Can Yahoo still be saved? - <AUTHOR> http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/09/technology/thebuzz/index.htm

<comment><USER2> I imagine that the brand won't have much mindshare after another 10 or so years. It is already pretty much dead to me other than a few email accounts. After it tanks, it will probably get picked up by someone and people will continue to be able to access their Yahoo mail.

Remember Webcrawler? That was the tool to use prior to Google, for a short amount of time at least. It's still there <http://www.webcrawler.com/> and owned by Infospace. Is it relevant? No. But it still exists.

Eventually those that lose to greater companies (like Google) on the web will totally fade away, but unlike old department stores of the past who haven't left a much of a trace in their wake, it is much easier to buy old web assets up and continue hosting them, if for no other reason than to steal their traffic for marketing purposes.</comment>


I Made My Shed the Top Rated Restaurant on TripAdvisor - <AUTHOR> https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/434gqw/i-made-my-shed-the-top-rated-restaurant-on-tripadvisor <comment><USER2> Similar to this, a few years back my then-roommates and I created a fake restaurant at our apartment, named after the nickname we gave to our kitchen. It was meant to be our own inside joke and we gave it a couple reviews ourselves.

The 4.5 star review caused us to get some walkup traffic, at which point we thought it was too real and canceled the experiment, although the page is still live if you link to it through our review history.

The best was a group of young 20 somethings who showed up and were really good-natured about the joke, so we invited them up for a beer and they dropped us a 5-star review.

</comment><comment><USER3> >The representative adds that "most fraudsters are only interested in trying to manipulate the rankings of real businesses", so the "distinction between attempted fraud by a real business, as opposed to attempted fraud for a non- existent business, is important". To catch these people out, TripAdvisor uses "state-of-the-art technology to identify suspicious review patterns" and says, "Our community too can report suspicious activity to us." They then quote a 2015 study that found "93 percent of TripAdvisor users said they find the reviews they read to be accurate of the actual experience".

If TripAdvisor can't catch out a restaurant which is entirely a farce how can they pretend they're catching out real businesses who might be nudging their results up a bit?

<comment><USER4> That's why I just go right to the negative reviews. Usually points out right away if the place is as it seems. Really helpful when booking hotels.

<comment><USER5> You mean the negative reviews created by the competition?

<comment><USER6> Is that really a thing? Like you I also try to read the negative reviews. If they're for dumb complaints like "the waiter had an attitude" or "the food took too long to arrive" I ignore them. It's only when I see more serious problems arising in a pattern that I'll discount the restaurant.

<comment><USER7> Yup. This applies for every popular site with reviews.

For other funny things with reviews, I have some experience with Polish eBay/Amazon equivalent, Allegro. The following things are regular occurrences there:

\- Employees of a seller creating fake accounts (and/or asking their friends and family to do this) and "buying" things with payment on delivery in order to leave 5-star reviews and positive comments. The things obviously never get sent, so it costs only as much as Allegro bills the seller per item sold.

\- Clueless people leaving negative reviews because they're clueless. Like e.g. a seller I know just got a 1-star review on quality and delivery time with a comment that said basically "I got the merchandise and it's fine, but I've been asking you for the invoice for two weeks and didn't get it". The guy bought the product only a week ago, and had the invoice sent _twice_ already.

\- Sellers fucking up, getting negative reviews, then calling each of the reviewers asking them to delete the negative review, and usually bribing them with discounts or free items.

Reviews on Allegro are very high-stakes thing for sellers; just a few negative ones can mean you lose a promoted spot or get your account suspended immediately. Such situations can literally make or break a small business seller. This leads to them reviews gamed to such absurd levels that you basically can't trust them at all, if the seller is a company.

Now these are anecdotes for one site only, but given my experience on-line, I'm pretty confident they generalize to anything popular with a review system.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Fake restaurants aren't only a thing bored journalists create. I went to a pop-up restaurant at a vegetarian food festival. The food and drinks were so bland and terrible I can only imagine the man running the place was a scammer.

For example he was selling a "rasberry lemonade" in a beautiful glass jug with fresh rasberry and lemon slices floating at the top. It looked delicious. The only problem was the lemonade had been diluted by about 100:1 so it was effectively over-priced water.

The fake "meat" was so terrible, he might as well should've just sold the ingredients he made the meal with.

After loosing $14 on this meal I could only conclude this man just travels around with his fake vegetarian restaurant scamming people.

<comment><USER8> You are confusing "fake" with "low quality".

<comment><USER6> No, I've been to low-quality, poorly run restaurants. This is like calling "fake news" low-quality news.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It's a funny article highlighting a cute hole in TripAdvisor's ranking system. TripAdvisor isn't being vile our misleading when they say they don't try to catch fictitious restaurants.There were no real, negative reviews of the restaurant, so it remained a perfect five with all very plausibly real reviews.

What they should worry about is detecting fake positive and negative reviews of real restaurants, which can cause businesses and diners a lot of pain and diminish the value of TripAdvisor.

Kudos to the author for "hacking" the ranking system in an unexpected way!

I wonder if they caught any fake negative reviews of the shed, jealous of its #1 spot...

</comment><comment><USER10> Well, congratulations on gaming a system based on trust. You can try to edit Wikipedia too and make Steve Jobs chinese if you want.

<comment><USER11> Did you read the article?

Besides being part comedy sketch, it's also part sociological experiment and part performance art.

It wasn't about gaming a system for financial gain in the least.

<comment><USER12> So you're saying making Steve Jobs Chinese on Wikipedia is a decent analogy?

<comment><USER13> Only if you legitimately convince people that Steve Jobs is Chinese.

<comment><USER14> That should be pretty easy considering he was born in Shenzhen...

<comment><USER15> How could he have gotten these great deals producing ipods when Apple was really struggling, were he not speaking Chinese perfectly?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> A true entrepreneur. Bringing, sell first and build it later, to a whole new level.

</comment><comment><USER17> Really cool story, but he never mentioned where he got the fake reviews that propelled him to #1 in the first place. There was one mention of the original "celebrity" endorsement, but what about all the reviews thereafter? Where did those come from?

<comment><USER18> At the end of the section you referenced, regarding endorsements:

> So I contact friends and acquaintances, and put them to work.

I think that's all there is to it.

<comment><USER17> So he has thousands of friends and acquaintances? Or did each leave multiple reviews?

<comment><AUTHOR> The screengrab[1] in the article show's only 96 reviews when the restaurant got to #1

[1] [https://video- images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1512580232417-n...](https://video- images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1512580232417-no1edit.png?resize=916:*)

(edited to update the image and review count)

<comment><USER19> > UPDATE 6/12/17, 17:12: After an eagle-eyed reader spotted that each mocked- > up TripAdvisor screen shot contained the same number of reviews, we have > edited the images so that the number of reviews match those in the actual > screen shots and replaced two of the images.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The foot/egg shot nearly made me spew my beverage onto my monitor from laughing.

</comment><comment><USER5> I can imagine someone turning this into a heart-warming film.

</comment><comment><USER21> Even funnier when he actually served food and people wanted to return.

</comment><comment><USER22> >UPDATE 6/12/17, 17:12: After an eagle-eyed reader spotted that each mocked-up TripAdvisor screen shot contained the same number of reviews, we have edited the images so that the number of reviews match those in the actual screen shots and replaced two of the images.

Wait so the whole article is fake?

<comment><USER23> No, what they are saying is that pictures that look like TripAdvisor screenshots in the article are not real screenshots of TripAdvisor site, but mockups re-created by the author. I guess this is for copyright reasons, since TripAdvisor could plausibly claim copyright on the actual content of the site, and given that the author is messing with them, it's best not to be legally exposed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I'm astonished a new entrant was able to make any dent at all. Mostly it's impossible for newer or smaller entries to break into the top. They must have some velocity weight that The Shed exploited.

All the social review sites have become review-farming contests, which makes them unreliable on the consumer side and frustrating on the producer side, and I don't know if that can be fixed. Yelp seems to do the best (at the cost of discouraging a lot of legitimate users by making their reviews disappear), but even so is not particularly good.

I think a curated review program, perhaps with a taste-matching algorithm like Netflix, could work much better... if the economics can be worked out.

</comment><comment><USER25> Epic. Tripadvisor is terrible for vetting places, so are google reviews, and facebook reviews. Tripadvisor is big in the UK, more reliable review sites like yelp don't have the adoption yet. Hopefully articles like this start to change that

</comment><comment><USER26> I haven't laughed so much at one of these since p-p-p-PowerBook [0]

0: [https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=10...](https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=1016390)

<comment><USER27> I saw the pics of the 15 years old mock computer that was sent to the scammers, and the first thing that came to my mind is: if the scammers had kept it, they could make good money reselling it now as a piece of internet lore. I guess the internet has corrupted us :).

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I think trust is still a very challenging problem to solve in the online realm.

Even if you can solve it, these types of things still have a very subjective nature to them.

</comment><comment><USER29> that's not hard, they just let anyone rate stuff... just like Amazon/Google/etc does... One day, you might get sued for doing it though...

</comment><comment><USER30> Vice is what you get when you combine journalism, capitalism, and navel-gazing college dropouts with no skills and lots of ambition. It's Tumblr for Medium. It would be beautiful, if it weren't so blatantly terrible. In a world where where startups with good ideas, talented people and lots of cash fail regularly, these witless wonders turn garbage into viral gold. Kudos to them.

