Why Are Palo Alto's Kids Killing Themselves? - <AUTHOR> http://www.modernluxury.com/san-francisco/story/why-are-palo-altos-kids-killing-themselves <comment><USER3> Here, hazarding a guess:

Palo Alto's real estate prices are among the highest in the nation. To afford that kind of real estate you have got to be a pretty big achiever; you've got to be book smart, emotionally smart, and capable. Unfortunately these traits are not 100% heritable. Yet the expectation is placed on the children to achieve at a level comparable to their parents. Living in an environment with identity-level expectations that are impossible to satisfy is miserable.

<comment><USER4> Yep. If you slip up -- a series of B's, a summer wasted at a dead-end job, or a break-up with a significant other you sunk tons of time into, and end in a lower-tier area, you'll be effectively "banished" from the community. Your "friends" will look down at you at the 10-year reunion you likely won't attend, and you'll never be able to afford to live in the area you grew up.

Banishment, or the threat of it, is one of the most psychologically difficult ordeals. Cut off from friends, community and our surroundings we have become accustomed to.

Making a middle-class lifestyle in the Bay Area affordable, with better transit, will go a long way.

<comment><USER5> Your first paragraph sounds so dramatic that I was expecting you to laugh the idea off as a joke at the end, but you didn't. It sounds like you're 100% serious. Is this actually the case? Don't mean to pry, but it sounds a little extreme, and I wonder if this has happened either to you or anyone you know. I grew up in Irvine (mentioned below as similar to PA) and no one I knew would have banished anyone for getting B's or not getting a nice job. We were normal kids.

<comment><USER6> You aren't literally banished. What happens is that if you can't succeed at a high enough level, then you won't be able to afford to live in the same type of community as an adult. Economic banishment, not social, although the social separation happens as a knock-on effect. As social/tribal creatures this is absolutely a huge deal psychologically.

<comment><USER7> I think this is the root of it. The high cost of living (high property values, high taxes, high regulation around inputs like fuel and wages) mean that being able to put four walls around a family and feel even a modicum of financial security requires a staggering -- a simply staggering -- income.

If one looks at the inputs into the cost-of-living issue, I suspect one would actually find that much of the pressure cooker atmosphere is the result of bad policy. There's no shortage of land, energy, labor, or even water* in Silicon Valley. But there's an enforced shortage of these things, and the resulting high prices create the "banishment effect" for these children.

* Since I'll take some flak for this, here's one supporting view: [http://www.city-journal.org/2015/cjc0402vdh.html](http://www.city-journal.org/2015/cjc0402vdh.html)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's not clear that kids in Palo Alto really are killing themselves at unusually high rates over the long term. There was a recent suicide cluster there, but any event that is random will clump in some location some time, and maybe there is nothing about Palo Alto itself that produced the recent clump. For sure, any event that happens in Palo Alto grabs the connection of well connected people who can get lots of media attention for their concerns, so there has been a lot of reporting and commentary about this issue. This article kindly submitted for our discussion from the _Modern Luxury_ website is just the latest in a large collection of articles by nonspecialists on suicide in Palo Alto. But maybe the problem will appear to go away as the random clumping of individual suicides occurs in some poorer and less well connected community next year.

Of course I desire for all young people everywhere to live long, healthy, and happy lives, and if there is something toxic about the culture in Palo Alto, let's by all means do something to fix it. But one part of that effort is to better understand suicide and its prevention, a topic I post about fairly often here on Hacker News. (Check my other posts just from today. I research this issue a lot.) A lot of the commentary I have read about Palo Alto this year has been heavy on speculation but very light on verifiable facts, and I think, with all due respect, that an important issue like youth suicide deserves to be treated factually and carefully.

<comment><USER9> The mantra of the fundamental materialist is always "it is only a coincidence" and it is quite useful to recite to explain away topics that might make one uncomfortable. Another good one is "correlation is not equal to causation" (except when it agrees with my preconceived reality tunnel). If you repeat it enough times or with enough conviction it might even start to sound true!

I attended Gunn in 2006 and this was happening in waves before I got there and continues to happen in waves since. There are guards that sit by the tracks (sometimes 24/7) to look out for students who are looking to take their lives in this specific way (buy them a coffee or donut on a cold night, they'll appreciate it). This is occurring at one of the most educated, affluent areas in the world. Hell even Radiohead poked fun at how perfect the place is. My AP CS class covered topics that weren't even included in my undergraduate CS degree at top ranked UC, and my social network from this school is more influential than any networks I made in college or graduate school.

If the suicide rate did meet some statistical "norm" then _that_ would be exceptional. Why are kids killing themselves in utopia? Why are some of the worlds most intelligent, rich, and power adults burying their children?

EDIT: "paid guards" -> "guards".

<comment><USER10> >If the suicide rate did meet some statistical "norm" then that would be exceptional. Why are kids killing themselves in utopia? Why are some of the worlds most intelligent, rich, and power adults burying their children?

Gunn '08 graduate here. It's because these intelligent, rich, and powerful adults are used to pushing themselves to the max, and they put the same pressure on their kids. However, not all children are like their parents, and a lot of them can't take the pressure.

Growing up in Palo Alto is weird, especially if you've lived somewhere else. Everyone is pigeonholed into being academically successful, creative, bright, and happy. All the parents want their children to be successful like they are. All the teachers want to create a demanding and rigorous academic environment that pushes these kids to the limit. But no one ever asks the children what they want, or gives them room to develop an identity of their own.

Instead, from the age of 7 you're expected to spend 8:00am - 3:00pm in school. After school your schedule is stuffed with extracurricular activities, ranging from sports to speech and debate to Kumon. Then you get home around 6-7pm and work on homework til midnight. Get up the next morning at 6:45am, rinse and repeat.

If you don't follow this schedule, if you opt out and don't take the required extra-curriculars or get a B in Algerba 2A/Geometry instead of an A, you're viewed as a loser. You're on the path to becoming a nobody in life. You're nothing.

So kids opt out by getting shit grades, playing video games, doing drugs, and some have serious mental issues and end up killing themselves. The adults then all get up in a panic. The teachers make long speeches about how they're here to help. The parents go to meetings and undertake inane measures such as posting guards at Caltrain, which doesn't really do anything.

Meanwhile, nothing changes. The teachers continue to assign an insane academic load, and give no room to the kids to breathe with the endless homework assignments. The parents continue pressuring their kids, because "yeah that other kid killed himself, but surely that won't happen to my child. My child will grow up to be smart happy and ambitious like me..."

... right?

<comment><USER11> Extracurriculars should be _radically_ optional, especially if the kids are actually doing homework until midnight. that's just not enough zone out time.

With my own kids, if they didn't absolutely love something, I always recommended them to drop it. They both found one, maybe two things that they loved and added value, and that seems to have worked out.

One of them made a living for a span of time talking college student who grew up that way off the proverbial ledge when it all melted down. But she'd also had enough freedom to e-publish a book by the time she was 12.

Growing up, the people that over-regimented their children's live were called "Colonel von Trapp" by my parents, in my presence, possibly to their face.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I grew up in Palo Alto, attended Palo Alto High School, and this is not at all surprising.

The train tracks are literally _right outside_ the school. Depending on where you're coming from, you may cross these tracks every day. If you're having suicidal thoughts it is extremely easy to step in front of the train.

I can also attest to the pressure that Palo Alto kids face growing up. It's an intense environment and the assumption is that you should be aiming to get into an Ivy, Stanford/Cal, or another top-tier school. (Stanford University is literally right across the street from Paly). Many kids in PA high schools have parents who work at big successful firms or at the universities so there's also a lot of pressure just to achieve what your parents have accomplished.

Many kids at Paly used drugs of some type to cope, and often the most high- achieving kids used the most drugs. I knew a lot of kids who used Adderall or similar drugs to get studying done or push through deadlines. Palo Alto parties are crazy - the kids have lots of money and easy access to get any kind of drugs they like.

I can only imagine that as the years have gone on the pressure has gone up.

<comment><USER13> The drug abuse part is interesting... The highschool I went to had drug problems, mostly smoking weed and a bit of cocaine, run of the mill shall we say. As a senior I made friends with kids from a private school nearby... every single of one of them was a drug addict, in fact a number of them have since gone to prison. I always thought it curious that parents send their kids to private or high end schools thinking it will protect then, when in my experience it has always been the opposite.

<comment><USER12> Yeah, it seems like kids from more affluent backgrounds often get into greater trouble. A lot of the kids I knew felt tremendous pressure to do everything right. They _had_ to get into Stanford because that's where Mom or Dad went. They _had_ to get into an Ivy or their life was over. Most Palo Alto kids, even the "slackers" are very smart and capable, so they could pull it off, no matter the cost. But it certainly took a huge toll on them.

I knew several kids who exploded in one way or another. Some years ago I got a call from an ex-girlfriend who had just gone through AA; she partied like crazy all through high school. Intense home background with parents who were doctors and expected much from her. She is now better but had to go through hell to find life on her terms.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> There was a community similar to Palo Alto close to me (affluent, very achieving- their high school everything was supposed to be the best at everything). The children were supposed to be perfect - academically, socially, spiritually, etc.

When I hung out with kids from there, it seemed like they were living their entire lives inside of a giant pressure cooker. There was always an underlying social pressure that everything they did should be perfect -- nothing would be accepted but the best. Their football team went 10-3 one year, and the football coach got fired. It was insanity.

