Bottom just fell out of Nikkei - <AUTHOR> http://e.nikkei.com/e/fr/marketlive.aspx

<comment><USER2> It seems like everybody in this thread is saying "No duh, invest in Japan right now!"

The assumption is that the market will turn around, and anybody who buys into Japanese companies stands to make a lot of money. If this is the case, then why are the prices going down at all? Are other investors really that ignorant?

<comment><USER3> Happens so, so often. A great example (very YC suited!) is Apple's stock prices in January.

When Steve Jobs announced his medical leave just under two months ago, the Apple (AAPL) price opened the next day (Tuesday) down 5.44% on Friday's close price. The low point on Tuesday was 6.45% lower than Friday's close price.

While the price did go back up a bit that same day (the Tuesday close was only 2.25% lower than Friday's close price), it kept dropping for a few days. By the time the markets closed on Friday, AAPL's price was 326.72, down 6.24% in a week (compare that Friday close price to AAPL's lowest price on Tuesday, which was 326.00).

For some reason, investors were selling Apple stock because of fears over Jobs. This seemed ridiculous to me, and sure enough, in the (nearly) two months since then, the market has shown that I'm not alone in that view.

If you bought AAPL stock at that Friday closing price and sold right now, you'd be selling 8.21% higher than you bought. Even if you didn't time the buying quite as well, so didn't get it at such a low price, if you bought it at the opening price on Tuesday (the day after the Jobs announcement) you'd have made 7.30% profit, or if you bought it at the closing price on that same day and sold now, you would have made 3.79% profit.

So even with pretty shit timing on when to buy, just by having faith that Apple stock would bounce back, that's a very healthy rise in value over just two months.

The cause (I think) of the problem is two-fold. For starters, people are afraid that, if they buy back in too early, they will be too far ahead of the market and prices will continue to drop - obviously, they're hoping to be just a tiny bit quicker than the market, buying just before prices start going back up again quickly.

The second reason is basically the same, but with a different approach. Rather than wanting to avoid having your shares devalue immediately after buying them, it's a case of not wanting to buy back in too soon because, the lower the price you pay, the bigger the return once they have bounced back.

<comment><USER4> The thing is, what if Steve Jobs couldn't return to Apple at all? So market was pricing that possibility into the price of Apple stock.

      There is a legitimate concern, that without Jobs to supervise things, in a year or two, the "magic" of getting the right product out at Apple would be gone.

      Sure, Apple would still be making money, because Tim Cook is a great COO, but the "vision" would slowly fade.

Think, Microsoft over the last 10 years(stock basically has stayed put). Microsoft still makes money, but it has a lot of misses to show for its hits. Meanwhile, Apple has been hitting them out of the ballpark.

      Remember, when you are buying Apple stock you are paying a premium on the expected growth.

<comment><USER3>
      in a year or two

And yet the stocks have bounced way up in under two months. The only way that wasn't going to happen was if Jobs died, or perhaps if he announced a permanent retirement. Neither of those things were going to happen so quickly after the announcement, otherwise they wouldn't have announced it the way they did.

So yes, the market _was_ pricing that possibility, but it was obvious that in no time at all it would forget about it and go mad over the Apple's short-term future. Sure enough, it did.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Careful. Japan's debt level, when compared to GDP, is higher than US: [http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/03/sovereig...](http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/03/sovereign_debt)

<comment><USER6> and they just lost ~1 trillion ++ worth of infrastructure... I believe they have a 10 year rebuild in front of them.

This is assuming that we have hit bottom on the catastrophe over there now and that we can contain the Daiichi plant.

It would be very interesting though, if things turn south and some massive takeovers occur in the next 12 months.

Imagine companies like Fujitsu, Hitachi or others (my mind is blank) being bought up by the IBMs Apples or even Google or GASP facebooks (those who have a lot of cash to buy tech houses in Japan and picot into HW?)

Pure fantasy sure - but so was the SCIFI scenario we are now looking at today, just last week.

<comment><USER7> Currency? Do you have a source on revised infrastructure damage figures, because I've only seen $100-150 billion estimates by some insurance companies.

<comment><USER8> Christchurch is $12b, and there have been whole cities leveled in japan, a whole prefecture is majorly affected if not downright destroyed.

$150b seems very low.