<comment><USER31> I respect your bittnerness towards the world, but Vice is no different than any of the other businesses that use easily accessible , low effort content to subsidize their high effort work (for instance: Vice uses articles like "I did everything Siri told me to for a week" to subsidize their video work, Buzzfeed uses listicles to support their genuinely good longform journalism, and Comme des Garçons uses the extremely boring "Play" sublabel to subsidize their avant-garde, expensive runway shows)</comment></comment>


Meta-programming JavaScript Using Proxies - <AUTHOR> http://www.dzautner.com/blog/2013/12/31/metaprogramming-javascript-using-proxies/#yolo

<comment><USER2> I recently wrote about a great, and very simple, use case for JS Proxies [1]. They are the cleanest way to implement the mediator pattern in JS, which has some great uses in MVC.

[1]: [http://blog.sorentwo.com/2013/12/06/presenting-by- proxy.html](http://blog.sorentwo.com/2013/12/06/presenting-by-proxy.html)

</comment><comment><USER3> Please note that he seems to be using the old Proxy API.

</comment><comment><USER4> Normally I like having features like this in a language, but in JS I think it will be just a new tool for the "ninjas" to write crappy unmaintainable with it.

</comment><comment><USER5> I didn't understand what was special/novel about Proxies at all.

<comment><USER6> Proxies basically paper over the numerous weaknesses in Javascript's design by exposing named hooks for things like function calls and property accesses. It's not special or novel - in a language like python the equivalent is mundane things like naming a method __add__ or __getattr__.

It's important for JS, I suppose, because without it a bunch of interesting metaprogramming techniques are impossible and you end up with inferior APIs that have worse performance characteristics. On the other hand, Proxy will probably be slow forever like all corner case JS features, so you really only win on API quality here :(

EDIT: I should mention that Proxies do have some really interesting use cases; sadly the linked post does a terrible job of illustrating any actual reason you'd want to use them.</comment></comment>


Let's Buy Hackaday - <AUTHOR> http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/let-s-buy-hackaday <comment><USER2> Or we could setup a free wordpress site and spread the word that the new Hackaday is at newsite.com, and not completely waste $540,000. What a disgrace.

<comment><USER3> 10 years worth of articles have value, I bet 80% of their monthly traffic comes from search engine. No amount of opening up a new free hosted wordpress blog and calling it the new hackaday is going to change that.

You might not see value in it, but I wouldn't be too surprised if some big blog network snaps up hackaday soon.

With a little bit care you can make some serious money with that much traffic, even if most of the traffic is tech savvy and some of them might use adblock and generally immune to traditional ads.

<comment><USER2> Right. It's a business. I don't get any of the ad revenue. Why am I being asked to donate money for what's essentially a private equity buyout?

<comment><USER3> Oh I misunderstood, I thought you were referring to the value of the blog.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I saw they were going to sell Hackaday the other week and created my own alternative: [http://hackeveryday.com](http://hackeveryday.com)

Would love to get a few authors /submitters on board and keep the site free. There are better ways to spend that $500k.

</comment><comment><USER5> Just so we're clear, I'm putting money towards it so someone else can buy it & make profit? Not sure what I'm getting out of this deal that I'd get it some private company bought it on their own.

<comment><USER6> Yes, seems like we're supposed to fund these guys buying it so it will supposedly be "cooler." They're going to have the "current writers and editors" own it, but they're at odds with other writers and editors, it seems.

Nary a buck was given.

<comment><USER7> Just to clarify a single point here. There are no writers or editors at odds with eachother. Brian is doing this in an attempt to buy it from Jason. I'm moving on to other things regardless of what happens at Hackaday. We're all super good friends and get along great.

As for the rest of the thoughts and concerns, well, not my problem!

<comment><USER6> I read that you had come to an impasse about how the site should be run with a competing group also seeking to acquire the site.

I didn't mean to imply anything too nebulous, and of course defer to you on it...you guys wrote it in the first place, and I simply meant to reference it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> So the owner get's to sell completely on his terms?!? Sounds like Calacanis is going to make out like a bandit.

</comment><comment><USER9> How about we don't bother and just subscribe to the Adafruit blog, which covers similar ground but is generally more interesting and timely (IMO)?

(Though, granted, it does include ads for Adafruit products, which isn't an issue for me since that's some great targeted marketing).

I have nothing against Hackaday, I've followed the site for years, but I'd rather spend money on cool products at Adafruit than toss it into a vague blackhole for purposes I don't quite understand with no guarantee the site will even remain up or relevant to me.

<comment><USER7> Their blog is fantastic actually. And while there are ads for adafruit items, you'll notice there are literally no other ads. zero.

Hackaday has adsense, so if you're not blocking it, you get the usual banners.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I don't understand what the money buys you. Just fork it, set up a new Hackaday and raise money for a specific purpose. Not to make the people behind the original site rich.

<comment><USER11> I guess the money here buys you the domain name but more importantly the traffic associated to it. If you fork it, you need to do a lot of SEO and hope that one day you hit the stats of hackaday.

<comment><USER10> So I figured, but my stance is that in the long run the repute and traffic would not matter. I'm more in favor of the OSS-mentatlity: fork it. I've never believed in crowd-sourcing funding for a buyout as I have little faith in the that the market is working when the buyer is not paying out of his own pocket and after all you're only exchanging one private owner for another.

<comment><USER11> I completely agree, in that case it makes no sense: why should I chip in for someone else to be the owner.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've got much respect for Jason Calacanis and his "This week in startups" Youtube channel, but I don't see how this benefits the contributors. Half a million donations and the users don't reap the dividends of investment, or earn an interest in the site?

Either the site should be sold as an investment so someone gets a real financial interest, or someone should just make "newhackaday.com" as a non- profit and move everyone over there.

<comment><USER13> From Calacanis recently on Twitter:

 _" Need designer to work gratis on wearable computer mockups for editorial. grt exposure/u own content. ping jason AT inside.com"_

[https://twitter.com/Jason/status/352489885682241536](https://twitter.com/Jason/status/352489885682241536)

<comment><USER14> He's making five figures a month from this (Hack-a-day) site, putting that back into other startups, looking to get half a million out of it, and wants a designer to work for him _FOR FREE_!?

Yeah, now I'm even happier that I decided to keep my money.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Before contributing, you should probably read this:

[http://hackaday.com/2013/07/15/were-going-to-buy- hackaday/#m...](http://hackaday.com/2013/07/15/were-going-to-buy- hackaday/#more-99917)

<comment><USER16> Fascinating, I liked this bit, _" Here's the skinny: if this campaign is funded, the writers and editors of Hackaday will keep doing what we're doing. If we're successful, we're going to write up more hacks than we are right now,"_

Reading through that particular link its clear that the challenge here is a business model that pays the writers and editors enough money. Raising 500K isn't going to get them a business model. Which explains the second question I had when I read the headline, which was "Why aren't they getting investment from a venture fund?" I'm guessing they are still working on a model going forward which would make an outside investor nervous.

The other thing I wonder is how their traffic has been changed by Google Reader going away, if at all. That's because I'm generally curious on that question. It seemed to me that it was a big traffic generator but I didn't have any proof one way or the other on that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> I think the Hackaday site can shed some light on this. It appears that the owner wants to sell and the community wants to buy to preserve it.

[http://hackaday.com/2013/07/15/were-going-to-buy- hackaday/](http://hackaday.com/2013/07/15/were-going-to-buy-hackaday/)

</comment><comment><USER18> I find it hard to believe it is worth $500,000. Jason is going to be making some easy money.

<comment><USER19> Have you read the blog post? They are making $14k a month, I know nothing about website valuation but I thought 36 months was the norm.

<comment><USER2> So I'm supposed to _give_ money so two managers can buy out the shareholder of a company, with no expectation of returns. I'm sorry, is Hackaday a charity? Am I getting a return on my investment here? Am I getting any of that $14k a month? Let me get this straight, I'm giving money to two guys to do a buyout of a site that makes $14k a month, and I don't get a piece of the cash flow?

This is all so preposterous, I don't know how Kickstarter is even allowing this to happen on their site. Calacanis is one hell of a scammer.

<comment><USER19> I guess you consider content doesn't have value then? This is the return. If it's not enough for you, nobody force you to give. This is the beauty of crowd funding.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> "If this is funded, what's stopping you from buying Hackaday, then selling it and keeping the money? The same could be said if Jason sells to someone else. At least with this plan there's some accountability."

Is ^this really true? I don't think so.

</comment><comment><USER21> Uh, selling a link for $10,000? Really people?

<comment><USER14> That's against Google's rules and doing that could get them banned from Adsense and then it's bye-bye to that easy $14k/month recurring revenue...

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Odd they list Page Views and not Unique Visitors - page views as a valuation metric really isn't THAT important, as you can inflate/deflate it using design (i.e. split articles onto multiple pages, etc...)</comment>


What it means to design and implement a bike-friendly dream office - <AUTHOR> http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_eye/2016/03/15/perkins_will_design_of_sram_headquarters_is_a_bike_friendly_dream_office.html <comment><USER2> The bike track in the photos makes more sense considering that SRAM is a bike components manufacturer.