The brutal thing is that not everybody can be the best. Even if the basketball team is winning the state title every year, only a select handful make the basketball team.

The smartest ones in that community were the ones that rebelled enough that the expectations were lower for them. One of my buddies bought a one-way ticket to Thailand without telling his parents, and came back a few months later. He said he felt appreciated for the first time; it was heartbreaking that it took something like that. For the others - no matter how much they excelled, it wasn't enough.

I want my kids to be able to live in a high-quality environment, but at a certain point it's just not worth it anymore. Palo Alto, full of tech millionaires/billionaires and the highest-achieving of the overachievers, must be absolutely brutal.

<comment><USER14> Oof, not to bring down the level of conversation, but fuck that (the environment you describe, not your comment). I am concerned for my kids' future lives, but I'm not overly concerned about perfect scores or anything like that. I would prefer to instill in them a passion for something--anything really.

I went to a _pretty good_ school (Northwestern), and while I don't regret it, I also don't think it's particularly affected my life one way or another. A state school diploma could have gotten me into my first position, and from there on out it was my performance that led me from one step to the next. It wasn't until I started to learn and build things for the love of it that I really started to create bigger and better opportunities.

I now live in a community in Austin that has some similarities to what you're describing. Super-competitive, high-achievers. But I think it's important to maintain a healthy appreciation for the artifice of it all. And while we encourage and try to feed the strengths and interests of our kids (I am helping my 6-year-old prep for an advanced math class), I think it's more important to try to raise happy, well-adjusted, non-jerk kids.

<comment><USER15> > But I think it's important to maintain a healthy appreciation for the > artifice of it all

I don't think it's artifice. If you want to get into the best universities, you have to have perfect grades and stand out. I think the culture being described in Palo Alto is a direct function of that.

You can raise happy, well-adjusted, non-jerk kids, but they won't get into good schools, because they won't sacrifice literally everything in high school.

Your choice: well-adjusted kids or getting into good universities, not both.

I think it's horrible that this is the situation---we need to reform university admissions.

My idea would be to have an over-achievement threshhold, above which students won't get accepted.

I had a perfect GPA in high school, and that's because there was something profoundly wrong with me.

<comment><USER14> To be fair, I haven't tried to get into a good school recently, so my perspective may be out of date. But I don't think perfect grades actually stand out at all. Doing something noteworthy because you are following your passion however would. I also think there is ample opportunity for really smart people to do incredible things without going to a "good" school. Honestly, university is not a goal, it is a means towards your later life, and it gets less and less important as you live your life. If my kids find something they care about and follow it early, I would not be disappointed at all if they never went to college.

<comment><USER16> Yeah, part of the problem is perfect grades no longer stand out much. Top tier colleges continually turn away students with perfect grades and very high test scores.

I have nieces and nephews that age, and from what I can tell getting in to a good college is an unpaid full time job now. Instead of working part time at McDonald's summers for spending money, these kids are being pushed to do things like create nonprofits for whatever "social justice" fad is in this year, or spending a month feeding people in Haiti.

That kind of stuff is fine if the drive is coming from within, but I would sure as hell have chafed at being forced into sainthood at age 16 in order to have a chance at being accepted to an Ivy.

<comment><USER15> During the school year, getting into a good college is much more than a full time job. It's an "all the time" job (except sleeping). And by "good college" I don't mean Ivy League, I also mean the next tier down.

Good grades no longer stand out... but _not_ having good grades stands out! So you have to have excellent grades.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Downvote me all you want. But I cannot put myself into these children's shoes.

I grew up on the 'other side of the tracks', but in the Bay Area. I grew up in an immigrant ghetto. Our plight was unheard of, unremarkable. Broken families, abusive parents, a failing school district, gang violence. These were all parts of my everyday reality. A couple of students in our school struggled to keep ourselves academically grounded in a world with few academic successes. Every day a small cohort of us would struggle to reconcile the beauty we found in mathematics with the twenty voices in class: "Teacher, why do we even need Geometry? Nobody uses it in the real world." In our world of McDonalds managers, dry cleaners, and landscapers, this was reality. Trigonometry was as useful as learning to mine for coal.

So when I see this outpouring of sympathy and intellectual support for kids in Palo Alto, I struggle to stifle a knee-jerk reaction that can only be described by abject cruelty. I understand that the local community is devastated. But the amount of emotional and intellectual outpouring by Silicon Valley engineers for these children baffles me because of how _useless_ it feels. The rich, with their systemic advantages, create a high pressure environment, leading kids to commit suicide. The alumni of the rich use their resources to try and fix this problem. Wouldn't these engineers better spend their time trying to fix the problems faced by hundreds of thousands of underprivileged schoolchildren each day, rather than the localized plight of a few children in a ridiculously affluent community?

This continues to remind me that the poor and disaffected are a footnote, whose cause is championed by poor newspaper editors, while the rich champion their own through and through.

<comment><USER18> So you lack empathy and can't understand that the stresses of their community while not equaling yours can easily rival it in stress and seriousness to a teenager.

Kudos on making it out, it's sad though that you can't see it from a child's perspective.

I guess you just need someone that's in a more harsh ghetto to make your story sound like it's irrelevant since their situation was worse. Try Latin American ghettos, SE Asia, most of Africa, etc.

<comment><USER17> >I guess you just need someone that's in a more harsh ghetto to make your story sound like it's irrelevant since their situation was worse. Try Latin American ghettos, SE Asia, most of Africa, etc.

And we're not posting articles about how the Rockefellers and Carnegies children are suffering impostor syndrome are we? You miss the point I'm trying to make.

There is a very specific thing here that interests HN readers. Why is it an article about PAHS kids who commit suicide appearing, not an article about the Carnegies, not the starving children in Asian ghettos?

HN readers must be, somehow, empathizing with this children. This is a fault of the programmer elite as a whole. We are extremely privileged. We are well educated, well compensated, extremely capable people. Instead of focusing our intellect, our will, and our drive upon eradicating world poverty, instead we try to help a small enclave of mentally troubled students in an affluent microcosm. We don't treat depression or mental illness as an institutional problem. We don't look at the social issues of parenting methods. No, instead we try specifically looking at kids in Palo Alto and why they are committing suicide. Why is this? I suspect it's because many of the readers here, themselves, went to Palo Alto schools, or come from elite backgrounds. They feel deeply for this particular space because they see themselves as part of it. And that's a sad waste of our talents.

Many, many issues need our help. Mental illness awareness. Income inequality and its effects on humanity. Poverty, welfare. Parenting as a lasting influence on children. Not PAHS suicides. Engineers, stop wasting your cycles on your own, and spend it on helping the rest. Be more like SpaceX and less like Washio.

<comment><USER19> >Instead of focusing our intellect, our will, and our drive upon eradicating world poverty

I'd love to eradicate world poverty, and cure depression also. But you can't do that with gadgets, can you? And what will anyone pay you for in tech other than gadgets? You still have to keep _yourself_ from slipping into poverty, using only the skillset you actually have (rather than flooding the nonprofit and government sectors with workers they can't even afford to hire right now), _while also_ somehow eradicating poverty and curing depression.

There's a reason HBO's _Silicon Valley_ made "Making the world a better place" into an _ironic_ slogan, and it's because all the techno-wizardry in the world, short of a few scifi dreams like replicators and AGI, can only do so much against what are fundamentally social problems, problems of small groups of humans _refusing to share_ technology and its outputs.

Fuck, the best I can think of right now is: would ultra-low-power computing maybe help ameliorate the power-consumption issues that exacerbate global warming? Or would they just make the world emit even more carbon?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Anecdotal, but I chat with a friend from San Francisco and he was telling me recently that he was feeling down because a funeral was coming up. It was about the 6th or 7th death of someone close to him that he had experienced, about half of them being suicides.

I can't even begin to fathom what that must feel like, I don't know anyone but older family members who have passed away.

</comment><comment><USER21> Teenage years are already tough years for many people. Being forced (by accident of birth) into such a self-described high intensity, high competition environment sounds pretty horrible for those not predisposed to more "average" levels of achievement. Looking around, all that's visible is young and older people all high achieving, and then if your scores or whatever slip a little, you ask, "Is there any place for me here?"

<comment><USER18> A woefully tragic "flyover state".

OMG, how do people even live there? ;-)

My quality of life here in Oklahoma far outstrips mine when I lived in SF, Redwood City & Pacifica (I did like a lot about the Bay Area though, just not a good match for me).

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> I've lived in the bay area for 25 years and know PA well. Since no one else has mentioned this yet, I would suspect a high percentage of the family homes are pressure cookers. The assumption that parents are steadily accruing wealth in high pressure but highly successful jobs is erroneous: the silicon valley culture is more akin to tight rope walking. The failure rate (and suicides) of entrepreneurs is very high and it doesn't take much in a very expensive part of the world for a job loss to turn into a very stressful scramble for financial survival. Imagine being an adolescent growing up in that type of pressure cooker world...

</comment><comment><USER23> The concept of "elite overproduction" is very relevant here. Essentially, more aspirants for elite positions than there are slots, mixed with a declining standard of living.

Personally, this tends to lead to psychotic depression as one's aspirations are effectively slowly drowned. Socially, this isn't a good thing since lower- elite strata dis-integrated from wider society tend to be the ones who start violent revolutions. As a minor example Occupy Wall Street was in no small part driven by out-of-work grads with no realistic shot at the mainstream elite career they were preparing for.

