I Hate Meetings (from MeetingMix, YC S08) - <AUTHOR> http://www.fixmeetings.com/i-hate-meetings

<comment><USER2> Don't take this the wrong way, but why would I want to share this on Twitter or Facebook or tell anyone about this page? There's nothing viral here, just some bland statements about meetings.

I would suggest that you do something more edgy, weird, funny or whatever, and not worry about tying it into "how to do meetings right" in the end. Just stick a footer in there with "MeetingMix helps you do meetings right" and focus on compelling, linkable content for the rest.

<comment><USER3> If you're friends with a broad range of people, you'll see all sorts of things that get shared or liked without much inherent virality to them. There are entire sites dedicated to phrases associated with like buttons that have absolutely no content at their endpoints (e.g. <http://fblike.net>). They basically just let users say they like something in their friends' feeds. If you add a like button to that page and set your Open Graph meta tags to make it say "natrius liked I Hate Meetings on MeetingMix.com"[1], I think you'll get plenty of traffic.

[1] I think the page would have to be on the meetingmix.com domain for that to work correctly. It might just make "MeetingMix.com" link to fixmeetings.com.

      og:title = "I Hate Meetings"
      og:site_name = "MeetingMix.com"

On fixmeetings.com and meetingmix.com:

      og:type = "website"

You might need some of the other meta tags in each place. Note that after 10 likes, you won't be able to change the title.

<http://developers.facebook.com/docs/opengraph>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> If you want to know how to run a good meeting, read Andy Grove's book, High Output Management. It's the best of the business books I've read.

It's hard work to make meetings useful but the book lays out the groundwork.</comment>


Two Weeks of Avoiding Cash - <AUTHOR> http://www.conrjac.me/two-weeks-in/

<comment><USER2> Tip for the lemonade- in the supermarket, rather than the fridge, go to the aisle with the giant bottles of coke on it. There you can pick up the same lemonade from the fridge, but twice as much volume for 30p. My favourite is fizzy flavoured water.</comment>


New attack steals SSNs, e-mail addresses, and more from HTTPS pages - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/08/new-attack-steals-ssns-e-mail-addresses-and-more-from-https-pages/ <comment><USER2> Yet another JavaScript-enabled attack.

Is there anyone left who is both informed and supportive of JavaScript being on by default?

<comment><AUTHOR> No, but how many people out of the general computer using population do you think qualify as "well informed"? And for better or worse, how many of them are each of us related to, or otherwise in position to be a bit concerned about?

<comment><USER2> > No, but how many people out of the general computer using population do you > think qualify as "well informed"?

Very, very few.</comment></comment></comment>


Xplain – Explaining X11 with an interactive X11 browser implementation - <AUTHOR> https://magcius.github.io/xplain/article/index.html

<comment><USER2> Previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8019346](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8019346)

</comment><comment><USER3> One of the coolest things I've seen in a while!</comment>


Vue Promise Builder Component - <AUTHOR> https://www.npmjs.com/package/vue-promise-builder <comment><AUTHOR> Component that builds itself based on the latest snapshot of interaction with a Promise.</comment>


Sign the petition to save Mysql - <AUTHOR> http://helpmysql.org/en/petition

<comment><USER2> From <http://helpmysql.org/en/theissue/gplisnottheanswer>:

> MySQL's database server has traditionally been a product developed and > maintained by a single company, not a community project depending on > volunteers or on multiple vendors (like Linux).

The time has come to solve that problem, instead of complaining about rights which _the very same guys behind the petition_ (Monty Program AB) deliberately retained and eventually sold for megabucks.

See also the previous discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=992478>

</comment><comment><USER3> Please, fix the wording "would a fundamental conflict". A missing verb perhaps.

> I, the Undersigned, use MySQL professionally and believe that Oracle, if it > acquired Sun's MySQL, would a fundamental conflict of interests between > MySQL...

</comment><comment><USER4> While there are legitimate competitive concerns with Oracle owning MySQL, there's also something unseemly about people who got rich selling control of their GPL'd software demanding that the current owners relicense it under a more liberal license.

</comment><comment><USER5> or in other words, sign the get-monty-rich petition :-)</comment>


Kickstarter Redesign - <AUTHOR> http://www.kickstarter.com/

<comment><USER2> Not seeing a redesign here... perhaps they are rolling it out gradually?

</comment><comment><USER3> I'd rather they allow international users instead of redesign an already excellent website.

</comment><comment><USER4> Looks the same as it ever was to me.</comment>


Quantum Computers Will Make Your Laptop Look Like an Abacus - <AUTHOR> http://www.newsweek.com/quantum-computers-will-make-your-laptop-look-abacus-327676 <comment><USER2> Thanks for the laughs :)</comment>


Show HN: TurboBench – Compressor Benchmark - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/powturbo/TurboBench <comment><AUTHOR> \- The only benchmark program including LzTurbo \- 100% in-memory benchmark, no I/O overhead

\- Include (>50) allmost all popular, latest or fastest compressors in one compiled package

\- No other compressor benchmark includes more codecs or offer more precision and features

\- Benchmarking Entropy Coders, Lz77 and BWT compressors \- Minimum plugins call overhead

\- Set one, a group or several compressors to benchmark at the command line

\- Multiple input files with recursive directories

\- Concatenate multiple small files into one multiblock file

\- Benchmark multiblock file as one large block, but each block processed separatelly

\- Avoid cache szenario found in other benchmarks with small files \- Set block size, file size limit,...

\- Set number of iterations, number of runs, benchamrks, set max. time per run and for all benchmarks.

\- Automatic sort \- :new: automatic update & merge of result files \- :new: Text, html, csv, markdown __and other output formats without retesting

\- :new: html output with sortable tables

\- :new: Transfer speed sheet for different connections or devices: GPRS,2G,3G,4G,DSL,Network,HDD,SSD,RAM

\- :+1: Speedup html plot

\- Linux and Windows binaries

\- 100% C/C++, w/o inline assembly

\- Enable/disable groups or individual codecs at compile time

\- All in one executable, no hassless installing of additional package</comment>


Race and Merit at MIT - <AUTHOR> http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/01/15/mit

<comment><USER2> Outside of fields like "music, theater and writing", the ones MIT is _really_ serious about, it's only fair to hire the very best. In those fields, at MIT you don't get tenure unless you are #1 or 2 in your sub-field (sometimes _maybe_ but very rarely #3).

" _Furthermore, it is clear that the value placed on gaining a diverse faculty is not high._ "

Damned straight: "the very best in their fields" has nothing to do with a "diverse faculty" as defined in this study.

Anyway, we're talking about pretty small numbers here. MIT has 1,003 faculty members, I don't think any departments are significantly/disproportionately larger than say the "average" (MIT has a strong policy of not letting the facility and graduate program of a department get too large because fields tend to go bust, witness aero/astro in the early '70s, nuclear engineering a little later, and EECS at the beginning of this decade; in the sciences physics has seriously declined and chemistry is smaller than it used to be).

So you have to be very careful about drawing conclusions. See the comment by Jack Olson: for many departments the pool of black scholars _is nonexistent_.

Bottom line of the report, as summarized in this article: MIT _may_ be imperfect in its pursuit of its ideal of meritocracy, and discussion of meritocracy along the axis of "diversity" is discouraged at best.

My comment: Too bad, if you want to play the academic game by different rules, the majority of universities and colleges in the US will be _delighted_ to accommodate you. MIT will _never_ do so.

Or as commentator "mb" put it, "There is no such thing as 'black thermodynamics,' 'women's calculus,' [or] 'hispanic quantum mechanics'".

<comment><USER3> Affirmative action also creates distortions in the pipeline for new hirees. For example, since essentially all private elite universities in the United States systematically discriminate on the basis of race, for a given "quality" of applicant, minority applicants are likely to have a more prestigious degree. This tends to concentrate the top-of-the-field scholars MIT wants to attract at a very, small set of institutions, since if you move just a little down the institutional prestige scale you'll find schools happily admitting minority students who are not cut out for careers at world-class research institutions.

This is difficult to verify because universities lie pervasively about their systematic racial discrimination, but when data does come to light about them, for example in the Gratz v Bollinger litigation, it typically shows that the discrimination is less a "plus factor" and more "two institutions at different academic tiers which happen to be geographically co-located". (The difference between the mean white and black student at the University of Michigan is more than the difference between the mean UoM student and the mean Harvard student.)

<comment><USER2> Thomas Sowell has written extensively about this, using his alma mater of Harvard. Using MIT as an example:

If you come across a minority MIT undergraduate, it's an absolutely safe assumption they belong there. With one notable exception (Dean of Students Shirley McBay, who just didn't have the right attitudes for that job), that was also my experience with the staff (probably goes along with the general attitude of meritocracy).

MIT is currently getting around 13,000 applicants each year with a third of them being qualified to attend (self-selection by applicants is _very_ strong). I would assume that MIT accepts pretty much every qualified STEM minority applicant (although I'm sure a lot go elsewhere; predicting yield is probably the hardest part of admissions).

As I remember, Sowell's general point was that the very top schools like Harvard (and I assume MIT) take a disproportionate fraction of the top minority students, and therefore to maintain "diversity" the lower tier schools will accept a fair fraction of minority students who aren't as qualified for the school (including ones who don't have much of a chance of making it).