In Austin, the biggest concerns for bike commutes (for those within an easy commute) are secure bike parking and showers/changing facilities for the commute.

One of our local bike stores, Mellow Johnny's, provides bike commuter services - $1 per shower - [http://austin.mellowjohnnys.com/the-latest/the-5-ways-we- can...](http://austin.mellowjohnnys.com/the-latest/the-5-ways-we-can-make- your-bike-commute-easier) \- which might make more sense than custom designing most office spaces for commuters.

When I commuted downtown by bike (about ten miles), I'd usually shower at the downtown location of my gym, and then ride the bike a couple of blocks over to the office.</comment>


Show HN: Zen Flowchart – The simplest tool to create flowcharts - <AUTHOR> https://www.zenflowchart.com/ <comment><USER2> I'm building a similar editor for an app, adding [1] at this very moment for pan and zoom, this is nice work.

[1] [https://github.com/anvaka/panzoom](https://github.com/anvaka/panzoom)</comment>


The Decline of Poverty - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/future-crunch/global-inequality-is-getting-better-fdbfde215b73 <comment><USER2> Neoliberalism!</comment>


Optimizely Raises $57 Million - <AUTHOR> http://blog.optimizely.com/2014/05/05/optimizely-series-b-funding/ <comment><USER2> I love this company. We use them every day and we recommend them to all of our merchants (who in turn love them). Their product is in a small but distinguished group of tools that are so good they set a new standard. I consider circleci amongst that group, for reference.

Congrats guys

<comment><USER3> I would love to know what other products are in your group.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Congrats on the funding.

Perhaps Optimizely should run a test on their blog to see if their overall revenue is truly boosted by blocking cmd/ctrl+click on the "homepage" link (or pricing, or about). I'm reading the blog post, but want to also open their sales site in another tab, and... I can't. Feels like a bad idea to me, but maybe there's some logic behind it?

<comment><USER5> Weirdly, middle-click (at least for me) does open the link in a new tab. If I were to venture a guess, it would be that that behavior was unintentional. If it wasn't, I'm also curious about the logic behind it.

<comment><USER6> Just in case someone from Optimizely looks at this: I was curious so I examined the JS source. It appears the "munchkin.js" helper is the most likely candidate. The code is obfuscated but I see a click event listener that is doing logic related to detecting the control key and simulating a mouse event. It's probably broken on Macs.

(In general, intercepting browser events and generating your own interacts poorly with obscure behaviors like ctl-click as well with popup blockers.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Wow huge round for 7,000 users, but I think I missed something. The plans range from $14 to $293/month and then there is an enterpise plan. If we say the average revenue/user is $100/month that would be $700,000 in revenue/month * 12 = $1.14M/year? Pretty impressive for 7,000 users, however, with 200 employees the burn rate is $10M/year?

Despite that the valuation is $200M, what did I miss?

<comment><USER8> $700k/mo * 12 = $8.4M/year (not $1.14M). So they're nearing profitability, have triple-digit per year growth, and the latest investors get liquidation preference that limits their downside.

EDIT: Fred Wilson has a good explanation about why "frothy" valuations make sense right now: [http://avc.com/2014/03/the-bubble- question/](http://avc.com/2014/03/the-bubble-question/)

<comment><USER7> A sorry for the miscalculation, did that on the way out the door.

Just thinking how big the market is. According to [https://www.quantcast.com/top-sites/US?jump- to=110000](https://www.quantcast.com/top-sites/US?jump-to=110000) there are 110,000 sites with >10k monthly visitors, so I think that's the market of which they probably can get 30k users max for which they can charge $100/month on average: 30,000 _$100_ 12 = $36M/year revenue.

So for web, that's the cap it seems. According to [http://www.appbrain.com/stats/android-app- downloads](http://www.appbrain.com/stats/android-app-downloads), there are 200,000 Android apps that have >100,000 downloads, which probably equates to 10k monthly active users, with iOS apps that's 400,000. So this will probably bring another $72M/year making it $108M revenue cap for Optimizely. So looks like the money for Optimizely is in the app market.

With 300 employees at max that's a burn rate of $15M + $25M marketing + $10M other costs, we got a profit of $58M = maybe $700M company, not bad.

Back of the envelope calculation, probably totally wrong, ok now back to work :)

<comment><USER8> I can guarantee their TAM is >$108M / yr.

I am involved in two websites that get a _lot_ more than 10k visitors / month. Neither are listed in Quantcast. Using (crummy) traffic estimates based on Alexa ranks, I'd wager that there are _at least_ 600,000 websites that would qualify for your >10k monthly visitors mark.

But I suppose it's all a moot point: They convinced at least one VC to invest, and that's all that matters. (Having used their product in the past, I probably would've invested too given the opportunity. Their product is pretty slick and saves a lot of time compared building your own A/B testing framework.)

<comment><USER9> Agreed. One of my sites is ranked 490,000 or so in Alexa. The worst month in the last year was 165,000 visits.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I was a huge user of Google Website Optimizer. It was so easy -- you just put Google's JavaScript in your site and it shows your users different versions of the page.

When Google shut it down, I tried Optimizely a few times. It was so much more complicated, I didn't have the time or skill to setup tests.

Optimizely- Congrats on the funding. I still want to use you. And maybe I'm dumb, but I have trouble figuring you out. Anything I can do?

Anyone know of a simpler alternative to Optimizely?

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry to hear that! Our goal is to make Optimizely so easy to use it just works. Clearly we've failed in this case. I'd love your feedback on what we could have done better to improve your experience.

FWIW, two weeks ago we launched our Optimizely Academy to help folks like you go from zero to hero: [https://learn.optimizely.com/hc/en- us](https://learn.optimizely.com/hc/en-us)

<comment><USER11> The thing is that, when you need an academy or getting people certified, your product is too complicated to use.

<comment><USER12> I hear sentiments like this a lot, but I don't agree. Many companies have training on how to use Google Calendar/Drive properly. That doesn't mean these products are too complicated.

<comment><USER13> >Many companies have training on how to use Google Calendar/Drive properly

Is this really a thing? I would be embarrassed if I couldn't figure out a site as simple as Google Calendar/Drive. How should I take advantage of this?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Most comments here focus on the immediate revenue potential. But this is part of a much larger ecosystem, that spends billions of dollars deploying enterprise marketing platforms with Adobe, IBM, SAS, Oracle. Performance Optimization is just one of the many areas in this space.

The enterprise marketing platform is an area ready for disruption. Few large, expensive and slow players. Most offering clunky proprietary products, that require a huge learning curve.

After (if?) Optimizely solidify presence in this space, they can move up the food chain: tagging, re-targeting, DMP, personalization, campaign management, content management, etc.

So far they're off to a good start. And worst case scenario, they'll be acquired by Adobe and will become the new version of Test & Target.

</comment><comment><USER15> Congrats.

"Triple digit year-over-year growth in annual revenue since launching in 2010."

Is easily misleading without context.

I don't expect companies to divulge revenue numbers, but a company founded on data driven insights for site content, could probably choose more appropriate metrics to share.

<comment><USER16> From a blog post last year, you can calculate an absolute minimum;

March 2013 - "Double digit millions revenue run rate."

So a minimum monthly rate in 2013 would be ~$850k, so a minimum monthly rate for March 2014 would then be $1.7M.

[http://blog.optimizely.com/2013/04/10/optimizely- raises-28-m...](http://blog.optimizely.com/2013/04/10/optimizely- raises-28-million-to-go-global/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Random thought: Companies like optimizely have key data on its customers (conversion rates) and it may be valuable to a VC to have a board seat / access for the data alone. Not alleging any malfeasance here, just think it is an interesting angle.

<comment><USER18> I am not sure why this got downvoted. Using cloud services for your a/b testing can reveal key competitive information to the company. So trust is a big issue. That is one reason why I try to keep everything inside GA.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> One of the most important products to happen to marketers in a long, long time. Congratulations guys! I love your product and find it incredibly easy to use.

</comment><comment><USER20> Congrats Dan & Pete!

It's been amazing to watch the growth of Optimizely from seed stage to the massive success story it is today.

</comment><comment><USER21> Shame they can't get their website to work in FF 29...

</comment><comment><USER22> Congrats Dan & Team! Amazing work</comment>


Crypto optimizations for Go blocked by licensing issues - <AUTHOR> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/golang-codereviews/m5QTnSUZU6c/Jc5yaMyF2_QJ

<comment><USER2> Previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9567176](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9567176)</comment>


iVerify, an app that tells you if you're hacked - <AUTHOR> https://blog.trailofbits.com/2019/11/14/introducing-iverify-the-security-toolkit-for-iphone-users/ <comment><USER2> > iVerify periodically scans your device for anomalies that might indicate > it's been compromised, gives you a detailed report on what was detected, and > provides actionable advice on how to proceed.

How can that possibly work in a meaningful way when the app is sandboxed on iOS?

<comment><USER3> It can only detect noisy compromises of the phone. So it can detect the public jailbreaks but it won't detect state level malware. [https://able.bio/elizabethwind11/testing-iverify-- 12unx2t](https://able.bio/elizabethwind11/testing-iverify--12unx2t)

<comment><USER4> Thanks for your review, however, I wouldn't go as far to say that.