</comment><comment><USER24> One thing that articles like this frequently don't mention: lousy reporting makes suicide more likely.

We know that there is an element of "contagion" about suicide. We know the way it is reported can either drive rates of suicide up or down.

There's a bunch of language and imagery in this article that will increase the risk of people attempting suicide.

It is particularly frustrating when the article mentions the spike in calls after reporting of Robin Williams suicide -- they know it happens but refuse to take responsibility to reduce it.

If you want to help You could look at getting ASIST (Applied Suicide Intervention Skills Training (yes, training training)) will give you usable skills that keep people alive.

[http://www.chooselife.net/Training/asist.aspx](http://www.chooselife.net/Training/asist.aspx)

There's a bunch of stuff that indicates mental health provision is poor. EG:

> Lisa hasn't found the grief counselors provided by the school to be of much > help.

We know that grief counseling probably doesn't work and that it might be harmful.

</comment><comment><USER25> It hurts me how thoughtless suicide with a train is. The engineer often suffers from PTSD and many (a closely guarded but often too high ratio) are never able to work again. People who have only one way to avert catastrophe - "dump the air" plus emergency brakes to stop the train as fast as possible - become lost in the horrible run-up to impact.

Suicide is never the answer, especially when it can ruin the life of another and lead to their own suicide. A chain of deaths that ripples through communities far removed from the place it starts.

<comment><USER26> In Japan, I believe they try to discourage death-by-train by making the suicide victim's family pay for the cleanup.

I don't know what the numbers are (if suicides have decreased as a result of this policy) but I suspect this only makes matter even worse for those left behind.

<comment><USER25> Wow. I did not know that.

It might actually be effective, as family impact is a big part of the culture and social responsibility in Japan.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> _The largest he labeled "Palo Alto," the second "Male." In the center circle was the word "Asian." "It seems," he wrote, "that the demographic most at risk are Asian (Chinese) males in high school (hey, that's what I am!)." It was an unmissable observation: Zhu's suicide was the third in a row by an Asian male._

In Palo Alto, and here in the comments as well, people refuse to discuss the most obvious connection to the suicides, the huge Chinese immigrant population in Palo Alto. And the pressure applied by tiger parents.

<comment><USER28> Bingo.

Friends in East Asia (specifically Korea and China) have long told me about the insane academic pressure over there and the spectacular amount of suicides of young people.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> an affluent neighborhood in Seattle recently had a cluster of teenage suicides. I think it must be hard to live up to expectations, real or imagined in a place like PA where incomes are skyhigh and that becomes the expected outcome/path, it must be very easy to become disenchanted and inadequate. I think these kids do not realize that most of that talent was imported to where it "fit", so these kids should be taught that there are other bubbles they can go to that they will fit into. not all of the world is obsessed with startups and valuations. If you are good at sports, go to a place that like sports, if you like the outdoors, move to the mountains, etc.

<comment><USER29> I think you can still be house broke even if you own a $2m house in Palo Alto.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> When I was building out El Camino Hospital, Lucile Packard's Children's Hospital was taking up a wing on the top floor, moving in from their other location at Stanford.

I got to know the LPCH people during the project, and they told me that the majority of their patients are preteen girls with severe eating disorders. They said that most of them were from extremely wealthy families in the bay area, and that their parents were typically super achievers in tech - <USER2> these kids felt neglected by their parents and stressed about the expectations put on them, and this was how they reacted.

</comment><comment><USER31> My 2 cents...

1 - It is due to academic pressure. You can't opt out of academics like you can if you're not good as sports or music. The parents have High IQ jobs, so this is what people aspire for.

2 - It is a shame.

3 - Guards at the train stations, while necessary, attack the symptom.

4 - I think a lot can be done by encouraging choice in high schools. The Palo Alto elementary schools have a lot of choice. Some are academic, some are more progressive play based, some are language immersion... I would like to see the Palo Alto schools offer such choices. Why not have schools or programs for the visual artists? Or musicians? Or people very into computers? Or other languages? Encouraging kids to find excellence in areas other than AP courses will go a long way.

</comment><comment><USER32> The article makes it sound like the percentage of students having suicidal thoughts is abnormal. It's actually 1% less than the national average... 3.7% is the national average for adults 18+, the article reports 50/1900 students.

<comment><USER24> Are you comparing like with like? The article talks about students hospitalised with suicidal thinking; is your figure for people hospitalised for suicidal thinking or does it include people in the community that have less strong suicidal ideation?

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Honestly, therapy should be part of the curriculum. So many kids come from fucked up situations be it their parents, peers, anxiety, etc... There is likely a silent fraction that do ok enough in the system who are missed because they don't exhibit obvious symptoms (failing grades, behavioral problems) etc... Of course this is probably impossible to implement since it requires parental permission and is likely to cost a lot.

</comment><comment><USER33> Sacred Heart, St. Francis, Menlo-Atherton, are some of the most popular high schools in the area(Palo Alto High School is ghetto).The truth is that there are a lot of spoiled brats at these schools who are entitled and think they are the best things ever. Their parents spoil them and their kids constantly harass and bully other kids. I have friends who have gone to all these high schools and the students there are horrible.

</comment><comment><USER34> It seems like one of the root causes behind dreadful situations such as the one described in the article is that the various groups of actors in the system (students, school officials, teachers, parents, etc.) aren't in tune enough with each other. There are many nodes in the graph, but it's quite sparse.

Quotes from the article:

 _> "She's referring to a series of chalk memorials that were drawn by students all over the Gunn campus after Cam's death. Rather than leaving them up as a reminder of (or, school officials feared, an homage to) suicide's lasting effects, the administration unceremoniously hosed them away within hours. The students were left feeling wronged, their voices and feelings silenced."_

 _> Lisa hasn't found the grief counselors provided by the school to be of much help. "They kind of, like, force you to talk to them," she says, "but you don't know them, and they don't know you, and every time you get a brand-new person."_

 _> Kathleen Blanchard, the mother of Jean-Paul, who died in 2009, has some simple advice for parents: "Talk less. Listen more. Listen deeply." She's speaking at a community event to an auditorium full of parents who are wondering what, if any, signals she saw in her son. "He sent out signs to people by phone and online," she says. "He even let people know that he intended to take his life. But they didn't understand."_

There's a reason why pedagogies like Montessori/Waldorf/etc. schools tend to work well. The educators who designed those systems understood the importance of having tight feedback loops and small social groups for children to develop into fulfilled, productive citizens.

Having teachers who get to know the students over several years, in small classrooms, with healthy parental involvement, and school officials that are in tune with what's happening really does help. It's the kind of stuff that just seems like commons sense when you see it in practice, and yet the vast majority of our schools are diametrically opposed to that. It's really enraging: we know what the properties of good schools and good teachers are, and what the properties of bad schools and bad teachers are - and yet we ignore all of it and perpetuate a model that hasn't changed much in the past 200 years. Modern schools - and particularly middle and high schools - are a toxic environment in which it's surprising that some kids manage to flourish at all.

Like 'tokenadult said, it's unclear whether there is a statistical significance to the suicides. But hearing the students interviewed for the article, it's evident that they are deeply unhappy. When you observe the social structure they spend their lives in, with Silicon Valley overachiever culture added on top, it's not hard to see why.

</comment><comment><USER35> I always wondered what if this was discovered to be genetic like homosexuality? What this isn't a bug of natural selection, but a feature.

<comment><USER36> our best guess is that homosexuality is partly explained by genetics, not fully. there's lots of headlines saying "genetic link for homosexuality found", which is ambiguous, so it's an understandable mistake.

by partly, I mean that we've found larger genetic links between 'propensity to work hard', and for IQ, than we have for homosexuality.

in the say way, I think we have indeed found some manner of link between genetics and depression, but again, it's sort of a tenuous thing.

<comment><USER35> Human behavior can never be fully explained by genetics, but a lot of these studies conflate 'homosexuals' and 'men who have sex with men' and there might lie the ambiguity.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Reposted from : [http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2015/03/25/guest- opinion-...](http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2015/03/25/guest-opinion-the- sorrows-of-young-palo-altans)

Dear Palo Alto,

As a product of Gunn and the PAUSD system (JLS, Nixon), I feel obligated to write yet another post.

I am 26, out of college (UCSD) and working at "G __ __* ", an ideal dream for any Palo Alto "product".

Increasingly, I am disheartened to see what has become of Gunn. The rash of suicide began immediately after my departure has yet to be addressed.

To me, the problem is much larger than homework. I took 6 APs classes, had a GPA of 4.0+, participated in extracurriculars and jumped through each hoop required to become an admirable college applicant. There was plenty of homework and stress, but to me, and many I knew, that was not the largest problem. I fell victim of depression and the classic existential crises that plague teenagers. However, there is truly no support system at Gunn. As a student you have the choice of Parents (no teenager talks to them), Counselor (stigma associated), Teacher (rare to talk about anything outside of school with). This deficit leaves no guidance for these youth, especially those looking for help.

I recently went to a workshop on grief with Sobonfu Some. I asked her about why these deaths were happening and how to address it. The answer is what we all know, but choose to ignore. There is a lack of soul in Palo Alto. We spend too much time distracting ourselves and our children. We do not connect genuinely with ourselves or our youth. On top of this thought, we do not deal with grief, and lack the support system to allow our children proper spaces and vessels to air their grief and other emotions. At its core, we lack a true overarching community, one that bridges education and family life. She also said "Nobody has ever committed suicide without asking for help."\-- a key point.