This cascades on down the quality/intensity ladder of schools, and is grossly unfair to a lot of the students who would be happy at a lower tier school but who struggle at best in the one they (initially) attend. Admittance to graduation rates are instructive.</comment></comment></comment>


Test Driven Development for Startups - <AUTHOR> http://yfrog.com/z/h74kmstj <comment><AUTHOR> Text:

We believe that people like _|customer type|_ have a need for (or problems doing) _|need/action/behaviour|_

We will know we have succeded when _|quantitative/measurable outcome|_ , and/or _|qualitative/observable outcome|_ which will contribute to _|key performance indicator of success for our company|_.</comment>


Show HN: HubChilla - Asynchronously Chat With Similar People Using SMS - <AUTHOR> http://www.hubchilla.com <comment><USER2> Facebook login only? This is a disturbing trend I'm noticing with a number of new websites/services. I don't think I'm alone in saying I don't like allowing apps access to all of my Facebook data and timeline. I won't use anything that only takes a Facebook login. Any plans for a stand alone login or is the Facebook data necessary for matching you up with people to chat with?

<comment><USER3> Thanks for your feedback! We use facebook login because its the easiest way for us to get the basic data to provide intelligent recommendations.

We have plans to roll out a separate stand-alone login soon, where you can fill out a profile with whatever information you choose to include

<comment><USER4> That sounds like a good plan, I'll check back then. I had a facebook back in high school, but got creeped out by some of their privacy issues and deleted it, this sounds like kind of a neat idea, though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> During the signup, I wouldn't animate the progress bar. I waited for half a minute expecting something to happen until I realized you were waiting for me to fill out a form.

Other than that, let's see what happens!

<comment><USER5> And hitting return anywhere in the signup page just reloads the page and looses the form for me in Chrome Canary.

<comment><USER3> Thanks for the feedback! We'll fix that right away.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Could you be more clear about what exactly you will tell these "people I want to meet" about me?

Also, please clarify some parts of your privacy policy

 _We may collect the following information when your register on or fill out a form on our site, HubChilla:

3\. Other information relevant to our surveys or offers_

Such as?

<comment><USER3> We tell all people three Pieces of Information:

1\. Your Gender

2\. Your Age

3\. Your location (City, State)

Thats all! Everything else is private.

<comment><USER7> So the example on your landing page where the user's school is disclosed is inaccurate?

<comment><USER3> Yes, that was a screenshot from an earlier version. As of right now, only age/gender/location are used, though we use your education history to train our model for smarter recommendations.

We are toying with the idea of putting back the school displaying feature back in if you encounter someone from the same school. It will depend on the data we gather.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Uh, this posted to my Facebook timeline without my permission.

<comment><USER9> When giving permissions to apps, change the settings of who can see updates from this app to "Only Me".

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Please consider adding a disclaimer, that it is not supported internationally. That is really not clear from the home page and clicking on help needs me to login on FB.

Getting the user's to connect on FB before they are made aware that the application won't work in his country is kind of a dark pattern in my view, and makes me trust your site less.

<comment><AUTHOR> Duly noted. Added it to the front page and pushed it live just now. Sorry about the miscommunication there -- we're going to put up better copy along with "What is this?", "FAQ", etc. pages (that don't require you to login to view) soon.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> We're sincerely sorry about any problems people have been having with #pause to make themselves unavailable to chat. There was a tricky race condition that was making it difficult for the #pause to propogate through, but it's been fixed now!

</comment><comment><USER11> Jesus, I just got like 2 dozen texts all at once before #pause worked. Thanks, I love paying for my texts.

It should NOT start until you text #play, as it seemed like it would.

<comment><USER3> Good Point! We'll definitely be adding that in - Sorry if you got surprised.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> When I worked in the industry we saw a few people try user-user chat. It always ended up with users sending threatening/harassing messages to each other, the service provider needing to hire moderators, and then realising that paying someone to be the other end of the chat is just as easy as paying someone to moderate and more effective.

So I guess what I'm saying is I hope you've figured something out to deal with those kind of users.

<comment><USER4> Have a spam filter that directs them to only be able to talk to other threatening/harassing users and let the problem solve itself?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Cool idea. Signed up and talking with someone via texts. Couple of features that you should add -

1\. Give questions to participants to talk about based on their FB likes or whatever data mining you could do.

2\. Multiple people chats - SMS is not real-time medium. So not sure whether other person has read my SMS or not. And I have no idea whether to wait or not. It would be cool to text multiple people at once

<comment><USER3> We agree! We're working on those features and hopefully will be rolling them out soon.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Since it doesn't rely on an internet connection, I would love to use this as an alternative to Omegle (I have crappy 2G) but it should definitely be anonymous. There's not a chance that I'm going to sign up for this with Facebook.

<comment><USER3> Your name is never disclosed - all the other person sees is your age, gender, and city.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> This is intriguing. I'm getting a lot of people from California, namely Palo Alto. Pretty cool. One of the conversations didn't make it through though. (I'm the guy from Georgia who's up at 2:20 AM).

</comment><comment><USER16> The Facebook auto-share any time I start a new conversation, text someone (for EVERY TEXT?!), or login to your website is awful. I liked the service but opt- out auto-sharing should be nuked from orbit.

</comment><comment><USER17> Still not really sure what it is. I tried the help page, but it foisted a login upon me before I could go any further. The about link is hidden from eye, and still doesn't really explain things.

</comment><comment><USER18> This is awesome! It's like Omegle, except where you only talk to Hacker News readers. Hacker News readers are much more interesting to talk to anyway :-)

</comment><comment><USER19> Tried to sign up, but it kept refilling the phone number field with the default value. Could just be a Firefox Beta (Android) thing though.

</comment><comment><USER20> SMSroulette? Hmm...

<comment><USER3> Pretty much! Except with intelligent recommendations :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Good stuff man, just signed up. Congrats!

My first conversation: \- "Show me your .vimrc and I'll show you mine" \- "Ah, I can't I'm married to emacs"

Sounds promising :)

<comment><USER3> Haha thats amazing! Glad you enjoy it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Started texting someone... they told me their first name and I was able to easily find their phone number + address from there. :o

</comment><comment><USER23> Also known as 0800-LOVEMATCH since the 90s.

</comment><comment><USER24> "15 people use this app"

This is basically chat between hn people. I don't think this is the place to create this kind of user base.

<comment><USER3> Actually we have hundreds of users chatting, and we're growing fast! Facebook only refreshes its numbers once every 24 hours, so if you check back again later you'll see more updated results.

We've been focusing on several different distribution strategies, and we have a strong user base of college students as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Integrate with common chat clients like google and I might've more interested.

<comment><AUTHOR> We've gotten this request multiple times actually, so expect an integration soon!

<comment><USER25> I was one of those requests via your chat, just making it here too :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I've tested it and it's really cool. 1000x better than airtime :)

</comment><comment><USER27> Support the UK please? It's really easy if you're using Twillio

<comment><USER3> We'll get on that soon. Stay tuned!

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> I almost signed up because of the demo chat on the home page.

</comment><comment><USER29> FYI: there's a typo on the homepage screenshot: "you to to"

<comment><USER3> Thanks for letting us know! We'll remember to fix that.

<comment><USER17> I thought that was deliberate! To humanise it.

<comment><USER3> Thats what I said ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Any chance of allowing this to be used internationally?

<comment><USER3> Its in the works! This is definitely something we're going to do, but we decided to perfect our launch in the US first before we start accommodating international phones. Stay tuned!

<comment><USER30> Maybe an SMS to Google Talk bridge?

<comment><USER3> We've gotten this request many times now, so expect an integration soon!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> How long did it take to build this? Fun idea!

<comment><AUTHOR> Friday 7/27/12 morning - thought of the idea, briefly talked about the features and did a basic spec

Friday 7/27/12 evening - started coding the backend text message routing logic and the website front (standard stuff - Node.js, custom MVC framework, Twilio API, MongoDB, Redis, Heroku, etc. - the works)

Tuesday 76/31/12 late night - Feature complete, things are all good to go and working (including edge cases, etc.)

Wednesday 8/1/12 - Built out Open Graph integrations, made minor tweaks, chose the name and bought the domain, some branding stuff (i.e. the chinchilla logo), submitted Open Graph actions to Facebook

Thursday 8/2/12 afternoon - Open Graph is all approved, did a test launch with a small set of users, ironed out a ton of bugs

Thursday 8/2/12 evening - posted on HN, making a huge list of things to do next, getting good feedback, and setting up all our other distribution techniques to be fired off tomorrow

6 days from idea to launch! We tried hard to go as fast as possible on this one (although we overbuilt a couple features that we've retracted for the launch - could've saved us a day of work if we had realized they weren't necessary).

[edited to correct the months on the dates]

<comment><USER31> Nice, thanks for the play by play! And I'm assuming you mean 7/27/12 morning? =p

Are you guys by any chance from ASU? Been meeting a lot of people from ASU :)

<comment><USER3> We're from UC Berkeley

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I'm getting spammed. #pause doesn't work...

<comment><USER3> We fixed it! there was a race condition in the code we hadn't noticed

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> The telco providers will love you ;).

</comment><comment><USER33> this looks awesome! tried it and actually met someone cool :) ahah

</comment><comment><USER34> already signed up. get at me.

