yourself you don't use a blackberry, so your comment doesn't exactly reflect on reality. I use a blackberry and I can confirm it's the worse phone I have ever had. It's missing features that my other 5 year old phone has, almost pathetic. To tap this, their prices are over the top. Personally, I don't think that article exaggerates anything.

I don't know why people want RIM to fail but I bet they will fail if they won't make a drastic change.

<comment><USER7> I have a Blackberry for work. It's fine. It receives emails. It makes phone calls. It makes a noise when I have a meeting.

An amazing work of art it is not, but it does work well enough. So I agree with the OP, it's uninspired but it's not horrible. It's a minimum viable product.

<comment><USER8> _It's a minimum viable product._

I'm not sure that is true today. The enterprise fortress is crumbling around RIM, and BES was the anchor giving RIM some stability. As more companies allow people to bring their own device in, being a very weak competitor to iOS, Android, and Windows very likely will be too much to overcome.

I expect Microsoft to buy RIM in 2012 in order to integrate BES with Windows Phone. Blackberry's OS will be shuttered then.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I used to be very ambivalent about BB devices, until I spent some time recently using a BlackBerry 9900.

I'd read about the BlackBerry OS being behind the times, and outdated, but as I used the 9900, I just wasn't seeing it. The touchscreen looks and works extremely well, the OS is smooth and responsive, and looks great too. And the web browser rendered every mobile site I loaded perfectly.

I know it is popular to cast BB devices as horribly outdated, but after using the 9900, I found myself seriously considering purchasing one and selling my iPhone 4. I love my iPhone, but the BlackBerry really impressed me.

This is anecdotal, I know...but perhaps we're all writing RIM off too soon?

<comment><USER10> I'm on the same boat. I feel the new 9900 is a great device. BBM is a great service and managing email on a BB is fantastic.

I'm seriously considering getting one (again. I'm on an Iphone4 now) as I see the Blackberry as a productivity tool and my Iphone as an entertaiment center (I'm actually considering dropping the Iphone for an Android, but that's another story)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> It seems to me that RIM needs strong, decisive leadership. The BlackBerry brand is still formidable.

I see RIM as being in a position similar to where Apple was prior to the return of Steve Jobs: Too many products, with the company's focus split in too many directions.

It's not too late for a renaissance, however. Perhaps even dividing BlackBerry products into four segments could work: consumer and professional, with a touch screen and keyboard device for each of the two groups.

BlackBerries already seem disproportionately popular among teens and young adults due to BBM. Deep integration of things like Facebook and Twitter into the OS could help strengthen the popularity of BB devices among this demographic.

Another big problem is lack of buy-in among the front line sales staff who are actually selling mobile devices. I've been shopping around for smartphones lately, and the bias of most salespeople I have encountered toward Android devices has been shocking. Don't get me wrong, there are many Android phones I love, but I've seen far too much bias among salespeople that is flat-out unprofessional; there's nothing wrong with sales staff having preferences, but I've often been told that BlackBerries are terrible, and iPhones are overpriced, so Android is the way to go. I'm knowledgeable enough to know better, but the vast majority of consumers aren't. If possible, RIM should work with its channel partners to try to stop this. Negotiating prominent placement in stores wouldn't be bad, either. It's hard to stand out in a sea of Android devices.

I'm an iPhone user, and I don't have a BlackBerry yet. But I like what they offer, and would hate to see RIM drift off into oblivion.

</comment><comment><USER11> Really amazing how quickly they slid after Android and iOS took off. I would not have believed it had I not witnessed it. It's really a lesson to all established technologies... you can fall faster than you ever realized.

</comment><comment><USER12> It will be a shame if they fail because OS 2 has the potential to be amazing, making "real time" really work on mobile, thanks to it's multi kernel architecture. Some detail here - [http://forums.crackberry.com/blackberry- playbook-f222/qnx-mi...](http://forums.crackberry.com/blackberry- playbook-f222/qnx-microkernel-strucksures-ability-626911/)

Can imagine UIs that adapt to your current location and environment as you move around.

</comment><comment><USER13> When they came out with the original timeline for integrating QNX onto the BB, I was excited. It was ambitious, but not impossible, and QNX is a fantastic OS that never found a niche. I was hoping RIM could revive it and give it the presence that I always felt it deserved. It looks like they may instead put the final nail in it's coffin instead.

The original timeline might have worked, it might have caught them up. Now that chance is way less

</comment><comment><USER14> Seems like a decent executive would have started a division running Android with Blackberry customizations a while back.

<comment><USER7> It's a risky proposition. Blackberry is software. Buying other people's software and reselling it makes you an easy-to-eliminate middleman.

HTC and Samsung like Android because they hate writing software (although not enough to stop doing it) and Android is much better than anything they could dream of making themselves. RIM, on the other hand, has already made pretty decent software. So it would be weird to throw all that away and start making low-margin hardware that competes with 100 other low-margin phones and tablets.

<comment><USER14> RIM has pretty deep enterprise integration compared to everyone else. Presumably they could leverage a lot of their existing software (on the backend - push, mail, messaging, etc) plus some great Android apps?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Can anyone shed some light on how this can happen? Don't managers use the product and ensure that it is better than the previous versions? How can they release Playbook OS 2.0 without BBM, email, etc?

<comment><USER2> > How can they release Playbook OS 2.0 without BBM, email, etc?

There's multiple Youtube videos of people running native email on Playbook OS 2. I think the article or the anonymous source is calling into question whether email is better on a BB10/Playbook OS 2 or the existing BB devices.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Maybe WebOS running on QNX might have been a good move. WebOS has been universally appreciated for the UI and UX (whereas OSes from RIM are not particularly well known for UX).

The SDK is also very friendly to web developers because Enyo is mostly HTML + JS, that will allow it to compete in the app space while being the 4th ecosystem. I do know that WebOS came on sale too late for RIM to use it on the Playbook.

Improving the horrible dev experience will go a long way towards the success of the platform. The dev tools are just atrocious by today's standards.

A must read letter to the management from an employee

[http://www.bgr.com/2011/06/30/open-letter-to-blackberry- boss...](http://www.bgr.com/2011/06/30/open-letter-to-blackberry-bosses- senior-rim-exec-tells-all-as-company-crumbles-around-him/)

Pretty prescient.

<comment><USER17>
      WebOS running on QNX

You can't run one operating system inside another without a virtual machine, which isn't feasible with today's mobile hardware.

It's also probably too late for RIM to purchase WebOS, at this rate RIM will be out of business by next year.</comment></comment>