You don't know what a given nation-state will do or what tools they will use. It's likely that many of them use lightly modified, off-the-shelf tools. Additionally, guides in the app offer the possibility to discover avenues of compromise we cannot automatically detect (e.g., Gmail settings, Apple profiles, etc).

You're also looking at our 'minimum viable product'. We'll continue to enhance the detections over time, introducing new ones in updates that we expect will take people by surprise. We'll address the specific technique you described in your blog in a future version.

Finally, where you and I agree is that comprehensiveness of the checks are limited by Apple's own sandbox. As an app in the App Store, we're limited to using only public APIs. However, we also have an enterprise app that is capable of using significantly enhanced checks when distribution via MDM is an option.

I acknowledge, in the app FAQ and in interviews, that this is not a complete solution to securing iOS, however, it is the best possible you can do within the constraints provided by Apple. I think we'll be surprised by what we find as more people install the app and its detections continue to mature.</comment></comment></comment>


Browser Market Pollution: IE[x] Is the New IE6 - <AUTHOR> http://www.paulirish.com/2011/browser-market-pollution-iex-is-the-new-ie6/

<comment><USER2> (2011). But still relevant. Here's a more recent comparison of version adoption rates from ArsTechnica: [http://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2013/09/window...](http://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2013/09/windows-8-more-widely-used-than-os-x-ie-still-on-the-rise/)

Or as an album of just the charts: [http://imgur.com/a/3UM4J](http://imgur.com/a/3UM4J)

<comment><USER3> Can you really blame Microsoft here?

The slow rate of ie adoption is from corporate users who are reluctant to update more frequently because of the risk of breaking their internal applications. If this was any other browser I am guessing the chart would have looked the same.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Isn't IE now silently auto-updating by default, just like Chrome?

[http://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2011/12/micros...](http://arstechnica.com/information- technology/2011/12/microsofts-new-automatic-update-plan-could-finally-spell- the-end-of-ie6/)

Hopefully that will address much of the problem.

<comment><AUTHOR> Microsoft apparently can't do that because of all those corporate customers which depend on subtle behaviors of a particular IE version they have apps developed against. This is a vicious cycle. Auto-update would work if it was the case from the very beginning.

<comment><USER5> Sure they can - just like chrome and FF can: you just add an option to turn it off. IE has that option already.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting. So, perhaps, it's because IE update usually requires OS restart and Administrative privileges when Chrome for example doesn't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> >Windows XP still accounts for 46.6% of Windows users

And yet it's suppose to be retired in ~6 months.

EDIT: Newer data isn't so bad. XP accounts for between 20%[1] and 10%[2] marketshare today.

[1] [http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww- monthly-201210-201310](http://gs.statcounter.com/#os-ww-monthly-201210-201310)

[2] [https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOper...](https://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportOperatingSystems.htm)

<comment><USER7> > [Published] SEP 27TH, 2011

<comment><USER6> See my edit. I only realized this was published in 2011 after reading the comments.

<comment><USER7> Yup!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Don't forget server versions of Windows. Server 2003's IE6 is going to be supported until 2015 and Server 2008's IE7 is going to be supported until 2020. And worst of all, Server 2012's IE10 is going to be supported until 2023 and can't be upgraded to IE11 without upgrading to R2.

<comment><USER9> Do people generally surf from Windows Server though? Or run webapps using Windows Server? I could see someone using Windows Server to go to a website and download a file needed for the server, but that should only affect roughly no one. If your website supports SMB or enterprise customers and your downloads aren't accessible on even IE6, you're massively misjudging your audience (and putting too much into your web development).

<comment><USER8> I agree that terminal server is the most common usage.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It would be interesting if someone published the 'effective browser technology guide' which defined the set of things that would look the same on all browsers. It might end up with just CSS2 and tables though :-(

<comment><USER11> [http://caniuse.com/](http://caniuse.com/) is pretty good for that.

<comment><USER7> That is a fantastic resource that every web developer should be aware of.

But it can't tell you if things will _look_ the same, and it only goes back as far as ie8.

Examples:

[http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer/doubled- margin....](http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer/doubled-margin.html) [http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer/floatIndent.htm...](http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer/floatIndent.html)

<comment><USER12> FYI, if you click "Show all versions" in CanIUse it goes back all the way, to IE 5.5, FF 2.0, etc.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: Service for aspiring programers to get code reviews from experts - <AUTHOR> https://engchannel.com <comment><USER2> I don't understand the economics of this. Professional programmers can easily make more than $65/hr. Reviewing someone else's code can take a lot of time: I spend 10+ hrs/week reviewing code for my team. How would the reviewers or the service make any money if this took off?

If the reviewers aren't really professional programmers this will just be the blind leading the blind. Better to learn how to search StackOverflow and how to ask good questions there if you want free crowd-sourced code reviews.

<comment><USER3> I imagine reviewing a beginner programmer's code will be less time consuming than code at work. The projects will be less complicated too.

<comment><USER2> Maybe, but beginners need a lot more explanation. I can't just comment "use a regular expression" or "remove invariant from the loop" with a beginner. I mentor a beginner programmer now, it's time-consuming, but I get paid full rate for my time.</comment></comment></comment>


Framework Whipped - <AUTHOR> http://meaganwaller.com/posts/framework-whipped <comment><USER2> Google cache of the original post: [http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:U53MirE...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:U53MirEmtHQJ:blog.8thlight.com/uncle- bob/2014/05/11/FrameworkWhipped.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk)

What's surprising is that @unclebobmartin didn't see anything offensive or wrong with what he wrote until a number of people pointed out that it indeed was: [https://twitter.com/unclebobmartin/status/465519956088848384](https://twitter.com/unclebobmartin/status/465519956088848384)

<comment><USER3> Is it really that bad? Did it send the message the response article is criticizing? The author states that she interpreted executive to mean man, secretary or assistant to be female. But this is never explicitly mentioned and it could just as well be the other way around.

I might be wrong, and while Mr. Martin didn't write a stellar article- it contributed almost nothing and could be summed up with, "Beware of becoming too dependent on a framework."\- I wonder if it's really so inherently sexist and misogynistic that it merits immediate action such as a takedown and public apology.

<comment><USER4> As I see it, it's using a strained metaphor framing his argument in terms of negative attitudes towards people (attitudes I think would be damaging no matter which genders they're applied to, but that are extra likely to hit a sore spot thanks to traditional gender roles) as a substitute for an actual argument.

Ironically, I think his framing in terms of power between groups hurts his conclusion. Sure, some framework authors don't care about their users, but others do, and frameworks aren't equally overbearing.

Much more interesting and useful would be an article on design decisions that lead to frameworks causing their users pain, and ways to avoid making those mistakes, or how to protect your own code from depending on a particular framework too heavily.

Plus, an argument with real substance might kill the temptation to lean on strained metaphors in the first place.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Given how much demand there is out there for qualified female engineers, I don't understand why Meagan or any other engineer who works there would stick around feeling uncomfortable. Go work for google or Apple or any of a number of other companies that would love to have you work there and would treat you with the respect you deserve.

As for Bob Martin, looking at the linked posts it seems pretty clear he is a lawsuit waiting to happen. His company should fix the situation, and _soon_ , or they won't be a company very much longer.

</comment><comment><USER6> The "harem=misogyny" part is backwards: The original article refers to the _programmer_ being unexpectedly stuck in the _framework 's_ harem... Not the other way around.

</comment><comment><USER7> A framework is like a puppy.

It is not just for Christmas - its for life.

<comment><USER8> Commence outraged comments by PETA supporters over your strained analogy</comment></comment>


Brad Feld No-Cost Venture Deals Course Starts September 24, 2017 - <AUTHOR> https://app.novoed.com/kfa-venture-deals-fall17 <comment><USER2> Brad Feld? Kauffman Fellows? Sign me up!

This is an incredible resource. I'm particularly interested in the other side of the coin: how to generate deal flow and the mechanics of making seed stage investments in "moonshots" and "hard tech". Having access to live video chat with two major players is phenomenal.

Thinking YC might need to step up its game here ;)

</comment><comment><USER3> Can't recommend the book enough. Having read both editions a couple of times, I'm still going to take this course.

It's a lot of content and I expect the course to make the more pertinent material points to stick watching the authors describe the content more personally.

</comment><comment><USER4> Their book is quite good. It should be read along with _Venture Hacks._ I prefer VH but the PDF weighs in at 1200 pages and while I have finished _War and Peace_ I haven't finished VH.

</comment><comment><USER5> This book is incredible! I read this book twice cover to cover and then hand copied a version to fully grok it. I make every member of every team I work with read it before I have any indepth conversations. It's that good, and an absolute nessecity in helping to get everybody operating from the same place.

</comment><comment><USER6> Worth it. I recommend the book to every entrepreneur I meet, it will help so much and save so much pain.

</comment><comment><USER7> I loved their book and would be interested in this, but it looks like it requires a real-time presence that I can't fit in at the moment. Hopefully they'll make recordings available.

<comment><AUTHOR> There are some assignments due that you have to turn in to get to each part of the course.</comment></comment>


Design In Progress: Choosing the Right Product - <AUTHOR> http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/1582-design-in-progress-choosing-the-right-product <comment><USER2> Jamie is "running up the flagpole" the 37signals product-description page... and getting some comments, though I find it a little difficult to respond to his (intriguing) "slice" of the page without seeing it all in context.