<comment><USER3> thanks for the support!</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Career advice sought; am I having a quarter-life crisis? - <AUTHOR>

Hello,
I am a late-twenty-something software engineer who works for one of the major tech companies. Lately I find myself dreaming about having taken a different path; specifically, I wonder what my life would have been like if I had become a scientist. Realistically it is too late for me to do an about-face, but I've been toying with the idea of getting a masters in one of the hard sciences and putting my software engineering skills to work in a research or applied setting. Specifically I am thinking of a masters in Physics, but I'm open to other possibilities.
Assuming that my goal is the loosely defined dream of any good nerd (I want to write code that runs on a rocket or in a component of the LHC, etc.), how practical would a masters in physics be? Is this even necessary? Would another degree be more appropriate? How many jobs like this (I realize that is very vague) actually exist?
...and truthfully, I'm not sure this is even coming from a logical place. I've spent the past few years myopically focused on sharpening my technical skills; when I finally lifted my head up to examine my life, I found myself disappointed with what I am using my skills for. I can't stop thinking about the incredible contributions made by past generations that have altered the course of humanity. I'm haunted by climate change, global hunger and thirst, our crippling dependence on oil, and many other problems for which there is a technical (at least in part) solution. Although nobody can really answer this for me, I would love some perspective on this point. Are these feelings common? I may just be struggling with the burden of an adult conscience and sense of mortality, to which the solution isn't necessarily changing my career.
So; I'm hoping to learn more about software development in applied science and research, and I would love to hear thoughts from others who have felt similarly. Thanks for reading this. :) <comment><USER2> Screw the masters, just start applying to companies doing the kind of work you care about. Every company needs software engineers!

[http://www.spacex.com/careers](http://www.spacex.com/careers)

</comment><comment><USER3> > I want to write code that runs on a rocket or in a component of the LHC, > etc.

A masters in physics might help, but for these specifics (which looks like you want to write code for embedded systems), these alternate degrees might also be worth it:

Engineering: mechanical, electronic or computer

Undergrad or postgrad? I'm not sure, as your education system may work differently. Embedded systems need the electronic background to it, so electronic engineering (or it may be called "electrical - light current" in your country) will be your best bet.

Check out the coursework available from the colleges and speak to admin/lecturers/someone-who-knows-something.

</comment><comment><USER4> As others have said, software skills mean you can work in nearly any industry. You can definitely use your skills in a new area!

"Realistically it is too late for me to do an about-face"

Why's that? :) You definitely can if that's what you want. I met plenty of PhD students in their 30s, 40s and 50s (some were in the sciences). Not every grad student is 22, fresh from undergrad, or in their 20s.

These feelings are normal. Definitely talk to close friends, family, a therapist, and people who have felt this way and 1) took the plunge 2) did not.

</comment><comment><USER5> If you want an masters degree in physics, get it because you want it, not as vocational training.

There's no point in spending the next 70 years wishing you'd given yourself permission to learn. It's ok to learn something for the sake of learning.

</comment><comment><USER6> I do career counseling and in my career I went from being a scientist to a engineer. Reach out to me if you would like to have Hangout/Skype session. E-mail in profile.</comment>


A Eukaryote Without a Mitochondrial Organelle - <AUTHOR> http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2816%2930263-9 <comment><USER2> _> The complete absence of mitochondria is a secondary loss, not an ancestral feature_

Basically the organism evolves to not need its mitochondria, replacing it with a different system.

The story goes that mitochondria used to be separate organisms (they have their own DNA) living in symbiosis with other cells, and eventually being subsumed.

So this would be an example of an organism similarly evolving to incorporate a bacterial symbiotic relationship (as opposed to what the mitochondria provide). Not surprising to me that this is possible, or that we eventually found something like this, given that this is how mitochondria came to exist in cells to begin with.

I was hoping that we would have found an organism that existed before mitochondria were subsumed into cells. That would be cool

<comment><USER3> To be clear, this is a lateral gene transfer from bacteria, which doesn't necessitate previous a symbiotic relationship with that bacteria, right?

<comment><USER4> Mitochondria are self-contained organelles. Gene transfer would be if their DNA became part of the nuclear DNA. What you suggest is that there was first a lateral transfer, and then that transferred DNA was ejected from the nucleus, and the cell somehow formed organelles that look surprisingly like bacteria. The theory I believe is that symbiosis evolved into mutual dependency, with the mitochondria starting to live inside the cells instead of outside them sometime along the way.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I can definitely recommend "Molecular Biology of the Cell", which is a undergrad-level textbook about cells. The latest edition is always very expensive, but you can get older versions cheaply. Link: [https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0815341067](https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0815341067)

<comment><USER6> I've been reading another textbook on the same topic recently, and find it endlessly fascinating. I can grok quantum mechanics intuitively on some level, because it's governed by simple mathematical laws, even if those laws are quite different from everyday experience of how physical objects work. Understanding how ordinary matter (atoms, molecules, then solids and fluids) forms out of fundamental interactions is, in principle, just a matter of solving for N variables, and you can use statistics when N gets large. But the complexity of how life exploits the precise interactions between thousands of different molecules to assemble complex machines, on scales from single proteins to whole organisms, involving thousands of interconnected feedback loops to sustain the process and counteract the large-N averaging effect of the second law of thermodynamics, is just mind-boggling.

If you're a programmer and think 10 million lines of code constitutes a complex system, reading about how cells work on a molecular level should be humbling.

<comment><USER7> If you've got a physics background, you might also enjoy _Physical Biology of the Cell_ [0].

I haven't read it personally, so I can't vouch for it, but I've seen it recommended as one of the go-to texts for those interested in the biophysics of cells.

[0] [http://www.amazon.com/Physical-Biology-Cell-Rob- Phillips/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/Physical-Biology-Cell-Rob- Phillips/dp/0815344503/ref=pd_sim_14_36?ie=UTF8&dpID=51B-wJKEMsL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR123%2C160_&refRID=1MK218JD2X3HACH3WCHV)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> For those in search of a succinct summary of the science: [http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/05/first-eukaryotes- foun...](http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/05/first-eukaryotes-found- without-normal-cellular-power-supply)

<comment><USER9> FWIW — [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11684595](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11684595)

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> I find it funny sometimes that we bitch about genetic manipulation in weird ways, but the Random Number God (RNG) pulls this one out of it's hat and does something rather unique and surprising.

<comment><USER11> If it can be done, it will be done. Mitochondria is a pita, so sure some enterprising cell decided to figure out a way to do without it and it did.

<comment><USER12> > Mitochondria is a pita

What's troublesome about mitochondria?

<comment><USER13> Free-radicals?

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free- radical_theory_of_aging#M...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free- radical_theory_of_aging#Mitochondrial_theory_of_aging)

<comment><USER14> You'll get those in any respiration cycle based on oxygen.

Mixing extremely reactive substances will destroy something. It's better to just deal with it, and reconstruct whatever is damaged - the path our body tries hard to take.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Choosing Minecraft over Disney - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/editors-picks/57a0128b53c9 <comment><USER2> My kids are huge Minecraft fanatics. I set them up their own server with a whitelist, and now they have over 40 of their friends on it building incredible things.

Not wanting to waste this opportunity, I'm using Purugin (<https://github.com/enebo/Purugin>) and helping them learn to write plugins in Ruby for their server. I'm writing a book with my son and daughter about the experience in hopes other parents out there can channel their kid's passion into learning a skill that will serve them the rest of their lives, no matter what occupation they choose.

Minecraft has been a life changing event in our home. My kids would rather create than consume. That's something I can get behind as a parent.

<comment><USER3> You are awesome :)

edit: if/when I have kids, I had been thinking of giving them a Linux box and a prepaid debit card, telling them, "you can do, install, buy, or do whatever you want with this machine, the internet connection, and the money, as long as it's legal". This fits in nicely with the kind of thoughts and attitudes I'd like to instill.

<comment><USER4> The money part is brave and will likely work out. However, its also a great opportunity to teach cash flow rather then balance sheet.

My dad did something really great when I was young: He paid me my entire allowance in bulk once a year. Of course the first year it failed and I bought all sorts of crap and was out within weeks. That was the idea. The year afterwards I was too afraid to spend anything because it was so painful having nothing. The year afterwards he introduced me to bonds and some stocks to help build some income.

<comment><USER3> You know, some Asian cultures (including my own - Japan) inadvertently does this through the New Years' Money Gifts given to you from your older relatives (uncles, aunts, grandparents). The amount differs from family to family, but it's not rare at all to get a couple hundred bucks worth from one person. This can add up to ~$1k easily.

So kids in these countries learn (well at least some of them) to ration this big annual pay day over the year, deciding whether they want to buy comics or that hot new game that came out, etc.

<comment><USER5> I once refused my grandma's money.

This turned into a lesson on always accepting gifts. It was awkward.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> To me, this reads less like a Minecraft-is-great piece and more like a tablets-are-great piece. Julie's daughter isn't just choosing Minecraft over Disney -- she's choosing activity over passivity, creation instead of consumption.

For the first time ever, toddlers (as in, people too young to understand how a Gameboy works) are interacting and playing in increasingly complex ways. It's not a niche often covered in HN, but the childrens' app market is booming at an unparalleled level: it's why everyone from Amazon to Valve is trying to get involved, because suddenly we have this ubiquitous magical technology that lets our five year olds learn fractions while being on an adventure -- and the price is $.99, instead of an overpriced $15.99 pop-up book or a $49.99 DVD.

There's a lot of FUD in this overwhelmingly technological age, but I think it speaks volumes when I think that I'd rather be a kid now than any other time. The future is bright.