For me, the nature of the pressure wasn't the most difficult challenge, but the culture and environment. The lack of self-discovery, the lack of community and most of all, the lack of a meaningful path make growing up in Palo Alto an innately hollow experience.

When you look around Silicon Valley, you see obsession with wealth, speed and disruption. We ceate and drive consumption without any intention, forming vehicles of distraction, ultimately supporting products/markets that do not serve us, humanity or society.

Palo Alto used to be the forefront of novel, progressive thinking. In this last internet boom, Silicon Valley has become more akin to Beverly Hills than Santa Cruz. If we examine the correlation between youth suicide and IPOs, they correlate well. ;)

I ask Palo Alto for a critical examination of how these market shifts affect our interpersonal culture and suicide rate.

For a place that values disruption so much, why do we, as Palo Altans, have such a hard time disrupting our own educational system to solve these issues? Where have these institutions and systems failed us? Why do we continue to allow our culture to become a barrier to happiness, when we never let it form a barrier to money?

Enough about problems. Here are my solutions:

1) Mandatory Nature Education and Retreat.

"Everybody needs beauty as well as bread, places to play in and pray in, where nature may heal and give strength to body and soul." John Muir

If students were allowed to spend time in nature and see how it can serve as a higher power if needed. The need of students, as society as a whole, to reconnect with the earth is central to existential crisis.

2) Palo Alto Alumni Mentorship Network (PAMN)

A network of Alumni and recent grads, willing to receive mentorship as well as be mentors to produce a support network. I have spoke with many grads in my age range (21-30) and all have been supportive and excited about this idea. This structure allows for people of all ages to support and in turn be supported. A system like this makes isolation much more difficult.

3) Places to Express themselves and to experience experience ecstatic of judgment--Teenage Centric

We need teen groups and other sacred space, where kids can go to speak honestly, openly and without fear of being judged. I know groups presently do this (Ecstatic Dance Palo Alto), but they are not catered to teens. The host of Ecstatic Dance Palo Alto is open to starting teen groups.

I welcome feedback and support. I am willing to take lead on these initiatives and will be reaching out to the school board about them as well.

Feel free to email: [removed]

May we all heal together.

Cheers, A-D-

Ps. Reason is Illusion

</comment><comment><USER38> I don't know if any studies have confirmed this, but it seems that smarter people are more susceptible to severe depression.

<comment><USER39> Yes, here is a graph detailing that phenomenon [1]

[1] [http://i.imgur.com/4TK2Hu4.gif](http://i.imgur.com/4TK2Hu4.gif)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> For whatever reason, these things come in waves.

Four suicides at one high school in one year increases the likelihood of a fifth.

</comment><comment><USER41> I don't know about Palo Alto kids specifically, but I do know that there have always been a lot of suicides among Caltech students as well as the faculty. I don't know about the non-faculty staff.

A friend of mine, Misha Mahowald, made it plainly apparent that she would win the nobel someday, then hurled herself in front of a train at the age of 33.

A brilliant young astronomy professor, whose name I don't recall, paid cash for a brand-new red convertible sports car, drove it at twice the speed limit from pasadena to palomar mountain then over a precipice.

While I was at the Intitute, I was told that there were quite a few suicides among caltech students but that the institute worked to keep them quiet lest there be an epidemic of suicides.

Not long after I left - but with the intention to return - I thumbed a ride with an off-duty pasadena emergency medical technician. When I told him I was a Caltech physics student, he shouted with great joy "CALTECH HAS SUCH SPECTACULAR SUICIDES!"

<comment><USER42> Well these days they mostly tend to involve helium, from what I hear through the grapevine. I hope Pasadena EMS is getting their rocks off some other way.

<comment><USER41> I once had a friend who was a surgical nurse. She regarded cardiac surgeons as freaks. She was completely convinced that they practiced surgery because serial murder was illegal.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> I went to a forum the other day in Mtn View where HS kids talked about their experience and the pressures they felt. Takeaways include: talk to your kids, don't be a helicopter parent, don't expect that your kids will want what you want. It's ok for them to take a different path.

The kids believed that many of the recent suicides did not have to happen - important for people to check-in regularly and ask how things are going. Kids won't always tell their parents - peers and teachers play an important role.

Somewhat surprising to me: reports of self-harm (cutting etc.) and eating disorders amongst girls. The kids said this doesn't get talked about much but is super common.

The forum was a nice way to listen & learn. IMHO community events like this would be more effective than track-side guards.</comment>


Secure private chat with browser RSA encryption - <AUTHOR> http://privytalks.com

<comment><USER2> how do you know that the person your talking to is indeed the person you sent the link to?

<comment><AUTHOR> Maybe using a passphrase?

\- What do I drink? \- Beer! \- OH HAI JOHN</comment></comment>


Cherry's new switches may help bring mechanical keyboards to more laptops - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/12/cherrys-new-low-profile-switches-may-help-bring-mechanical-keyboards-to-more-laptops/ <comment><USER2> Personally, I really _like_ short-throw keys on a keyboard, with less key travel. Whenever I find myself using a thicker, mechanical keyboard, it feels wrong somehow, and I don't enjoy typing on it.

At my desk, I use a USB version of the same laptop keyboard and mouse that's on my laptop: [https://download.lenovo.com/km/media/images/PD026745/tp_comp...](https://download.lenovo.com/km/media/images/PD026745/tp_compactusb_kb_0b47190.jpg)

<comment><USER3> Do you press the keys all the way down on those thicker mechanical keyboards? Because it doesn't actually take that much key travel for a key press to register.

<comment><USER4> I've used a mechanical keyboard for a couple years. Yes, there is a 1-2 mm buffer zone after the keypress registers. No, it's not practical to manually stop and reverse within that zone consistently while typing at a fast speed. I would even say it's unsafe due to the extra tension in the wrists needed for that kind of precision. But it is possible to just type a little softer and reduce the noise of the "clack" as well as wrist tension.

<comment><USER5> I find a type a lot lot softer now than I used to (which, since I don't bottom out the keys, means less strain because I only barely touch keys). I use a Kinesis Advantage 2 (with a 3 button foot pedal and Cherry MX Brown keys) and its absolutely the most comfort I've ever had while typing. I type faster and more accurately than I did before and I feel a lot less hand/arm strain even after long periods of intense typing. I honestly wish I'd bought one ten years sooner (ok, an Advantage, since the Advantage 2 didn't exist then), when I first considered it, but didn't because the price seemed too high. I type that much, though, that the cost is nothing over its lifetime, especially if it helps me reduce or avoid RSI.

I'm always baffled when I see pepole absolutely hammer their keyboards. My hands hurt just thinking about it. Or just using bad keyboards at all. Our careers and hobbies rely on our hands so much that its a no brainer to optimise for their wellbeing, even if the keyboard is a tad expensive.

But I'm obviously a fanboy now, and I'm sure not everybody loves them as much as I do...

<comment><USER6> Can't speak for anybody else, but I know -I- hammer at my laptop keyboard because the keyboard is terrible and if I ease off it will sporadically fail to detect keypresses. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that this is the case for a lot of laptop or other less-key-travel keyboards, especially outside known brands. I use an external kb/mouse/monitor wherever it's feasible, but in that instance I generally just have to grab whatever is lying around the workplace, which means I generally get older mechanical keyboards with longer key travel distance (which, in turn, I don't have to hit as hard, though I'll admit that I still make a pretty satisfying whack on the spacebar). I -could- order my own kb/m and carry them around with me (and maybe I should), but then it's not really much of a laptop is it? :p

<comment><USER5> Thanks for the insight!

I typically have my own Jones is at home and a keyboard in the office (maybe I'll buy my own second kinesis some day as not all employers provide me with one) and use the laptop keyboard when I'm not at my desk (at home or in the office).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Meanwhile we have the keyboard of the new Macbooks. Get as loud as mechanical keyboards with no tactile fisher price feeling. And we should not even start of talking about durability.

<comment><USER8> I may be weird, but I have a 2017MBP and I love the keyboard.

<comment><USER7> Well I hate them when coworkers are using them in a shared environment.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I'm using a Thinkpad T430, at the moment. I can live with the chicklets, although the surface on these is a touch too slippery for me -- my fingers too easily find the edges of the keys, upon occasion.

However, the frustrating part is that some keys occasionally fail to register. Left shift being one of them; some of my ampersands turn into sevens (and, it just dropped the n in "into") -- particularly frustrating when I mean to background a command.

The "God we all miss them", "real" keyboard on my W520 does not exhibit this.

This T430 does have the backlit keyboard; I understand it's from the parts supplier (I forget which, offhand) that tends to have more "wobble" in their keys. That may be part of it.

People focus SO much on the internals of these machines. For fuck's sake, start by putting good keyboards and displays in them. I don't care how fast it runs, if it's a pain to use and its ergonomics slow me down.

I don't mind "cheaper", "thinner", "cooler" (style), whatever laptop designs. I DO mind the trend towards that being the only thing I can buy.

I don't have a T25, yet, but I may. And I hope there's a T26 or whatever they call it, and so on.

(And then, I'll dream about an open BIOS and a machine that is really _mine_ , in terms of its computational functionality.)