<comment><USER9> The Christchurch figure is a debatable one, as the government is talking it up so as to justify an asset sale (national park mining and power companies are current favourites) while the true figure seems unknown (I can't find a good source, any you know of?). The EQC only pay part of some claims, but here are their stats <http://canterbury.eqc.govt.nz/repair-replacement/progress>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Time to start buying. Bet Buffet is taking a look at all those wonderful Japanese companies who moats are wide, have good fundamentals, and produce reasonable free-cash flow. Hope his "itchy trigger finger" found a few targets. My IRA could use a boost after the last few years.

<comment><USER11> any recommendations? Toyota?

<comment><USER12> Toyota's stock is probably undervalued to begin with because of the stupid pedal thing, and this probably makes it extreme. Short-term traders need not apply, though.

<comment><USER13> Toyota's trading at 21 times earnings on the NYSE... that doesn't seem like a crazy bargain. (Or is there some parallel listing on the Nikkei?)

<comment><USER14> Toyota is listed on the Nikkei. The thing at the NYSE is called an American Depository Receipt (ADR). Basically, it is a coupon that says "Entitles the bearer to two shares of Toyota common stock in Japan."

In principle, the two do not necessarily have to move in lockstep. However, because of the massive size, prominence, and stability of Toyota, one would ordinarily expect them to correlate extraordinarily heavily as anything else is an exploitable arbitrage opportunity.

<comment><USER15> Various algorithmic traders play on these dual listings. Put a computer in between (in network terms) and you can trade ahead of the people in either japan or new york.

and of course you can also do regular pairs trading (if they drift farther apart).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> There's no better time to buy stocks than during a market panic. Japan is a wealthy country. The Japanese work ethic is unbeatable. Now is a great time to buy Japanese stocks.

<comment><USER17> Be careful. Good work ethic doesn't always mean business success. The two are correlated, but that doesn't suggest that tossing money at any Japanese company is the way to go. Still do your due diligence and only invest in solid companies. This is certainly an opportunity, but not a reason to be irresponsible.

<comment><USER16> Here's a list of companies "from or based in Japan": <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_of_Japan>

Sony, Toyota, Honda, Nintendo, etc. Japanese companies like these that were a great investment a week ago are still a great investment. Only now the stock is less expensive because of a temporary panic. Smart money is buying up all the stock possible for these companies before they can rebound.

<comment><USER18> The big question is how the operations of each of those companies is affected. If operations are hugely impacted and would require time to rebuild, their stocks will not rebound so easily.

<comment><USER17> Good point, but if you consider corps like those mentioned by the parent, they are clearly internationally-diversified companies. If their operations in Japan alone are impacted, it's cause for concern, certainly, but the company as a whole is likely none the worse for wear, and this is just Mr. Market overreacting as he likes to do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Be careful - "John Mauldin: Japan Is a Bug Searching for a Windshield"

[http://www.fool.com/investing/international/2010/07/22/john-...](http://www.fool.com/investing/international/2010/07/22/john- mauldin-japan-is-a-bug-searching-for-a-windsh.aspx)

<comment><USER20> A smart man no doubt, but taken out of context for the current discussion.

He is talking about long term deleveraging in many different countries. His outlook for the US is just as grim.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> The ad I saw on the right side seems highly inappropriate. Or, perhaps, appropriate - I'm not sure.

[http://adb.nikkei.co.jp/ad/logo/2008b/NikkeiWeekly080722-NNI...](http://adb.nikkei.co.jp/ad/logo/2008b/NikkeiWeekly080722-NNILargeRect.gif)

</comment><comment><USER22> How does one invest in the Nikkei 225 in the USA? I'm looking for an Exchange Traded Fund (ETF) type of deal. I see that there are a couple mutual funds (UJPIX) but I'm more interested in something on one of the US markets.

<comment><USER23> Good idea. iShares markets an ETF called the Japan Index Fund that tracks a broad range of indexes: <http://us.ishares.com/product_info/fund/overview/EWJ.htm>

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> REMEMBER: This is probably not the best place to get investment advice. Everyone's got an opinion but it's different when you've got actual cash on the line.

</comment><comment><USER25> Can someone share the best way to enter the stock market for someone who is completely clueless on stocks in general yet wanted to dabble in them for quite some time?

<comment><USER26> I'd be very careful, if you're not experienced at all, you could get wiped out pretty easily in a market with this much volatility. A lot of people would've said today's trading session was a great day to buy, but look what happened.

This is what they call a Black Swan event and nobody's sure that we've seen the bottom yet.