<comment><USER7> It's more than that. I have an 8 year old and an 11 year old who are into minecraft. Minecraft is 100x better than other video games. My son is using redstone and logic gates to build things. My daughter designs these expansive cities with, yes, pools full of wool. It's better than shooting zombies with peas or wiping out the world with an engineered parasite.

<comment><USER8> This seems like as good a place as any to ask for some parenting advice - I've got a 5 year old. Everybody in his school has iPads. I've noticed a few kids have minecraft, but I've resisted installing it on his iPad because from the sounds of it, mincraft is a diabolically addictive game :-)

However the story and this thread is having me re-think my opinions.

So what age should I set him up with mincraft? Is it suitable for 5 year olds?

<comment><USER9> > ...mincraft is a diabolically addictive game

Yes, Minecraft is really addictive.

> So what age should I set him up with mincraft? Is it suitable for 5 year > olds?

Content-wise, it's definitely suitable for a 5 year old, the addiction aspect is something you'll have to manage. It may be a good idea to start with the creative mode.

The survival mode contains no graphic violence and the enemies are zombies and skeletons that are already dead, although you might have to kill some cute animals to eat (you can play vegan if you like the challenge). There's no sex except animal reproduction, which is represented by tiny hearts and small animals appearing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I had to put on a blanket "live action Disney Channel show" ban after my son (10 at the time) started marathoning "Good Luck Charlie" on Netflix and transformed into an obnoxious little jerk, never missing a chance to make a snarky comment. It was very disturbing. Removing the garbage quality tween shows caused an immediate reversal.

Still, not everything Disney makes is bad, Phineas and Ferb is _brilliant_.

<comment><USER11> I'd have a very short list of shows that Disney makes that aren't evil.

1\. Phineas and Ferb

<comment><USER12> I have one problem with Phineas and Ferb, a show I otherwise enjoy. The sister is a classic Disney tween show girl. It sets an awful example for my daughter as she relates to her brother and other peers - the boys are doing all this great, awesome, fun stuff while the girl tattles on them and cares only of boys and popularity.

<comment><USER10> The other female characters (Isabella, Vanessa, et. al) are strong enough that I can forgive the broad clumsy parody that is Candace.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I think too many commenters here are focusing on the positive effects of Minecraft rather than the negative effects of modern television.

In my opinion, anything is better than Disney Channel, Nickelodeon, and their derivatives. The author pretty thoroughly covers what is wrong with them, and she is not alone in her opinion. I know people who have specifically blocked those channels on their TV, so that the kids are forced to watch something better.

<comment><USER11> The Disney shows are just evil - they give kids horrible stereotypes to emulate. I know several girls that are walking little Disney show characters. They are mean, snarky, and talk in zingers like the punchlines of Shake it Up or A.N.T. Farm. It is kind of sad.

We see a change in behavior when our 7 year old daughter sneaks off and watches some of these show. Instant attitude. Our clever daughter decides she wants to be a famous dancer.

<comment><USER14> I ate dinner in a Burger King last week that had a TV playing The Wizards of Waverly Place.

I was horrified. The main character shows no empathy toward the people around her (she lets some girls eat some spoiled sandwiches that she was told to dispose of, and doesn't skip a beat when they later start vomiting) and insults and physically attacks her brother (knocking over his food tray) constantly without any provocation. She repeatedly mis-uses trite motivational sound bites to deflect blame (announcing, "We could focus on the past, and on whose fault this is, or we could focus on the now" when the fault was clearly her own negligence--that started to make me want to punch her in the face!). And, of course, she constantly uses magic to cover up her mistakes and avoid responsibility.

I'm not even a parent, and I'm mad.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It was a wakeup call for me when I literally heard the Disney channel coming out of the mouth of my 7 year old girl. I spent a day and actually watched that stuff. Day-um. It was good for a life lesson about how tv is a huge exaggeration of real life and you probably shouldn't talk like the characters on tv until you can appreciate the impact of those words and attitudes.

<comment><USER16> It was a wakeup call for me when I literally heard the _Fox News channel_ coming out of the mouth of my 70 year grandmother... etc. Barf.

The point is much more general: programmed stimulation is a problem. Unless you are a slave owner, then programmed stimulation can be good for production.

<comment><USER17> Well, there's a difference in that Fox News was simply telling your 70 y/o grandmother that her preexisting views were shared by many others, and therefore acceptable to express in public.

On the other hand, live action Disney shows have a much greater effect, because they can permanently affect the mental and social development of young children.

<comment><USER15> The part I really had trouble with was the shows had kind of a pervasive cynicism to them while the dialog consisted largely of biting sarcasm. The message seemed to be "whoever is fastest on the draw with a sarcastic insult is coolest."

Just taking an episode of South Park and s///g'ing the profanity with disnified words like "dweebiod" doesn't alchemically transmute it into "wholesome family entertainment". If you talk to your real life friends like the "friends" do on these shows, you're not going to have many of them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Minecraft Lets Plays are amazing, I can't think of any other game where it spawned such a large community. For people who want to watch a little bit more serious Lets Plays (not just targeted at toddlers) I recommend the MindCrack[0] server/network of Youtubers. In particular EthosLab[1]. There is also a large community around the ForgeCraft[2] server where most major mod creators play and test their mods. Direwolf20[3] in particular.

[0] <http://www.guudelp.com/>

[1] <https://www.youtube.com/user/EthosLab>

[2] <http://www.reddit.com/r/forgecraft/>

[3] <https://www.youtube.com/user/direwolf20>

<comment><USER19> I actually watch Japanese Minecraft LPs - it makes for excellent study material, and is highly entertaining.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> Although I agree that exposure to computers is great for kids, how young is too young?

I've got a toddler (3yo) who plays games on my phone. He's actually pretty good at some of the platform games on it (astonishingly good considering his age), but we're questioning his maturity with phone use.

He asks my wife all day long "when is daddy coming home", only to hear "can I play with your phone" when I walk through the door. I'll let him play with it for about half an hour just before dinner, but telling him to pack it away to eat dinner is like a declaration of war.

We've gotten to the point that we've banned him outright using my phone because of the anger/temper that it's caused. I know the links of bad behaviour and sugar consumption, but we're thinking that phone use is _worse_.

Anybody else seen this behaviour, or is it just bad parenting?

<comment><USER21> Welcome to being a parent. Throughout their lives they will find things that they desire above all else. Your goal should be to figure out how to use that to teach them moderation, and 3 is about the right place to start in my experience.

The primary goal for me at that stage was to help them understand delayed gratification, or specifically that working on something not as fun can lead to something fun. The secondary goal turned out to be to find other things that are just as fun. This latter goal was abetted by reading stories like "Bread and Jam for Frances" in which our heroine learns that while Bread and Jam is tasty, it isn't all there is in the world.

I did not realize it at the time but the secondary goal of finding things equally fun becomes really useful as they get older. To know from experience that no matter how fun this thing you are doing is, there are other things that are fun out there waiting to be discovered, helped mitigate some obsessing on the one fun thing. Reading/books are great for that since they come in many shapes and topics and you can learn a ton from them.

<comment><USER20> Thanks for the comment.

You're right. I think the lessons of moderation and delayed gratification should be a goal and not a blanket ban.

Finding things equally as fun is hard. He knows what he wants... what works is distracting him from what's in front of him to something else not equally as fun. We'll work on that.

As for reading, he really enjoys books but just not nearly enough as gaming. He's favorite is "The little yellow digger" and he's even memorised it. Highly recommend it.

<comment><USER21> Well, I'm not going to say parenting is easy, it's not. If it helps there _is_ something more fun out beyond his current experience, you will know it when you find it, and you'll be on to the next thing.

As for books, the thing with reading is to get past reading into _thinking_ and once you get there games won't be nearly as entertaining because they are always the same. Something we've done over the years is reading and talking about them. Even simple books like The Animorphs series have things to talk about, or the Boxcar Kids, or any of a zillion books. Good starters are "how would you have told this story?" or "can you create a similar one?" "What do you think character X was thinking?" "Do you think we could build a fire with just a rock and a piece of steel? Lets try it."

As long as you stay engaged, your kids will keep coming back. At this stage they are genetically programmed to seek out your approval (too bad for them, but a critical survival tool in the parental arsenal) Expect more, stay engaged, and if you have the experience I have had you will both enjoy the trip.

<comment><USER20> So far, reading has been passive. I'm liking the idea of prompting for the character's thoughts. That sounds really interesting and positive. Thanks for the suggestions.

And you're damn right. Parenting is not easy!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I wholeheartedly support the idea of children using interactive creative environments rather than just watch TV. However, as a non-parent, I can't figure out why cursing is such a big deal. Many parents wouldn't bat at eye at some pretty awful violence in movies(think Batman or something), but feel "fuck" is cause for evacuation. I have the same issue with fear of nudity.

<comment><USER23> I think I can answer that as a pretty liberal parent. Like you I don't have a big problem with cursing or nudity. But that does not mean I let my kids listen to cursing or watch nudity willy nilly. To me it is not that the hearing of cursing itself is bad. The problem is that kids start saying those words themselves in inappropriate settings. That reflects badly upon you as a parent. Things related to nudity, sex, bodily functions etc is not easy either. Like when visiting a restaurant toilet and your son asks questions about how you pie very loud so everybody else can hear. It is not really about the kids, but the fact that everybody care a lot about what everybody else thinks about you and your kids.