<comment><USER10> I'm just like you, I prefer a good keyboard, mouse and screen over lightness and thinness. That's why I went with the T25 instead of waiting for the 8th gen Intel's last year. Good keyboard, a minimal window manager and I'm the most efficient. But I think we're in minority.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> GoldTouch has a folding mobile ergonomic keyboard in USB and Bluetooth versions, relatively silent full-size keys with tactile feedback, 2.7 mm key travel, 45g activation. They have been around for a while and began with desktop keyboards.

[https://www.amazon.com/Goldtouch-GTP-0044-Mobile-Keyboard- US...](https://www.amazon.com/Goldtouch-GTP-0044-Mobile-Keyboard- USB/dp/B00DT73FVM)

[https://deskthority.net/wiki/Goldtouch_Adjustable_Keyboard](https://deskthority.net/wiki/Goldtouch_Adjustable_Keyboard)

<comment><USER12> I have one and these are pretty good, but I wouldn't say the keys have an amazing feel - its more the form factor and tenting that I like about this keyboard. The goldtouch keys are a bit wobbly vis-a-vis the new apple desktop (not MacBook) keyboards with butterfly switches, which are quicker to type on.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Mechanical Keyboards have always been a curse in disguise for me. Sure, the feedback is nice but the 'click' sound is very distracting and breaks my flow.

It's even worse when a coworker/housemate/other person has one. I swear that sound is not impeded by walls.

<comment><AUTHOR> My partner has the same, she hates my mechanical keyboards (mainly a Razer BlackWidow Ulimate Stealth). However she's sensitive to sounds in general (we suspect its part of a form of autism for which she'll get psychologically tested this year). It was an important factor of the decision to skip the MBP 2016, forcing me to go with a 2015 version instead.

However, it is possible to make the sounds less severe by touching them lighter. And on the Razer device these are Cherry MX Black with silencer. There's Cherry MX Brown if you need a more silent switches. If it was my choice, I'd use Cherry MX Blue (or, well, Green, as it resembles the old IBM keyboard the best)...

Personally, the sound of keyboards doesn't bother me (though I wonder the effect on TEMPEST). I just get annoyed by sounds from mobile phones in general. Especially if it keeps occurring all the time while the user is using the phone. Pointless IMO. "Look at me, I'm popular." I find it rude when people cause noise in public (such as a restroom, or a train/bus), be it they're on the phone or having a phone which generates noise. The exception I got to that is children. I have compassion for children, tho its the parents who should solve the problem that isn't always practical.

<comment><USER14> Made an account just to comment on this.

I support you guys' decision to getting screened for the spectrum. In the meanwhile, do check out the Wikipedia page for Misophonia.

I have a form of it, where I can't eat around people because the "chewing sound" they make is absolutely rage inducing. Similarly, one of my friends has a form of it where the sound of someone cracking their knuckles enrages her just as similarly, and she will start bawling, not crying, bawling for a good while. Neighter of us have a reason (or memory thereof) to associate these sounds as triggers.

So, while I'm not a medical anything, I do suggest checking out that page, at least to quench your curiosity. For some added context, I do suffer from other auditory ailments, as well as ADHD. A link between misophonia and different mental sicknesses is suspected, however there is almost no research on this subject, leave alone one that's looking for links. YMMV.

EDIT: typos; on mobile

<comment><AUTHOR> Cheers, TYVM for mentioning this. I bought this DVD [1] and will bring this subject up in my local autism group (I got a diagnosis as well). There are many more reasons for us to get her checked for the spectrum (me getting diagnosis was an eye opener for sure). I suspect this proposed disability (it isn't part of DSM or even ICD) might be linked to autism. At the very least, there's more sound related issues such as light sleep, exceptional hearing, and sensitivity to emotion in sound. Part of autism is under- and oversensitivity.

[1] [http://www.quietpleasefilm.com/about-2/](http://www.quietpleasefilm.com/about-2/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This seems to be only a smaller red switch (linear, no tactile feedback) with a translucent casing for those 'gaming' laptops.

I don't think that this will bring a (clicky,) tactile MX switch to thin and light ultrabooks which are (imho) more suitable for coding.

<comment><USER16> I've been looking for low profile switches to built a mobile version of my Atreus keyboard. Nice to see Cherry entering the game. Kailh has more options, including tactile [https://www.novelkeys.xyz/product/kailh-low-profile- switches...](https://www.novelkeys.xyz/product/kailh-low-profile-switches/)

<comment><USER17> The problem with those Kailh is getting keycaps. At least the cherry one will be compatible with MX keycaps, although I don't know where you'd get low- profile ones from. Hopefully they're available as spare parts soon.

As an ergodox user, I'd also be really interested in a mobile low-profile Atreus, but I need more keys, at least like an Atreus64.

<comment><USER18> There's an atreus62 variant available (I have one, love it). You can order the components (or prebuilt models) from profetkeyboards.com

Personally, I shift the letter keys out to the sides by 1, so the pinky's only have 1 column to deal with, and there 2 extra rows in the middle. This also has the effect of rotating the wrists outwards even more - comfy!

As it turns out, I don't even need the full 62 keys (and have even pulled 8 keycaps off!). Depending on your preferred layout, you might also get away with <60 keys.

But a low-profile variant would be nice :)

<comment><USER17> Oops, I actually meant atreus62.

But maybe an atreus64 would be better (if it existed) because I would like some more thumb keys like my ergodox.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> On the Topic of Keyboard, Dell has a new Keyboard on its new XPS 15 called Maglev, using magnet instead of switches, which said to allow the thinness of MBP keyboard while still giving some key depth.

I cant wait to see how that turns out.

</comment><comment><USER20> Is the travel comparable the rubber-dome spring based ones in most laptops? (excluding apple's latest obscenity of course).

I like the short travel and low force of most laptop keyboards but I really hate the flimsy spongeyness of them... they aren't proper switches like cherries so they have a tendency to be wobbly, inconsistent and spongey. Over time this gets worse.

I'd really like it if I could keep the low travel and low force but have it smooth consistent and non-spongey.

</comment><comment><USER21> Thin laptops won't be getting this tech. These switches are still thicker than an entire macbook pro.

</comment><comment><USER22> Couldn't haptics (and taptics) be used to augment a keyboard with better feedback and a feeling of travel and bounce back without an actual physical switch?

<comment><USER23> Good mechanical switches have a kind of mechanical haptic feedback that lets you know with a click, that your keystroke has registered, without bottoming out the key.

<comment><USER22> Right. I wonder if travel can be eliminated even further with vibration-based, rather than actual mechanical, feedback.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I have 4 broken and beloved Model M keyboards that I can't throw away. Which Cherry switches would make feel like I were using one of them?

<comment><USER25> You need Cherry greens modded with 95g springs... or just buy an Unicomp :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> Still waiting on the wireless mechanical keyboards :-).

<comment><USER27> There are quite a few on the market.

<comment><USER26> I see that I am a bit behind in that two (Velocifire, and RK) seem to have actually mechanical wireless keyboards (I found that when looking for them that often a chiclet style would be advertised as 'mechanical' while still just being a squish dome type) I've ordered one of each from Amazon to see if they can replace my current daily driver which is the Corsair.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> The great thing about mechanical keyboards, for me, is that almost all of them are full-size, and are laid out according to the traditional old IBM PS/2 design. For me, that form factor is important, because I have big hands with sausage fingers. The mechanical switches, in and of themselves, are less important than sturdy construction and consistent layout. I've never had two laptops with the same keyboard layout, and seen some downright-boneheaded ux decisions - my current work machine puts the power button inline in the top right, where you expect a delete button to be.

</comment><comment><USER29> I felt the first twinges of carpal tunnel back in the day but switching to a Cherry keyboard cleared it right up. Now I wouldn't use any other.

<comment><USER30> The best thing to do to deal with carpal tunnel is to change your keyboard out every few months. It doesn't matter if its Cherry or whatever - simply don't use the same keyboard for longer than 3 - 4 months.

(This is just my personal experience. 30 years ago I was diagnosed with carpal tunnel, and I change my keyboard every 6 months. Never had it since!)

<comment><USER31> This makes sense. Changing the keyboard presumably leads to a different set of repetitive motions and different injury mechanisms, giving your musculoskeletal system the opportunity to heal existing damage.

Was the approach of changing your keyboard periodically recommended by a medical professional? Or by something you read?

<comment><USER30> Was recommended to me by a medical professional in 1986. Worked wonders!</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Show HN: I built a podcast app that skips over the ads - <AUTHOR> http://adskippro.com <comment><USER2> I block ads on the web because web advertising networks proved that they had no respect for user privacy, lacked security controls around their ad delivery, and were targeting using data that they probably shouldn't have had access to.

Podcasts do not suffer from this. It's much harder to identify a user, the ads aren't software, just audio, so security is better and there's not much way to see who is listening to the ads other than voucher codes/referral links (which are inherently opt-in).

Yes I can always skip ads. Do I feel any security or privacy need to automate doing this? No.

If/when podcast advertising goes the way of web advertising, then there will be an eager market for this product, but until then let's enjoy unobtrusive, respectful ads from hosts we trust, with targeting done broadly by podcast rather than personally identifiable information.

<comment><USER3> Podcast ads suffer from the same issue as most other ads, which is that they're primarily lies intended to manipulate your emotions and influence you to act in ways that are against your self interest.

<comment><USER4> You know, sometimes that's true, but sometimes they really do just communicate what a product is and why you might want it. There are a couple podcasts I listen to where the ads are almost uniformly worthwhile — for someone, if not for me. Podcasts with obstreperous or manipulative ads tend not to be worth listening to anyway; good podcasters value their audiences too much to insult them.