Looks like a design seeking, foremost, a more "fun" feel. Not sure the result really is also an "informative" feel, IMHO.</comment>


EC2, RDS, and Elastic Load Balancing issues - <AUTHOR> http://status.aws.amazon.com/?US-EAST-1

<comment><USER2> AWS knows which AZ is affected and they permutate them so AZ-A can be different for different people, but why can't they tell me which one is affected (from my perspective) when I'm logged into the console?

"Availability Zone Status" shows all green.</comment>


Lobste.rs has now more than 10k members - <AUTHOR> https://lobste.rs/u/ <comment><USER2> haven't been there in 2 years. it had some flair initially since the topics that HN would consider borderline were demoted much stricter on lobste.rs. so it appealed to the SW developer in me but over time I moved back here and forgot they existed. in the end most discussions from lobste.rs already had HN counterparts with much comments in the threads due to huge difference in user- base. But I also felt there were a lot of HN haters over there and an attitude that lobsters would be a better HN.

 _imvho_ lobste.rs is annoyingly managed top-down by the founder. Opinions usually have to resonate with his (and his bros) ... maybe this is just because the community isn't yet big enough to actually incorporate other sides of the bubble. The discussions I have seen him fight out, and ban people over were ugly. They usually started on the premise of _technical disagreements_ and escalate into a war because of the founder being high on lobsters being his platform so his opinion has to be the right one ...

it felt a lot like majordomo email lists for tech/devel discussions in the 90ies. If you didn't agree with the admin (no matter if their technical points where moot) you were out (that being a poorly managed list - there were ofc many great places where it was a great place exactly because it was ruthlessly managed). But if you want to scale to these dimensions I think founder ego can clash with the growth of the platform.

For me having this behavior witnessed against some of the lobste.rs users, the platform just felt like another bro-culture I could happily live without.

What for me feels narrow might feel "more puristic" to others. But I think lobste.rs could do more in terms of creating a welcoming environment by either distributing the power a little. It's not a thing the community can do since the founder has to be OK with and embrace it. Until then I'm happy to reduce my HN addiction by just limiting to HN.

Again this was some time ago. Maybe this has all long since changed. I'd hope so.

<comment><USER3> > _The discussions I have seen him fight out, and ban people over were ugly. > They usually started on the premise of technical disagreements and escalate > into a war because of the founder being high on lobsters being his platform > so his opinion has to be the right one ..._

Examples of this?

<comment><USER4> > Examples of this?

Me. I was forcefully removed from the lobste.rs community by "pushcx" (after years of activity) for posting "a lot of really negative comments" and not playing along with his culturally insensitive offer to "help".

When will these people learn that faking cheerfulness cannot be imposed on the whole world? Anyway, to add insult to injury, all my comments with negative scores were deleted after the ban.

"I appreciate that you haven't attacked anyone", he wrote, before going on his little power trip. Involuntary humour is better than no humour at all, I guess...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I like that they show who invited who. Wonder how many members hacker news has?

</comment><comment><USER5> Haha, I thought it was a social network for Jordan Peterson fans.

<comment><USER6> [https://lobste.rs/about#michaelbolton](https://lobste.rs/about#michaelbolton)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> For folks that are interested in joining, feel free to swing by #lobsters on freenode and ask for an invite. You'll probably get asked for your Github, personal portfolio, or some other indication you have technical chops, and then somebody will send you an invite if they feel comfortable attaching your name to their account.

It's not a community for everybody--we deliberately focus on actionable technical information and training, and tend to skip over more entrepreneurial or marketing stuff ( [https://barnacl.es](https://barnacl.es) is a sister site that's way better for biz talk).

The culture is ongoing in refinement ( [https://lobste.rs/s/oackyq/lobsters_community_standards#c_sy...](https://lobste.rs/s/oackyq/lobsters_community_standards#c_sybvqw) ) and evolution, reinforced by periodic meta threads where aspects of the site and culture are drug up and commented on and tweaked.

It's probably the most rewarding and healthy tech community I've been involved with in the last decade. :)

<comment><USER7> I always found it fascinating this seems to purposefully (accidentally?) prohibit employees of big companies who are prohibited from open source software development work without jumping through a lot of hoops.

<comment><USER8> Can't you just give them your company email if you're insistent on joining? I'm sure they'd put a SWE at FAANG in the "has technical chops" bucket.

<comment><USER9> The poster's speculation was incorrect. We don't care about employer.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Map shows how long it took to travel the world in 1914 - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/12027166/What-travelling-was-like-100-years-ago.html <comment><USER2> Interesting that it took 40 days to get to northern Africa despite its relatively close proximity to western Europe.

<comment><USER3> I am guessing 1914 Northern Africa was not as nice as it is now. Probably an issue with roads.

<comment><USER4> Infrastructure in general I think. The articles mentions railways, which seem to help a lot towards shorter travel times.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Url changed from [http://humanprogress.org/blog/the-best-map-you-will-see- toda...](http://humanprogress.org/blog/the-best-map-you-will-see-today), which appears to copy [http://www.cato.org/blog/best-map-you-will-see- today](http://www.cato.org/blog/best-map-you-will-see-today) without linking to it, which points to this.

<comment><USER6> Telegraph points to [http://www.intelligentlifemagazine.com/places/cartophilia/ti...](http://www.intelligentlifemagazine.com/places/cartophilia/time- travel)

I remember it from earlier this month. Really interesting graphic.

<comment><USER5> Good catch! Apparently I develop link fatigue after 2 hops.

That makes this a dupe of [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10647586](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10647586), which also explains why users flagged it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> In 1873 it took 80 days, or so I hear.</comment>


'Environmental Nightmare' After Thousands of Atlantic Salmon Escape Fish Farm - <AUTHOR> http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/08/24/545619525/environmental-nightmare-after-thousands-of-atlantic-salmon-escape-fish-farm <comment><USER2> "The Atlantic salmon bring with them pollution, virus and parasite amplification, and all that harms Pacific salmon and our waters of Washington," Beardslee said."

I honestly think that the Joe Blog's of the world have no idea how detrimental fish farming like this is to the environment, people in my family see it as a nice alternative to eating mammals. It's sad things like this have to happen to bring it to public attention.

I hope in the future they teach children to find out where there food comes from and what impact it has on their environment before purchasing it. This stuff isn't cool.

<comment><USER3> The answer is 1/7\. 1/7 of the calories needed to grow the amount of protein, that a cow needs. They dont need to heat themselves up. They dont need to build large bones to fight gravity. Sorry, i know its not cool to be for something nowadays, fish farming of all the farming, has the best ratio.

<comment><USER4> _Aquaculture_ has the best ratio, but fish farming isn't the only way to do it.

The GreenWave folks seems to have a decent alternative. They base their aquaculture on filter feeders (oysters, mussels, scallops, clams) and autotrophs (ocean kelp, a salad green which btw is the source of omega-3 in fish), with the result that their farms _clean up_ fertilizer runoff from terrestrial farms and reduce eutrophication. Their protein requirements are even lower than fish farms, requiring 0/7ths of what a cow needs (ie no inputs).

Here's an overview from the founder Bren Smith, who incidentally is pretty funny: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjFPdTnclUA&t=4m20s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjFPdTnclUA&t=4m20s) (skip ahead to 8m for just the farm description)

<comment><USER5> To be fair, chinese do exactly the same since 1950, when they invented and polished the modern polyculture systems based in seashells, ocean kelp, and crabs or fishes (and a similar freshwater version since thousands of years ago). Culture of marine filter feeders is not exactly breaking news for spaniards, french, dutch or japanese. If you can't resist the urge to invest on them, remember that GreenWave is just another company doing the same as thousands of current asian and european companies. Would be not much different than claiming that a californian company invented wine in 2017.

<comment><USER4> That's fantasic. Thanks for the correction.

Attribution aside, I'd like to see the technique more widely known and practiced. The commenter was defending fish farming by favorably comparing it to cows, but ignored shellfish polycultures probably because they simply didn't know about them.

It appears to be mainly China that practices it widely. To the extent the Chinese aren't scaling it globally as a climate-friendly alternative to fish farming, they leave an opportunity for other players.

Some links:

[http://www.circleofblue.org/2012/china/chinas-marine- aquacul...](http://www.circleofblue.org/2012/china/chinas-marine-aquaculture- shellfish-industry-really-big-and-apparently-safe/)

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

[https://theconversation.com/how-farming-giant-seaweed-can- fe...](https://theconversation.com/how-farming-giant-seaweed-can-feed-fish- and-fix-the-climate-81761) (discusses both GreenWave and China)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> "Department officials blamed the structure failure on high tides caused by the eclipse...."

That's certainly creative.

<comment><USER7> Isn't that true though? The sun-moon-earth in a straight line when the moon is near perigee _would_ cause unusually high tides.

<comment><USER6> It would, but the tidal effect of a perfectly aligned sun/moon would not be much different from the tidal effect of a mostly-aligned sun/moon. It's really just another spring tide, which happens about twice a month.

Plus, the failure didn't even happen during the eclipse. It happened two days earlier, when the moon would have been 20-30 degrees away from the sun's position. That combination happens quite frequently.

The article notes that tides weren't abnormally high, and had reached greater heights at some point in every month of 2017 so far.