E.g. in Norway where I am from, it is perfectly normal to let kids run around stark naked at the beach. It is seen as natural and nobody stares or makes a fuss about it. I don't have a problem with that. However when visiting the US, we don't let the kids run around naked at the beach. Not because we suddenly changed our attitudes towards nudity, but because we don't want to stick out. We don't want people to stare at us and think we are bad parents.

Ironically I read something related when visiting the DDR museum in Berlin. Being nude at the beach started as a protest against the conformist communist party. But eventually everybody in DDR became a nudist, because they didn't want to stick out by wearing clothes, because the majority stopped doing it.

<comment><USER24> I'm not sure but you could probably get arrested for letting your kid run naked in US. If you took pictures of your naked children you'd be charged with producing kiddie porn regardless of context (beach, parent, kids having fun).

One mother was charged for leaving her baby in the stroller outside of the diner in the US despite the fact that in her european country it's totally fin and everybody does it.

<comment><USER25> Wait, so every picture of a naked child is automatically child porn? And you can't let your children run around naked on the beach?

Man, you Americans are strange. _goes back to eating his soup of sheep's stomach_

<comment><USER26> > _"every picture of a naked child is automatically child porn?"_

Legally speaking, no. If the courts were given a picture of your kid running around naked on the beach, doing normal beach things, without any other reason to believe this was "child porn", they'd drop the charges fast.

The main danger is that Child Protective Services has a fairly broad mandate. If they're going to make a mistake, they'd rather be overprotective than underprotective. So if you have a picture of a naked child, they're likely to try to have your child removed from your home (temporarily) even if they know the charges won't stick.

<comment><USER24> > If the courts were given a picture of your kid running around naked on the > beach, doing normal beach things, without any other reason to believe this > was "child porn", they'd drop the charges fast.

I read that for some people charges were not drop fast enough to not ruin their lives.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2290682/Walmart- Lisa...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2290682/Walmart-Lisa-Anthony- Demaree-lost-custody-children-month-employee-called-police-bath-time- pictures.html)

> If they're going to make a mistake, they'd rather be overprotective than > underprotective.

That's funny how they think that they are being protective by removing the child from the house where it has spent its entire life because they think that might save the kid few weeks of potential additional abuse.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> What Disney produces is content made for kids. What SkyDoesMinecraft produces is content made for everyone that happens to be appropriate and relevant for kids. The latter represents what the world is. The former is a fantasy. Minecraft is awosome but the unique appeal here is of YouTube. It is, and has been for years now, a one of a kind window to the world that is especially appealing to kids. It can not be duplicated but it can go wasted. Don't be sad though, you can always skip this ad in 5 seconds.

</comment><comment><USER28> I can't speak highly enough of the transformative capabilities of Minecraft. My 7yo has been struggling with reading because of working memory issues, even though he has a verbal reasoning score that is off the charts (we had him psych tested as part diagnosing why he was struggling with his reading).

Minecraft was about the best thing we found to motivate him to read. He wanted to know how to do stuff, I told him "it's in the Wiki" and point-blank refused to help him do it in the game. He struggled at first to even be able to type stuff into the Wiki search box, but he persevered and his reading has improved dramatically.

Every now and again (mostly at random) I will 'reward' him by jumping onto the console and dropping in a couple of special items that he hasn't seen before, and then watch him go off to the Wiki to try and work out what to do with it.

As I said, I just can't speak highly enough about it and I've told everyone who will listen about how good it is. The simplest explanation I've come up with to explain to grandparents and other interested parties about what he is doing is this: "it's Lego for the mind".

</comment><comment><USER29> Content produced by Disney and others are written with a stereotypical kid in mind. Their brief must be something like this - "Our target audience needs a bright colour palette with lots of bubble gum pink and syrupy greens. Should have fast and loud sequences to keep them engaged. Goofy characters work. In any case - Don't Make Them Think".

Trust me it is a relief to not see the young generation glued to such content all day (which even they don't find engaging any more). If they find joy in building and designing something themselves, then more power to that.

</comment><comment><USER30> For kid-friendly minecraft videos I recommend Paul Soares Jr.: <http://www.youtube.com/user/paulsoaresjr>

<comment><USER31> Another good one is kurtjmac: <http://www.youtube.com/user/kurtjmac> He also raises money for charity by walking to an area of Minecraft where the terrain generation glitches out, called the "Far Lands".

<comment><USER32> As well as Etho's Lab. He keeps the language PG and has quite the following. <http://www.youtube.com/user/EthosLab/videos>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I have four children between the ages of 9 and 17 and they all play Minecraft. One of the most interesting things about them playing it is that they'll play together as a team building elaborate home structures. At one point, they built an amusement park with roller coaster rides and everything. One of the other games I have introduced them to is the game Fez. It allows them to simply explore another colorful 2d/3d world as a single player.

</comment><comment><USER34> When you think about it, Minecraft is this generation's LEGO. Kudos to Notch!

<comment><USER35> Yep. My 5yo still alternates between "Minecraft" and "the Lego game."

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> Great article. My kids are exactly the same (5 and 8). I would rather have them use their imaginations to play and build than watch TV violence or stupidity.

I would recommend iHasCupquake for YouTube videos. She is engaging and funny and is someone your daughter can find inpiration in as well (youtube.com/user/iHasCupquake)

Oh, and iHasCupquake, if you for whatever reason read this my daughter thinks your "hair is very pretty".

</comment><comment><USER37> One thing about this whole discussion really bugs me:

Everyone is just talking about how to keep the children occupied with technology. I really think this is the wrong approach, there is so much more to learn and explore than stupid pixels on a screen.

When we were young my parents had the attitude that it's very important to get a "feel for the earth", in a very literal way. That's why we spend as much time outside as possible. One of the few things I remember about primary school: I was the only one who knew potatoes grow below ground. Where has this world come, that our children know so little about even the most basic stuff??

<comment><USER38> Children use huge amounts of time.

It might sound like parents are spending all this time dumping a child in front of a screen but really this time is quite short compared to the rest of the time that's available.

Gardening is another great activity. Start with cress, then herbs and vegetables in window boxes.

<comment><USER37> In my opinion "dumping a child in front of a screen" should really be the last option; only used with a good excuse and balanced by extensive investment of time. (It's of course easy for me to talk like that, but I see one of the greatest responsibilities of live in raising your children properly. Which for me includes spending a whole lot of time with them.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> This is the massive change afoot that Hollywood needs to recognize. 20 years ago they were fighting over which network you would watch or which film you would go to see. But now the entire Movie/TV industry has to compete against other forms of entertainment. While you can argue that this has always been the case, computer-based entertainment is a lot more "TV-like" than going out to a concert or seeing a play. I think this long term trend poses an existential threat to the TV and movie business. They are going to need to adapt to this new environment or risk irrelevance.

</comment><comment><USER40> It got to the point that my kids were _begging_ me to cancel cable TV and use the proceeds to buy an additional computer so they'd have less sharing contention for the computer that did Youtube and Minecraft.

So I did.

</comment><comment><USER41> One of the things I've learned from meeting smart adults with kids is how legitimate -- and prevalent -- are "no stupid bullshit" rules governing what kids may watch. I've met more than one couple now that forbids Hannah Montana, Bratz, and other associated nonsense, and their kids are probably better functioning for it.

If instead of idiot TV they're messing around with Minecraft -- a screen-bound Lego set with as close to infinite pieces as makes no difference -- so much the better.

</comment><comment><USER42> OMG this is so true. Disney and Nick were so bad that we cancelled cable for several years before eventually giving up when a good deal came along. :( We've regretted it. We limit how much they watch, but it doesn't matter. It isn't even attitude so much as just non-stop nonsense from both kids at the dinner table because that is what they watch. The shows aren't funny to begin with but imagine children trying to parrot the same behavior of the children in the shows without having any idea how to fully pull it off. It is HORRIBLE. Please make it stop. Our cable contract is coming up, but the fam is addicted again to the other shows we didn't get on air or via netflix.

So screwed.

</comment><comment><USER43> when I was growing up I was sort of forced, sort of coaxed into reading a lot of books. So maybe I am biased, but it seems like reading books is the most educational experience a young mind can have. I also built a lot of legos, which is kind of like a real world analog to Minecraft (correct me if I'm wrong on that), and that helped develop my spatial reasoning I suppose. But it seems like literature has an almost endless potential to educate and expand your mind, whereas at a certain point minecraft/legos/etc will reach a state of greatly diminished returns. So why is the only other option for this woman's child a TV?

</comment><comment><USER44> I tried a couple of times to get my daughter interested in Sim City, Second Life, Minecraft, etc.

Every time, she decided if she was going to go to all the trouble of building something, it should be a real thing.

She has since gotten very active in team sports.

</comment><comment><USER45> I love Minecraft. It's one of the priceless games on the web that doesn't try to convince you into buying things with your won money- Passes, Rubies, Tokens, whatever you call them, they worth about as much as real money after it's accidentally dropped into a volcano.

Minecraft also lets you create your own story, over and over again. You can create custom maps, wire up amazing redstone systems, and simply give the player a challenge to overcome. One of the most popular maps, Skyblock, is just a few floating blocks in space, which gives the player a challenge to face.

Minecraft is one of my favorite games, and will always be.