<comment><USER5> I agree with Jason completely

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Cool idea? Yes. Good idea? No.

If we do stuff like this, the podcast industry will switch to a closed system which would require you to install proprietary apps to listen to stuff. Likely several different apps for different shows and companies.

As it exists today, it's a very open system, with publicly accessible feeds and the ability to use any app. Don't ruin it. It's not hard to press the "skip forward 30 seconds" button when an ad starts playing.

Edit: also, it's _super_ unethical to have a paid app that profits by taking away any scope for content creators to monetize. Leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.

Didn't realise it was a paid app at first. Shame on you, OP.

<comment><USER7> So its ethical to manually skip the ads but not to automate the process?

<comment><USER8> Is it ethical not to look at a billboard when you're walking down the street?

Is it ethical to mute the TV when commercials come up?

I think it's just your choice, right?

<comment><USER9> This wasn't meant to be a question of ethics, but one of incentives— let's view it from a standpoint of "will this ultimately be bad for society."

> Is it ethical not to look at a billboard when you're walking down the > street?

This is fine, you're in a public space where somebody paid for an ad on nearby private property, and society wouldn't be worse off if everybody ignored billboards, advertisers were no longer willing to pay for billboards, and we got rid of the lot of them.

> Is it ethical to mute the TV when commercials come up?

This is fine, you paid for the TV and you pay for cable, and there will be no consequences to many people muting the TV during commercials.

If, however, you're given something for free that could be taken away, and it is able to be offered for free due to the business model of ads, taking this concept to its conclusion where everybody automatically skips over ads will make the free and open podcast system no longer viable.

Advertisers will no longer be willing to pay for ad space on podcasts, and the podcasters will have to move to charging per episode, or more likely, getting tiny royalties from a company like Spotify.

<comment><USER10> > This is fine, you paid for the TV and you pay for cable, and there will be > no consequences to many people muting the TV during commercials.

The nature of advertising has turned the entire TV device into an advertising machine that phones home whether I mute and look away or watch "ad-supported" content, or paid-for content, or my own content. I cannot buy a TV that does not funnel my private life into someone's advertising budget thanks to Smart TVs and the normalization of surveillance capitalism.

If a podcast can not survive off its syndication, its advertising, its royalties, nor off its direct subscriptions, then the market has clearly spoken: that podcast is not providing value to listeners, and if it weren't subsidized as a channel by which advertising campaigns reach a desired market segment, it wouldn't exist at all. Clearly if this scenario causes you to shed tears, perhaps consider donating or subscribing, otherwise that podcast isn't a valuable product, it was a line item on an advertising campaign meant to reach you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> A good percentage of the ad-supported podcasts I listen to also have an ad- free feed for their Patreon subscribers. I'd say look there first if you're looking to spend money to avoid ads.

We messed this up 20 years ago when online print media tried doing the same, and the result has been an endless and wasteful arms race. Let's not mess this up again.

<comment><USER12> The arms race is inevitable. Podcast companies haven't been receiving investments because of that sweet SquareSpace money. They want to track everything there is about how a podcast is listened to and by whom and then monetize that every way they can.

<comment><USER11> Right now, they're a long way from doing sophisiticated tracking. My podcast app just downloads an mp3 file from a feed; it's not executing any JavaScript, or otherwise doing anything they can use to do the kind of tracking that happens on the Web.

That regime has been stable for decades, and I can't imagine it will change unless something changes to make it stop working for podcasters. Because moving their distribution channel from RSS to some sort of closed app risks alienating their audience.

<comment><USER12> Some of the big podcast apps have recently been sold and it only makes sense that they plan on adding telemetry.

The MP3 file might not change, but there's a chance that they are going to start watching you play it.

A lot of investments have been made in the podcast world recently and VCs usually don't make things better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'm going to have to agree with this is not a "good" idea. ~95% of podcasters are just small team folks. They make a bit of money on the side with it or just barely make enough to do it full time. I've always been willing to listen to the ads done by creators on both youtube (Not the yt ads, the ones creators do little skits or do a speech that benefits them directly) and podcasts. It supports the content and most of the money goes to create more stuff I actually like to watch/listen to.

</comment><comment><USER14> Cool project, interesting decision to monetize something like this though.

I made SponsorBlock ([https://sponsor.ajay.app/](https://sponsor.ajay.app/)), which is a similar premise for YouTube videos except free, open source, and with a publicly downloadable database. I posted about it on HN back in August.

I'd be curious if you'd be willing to do what I've done here and make it more open. When you are dealing with things like this (ad blocking), it gives you more of a responsibility to share.

Anyway, how do you do this? Is it a reporting system? Or is there some kind of algorithm you made?

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not a reporting system. I believe that idea has been tried and did not work. This uses all-new technology to find the ads and skip over.

<comment><USER15> By just looking for the music that plays at the beginning of some ads?

<comment><USER14> That's probably it. Their vague terms make me suspicious.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I came here to judge - but if there's no way of paying for the adverts to go away (stitcher? maybe spotify (I pay, but don't use it for podcasts)) I have sympathy.

Skeptoid did offer a nice/hacky/old-school solution likely to work with your favourite player - subscribe manually with ~ [http://<username>:<password>@<site.com/ad_free_url/>podcasts...](http://<username>:<password>@<site.com/ad_free_url/>podcasts.xml)

Providing your player lets you put in a URL - it "works" and doesn't require you switching your client.

I do wish there was a slightly more formalized process letting you provide credentials to your app and it sorting this all out for you - but then I'm reluctant to engage in a movement that might f'up the XML+MP3 standards approach that's allowed podcasts to flourish.

<comment><USER17> This is quite common - many podcast apps, if not the very biggest ones, support feed importing and those feeds can include a username and password. It's really not that complicated, it just looks like a long URL and in most cases you can click on it in an email or website on your phone, and add it directly to the podcast app from there.

The hard part at the moment is the friction from your podcast app to paying to "unlock" that feed to importing it back to your podcast app. Some of us are working on a standard called PodPass ([https://www.niemanlab.org/2019/08/podpass-wants-to-build- the...](https://www.niemanlab.org/2019/08/podpass-wants-to-build-the-identity- layer-for-podcasting-before-some-big-tech-company-does-it-first/)) to make it seamless, but without the walled gardens.

<comment><USER16> Yep - that's the vague amorphous idea I had rattling around my head, just described by somebody who knows what they're doing.

As stated - it's getting the initial adoption going that's problematic. Probably pointing out the obvious, but NPR bought my favourite client Pocket Casts. At naive glance, looks like a good fit. NPR already has an excellent group of people who've donated (so whole bunch of people paying already) and with this would give them a way of rewarding them with the adverts removed. Plus think both sides of this would be advocates for still allowing the output to be available widely, and not walled up somewhere.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> As a podcaster (Mixergy.com), I love this.

My listeners should never feel guilty about skipping ads.

If my ads aren't interesting or don't improve your life, you owe it to yourself to skip.

I keep working to improve my ads. Most recently: I hired a copywriter (Neville Medhora) to go over my ad reads. And today I recorded interviews with 10-second ads, instead of 3-minute ones.

<comment><USER19> If your listeners use this app they won't know whether the ads are interesting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Pure curiosity, is this based off of Adblock Radio?

[https://github.com/adblockradio/adblockradio](https://github.com/adblockradio/adblockradio)

I've been curious for a while how hard it would be to proxy my podcast feeds through a local server that stripped ads. As far as I can tell, this stuff has to be done dynamically per-file -- sharing timestamps don't work because ads are dynamically injected during each download.

<comment><AUTHOR> It's not using Adblock Radio, though that is an interesting idea. All new technology.

<comment><USER21> Creator of Adblock Radio here. If some day you are able to share your approach to filter ads, especially native ones, I would greatly appreciate it.

<comment><USER22> Their homepage shows you the few podcasts they support which suggests some sort of manual pattern recognition per channel. It's clearly not a general solution like adblockradio.

<comment><USER23> Yeah, looking at the list I know 99pi and Reply-all play special music at the beginning of their ads.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> I find it interesting that their terms of use attempts to place restrictions on _linking to their homepage_ : [https://adskippro.com/terms.html](https://adskippro.com/terms.html)

I also find it interesting that this is in the terms, when their app is $1.99:

> To the extent that the app and the information and services on the app are > provided free of charge, we will not be liable for any loss or damage of any > nature.

<comment><USER25> My guess is that they're using a boilerplate ToS, as the app looks relatively new.

<comment><USER26> It's a bit mad to put up a ToS that your users are nominally expected to follow when you clearly _haven 't read it yourself_...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> I was thinking about making exactly this today while listening to 99PI. Decided that I would rather support the makers. I wish that the various apps allowed subscriptions to avoid ads in a given podcast. 99PI is doing a fundraising drive right now. As part of it, they share that 1/10,000 listeners donates. I would be happy to pay 99PI $1 a month for their podcasts if I could skip ads.

<comment><USER28> If the advertisers can't tell if you're using this app or a traditional podcast app, are you really supporting the makers any less by using this app? The advertisers won't pay them any less because they won't be able to know that x% of users didn't hear the ad.

<comment><USER29> Who says they can't? The user agent used to download the podcast is a pretty strong signal, and it seems reasonable for podcasters to expose this data if it means higher bids on ads.