<comment><USER8> Well, it being a total (non-annular) eclipse does mean the moon is relatively close.

<comment><USER6> Right, but lunar perigee will approximately line up with the sun about twice a year, so that's not unusual either.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Related: Public urged to remain vigilant after Pacific salmon found in Irish rivers (August 14 2017)

[http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/public- ur...](http://www.independent.ie/breaking-news/irish-news/public-urged-to- remain-vigilant-after-pacific-salmon-found-in-irish-rivers-36030119.html)

</comment><comment><USER10> Question is, why are they farming atlantic salmon on the pacific coast?

<comment><USER11> Atlantic salmon are larger than native species on the coast, so more business value. They also grow faster than than native salmon.

<comment><USER12> > Atlantic salmon are larger than native species on the coast, so more > business value. They also grow faster than than native salmon.

You've missed the point. Of course they do it because it makes business sense. That's the whole point of a business.

What remains a mystery is why on earth would they be farming an invasive specie right in the ecosystem they are a threat.

<comment><USER13> You're answering your own question : they do it because it makes business sense and they probably won't be the one to pay for the damages (not personally at least)

<comment><USER12> > they do it because it makes business sense

That's far from being the point, and it doesn't answer anything at all.

I mean, I assume this "environmental nightmare" happened on a fish farming business located in Washington. After a brief googling, it appears that Aquaculture companies in Washington are required to apply for a commercial license.

[http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/commercial/misc_additional_perm...](http://wdfw.wa.gov/licensing/commercial/misc_additional_permits.html)

Why on earth would a commercial license be granted to a business that involves introducing invasive species on a protected ecosystem?

<comment><USER14> Primary industries have a lot more political clout than environmental protection. Primary industries generate tax dollars for the government; conservation consumes it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The worst thing about this is that this company will get nothing more than a slap on the wrist. And their larger fish farm that they want will of course get approved, even though they can't handle a smaller one. It's incredibly offensive how little government officials actually care about the environment.

<comment><USER16> I'm not being flippant; I'm genuinely curious.

What's your ideal punishment? Death? Life imprisonment? Complete liquidation of the company? Fines or wage/income garnishment for executives and mangers and board members?

Shouldn't at least some government officials also be punished? I'm _miffed_ that they're not routinely punished for similar (or worse) lapses.

And what exactly is it for which you wish they'd be punished? Potentially introducing an invasive species into the habitat of a protected species? Or failing to do more to prevent the actual introduction?

<comment><USER15> Companies that engage in environmentally-risky practices should be fined so heavily that they shouldn't attempt environmentally risky things unless they know they can do it properly. This creates a great advantage for well-run companies because it's basically a moat. Other companies that try it will fail dramatically because they'll get fined into oblivion.

This, to me, includes chemical factories. Whenever they have a gas leak, or an chemical spill, the fines should be utterly draconian. Personally I think a CEO of a chemical company should live no more than 1 mile away from one of her factories, but that's the environmental fascist in me.

Ineffective government officials should be fired with prejudice.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Wow, it's like a vastly lamer and far less exciting Jurassic Park.

<comment><USER18> life, finds a way

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Somewhere in the middle is the interesting bit (to me at least: "why is releasing fish an issue?"):

> Warren said his main concern is that Atlantic salmon could out-compete > native Chinook salmon and steelhead for food and spawning grounds.

<comment><USER20> We need good science media to explain these things to the rest of us.

For instance, where I'm from, a failed float switch allowed millions of gallons of treated drinking water overflow into the local streams. The EPA pitched a fit about a hazardous chemical release. It is really difficult to support and believe in the EPA's mission without an explanation why the same water you drink and spray on your lawn suddenly becomes a hazardous chemical.

<comment><USER21> Reference please? My Bayesian estimate is that it is much more likely that you misunderstood badly or believed fake news than that the EPA was upset about a drinking water spill.

<comment><USER20> I can't find a reference, unfortunately. This was in the Arkansas River watershed, likely back in the 1990s, and so has likely not made it over the digital divide, yet. Consequently, we might only have my memory of the event to depend on. I will concede that it may have been local (Colorado) authorities, and not the US EPA.

But my point still stands: Drinking water is surprisingly and counterintuitively an environmental hazard. It is easy to conclude that the local environmental agency is being irrational without good science media explaining.

It is well-understood that chlorinated water causes fish kills:

      https://www.fws.gov/nc-es/edout/albefitfish1.html
      http://www.vita-d-chlor.com/specs/awwarfdechlorguides.htm
      http://www.fosc.org/AL-Chlorine.htm
      http://ntv.ca/chlorinated-water-killed-hundreds-of-fish-in-waterford-river/

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> [https://thetyee.ca/News/2017/08/24/protect_salmon/](https://thetyee.ca/News/2017/08/24/protect_salmon/)

</comment><comment><USER23> we should release fish small enough to fit through nets, so that they outbreed fishes we catch and the fishing industry goes bankrupt.

</comment><comment><USER24> As bad as this is I hope some late night comedy show take it and runs with it. Lots of good xenophobia, immigration and west coast jokes could be made from this.

</comment><comment><USER25> i wonder how this will affect the already struggling pacific northwest resident orca population.

</comment><comment><USER26> This is appalling. As an avid fly fisherman, these farms are disgusting. You can see how sick these fish are at the local costco. They put the farm raised salmon fillets right next to the wild salmon fillets. They are pale pink compared to the vibrant rich red of the wild.

These farmed salmon exist in this huge pen of netting, where they swim in their own filth and spread disease amongst each other and any wild salmon swimming through the filth that washes out from the netted pens. It hurts and damages the wild population as they spawn and swim through this sickness and get sick.

I wish they were banned personally, but if humans are not smart enough to not buy this sick farm raised salmon then we deserve to have salmon wiped from the earth.

It's such a shame.

<comment><USER6> According to the internet (always reliable), the natural pink color of wild salmon comes from their diets. The most natural diet for farmed salmon would make them gray, and that wouldn't have anything to do with their health, just the fact that they'd be eating different things. But people won't buy gray salmon, so farms include a pigmenting agent to give them color.

<comment><USER27> Yes, it's from the crustaceans in the natural diet. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astaxanthin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astaxanthin) for background on natural and synthetic forms of the pigmentation.

I don't eat meat, but watching a documentary on sea lice in farmed salmon made me lose my appetite for everything. Getting a little queasy just thinking about it.

<comment><USER28> How do they remove parasites from sushi and poke fish?

<comment><USER29> Sushi grade fish is frozen at a specific temperature for a specific time period to kill parasites.

<comment><USER30> In the USA. Sashimi (sushi is the rice) is never frozen in any decent restaurant in Japan, so the question remains unanswered...

<comment><USER5> If you find this is because it was farmed fish and farmer fish can't have this type of inner parasites that cause trouble. Although is true than can have more load of external parasites in skin or gills they are super-clean inside normally. Much cleaner than wild fishes.

I bet that most, if not all, decent restaurants in Japan ultra-freeze _wild_ fishes on the other hand, even if they may not admit it.

<comment><USER30> > I bet that most, if not all, decent restaurants in Japan ultra-freeze wild > fishes on the other hand, even if they may not admit it.

They (can, in some restaurants or if you ask) serve the head next to the sashimi and it is still twitching so you know it is fresh. So no, they don't.

<comment><USER28> So the parasites don't exist in Japan or they don't affect people who eat them?

<comment><USER31> > The Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry has issued an official warning on the > rapidly growing number of Anisakis infections linked to eating raw or > undercooked fish. [...] The ministry urges consumers to keep the fish frozen > below minus 20 degrees for at least a day, or heat it for at least for a > minute in temperatures exceeding 60 degrees, which should kill the larvae.

[https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/05/12/national/scienc...](https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/05/12/national/science- health/anisakis-infections-raw-fish-rise-health-ministry-warns/)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Hello Moderator - <AUTHOR> I need a contact id on which I submit my vulnerability report..... <comment><USER2> As per HN Guidelines:

" _Please don 't post on HN to ask or tell us something (e.g. to ask us questions about Y Combinator, or to ask or complain about moderation). If you want to say something to us, please send it to email@example.com._"

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)</comment>


Crash course in applied functional programming - <AUTHOR> http://redsymbol.net/articles/crash-course-applied-functional-programming/

<comment><USER2> I really enjoyed the humor in this article. It makes it accessible enough that I will probably send it to a few if my newbie-programmer friends.

After discovering functional programming myself I figure everyone who doesn't love it must not know what is is. It's the best thing since 640k of ram, after all. But there are people who have heard of it, maybe tried it, and just gone right back to their Java and forgetting that the strategy pattern even exists. After talking with some programmers at work I find that they think it isn't necessary and, more than that, isn't approachable.

I personally love the mathematic approach. It is more natural for me after my time in math and physics. Most people don't like math, and we need more articles explaining how FP simplifies programming they are already doing. I liked that this introduction was very approachable in that respect.

<comment><USER3> _I really enjoyed the humor in this article. It makes it accessible enough that I will probably send it to a few if my newbie-programmer friends._

Thanks, that's what I was going for - glad it's funny to someone other than myself ;)

I had been reading through a backlog of old Steve Yegge articles at the time, some of which have very good jokes, and that inspired me to try to use it in this article. I agree that when done well, it can make the information that much more approachable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The other thing I'd add into something like this is, by analogy, objection orientation is all about binding data to functions and calling it a "method", but what it's _really_ about is what you then build out of that, like the classic Design Patterns. When you program in OO, you don't sit here thinking to yourself "OK, I'm calling a method, wooo! OK, I'm calling another method! Wooo!"