By the way, it's budder. XD

</comment><comment><USER46> <http://www.reddit.com/r/mindcrack/>

Since a lot of young parents are on this thread, I'll risk the reddit link and plug for the MindCrack community. Many up loaders there are curse banning and very kid friendly. EthosLab is by a Canadian coder/garden supplier and is logic gate heavy. KurtJMac is a Chicagoian graphic designer that is walking to the floating point error in the games world algorithm generation for charity having raised 70k for cancer patients and talks about astronomy and NASA. Both are very good.

</comment><comment><USER47> Minecraft on a tablet? How does that work?

<comment><USER48> It is a watered-down version, with touch-based controls.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> Preface: My son is 3 years old.

I let my kid choose his own entertainment. He'll more often than not either request the tablet or violent Donald Duck cartoons from the 50s (both of which we cap the duration to ~15 min). I believe that while curiosity is something to foster, we shouldn't force it upon our kids without providing them with alternative choices. Helping him develop an ability to discern pros and cons when making decisions along with negotiation skills will help round him out much more than trying to force him into a purely producer role.

</comment><comment><USER50> Remember when the iPad came out and was widely decried for being suitable only for passive, non-creative consumption of content?

<comment><USER51> Playing games is still passive, non-creative consumption of content.

<comment><USER52> Have a look at some of the things built on Minecraft (we're talking all the way up to fully functional CPUs, here) and then tell me that it's both passive and non-creative.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> _"Bad language is easy to curb, but stupid adult stereotypes, sarcasm, backstabbing behavior, and contempt are not."_

Old way of conditioning, meet the new way of conditioning where the complexities in the way people live their life reflected in media are still circumvented and avoided in order to provide temporary peace of mind and entertainment.

Edit: I probably shouldn't share these types of thoughts on HN, but do anyways seeing what others care to explain about possible underlying dynamics going on here that aren't being said. Sorry if I am offending the HN groupthink.

<comment><USER54> I don't understand what you are saying? Playing minecraft or watching amateurs' videos of themselves playing is _conditioning_? By who, and how?

<comment><USER53> Bear with me.

The conditioning in this is media is shaping the minds of individuals (intentionally or not), who will most likely not be aware of this going on during consumption. The old way being television or in relation to this posting, Disney and "…stupid adult stereotypes, sarcasm, backstabbing behavior, and contempt…". The new way being "interactive" media, or in relation to this posting, Minecraft and related content consumed where "Bad language is easy to curb…".

The "stupid adult stereotypes, sarcasm, backstabbing behavior, and contempt" is hardly unique Disney or other child TV consumption (or TV for that matter…). One thing people point out with television consumption people have stated time and time again, is that it hardly invites it's viewers to explore ideas outside of the content while viewing. Then it seems like some how, the ability to be able to interact with media with content like Minecraft is some how better (allows children to be more creative, enabling more thinking, or whatever people say the benefits are compared to what people think of television now [though I bet some people were touting the benefits of television not to long ago…]), which I can see/understand the argument being made here for that with the logic being made on surface level.

However, the thing is that it isn't like what the children are doing is outside of the purpose of the game and are very much only able to do things within the constructs the game. At the end of the day, it is still a game. And like Disney shows or the like, it still does not invite the player to explore ideas and concepts that are going within the game at the same time. So to me, it seems like overall the child is no better off with being able to digest things like "Bad language…" and notions of "…stupid adult stereotypes, sarcasm, backstabbing behavior, and contempt"(hardly unique to our times since it is apart of human nature after all) that could be going on in the game or other consumable content related.

It seems to me it would be foolish to think that this "new interactive media" does any more or less compared to the "old way" (TV, or the tech before that like radio and even books) when it comes to addressing the underlying issues being avoided. And apparently, even trying to have a discussion upon such seems to be avoided…

<comment><USER54> The thing is that a lot of what people do in minecraft is not towards a single goal or accomplishment that is pre laid out by the minecraft developer(s). If you haven't played it before, it's a vast 3D world of detachable bricks that are created using a procedural algorithm. There are other entities in the world the user can fight against. But, the dominant part of the game is crafting your own creations using the 3D bricks not necessarily for any purpose at all besides one that you come up with. It's a lot like Legos in that respect. One user built a life size model of the Star Ship Enterprise (for no in-game reward at all) [http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/09/28/somebody- built-the-starshi...](http://www.pcgamer.com/2010/09/28/somebody-built-the- starship-enterprise-in-minecraft/)

So because of that, minecraft _does_ do more than watching TV, or most other goal oriented video games. If it doesn't, you'll have to elaborate on what you mean by "the underlying issues being avoided".

<comment><USER53> > _you'll have to elaborate on what you mean by "the underlying issues being > avoided"._

Third paragraph: > _However, the thing is that it isn't like what the children are doing is outside of the purpose of the game and are very much only able to do things within the constructs the game. At the end of the day, it is still a game. And like Disney shows or the like, it still does not invite the player to explore ideas and concepts that are going within the game at the same time. So to me, it seems like overall the child is no better off with being able to digest things like "Bad language…" and notions of "…stupid adult stereotypes, sarcasm, backstabbing behavior, and contempt"(hardly unique to our times since it is apart of human nature after all) that could be going on in the game or other consumable content related._

<comment><USER54> What do you mean by "does not invite the player to explore ideas and concepts that are going within the game at the same time"? And why is this so important to a child's development that without it, "overall the child is no better off"?

<comment><USER53> Does the game invite the child or player to think about their motivations when constructing things? Does the game make them think about their emotions and what is going on in the head of other players when they are razing other players creations and how that affects gameplay? Does the game help them abstract the experiences when playing the game, show them how it relates, and ultimately help give them a better understanding to the world they live in?

I would say no to all of these, just like would say about TV. And it isn't that is important or not, it is just that it offers no fundamental difference from the media that has come before when it comes to development of the mind.

<comment><USER54> In minecraft, you can chat with other people within the world. So there is communication. If you raze someones creation (which may or may not be possible depending on the access you've been given), someone else may react to that and tell you to stop. In extreme cases, you may be booted or banned from the server. Likewise, if you help other people in the game, they will likely praise you and be willing to help you on your own creations.

In real life, if you destroy or hurt someone else as a child, you are told that was bad and why. In extreme cases, you may be put on a time out, or forcefully removed from the situation. If you help other people, you make friends who will be more willing to help you.

So what is the fundamental differentiating factor, as far as emotional development goes, between minecraft and real life? Both have comparable consequences to a person's actions as it regards other people's feelings.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> My 10 year old daughter and 8 year old son are both deep in love with Minecraft, so I most certainly agree with that part. I also have the same disdain for Disney XD, with the same complaints as the linked -- they have truly terrible writing, and are just horrible social models.

I have to add a caveat about the Minecraft videos, however, in that many of them are just as bad or worse than tween shows. While some are just walkthroughs, a growing number are obnoxious cliche fests (e.g. screaming and yelling expletives when a creeper appears, etc). There is a large set of people trying to capitalize on kids watching minecraft videos.

<comment><USER56> I think the awesome benefit of youtube is that you can leave direct feedback. Give it a thumbs down plus explain why.

Teach your kids to do that and eventually things will improve. Just don't expect that of Disney.

<comment><USER38> Yogscast (quite sweary British minecraft youtubes) have 4,806,098 subscribers and 1,931,000,000 video views.

This video [1] has 1,076,520 views, 49,507 up-thumbs and 808 down-thumbs, with over 7,000 comments. It's been up for about 24 hours at this point.

I fully support down-voting and commenting, but I'm not sure it's going to have any effect.

Luckily, there are plenty of other videos where decent attitudes are on show.

[1] ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_idfJmWRj3s&list=UUH- _hzb...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_idfJmWRj3s&list=UUH- _hzb2ILSCo9ftVSnrCIQ&index=3))

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> "Please sign in to continue"

No.

<comment><USER58> You do not have to sign in to read articles.

</comment></comment><comment><USER59> Lame. She still doesn't really give a shit what her kids are doing so long as she doesn't get back talk.

Fuck you lady.

<comment><USER36> Obviously not a parent, either that or you're miraculously able to entertain your kid(s) 24/7.

<comment><USER60> It's perfectly OK and healthy for kids to be bored.</comment></comment></comment>


Python: Even a Feature That You Do Not Use Can Bite You - <AUTHOR> https://blog.petrzemek.net/2019/02/22/even-feature-that-you-do-not-use-can-bite-you/ <comment><USER2> Understanding the basic syntax for assignment isn't a high bar to clear. While it's maybe not ideal to use colons for both the "assignment-like" separator between keys and values inside dictionaries and the annotation of types, introducing any new syntax features into a language that's been around for decades is never without compromise. Colons are also used at the end of block statements and in index ranges and nobody complains.

In this case you hit the most benign sort of change: Code that was previously syntactically invalid is now syntactically valid but has silly semantics. There's never going to be a way to avoid this with full generality, and your code _never_ worked — type annotations just delayed your runtime error by one line.

When annotations were introduced in 3.4, there was no requirement they be used to annotate types instead of something else, so any valid Python expression is allowed syntactically. In 3.6 the use of annotations for anything other than types was provisionally deprecated, and in 3.7 is fully deprecated. In 3.8, non-type usage will be disallowed as a TypeError, and the only allowable non- type annotations will be strings, (which will be interpreted as bare identifiers for backward compatibility with pre-3.7 code that uses them as forward references). At this point your code will revert to raising an exception on exactly the same line it used to.