<comment><USER30> The user agent string has _mostly_ been used to lie about the source of a request: [https://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string- history/](https://webaim.org/blog/user-agent-string-history/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> So get the free content without giving the content provider money or any opportunity to monetize via ads ? And expect that they will give quality content forever ?

<comment><USER32> I would rather be able to get paid content without giving the content provider money or any opportunity to monetize via ads, but that doesn't seem to be an option.

<comment><USER31> I think this works in idea but not sustainable for provider. May be if there is a way to get both...choose free or pay for add free.

Some of the major podcasters tried going paid route and reversed back to ad based model. i.e. tim ferriss

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> It has just about the ridiculous ToS I've ever seen, including stating that you can't post links to it! [https://adskippro.com/terms.html](https://adskippro.com/terms.html)

<comment><USER34> I thought it was funny that an unethical app even has a ToS in the first place. Like the guy robbing my house telling me I can't pick his pocket.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> I'm still shocked that Google has not made a podcast platform wherein they manage the ads and subscriptions. Host the audio, inject ads at the breaks, allow paid subscriptions that remove the ads, have a monthly payment option, etc. Basically half YouTube half Audible.

I do listen to one podcast that has an ad-free feed for patreon supporters. It works rather well and they have add a surprising amount of bonus content for subscribers.

<comment><USER32> How is the ad-free feed hosted? I'd love for this to be a widespread thing, but I listen to podcasts almost entirely during long drives, so I worry that paid content will fragment distribution.

<comment><USER35> [https://www.patreon.com/law](https://www.patreon.com/law)

You get a unique RSS feed for the commercial free episodes and bonus content.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Personally, I'm OK with ads in podcasts. They are based on the general audience for the show and doesn't have any intrusive tracking or personalization.

If I'm really tired of the ad I can just skip ahead 30 seconds.

</comment><comment><USER37> You want me to pay $1.99 for an app I can't try, which doesn't have any other features that other podcast player apps have, and also prohibit linking to your product anywhere in your ToS? It's a very shady beginning, to say the least.

</comment><comment><USER38> Can't wait for old-timey radio product placement in my podcasts.

"The party enters the wizard's keep. It smells fresh and clean, like it was recently cleaned with Febreeze, which the wizard uses for all his odor- destroying needs."

</comment><comment><USER39> You're getting a lot of hate for it but congrats on the release. Can you comment on how you are identifying ad content?

<comment><USER40> Doubtful. I'm interested in that as well.

If I were making it, I would listen for keywords (ex: Cash App, Onit, MyBookie.com, Manscaping, Dollar Shave Club) that could be updated like an AdBlock filter list. Combine that with obvious changes in inflection, notable differences in the waveform, etc.

I would also assume my implementation would cut the podcast down to about 4 minutes with all the false positives.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> I think people are making too big a deal out of this.

Popular podcasters do make money through Patreon for example, not everything comes down to advertising.

And for frank, honest commentary, I think I would rather not have advertiser influence over podcasts, just like the news.

And many people do podcasts just out of passion or a hobby...they are more like blogs than anything else.

</comment><comment><USER42> To the people saying this is morally wrong, let me give you a different perspective: I watch a lot of YouTube videos and they are ad-supported (although I do support them on Patreon whenever possible). The ads are for the likes of SquareSpace, Skillshare, etc (there's also lots of shit like VPN providers but let's focus on the good ones first).

I'm already aware of these brands, I even recommend one of them to clients. At this point, the ads aren't telling me anything new, don't make me aware of a new product, they are just annoying and waste my time.

Is it still wrong to block these ads?

<comment><USER6> As I've said elsewhere in the thread, it's okay to manually skip ads, because some percentage of the users will still listen to the ad, especially if it's the first time they're hearing it.

If you implement automatic ad blockers, that guarantees that no one is listening to the ad. Which would mean no revenue for the content creators. Which would lead to a really crappy system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> The best way to skip ads in podcasts is to not listen to the podcasts if you don't like the ads. Or, you know, pay the creators.

<comment><AUTHOR> OK, but do you read every ad on every web page you visit?

<comment><USER43> Consciously? No. Subconsciously I probably scan them as I look around the page which can trigger further investigation.

Did you pay full attention to every ad you listened to in a podcast? I don't even know what your point is.

Full disclosure, I use ad blockers online (but whitelist sites and subscribe to others). The reason I do so is first and foremost for security reasons. Ad networks deliver malware, despite their best efforts. They also deliver battery-draining ads and bloat. I'm not inherently opposed to advertising, however. Last I checked, listening to ads in podcasts is not going to give your phone malware or spin up your CPU 100% so I don't really see the point of blocking them. As far as advertising goes, podcast ads are pretty benign. Sure, you can do it and I'm not even going to call you a bad person, but it just seems like the wrong battle to be fighting.

Either it never takes off and the whole thing is moot, or it really takes off and forces podcast creators to monetize in ways that are less benign. No real gain.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Ads are terrible regardless of whether they are "nice, inoffensive privacy protecting ads" or "unethical spyware web ad network ads".

This is a great tool and saves people their only truly nonrenewable resource: time.

Thank you for making it; if I listened to any of these podcasts I would be using it.

Always block everyone's ads.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you. Which podcasts do you listen to?

<comment><USER44> The Bunker New York

[http://thebunkerny.com/podcasts](http://thebunkerny.com/podcasts)

Mysteries of The Deep

[https://m.soundcloud.com/mysteriesofthedeep/sets/mysteries](https://m.soundcloud.com/mysteriesofthedeep/sets/mysteries)

The latter is even in alac-m4a lossless, something that surprised and delighted me.

One is run by a friend and the other is run by a friend of friends. They're both truly excellent.

Neither have ads.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Seems odd...

Most podcasts are pretty grassroots without financial backing, I think.

I don't really mind the ads, and most podcasts apps seem to have skip buttons anyway. I mostly use the iOS podcast app, but it has a 30 second skip button. That usually gets me right past the ads.

</comment><comment><USER46> Amazing! Was meaning to build something like this for a while, glad you beat me to it! Re: monetization/ethics/etc -- would 100% support podcasts that follow the Brave model with opt-in for ads or pay if you want ad-free experience.

<comment><AUTHOR> I agree - thank you!

<comment><USER46> Just realized this is iOS-only. Any chance you've built this on react-native (which will make it trivial to port to Android)?

<comment><AUTHOR> Not react-native, and the port to Android will not be trivial.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> So how does it really do the skipping feature? Do you transcribe the podcast and look for standard advertising copy for companies like Squarespace, hello fresh, etc? Would it register a false positive if one of those company names is said?

<comment><USER6> Most podcasts, have a particular jingle/tune that plays before/during the ad, which should not be difficult to identify with some clever code.

But honestly manual flagging wouldn't be too hard either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> I was thinking something like this should exist, but podcasts should be paid for skipped ads. I don't mind paying a small fee for ad free podcasts.

I also want some system that fast forwards all the intro stuff straight to the meat and potatoes.

<comment><USER49> I think you can do that with Pocketcast (free on android, paid on the web) and set a unique time for each podcast.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Founder here:

I think that many people already skip the ads using the 30 second skip forward button. I know I did before building this app.

I'm also thinking about safety -- people driving their car and reaching for their phone to skip the ads.

<comment><USER50> The biggest issue here for me is that you're charging for this app. You're basically asking me to pay you for your hard work of removing ads from someone else's hard work of creating content.

<comment><AUTHOR> If it was free, you would be fine with it?

<comment><USER50> Pretty much, yeah. While obviously not nearly as severe, I view this basically as war profiteering. Consumers are waged in battle against a broken industry and you're offering some help, but only for a cost.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> Would you mind sharing what approach did you use to trim the ads? Did you manually detect the ads and then trimmed the file or are you using an automatic (perhaps ML-based) approach?

<comment><AUTHOR> The only thing I can share is that it does not modify or trim the podcast.

It downloads the podcast, finds the ads, plays it, and skips over the ads. The ads are still in there. After it skips the ads, you could manually skip backwards and hear that they are still there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER52> This submission is _advertising_ a paid app to... skip ads.

Question for OP: how would you feel about a browser extension that automatically recognises submissions of this nature and hides them?

<comment><AUTHOR> HN Rules: "Show HN is for something you've made that other people can play with. HN users can try it out, give you feedback, and ask questions in the thread."

I thought the whole purpose of Show HN is to show what you've created. Should there be restrictions on the types of things being created?

In your example, I think the browser extension would hide every submission on Show HN.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> Very cool idea, I'm curious about how this was built and works.

I'm also curious if you think you'll face any challenges or if Apple will allow this to live on the play store?

<comment><AUTHOR> I can't tell how it works, because I don't want to create competitors.

I don't see why Apple would have a problem with it. Their own "Podcasts" app lets you skip ads. This app finds the ads and skips automatically.

<comment><USER53> Lmao, because you are draining their platform's content creators of value?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> Podcasters should probably provide ad-less versions of podcasts for subscribing users, e.g. using Coil or similar extension for monetization.

</comment><comment><USER55> Edit your title : "I built and app that skips over other peoples add and puts mine in"

<comment><AUTHOR> Perhaps you misunderstood what the app does?

<comment><USER55> I'm really happy you respond to the harsh criticism given, but do you think its cool to say : "Hey, no adds in this paid app........ But the money doesn't go to the guy who made the content"

I get why you might have done it, hey a nice adblock feature. But you are asking for money for it.. Did I miss something ?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> So how do creators block this app, since those users are literally worthless to them?