Similarly, this is just the baseline stuff, the really interesting stuff comes out of what you build from that, which varies depending on the precise flavor of functional you are talking about. What's really interesting is what you build out of this stuff; you hardly ever sit there and go "Wooo, I'm mapping! Wooo, I'm reducing! Wheeee!" In fact you can write a lot of Haskell without ever writing the (local equivalent of the) word "reduce" or "filter" because you're always actually using something using that under the hood. (map I do end up using directly with some frequency. And I'm not saying I _never_ use fold or filter directly, but it is often actually under the hood somewhere while you use something yet more declarative.)

</comment><comment><USER3> Hi HN. Glad you're liking this article. I didn't realize it was on the front page until a reader emailed me directly pointing out a correction.

This actually came out of a conversation I had with one of my best friends, a computational physicist. He writes massively parallel software in Fortran, which runs on supercomputer clusters.

He was curious about this whole functional programming thing; I wrote a very long email explaining/demonstrating some concepts, then later cleaned up and turned it into this article.

I wrote it maybe 3 years ago; if some parts are a little dated (references to python 2.4, etc.), that's why. Though it seems to have held up well enough overall!

Anyway, enjoy! Happy Holidays everyone.

<comment><USER5> Thanks for the article.

There's a typo. Search for "interator" to find it.

<comment><USER3> Will fix, thanks!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> The article suggests this book: [http://gustavus.edu/+max/concrete- abstractions-pdfs/index.ht...](http://gustavus.edu/+max/concrete-abstractions- pdfs/index.html) before embarking on SICP.

Can anyone comment on the text please? I've not heard of it before.

</comment><comment><USER7> Does Icon have list comprehensions? I did a small project using Icon in one of my classes and I don't recall it having them, and I can't quickly find evidence of them.

</comment><comment><USER8> Interesting that the author thought it would take too long to write about lambda functions

<comment><USER3> I really just ran out of time :) Had intended to go back and add that someday, but never did. In retrospect, I think it's fine the way it is - whoever reads that article will have a good foundation for actually using lambdas, which will be easy enough for them to learn about in other ways (if their language of choice even supports lambdas).

<comment><USER9> You can still add it! For completeness. That's the clearest writing I've seen in a long time.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for the compliment :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> > (The above is a heuristic example. So you nice people with the pitchforks > there, please forgive that I did not protect against SQL injections, etc. I > promise that in real life I did. Thank you.)

The newbie who's just copying and pasting your code won't read that disclaimer. Or care. It's still irresponsible, even as a toy example.

<comment><USER11> Irresponsible?

People with knives may not know that they cut. People with hairdryers might not now you're not supposed to use them in the tub and people with microwaves might not know you shouldn't dry your cat in it.

Now, you argue that people who just lift code off of webpages, without even reading all of it, deserve something. What a stupid thing to criticize.</comment></comment>


Show HN: State of RSS Survey - <AUTHOR> https://feeder.co/blog/473-state-of-rss-survey-2020 <comment><USER2> The "Start Survey" button is only visible on mobile. On desktop, I was not able to start it. (something might be blocked by uBlock)

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh no... Thanks for the heads up. The survey was previously embedded in an iframe, so pushed a fix for that now.</comment></comment>


Creating a new web app: announcing EasyEmailProtection - <AUTHOR> http://tbbuck.com/creating-a-new-web-app-announcing-easyemailprotection/

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi everyone, blog post author here. If you want to ask or suggest anything, I'm all ears :)</comment>


Broken by Design: MongoDB Fault Tolerance - <AUTHOR> http://hackingdistributed.com/2013/01/29/mongo-ft/
<comment><USER2> "Broken by bad logic"

The post contains the 'straw man' informal fallacy - ie. standing up an absurd scenario in order to knock it down.

Mongo provides write concerns for several use cases. Those concerns are:

NONE NORMAL SAFE FSYNC_SAFE REPLICAS_SAFE

The author focuses on the write concern NONE - a write concern that is provided for the 'fire and forget' use case. To choose NONE and expect guarantees and fault tolerance is simply user error.

<comment><USER3> Something tells me that you did not read the article.

<comment><USER2> Something tells me you did not read the manual.

The post focuses on the least safe mode (NONE), and barely touches on REPLICA_SAFE at the end of the article. Leaving the reader to wait for "a future blog post".

Choose the tool and configuration for the job. For a Mongo user that needs fault tolerance and consistency guarantees, I would recommend (based on documentation) choosing a configuration that attempts to provide those.

The safest server configuration would be a multi-node replica set (3 or 5) that spans multiple data centers (preferably 3 or more). The safest client configuration would be a write concern REPLICA_SET (majority).

If you have examples of Mongo not providing fault tolerance in this setup, the world would be a better place if you shared.

<comment><USER3> I not only read but _quoted_ the manual, in parts of the article that you evidently skipped. I also described why SAFE and FSYNC_SAFE, aren't. I also described why getLastError doesn't work when pipelined or multithreaded.

It's hard writing for the "tl;dr"-generation (as this exchange demonstrates -- there was a time when it used to be embarrassing to have someone say the same thing twice to you in a discussion).

I'll have a separate blog entry on why REPLICA_SAFE is broken, and how the setup you outlined can lose data.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Ironically, whatever this is linking to is throwing a 500 error.

<comment><USER5> That isn't irony.

<comment><USER6> A post criticizing MongoDB for being "broken" goes down? I believe it is.

<comment><AUTHOR> Then it criticizes MongoDB for doing little if anything against data loss, was any data lost during this outage I didn't see? ;-)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is the 3rd or 4th time I've seen this article in the past few days so I've decided to post my take. I work with Mongo in a production scenario but I'm hesitant to post because these things tend to turn into a pointless argument. So let me stress: this is not an attack on the blog post, I'm hoping to improve the discussion here. Here goes:

\- "It lies." Mongo used to have a default where a driver would fire off a write and not check that it succeeded with the server. This was very obviously a decision made to improve benchmark performance, though I imagine a benchmark with only default settings would be rather naive. Regardless, yes, the default was a stupid corporate decision but it is well known and should be apparent if you're deploying a Mongo cluster. Additionally, as the author notes, this default has changed and this entire point is no longer a concern.

\- "Its Slow." A real point he raises is that its a little wonky you need to send a separate message for getLastError. I suspect this is an artifact of Mongo's historical internal structure. [http://docs.mongodb.org/meta- driver/latest/legacy/mongodb-wi...](http://docs.mongodb.org/meta- driver/latest/legacy/mongodb-wire-protocol) . If you look at the wire protocol, I think it is designed such that only the OP_QUERY and OP_GET_MORE message types get an OP_REPLY back. getLastError is a command, which are run through an OP_QUERY message. He notes that using this check affects performance. It does, but lets dig into this:

"Using this call requires doubling the cost of every write operation." If the author benchmarked this, I suspect he would find that it vastly more than doubles the latency of a single write operation from the client's perspective. My understanding is that when performing this kind of safe write, the driver sends an OP_INSERT, for which it doesn't have to wait for a reply, then immediately sends an OP_QUERY message (getLastError), on which it hangs waiting for the OP_REPLY. In other words, this is now slower because we've created a synchronous operation immediately after just firing off the insert command. Again, its a little wonky that we send Mongo two messages, but one is immediately after the other and that is vastly overshadowed by the fact that we now have to wait for a reply. I believe 1 synchronous send and receive is unavoidable to ensure a safe write in ANY system, and the argument about sending 2 messages really boils down to sending about 200 bytes over a socket vs 400 bytes, I personally don't worry about it.

\- "It doesn't work pipelined / it doesn't work multithreaded." He is also missing the real complexity here, and this is where I have a problem with this blog post because this is not a theoretical discussion, if its content is true then it should just be proven rather than FUD launched into the world. As noted in the docs ( [http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/reference/command/getLastErro...](http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/reference/command/getLastError/) ), getLastError applies for the socket over which the command was run, so its up to the driver to execute the getLastError on the same socket as the write, which is an implementation detail and a solved problem. The way the drivers do this in practice is you set the write concern and the driver takes care of the rest. If you run getLastError manually then it depends on the driver, but for Java the correct procedure is addressed at <http://docs.mongodb.org/ecosystem/drivers/java-concurrency/> . So for the fastest possible safe performance, you multithread (which is effectively pipelining from the server's perspective) and run operations with the driver's thread-safe connection pool. Suffice to say people actually use these drivers in a multithreaded context in the real world, and they work.

\- "WriteConcerns are broken." There are several relevant settings here, including write concern acknowledgement and fsync, the author is confused about how these map to the Java driver WriteConcern enum values. The acknowledgement setting (elegantly stored in a variable named "w", thanks 10gen) is the number of replicas that must confirm the write before the driver believes it has succeeded. I personally set this to 1, but you could potentially wait for the entire replica set to acknowledge. The fsync setting is whether or not this acknowledgement means that the server on these machines has completed the write in memory, or actually synced the data to disk. I set this to false for performance. There is an excellent StackOverflow answer on Java Mongo driver configuration at [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6520439/how-to- configure-...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6520439/how-to-configure- mongodb-java-driver-mongooptions-for-production-use) .