<comment><USER3> The problem is not understanding, it's fat-fingering (especially when dict literals and dict comps use `:`).

> type annotations just delayed your runtime error by one line.

Or it introduces a subtle bug because this was intended as a reassignment or somesuch.

<comment><USER2> The real problem, as others point out, is not using a linter to catch errors before runtime. Mypy flags this problem through static analysis.

You're right I'm being uncharitable by saying "understanding". I'm annoyed he bothered writing an accusatory blog post about this aspect of the language without mentioning any of the alternative syntax proposals helpfully discussed in the PEP, or exploring why annotations work this way. The designers have been very transparent and conservative in considering different ways of doing it, and the OP doesn't offer any ideas for improving the interpreter, or note that the behavior he's complaining about will be fixed in 3.8.

<comment><USER4> > Mypy flags this problem through static analysis.

The problem is that there's not really such a thing as static analysis in python. For example, if I wrap it in a function like this, mypy doesn't complain at all.

        def blah():
            ages = {}
            ages['John']: 42
            print(ages['John'])
            return ages

<comment><USER2> Mypy intentionally does not check annotations inside untyped `def` statements. This is a feature meant to make it easier to gradually introduce types in code that wasn't intended to be typechecked. If you call mypy with the flag `--check-untyped-defs` or just annotate the function with anything at all, you will see mypy checks the inside of the function:

        from typing import Any

        def blah() -> Any:
            ...

I'm not sure what you mean by "there's not really such a thing as static analysis" in Python -- that's exactly what Mypy does.

<comment><USER4> Cool, I knew I had to be missing something. You're right of course.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is a weird article to me. There seems to be an implicit condemnation of Python for this new feature resulting in non-error, unexpected behavior under certain typoes, despite the fact that that is true for literally any typo that results in valid code in any language (such as, e.g., = instead of ==). I don't understand how it would be possible to add a new syntactic option without being "bit".

Regarding type hints' ability to be arbitrary code, I suspect this is to allow you to use nested type hints from the `typing` library, like `Tuple[int, int]`, as well as more complex or user-defined types. Plus it just gives more flexibility in general.

I'd be interested to hear the author's suggestions on alternative syntax or ways to catch when the programmer intended something other than a type hint, or even arguments that type hints are extraneous and should not have been added - personally, I've found them quite useful recently, in combination with pylint.

<comment><USER6> There were some people who thought that trying to bolt a type system on to Python was a bad idea.

A common response to them was "you don't have to use it; you can ignore it and you're no worse off than you were before". I think it's reasonable for him to point out that this isn't quite true.

<comment><USER7> I dunno. This sort of problem would apply to any new feature with syntax. It doesn't seem fair to blame the type annotations specifically.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I mean technically it's a feature you're using, just unintentionally. Kinda like setting a mutable object as a default argument.

But I'll admit I got bit by exactly this recently, wrote up an "assignment" using a colon instead of an equal sign and it didn't do anything, but didn't fail either.

Somewhat frustratingly, pycharm didn't warn about it either. I should probably check their bug tracker to see if somebody already reported it.

<comment><USER8> I don't think so, because 42 is not a type in Python (it could be one day, though - in TypeScript, 42 can be used as a type, basically an enum with only one value). I think (naively) that it should throw an error.

<comment><USER3> Annotations were specifically designed as general-purpose, not specifically _type_ annotations. So the ability to put arbitrary expressions in annotations was very much intended.

In fact, the type _hints_ of the typing module are not actually types.

<comment><USER8> Ah, I see, good to know.

What I wanted when I found the PEP a few days ago were docstrings for instance variables, which isn't one of the things that this provides, so I stopped reading. I ended up using properties but it's a bit verbose.

It's great that typings are in a module so it can be extended or replaced!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I wonder why most people defend this feature. The problem is not the annotation, you can do that in ML, too:

      Poly/ML 5.6 Release
      > 5 : int;
      val it = 5: int

But you cannot just use 42 where a type is expected:

      > 5 : 42;
      poly: : error: <identifier> expected but 42 was found
      Static Errors

It's pretty silly that Python did not develop an actual type system if annotations like that are supported.

<comment><USER10> In the void of enforcing a speficic one, you allow people flexibility to do custom things.

For instance linters not understanding type specificatins beyond a certain complexity but still using them in your code and some custom decorator to check them at run/dev time

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> non-clickbait title: Python: Mistyping a character in your code can bite you.

Any IDE or linter worth its salt would catch this for you.

<comment><USER4> Can you recommend a particular linter? I use flake8, which does not warn for this. I just tested pylint which also does not appear to warn for this.

<comment><USER12> PyCharm would highlight the expression after : as a type that was not imported correctly (or an expression that is not a type).

I would assume mypy would cause an error.

<comment><USER4> If I wrap it in a function, mypy doesn't throw an error. I'm not sure if mypy has a function to lint such code without executing it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> In any language that undergoes syntactic extension, there is new syntax that is a syntax error in an old version of the language. Erroneous programs written for the old version which land on that previously bad syntax will undergo a change in behavior.

This is true even in languages that don't undergo syntactic extension. If you call a nonexistent function today, your program bombs. Tomorrow, that function could be added, so now something unexpected happens, perhaps.

Lisps are susceptible. Today (foo bar) is diagnosed; tomorrow it's new syntax (not simply a new function), because _foo_ exists as a macro operator.

However, functions and macros, being named, can be namespaced to curtail such issues. Random, _ad hoc_ read syntax extensions, not so much.

One approach is that files, or sections of files, can support annotations which indicate what version of the syntax is required.

Under GCC, if you want only C89, so that any syntactic extensions from later dialects are invalid syntax, you use '-ansi' on the command line to select that dialect. For oinstance, support for // comments disappears, and so x // _blah_ / y is x / y, rather than x followed by a comment-to-end-of-line.

</comment><comment><USER8> This is true. I don't think Python is to blame for it, though. Any language has potential for making a mistake that's syntactically valid but doesn't have the intended meaning. It's like when a former manager of mine typed "call me at your continence" when he meant to say "call me at your convenience".

<comment><USER13> Languages can help manage change, though, providing features such that programmers working against older dialects of the language, who make mistakes, get diagnostics according to the old version, rather than accidentally stepping on new syntax.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> It seems odder to me that 42 is a valid type hint than that the LHS can be an expression. But I share with most of the others here the opinion that this really isn't a problem with Python. Every language makes trade offs, and python gives you incredible flexibility and expressiveness in exchange for a lack of certain guardrails.

Once a coworker came to me with a program that was unexpectedly failing, and it turned out that somewhere in the code there was a function that takes a callable, but instead of

        something(iterable, func)

he had written

        something(iterable, func())

There were no IDE errors/warning (in fact PyCharm tends to induce this error by auto inserting the parens) and the behavior that resulted made it tricky to catch.

Nonetheless, personally I'd take that over most other options for run of the mill progamming tasks.

<comment><USER12> PyCharm would highlight that error as a yellow warning if you correctly define the types of the arguments for "something".

This would also not be accepted by mypy.

<comment><USER14> Iirc this was pre type hints, so the example might be invalid now, but I'm sure I could come up with other examples that demonstrate the same point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> This isn't a good article to post. It's just one person complaining about a change he didn't know about.

It's really just a syntax change. I probably wouldn't have chosen that particular syntax using colons, or I would have forced another keyword like "set" in front of it, but it is what it is. He created a bug and he likely won't do it again, so problem solved.

<comment><USER16> I also didn't know about this change but now I do because this article was posted.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Ok I don't really see the issue. You could just as easily write x is 42 as x: 42 and you have the same issue. it's not really a language problem. If you see keyerror, you should know that that value didn't properly get added to the dictionary. When investigating why, you should see your error of using the wrong operator. Language is functioning properly

</comment><comment><USER18> So how do people defend this one:

      >>> [][0]
      Traceback (most recent call last):
        File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
      IndexError: list index out of range
      >>>
      >>> [][0] : "bug"
      >>>

</comment><comment><USER10> Instead of the weirdly alarmist nature of the article, it would be a more fair point to make that colons are now very overloaded in python syntax.

</comment><comment><USER19> The level of assumed ignorance of the reader in this article is a bit high given the subject matter.

</comment><comment><USER20> also, annotations end up accumulated into global __annotations__

PS: wait until he reads about := assignement syntax

</comment><comment><USER21> Local variable type hints are a major reason I refuse to use python versions before 3.6. What is this guy's problem?

</comment><comment><USER22> Weird article title. This is more neat than it is alarming.</comment>


Why Not GitHub? - <AUTHOR> https://sanctum.geek.nz/why-not-github.html <comment><USER2> GitHub is large enough now that its a supplychain liability. Much like the recent Docker Hub compromise, its a juicy target for everyone's infrastructure and its only a matter of time before something big happens.</comment>


"How do you talk to 'I have nothing to hide' people?" - <AUTHOR> https://lobste.rs/s/6yrndd/how_do_you_talk_i_have_nothing_hide_people <comment><USER2> Ask them to unlock their phone and hand it over. Reassure them they can watch everything you do with it and that you won't use it to impersonate them, and if they want you to stop, the safe word is "I have something to hide."

<comment><USER3> This. Throwing facts and figures at them won't work. You have to make them feel it. I usually ask them if they have any problem with revenge porn sites.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> First, you have things to hide. Your bank account number, at a minimum. I'm pretty sure that everyone understands that one as soon as you say it. You _don 't_ want your bank account access information to be general knowledge.