</comment><comment><USER57> I think this is wrong morally.

</comment><comment><USER58> I intrigued at how uniformly negative the reaction is to this. Do people here not use things like AdBlock? Do you also avoid fast-forwarding over ads in videos for the same reason?

<comment><USER14> I think it is that they are charging money.

<comment><USER58> Seems like a weird place to draw the ethical line.

<comment><USER14> Almost every adblocker out there is free and open source for a reason.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> Some people just want to watch the world burn.

</comment><comment><USER60> The big picture is that podcasts are economically public goods (non-rivalrous, non-exclusive), or at least would be completely if not for copyright restrictions legally.

Ads _detract_ from the value. In other words, as a resource, ad-laden podcasts are _worse_ than ad-free podcasts.

If you ask people to pay to access the ad-free versions, that's a "club good" (non-rivalrous but now exclusive). That also dramatically reduces the value to the world. (Also, the existence of ad-laden ones is a detraction itself, even affecting the ad-free versions because ads create conflicts-of-interest).

So, all the economics here is about about the public goods dilemma. How the heck can fund the work without all these detractions? Taxes? I'm not saying the answer is easy, I'm saying we should get the __question __right.

The one view I reject: that somehow ads in podcasts are a _good_ thing. Rather, ads are an unfortunate compromise given the challenges of funding public goods. There's little room for debate there.

What is called for is specifically funding models that somehow coordinate critical mass of people _without_ the use of paywalls or detractions like ads.

</comment><comment><USER61> typo: under supported podcasts, heavyweight is listed twice.

</comment><comment><USER62> This is simple fraud.

</comment><comment><USER63> This is why we can't have nice things. Podcasts rely on advertising for revenue, and given the static nature of pre-recorded ads, they are the least intrusive in this era of AI driven hyper real-time ad-targeting. Reminiscent of print ads on newspapers.

So respect the effort of the creator and stop automating ad skipping. Heck, I even implore you to listen to the ads that make your favorite shows available for free, but you always have the skip-ahead button in your player

<comment><USER12> NPR inserts targeted ads when you download an episode.

<comment><USER15> Isn't it only geo-based though? Of the IP you are downloading from? Fine. Do that. That is still very unobtrusive

<comment><USER12> It isn't clear exactly what they are doing nor have they said what their plans are.

I think NPR bought Pocket Casts and I doubt they spent all that money with no plans for a return on that investment.

<comment><USER15> I fear more and more podcasts are going to start locking you into a podcast app.

It's turning into the video streaming scene

<comment><USER12> I think that's exactly what some of these companies think they are building - Netflix for podcasts. Unfortunately for them, there isn't a lot of value in podcasts for most people and I can't see that changing.

<comment><USER15> Exactly. My limit is $5/month and a lot of smaller podcasters seem to agree that it is an adequate amount for bonus content/no ads.

Hell, I know a few that for $1 or $2 they get the full ad-free podcast

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> da wut??? apple actually allowed this?

<comment><USER65> Why wouldn't they allow it? What rules are being broken by this app?

</comment></comment><comment><USER66> Cannot believe this was flagged

<comment><AUTHOR> Why should a lively and interesting discussion be flagged? I'm interested in hearing all opinions, not trying to shut down someone I disagree with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> And now suddenly (looking at a lot of the comments here) ad-blocking is about privacy? I simply don't want to see/hear crap, period.

<comment><USER68> "I want people to spend the equivalent of a full-time job researching content, writing shows, organizing guest appearances, producing high-quality audio, and marketing/distributing it to me. I'm prepared to pay exactly $0 for this, and I can't not be entertained for a 30-second sponsor spot."

<comment><USER67> The absence of content while the ad plays is obviously not the issue. It's the presence of other, malicious content.

<comment><USER68> What's the current state of the art on embedding malware in audio files?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER69> I think it's funny the outrage over ad skipping podcasts, but keeping browser ad-blockers installed is ok. I mean there is only so many times I can hear the same casper, generic vpn, eero, ad and not want to pull my hair out. Especially when the podcast boasts about how they use the product and how it's not like anything they've ever tried before.

<comment><USER6> > but keeping browser ad-blockers installed is ok.

That's because web ads track you, can inject malicious code, and are obtrusive.

As I said elsewhere in the thread, a lot fewer people would be using ad blockers in browsers if web ads were as simple as podcast ads (the equivalent would be unobtrusive static images with links).

<comment><USER69> If you bought a DVR and recorded a TV show would you want the one with the commercial break skipper feature?

<comment><AUTHOR> I sure would :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> OP here:

If you are already skipping the ads with the skip-forward button in your favorite app, you will love AdSkipPro. I use it every day driving back and forth to work, and I think it's great.

If you don't skip the ads, and you enjoy listening to them, you will of course continue to do so using your favorite podcast app. AdSkipPro will not be for you.

I don't think there will be any net difference to advertisers and the podcasting community. Those that skip will continue to skip, and those that don't won't.</comment>


New technique allows non-artists to draw complex perspective accurately - <AUTHOR> http://www.architizer.com/en_us/blog/dyn/29817/3d-drawing-machine-allows-viewer-to-trace-onto-reality/

<comment><AUTHOR> The intro goes on a bit, but the penny drops 2 minutes in.</comment>


Emirates CEO: After Boeing Crashes, I'll Look at Airbus - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrGFVN4MIB8 <comment><USER2> Is the recent trend of Boeing failures a sign of diminishing quality?

<comment><USER3> Some have made the case that Boeing's quality began to slide when they bought Douglas and adopted that company's outsourcing methods as opposed to building everything in house.

<comment><USER4> It has been argued that that merger was effectively a reverse takeover of Boeing and the resulting company is essentially MacDac in a Boeing suit.</comment></comment></comment>


Why Kotlin Sucks - <AUTHOR> https://proandroiddev.com/why-kotlin-sucks-ab27a6b15cb6 <comment><USER2> Clickbait article, he admits as much in the first paragraph. This should be titled "a list of Kotlin's biggest flaws," but of course that wouldn't get as much attention.</comment>


Ask HN Mac users: Do you use an antivirus ? - <AUTHOR>

If yes, which?<p>Please see instead: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=933172 <comment><USER2> try <http://news.ycombinator.com/newpoll>

</comment><comment><USER3> No, but more techy people will tend not to download / install / give passwords to "dodgy" applications

</comment><comment><USER4> No, and I don't use AV on my Windows machine either. Never had a problem with either.

</comment><comment><USER5> No, of course not. What would be the point?

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Yes [which?]

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> No</comment>


How I implemented iPhone X's FaceID using Deep Learning in Python - <AUTHOR> https://towardsdatascience.com/how-i-implemented-iphone-xs-faceid-using-deep-learning-in-python-d5dbaa128e1d <comment><USER2> For those who are new to machine learning, this is like duct taping four wheels together and calling it a Lamborghini. Maybe a good start if you want to learn about basics of face recognition, but iPhoneX FaceID keywords here are clickbait. This is nothing like the technology used in iPhoneX.

<comment><USER3> Can you please explain further? How does it work on the iPhone? How is it different from this method?

<comment><USER4> The technique in the article does not seem to be using depth data (there is a picture in the article), only RGB image data.

So, he could have gotten the same results with a webcam.

My understanding is that these depth cameras create a 3d point cloud and use the rgb to map/overlay color onto the 3d.

<comment><USER5> The article does mention doing experiments using depth information from a Kinect. Also, the actual code on the github repo does appear to use depth info.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'd love to see some comparison between this prototype and real FaceID. How good are each at recognizing the same people with different appearances (haircut, glasses)? How good are each at rejecting different people with similar looks like siblings?

<comment><USER7> Even apple can't tell the difference between twins

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> Crazy to think that a ton of neural networks are running on live sensor data every time I unlock my phone. Truly amazing and seamless technology.

<comment><USER9> Applying the model is fast, training it is slow(er). Not that crazy.

<comment><USER8> For something as common as unlocking my phone, the algorithm needs to be extremely fast and power efficient not to mention this is a PHONE, so yes I still find this impressive. The fact that sensor data is being processed through a neural network using a dedicated chipset for neural net operations would seem like ridiculous overkill if you explained it to me ten years ago. Furthermore, the network is actually being re-trained on the fly to accommodate for changes to the users facial hair, etc.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Can someone who's actually worked/implemented/published face detection/recognition please point to state of the art results for this task? Are neural networks better than hand crafted feature extractors?

<comment><USER11> I based my work on FaceNet, a quite recent paper that achieves state-of-the- art results and incredible robustness using very similar techniques to the ones I implemented here (siamese networks, contrastive/triplet loss).

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Duct tape PhD notebook. These prime examples of "Untitled.ipynb mentality" are what makes me shake my head. No annotations, no exploration of the dataset, no sanity checks, printf debugging, uncaught error messages. But putting just because it doesn't collapse under your feet, put your name upfront and it's good to go.

</comment><comment><USER13> Very minor nitpick: Surface devices have combined infrared and regular cameras for face unlocking for years. It's a great tech but it didn't start with the iPhone X.

<comment><USER14> I don't have the iPhone X but the Surface Face ID is a piece of shit.

<comment><USER15> Surface hello works for me nearly every single time fast and seemlessly. Love it.

<comment><USER14> Looks like it isn't random per day but rather works well on some faces and terribly on others.</comment></comment></comment></comment>