The author also spends time noting that if you only ensure the write succeeds on a single machine, and you irreparably lose that machine before replication, then the data is lost. This is obviously true for every distributed system.

I've used a 4-shard Mongo in a production multithreaded environment that handled several hundred million writes. For part of this period our cluster was extremely unstable because of a serious data corrupting Mongo bug (more on this in a second). I haven't done a full audit but based on our logs, in about 6 months I've seen exactly 1 write go missing, so I'm personally not concerned about the things mentioned in the blog post. I've also been happy with performance as long as the data size comes under the memory limit. If your data exceeds memory, Mongo essentially falls on its face, though this is hard to avoid when a query requires disk accesses.

Mongo is not without its problems, however. As I mentioned, QA is a real concern, we hit a subtle bug when we upgraded to v2.2 that caused data corruption when profiling was turned on and the cluster was under high load. It was very difficult to debug, and basically should have been caught by 10gen before their release.

Another serious problem is that sharding configuration is still somewhat immature, and it seems like every new release is described as "well it used to be bad, we finally fixed it". Here is an example: you pick a shard key that can't be split into small enough chunks, and now shard balancing silently fails. Ok, so you pick a better shard key, but you can't migrate shard keys, so you have to drop the collection and start again. Except dropping a collection distributed across a cluster is buggy, so you can't recreate the collection with the same name and a different shard key. So you just pick a new name for your collection, and you have this weird broken state for the original one sitting around forever unless you completely blast your cluster and start from scratch. This sort of thing is not fun!

Mongo has many pros and cons, personally I think its real advantage is simplicity for developers which makes it worth putting up with the other stuff. Sorry for being long winded, hopefully this has been useful.</comment>


Signature of a resonance transition between Mars and Earth - <AUTHOR> http://news.wisc.edu/from-rocks-in-colorado-evidence-of-a-chaotic-solar-system/ <comment><USER2> Orbital resonances are a powerful phenomenon over a long enough time. This article doesn't mention it, but Mars's rotational axis is also chaotic. The whole planet can change its axis of rotation over the course of a few million years. It is likely that something similar happened to Mercury, though tidal friction has slowed its rotation enough that it's unlikely to occur anymore. The only reason this doesn't happen to the Earth is that the presence of the Moon stabilizes our rotation.

Also, there is a few percent chance that Mercury will be ejected from the Solar System due to orbital resonances before the Sun dies. A general principle of planetary dynamics is that systems are only barely stable --- they are stable only over timescales of approximately their lifetime. Then they will suddenly go through a period of chaos, only to settle into a slightly more stable state and start the whole process over again, with a longer timescale.

<comment><USER3> > _A general principle of planetary dynamics is that systems are only barely > stable --- they are stable only over timescales of approximately their > lifetime_

I think I might be misunderstanding what you wrote, because it sounds tautological to me - "Systems are only stable as long as they remain stable systems."

<comment><USER2> I find it a bit counterintuitive. After all, the natural timescale for planetary dynamics should be the orbital period --- i.e., a few years. So one might think that if the system is unstable, it will dissociate within a few years. If it doesn't do that, then it should be stable for all time. But instead the next system takes 10 years to fall apart. And the next one takes 100 years, and then 1000 years, and so on. And eventually these systems (whose natural timescales are still years) take billions of years to fall apart.

You would think that if it is unstable, then it should reorganize itself into a system that _is_ stable for all time. It's a little bit odd that every time the system reorganizes itself, it is only a little more stable than it was when it started. Somehow, planetary systems are always just sort of end up teetering on the edge of stability.

<comment><USER4> That is interesting - it seems counter-intuitive to me that the periods of apparent stability would tend to increase in duration over time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> So they seem to be implying a gravitational interaction between Earth and Mars. Out of curiosity I wanted to see roughly what kind of forces we're talking about at closest approach. (Edit: including feedback below, thanks)

        r   1e11 m
        Me  6e24 kg
        Mm  6e23 kg
        G = 6e-11 m^3 kg^-1 s^-2

        F ~~ GMeMm/r^2 = 6e-11 * 6e24 * 6e23 / (1e11)^2
          ~~ 2e16 N

[http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=G+*+6e24+kg+*+6e23kg+%2...](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=G+*+6e24+kg+*+6e23kg+%2F+\(7e19m\)%5E2)

<comment><USER6> Your distance is off by quite a bit (should be ~1e11 m at closest approach).

The actual force is closer to 10^16 N. Which is big, but 10^7 weaker than the earth-sun interaction. But the sun has to move the earth by a couple AU per year whereas Mars has had a couple billion years to move it by the same amount.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Chaotic movement towards the end of simulation looks suspiciously like aggregation of computational errors and loss of modeling accuracy.

<comment><USER2> I haven't read their paper, but the usual way to test the accuracy of your N-body simulation is to check to see how well energy is conserved. If your simulation is going crazy due to numerical errors, this will be reflected in the energy changing wildly. If the change in energy is very small, it is likely that the chaos you're seeing is real.

<comment><USER8> Yup. For more accuracy, you can also vary the timestep by small amounts and rerun the simulation. If they give the same results you assume that numerical errors aren't a problem.

Depending on the integration scheme used, the errors sometimes bias in the direction of adding energy, so normally numerical errors would look like all the planets gaining velocity and leaving orbit. "Blowing up" the simulation if you will. The wiggles in orbits of the video look like a legit chaotic system to me.

<comment><USER2> One thing to note, though, is that if the two calculations match, then that's great and you can trust the results. But even if they don't agree, you still might be able to trust the results. Often these sorts of long-term simulations are only done in a statistical way. You can't trust the results of any individual simulation due to numerical uncertainties, but you can trust the aggregate results of a large set of simulations all run with slightly different initializations. (So, you could run many long term simulations of the Solar System to conclude that there is a 3% chance that Mercury will be ejected.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is an excellent piece of work and one that helps give some solidity to the notion that the stability of our situation on the planet only seems stable because we have only been recording (and hence reliably remembering) how things were for the last 2000 years or so. Suggesting once again that being able to live on different planets in the same system and to easily move between them would be an excellent survival tactic.

</comment><comment><USER10> Off topic, but: Did anyone else find it annoying that the actual research is about rocks in Colorado, but the picture is from Big Bend in Texas?

</comment><comment><USER3> I like the crash-porn at the end that preserves our landmasses exactly.

And say what you will about the instability of the solar system, but if orbits start coinciding, it might make interplanetary travel quite a bit cheaper!

<comment><USER11> That is actually only about a third of the way down. There are more details about depositions and ancient oceans below.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> if planets revolving our sun can somehow collide with eachother, we should be able to see the same phenomenom happening in other star systems. Do we have evidence of it?

<comment><USER13> > _if planets revolving our sun can somehow collide with eachother_

It's not "somehow", it's only a matter of time until something happens in most star systems. They are only stable over human-relevant time spans, they're not static. Every star system is the result of the evolution-like process of its formation. What we see as the result of that process is literally only there because it survived long enough for us to see it. These systems do change over time. Small deviations add up, some are subject to cumulative destabilizing factors (such as the Earth-Moon system), and sometimes it's just due to a rare event occurring.

> _we should be able to see the same phenomenom happening in other star > systems. Do we have evidence of it?_

Oh yes. We're seeing extrasolar planets that we think have moved significantly during their life (mostly inwards, because our detection methods favor those). And sometimes we see dust clouds that are the result of planets colliding.

Again, there is nothing new or surprising here. We haven't thought of star systems as static and perfect for a long time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Well, after a billion years the sun will be too hot for life on Earth to survive anyway, so it seems a little pointless to worry about orbit destabilization at that point; if we're somehow still around, we'll have to have moved off-planet anyway. That or taken control of the planet's orbit (to move it away from the sun), in which case we probably have the tools to handle the problem regardless.

</comment><comment><USER15> How would radioisotopic dating work here? All the clay is coming from the same places upstream and being deposited in layers. Same for the calcium carbonate. So just rearranging the material shouldn't change the decay rate, right? What would be radioactively different from one layer to another?

<comment><USER10> Seems to me that, when dating the clay, you're dating the formation the clay eroded from (unless whatever radioactive isotope you're using escapes out of small rock particles). Calcium carbonate, on the other hand, as the article said, is produced by life forms - but from what material? Well, the "carbonate" could be atmospheric, but the calcium isn't. It also could be dating its origin, not its deposition.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Hmmmm.... So if you were immortal and wanted to ditch Earth, it would be best to go to a supercool dwarf with only 1 planet? Otherwise you might get pulverized before the end of the dwarf's lifecycle?

<comment><USER3> A rogue planet headed for intergalactic space might be a better bet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> This would be really scary if it was relatively eminent, but its like so far away that we would have 5th dimensional technology if we survived as a species by then and could slip into different parallel dimensions where issues don't happen or way more likely before would have already populated many exoplanets rendering this not even an issue. Did I mention I don't know what the hell I'm talking about?

<comment><USER18> The 5th dimension? You might be under the influence of Dr. Chaotica.

<comment><USER17> Probably. I shouldn't stick my nose in a subject I have no business to comment on. I'll keep on programming. :)</comment></comment></comment>