Second, if you have a window that someone can look through (the feds, say), someone else can also look through it (criminals, say). What one can do, someone else can do.

I think most people can grasp those two points. (For the second, you may need to give some examples of NSA-only stuff that became generally available.) But the combination of those two points leads them to "I have things I need to hide, and I can't let even the government peek."

<comment><USER5> FYI, in europe, the bank account number (IBAN) is public and you can't do anything with it except wire money to it

<comment><USER6> This is wrong, and has in fact always been wrong (even in the old system you could use a bank acc number, an address and a name to take money from an account). You can take money out of bank accounts with just IBAN and a name (though even the requirement for a name is spurious). Of course there are legal repercussions and usually the bank refunds your money - but that's when it is already too late.

The banking system you are talking about is built entirely on trust.

<comment><USER7> Interesting, do you have any source for that? How would do that using only IBAN and a name (i.e. without faking a signature, having the PIN number, a compromised device etc.)

<comment><USER8> It's called Direct Debit: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_debit](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_debit)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "Then why don't you live stream yourself pooping? Why don't you let people walk into your house and look around, just out of curiosity?" Tell them their privacy belongs to them. When they let someone shift the question from "what do I want you to see" to "what have I got to hide", they cede power to that someone. They might not care about that power now, but when they end up caring, it will be too late.

</comment><comment><USER10> You don't, that's a waste of time for anyone actually proficient in OPSEC.

After years of advocating for privacy on multiple fronts (amateur-enthusiast to professional) I realize that most people are not capable of being trusted to protect themselves from even the most basic threat vectors, and that convenience is the biggest priority in their calculus, thus it will never occur to them why things like PgP encryption and cryptocurency is necessary until its too late.

At which point they're a potential customer, so why am I going to reduce my Market share?

</comment><comment><USER11> I say that's fine, you don't have to hide anything. Most people have things they would like to keep private however.

Some older folks may not have nudes on thier phone or porn habits to hide.. but most younger folks have nudes of themselves and people they know or have known , or at least something 'incriminating' \- almost nude, drinking, whatever..

and I go to explain how hundreds or thousands of engineer-nerds have access to their daughter's pics and videos, chat logs and history of wives and husbands..

we're given permission by them to collate this info and combine it shopping habits, cc and debit purchases. We can know when they are pregnant before anyone else. We have systems that auto-copy their pics if they are 80% or more nude and saved on a one-drive system (do all win 10 systems have that?) and sends those nudes and nearly nudes for humans to inspect them,

call your bank in the morning and ask them if they auto-opted-you-in for sharing all the purchasing data from your debit card.

Last I checked if you wanted to buy pics of their daughter they were around $10 for license and commercial use.

See you may not have anything to hide.. but because you use these privacy destroying services the network effects of family / friends also use that.. you are creating this problem for others.

So just grab a few phones from girls in your family and copy all the pics and browser history from all their apps - and give copies to the neighbors.. cuz the girls in your fam are already sharing them with thousands of other people they don't know.. it's just they likely did not read of understand the permissions they gave, so they have no idea how many engineer-nerds are looking at their pics, videos, and purchase history.

Think I'm missing a few things on this rant, need to dig up my old comments on this and blog it or something I guess.

</comment><comment><USER12> Ask them if they close and lock the door when they go to the bathroom. If they say yes, ask them why.

<comment><USER13> There's a difference between privacy and secret. Don't conflate them!

~h.t. Cory Doctorow

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Just say "I have something to hide. Do you believe I should be able to?"

</comment><comment><USER15> There's two facets to this: one is about privacy and the other is a naïveté about the nature of people with power and how the weak fail to anticipate the powerful's capabilities.

First: _Okay, they give me all of your passwords, banking PINs, a list of all of your sexual proclivities, all of your browser histories including porn, and agree to live in a glass house that 's live-streamed 24x7 to the internet._

Second: The weak rarely realize the scope of capabilities the powerful can lord over them. One obvious capability is powerful can direct district attorneys/crown prosecutors to look for evidence that a target has committed a crime. One common attack is over-prosecution for technical infractions that the weak volunteer; that this, giving too much information combined with tens of thousands of arcane laws setup the victim for attack. For more on this topic, there's a good book called _Three Felonies a Day._ Furthermore, sometimes the powerful just make up "crimes" to justify harsh punishments: Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning, Fred Hampton and Leonard Peltier are just a few that come to mind. (Daniel Ellsberg's freedom is a miracle.) Furthermore, powerful people have powerful friends who have even more capabilities at their disposal. It's not some sort of grand, organized conspiracy theory, it's human nature that people of similar interests help others in a similar station and those at the top have many more sacrificial Random Jobs.

</comment><comment><USER16> They usually have something to hide, so make a jokenthat proofs this (ask them to let you scroll through their picture gallery etc). And then when they feel uncomfortable change to a more serious tone and tell them how information translates to power. It is not the other person that is the problem — it is a problem when this information is abused by megacorps and governments.

So in a very old school way privacy for citizens is about division of power and restoring symmetry. If your government or a company knoes everything about you while you are only allowed to know the glossy salespicture version of things, something is off.

</comment><comment><USER17> In what context is the question of whether somebody has anything to hide even relevant? It's like asking how to convince somebody that unicorns aren't real. Very few people believe unicorns are real and the fact that those few people believe unicorns are real is of little consequence. The real question is do you trust the law to keep the things you want hidden hidden and to make the secrets of criminals that you don't want hidden available to law enforcement officials. For most people in the United States, that's a "Yes."

</comment><comment><USER18> I tell them that they will pay more for a plane ticket than others if they don't hide their Apple products or their profession. Suddenly they understand that there IS something to hide...

</comment><comment><USER19> We all have something that we don't want other people to know or see. Ask them why they wear clothing every day. And close the door when they are in the restroom.

Also, point them to all the damage the Sony hack did. There was nothing illegal in the emails and I'm sure many thought they had nothing to hide. But the hacking of the email sure made their lives hell.

Lastly, talk to them about all the identity theft fraud that's constantly in the news.

You may be able to trust some people with some of your info. but you can't trust anyone but yourself with all your info.

</comment><comment><USER20> These three questions work pretty well:

1\. If you called a lawyer, would you expect privacy?

2\. Do you want naked fotos of your family on the Internet?

3\. Did you tell your co-workers/boss who you voted for?

The real zinger is:

Do you know the police track your vehicle from home to work and back? (It's been reported the US government flies privately-registered surveillance aircraft over large US cities in a racetrack-pattern and use time-lapse photos to track vehicles.)

</comment><comment><USER21> You could frame the right of privacy in different terms such as encryption is a type of munition to protect your information from a tyrannical government. This closely matches the typical argument people use for second amendment rights.

There are also other ways to frame the premise:

If you have nothing to say, then why do you need the freedom of speech?

If you have nothing to defend, then why do you need the right to bear arms?

</comment><comment><USER22> Maybe they are just saying "I have nothing to hide from the _government_ "? This might be true for most law-abiding citizens in the US atleast where there is a reasonable rule of law (as compared to many other parts of the world!).

<comment><USER23> That's what that phrase means, people saying "hand over your phone" or "leave the door unlocked" or "livestream your life" completely missed the point, which doesn't even resonate with what the article was referring to.

The articles talked about trading privacy for convenience and comfort. All the "counter arguments" people listed have nothing to do with those two.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> If they're serious, I'll give them the points made in the comments on the page.

If they aren't serious or don't care about the answer, I ask them to leave the door open next time they poop.

</comment><comment><USER25> Well, one thing is that people don't know the things they might have to hide. Many of the jews murdered in the Holocaust were basically unaware they were even jews, before they started to be persecuted for it. Hannah Arendt was one such case.

Unfortunately, this is very common in history. You would never have known that buying a noble title in Bourbon france would lead to the guilotine, nor that being a committed communist would probably get you shot under Stalin. These things are very unpredictable. Being German in early-20th century Montana was dangerous. Being black in 1700's Haiti was, so long as you were free, absolutely not a problem - until it suddenly was.

There are countless examples like this. Nobody knows what's coming next.

</comment><comment><USER26> Saying you have nothing to hide is not acceptable, it's (for the most part) a submissive declaration. If you accept open and unsupervised scrutiny on things that are private by nature, you not only give up parts of your basic freedom, you also give out something extremely valuable, for free. This is totally unacceptable in a capitalist system. You should be ashamed, you commies.</comment>


Two Weeks Vacation Is Only a Recommendation, Not a Rule - <AUTHOR> http://www.expatsoftware.com/Articles/2007/02/two-weeks-vacation-is-only.html <comment><USER2> > How much vacation time did you take last year? If you're like most workers > in the States, it was probably less than 3 weeks. That's all your company > will give you, right?

Wrong. My company _is obligated by law_ to give me 26 days of paid vacation.

Oh, you meant you assumed I live in USA. Too bad.</comment>


Ask HN: How to receive OS X notifications on Android device? - <AUTHOR> I need a secure, fast, and reliable way to receive notifications from OSX on an Android device.<p>Is there a [preferably open-source] solution to that? <comment><USER2> PushBullet app for Mac should do that: [http://pushpal.arjones.com/pushpal.html](http://pushpal.arjones.com/pushpal.html)</comment>