Edit: If you want to see an example of how these drops can be deceiving and might not represent the true bottom, look at Citi's chart: [http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=C+Interactive#chart2:symb...](http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=C+Interactive#chart2:symbol=c;range=5y;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined)

You don't want to be the guy who bought a large long position when the PPS was $20, thinking it would easily jump back up to 30 or 40.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes - especially since right now everyone and their broker are thinking of ways to get in at those prices. Chances of you getting a decent deal while it's still around are slim, especially if you have no prior knowledge. If you don't know enough to know who the fool is in the market, you are the fool.

<comment><USER18> True story, probably experienced by thousands of people. Know someone who was into daytrading stocks and such. He had a home, no mortgage, no debt. Ended up losing the home. Wife left, took the kids. Wife eventually came back with the kids, they live a simple life now in some apartment. Life is not what it was, but they're getting by.

If you don't know what you're doing, you can lose everything. When you talk with truly successful traders (I know one who makes a million a year or more), you learn to appreciate that doing it well is difficult and requires a discipline that few people have.

<comment><AUTHOR> The trick to getting rich is trading with _other people's_ money.

You win, you get commission. You lose, it's not your money.

<comment><USER18> This fiduciary disconnect can create a lot of malevolent market behaviour if controls aren't in place. And more often than not, controls aren't in place.

[http://blogmaverick.com/2008/11/13/the-hedge-fund- disconnect...](http://blogmaverick.com/2008/11/13/the-hedge-fund-disconnect/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> This is a tough bet. My first reaction was, "They are going to open up their wallets and spend like crazy to rebuild." Then I heard on the news that Japan runs a massive fiscal deficit and I thought, "Where are they going to get the money." When the market cools, it might be good to pick individual stocks (construction and pharma come to mind). Right now though, staying out of the broader market (index funds, etc.) might be prudent.

</comment><comment><USER28> Thanks for posting this. I like to buy into crashes (with some safety margin if I'm wrong). +$4k on the SGXNK so far because of your great timing! :)

</comment><comment><USER29> Disasters like this are, in theory, actually beneficial to economies-- especially stagnant ones like Japan's. The capacity for immediate bonafide economic growth has been diminished but that doesn't mean that economic production will decline. There is now ample room to deploy all that surplus capital (humans, machinery, money) that was previously unproductive. The upper echelones of the financial sector will make a killing shorting and re-buying.

Advanced reading on a parallel concept: [http://www.irows.ucr.edu/conferences/globgis/papers/Arrighi....](http://www.irows.ucr.edu/conferences/globgis/papers/Arrighi.htm) The quoted and cited David Harvey piece (2007, albeit the condensed article veresion and not the full-length book) would have been a better reference however is apparently no longer online. This, though, is amazing: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0>

I believe Naomi Klein made a good buck on dumbing down and re-orienting the above hypothesis.

<comment><USER30> Only an economist can consider a theory like that for more than a few seconds and not laugh hysterically. As Tom Woods has said, following this logic, the best thing we could do for our economy is build a huge armada of amazing battle ships, have Japan do likewise, then float them to the middle of the pacific and, after evacuating them (surely, the loss of human life is not a necessary component in this economic model, is it?) blow them all up.

Rinse, wash, repeat. We're all rich!

<comment><USER29> Empiricism is not on your side. The richest country in the world spends more than its fair share on 'a huge armada of amazing battle ships', actually, as much as everyone else on the planet put together, and also actively seeks out remote spots of the planet to blow stuff up in.

Rinse, repeat, very rich.

<comment><USER31> When you talk about the richest country in the world, are you referring to Qatar or Luxembourg?

According to the IMF and CIA World Factbook, Qatar has the highest GDP (PPP) per capita. According to the World Bank, it's Luxembourg: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_\(PPP\)_per_capita)

<comment><USER29> Nah, neither, I was using raw GDP. Those countries don't have politico- economic systems which funnel large chunks of their populations into either incarceration or the military. Forbes list also seems appropriate for the discussion given the 'very rich' theme going on.

Care to dig up those rates/expenditures per capita?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> The Nikkei is still higher than it was two year ago.

</comment><comment><USER33> The Nikkei is now at a ten year low

<comment><USER34> No it's not... it's not even at a 2 year low.[1]

[1] [http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=^N225+Interactive#chart2:...](http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=^N225+Interactive#chart2:symbol=^n225;range=2y;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined)

<comment><USER33> The Nikkei 300 is, you're linking to the nikkei 225.

The nikkei 300 index is _"The Nikkei 300 is a market value-weighted index of the 300 major issues on the first section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE). The Nikkei 300 uses a weighted average based on market capitalizations of component firms to reflect movements in the overall value of first section stocks. This contrasts with the widely followed Nikkei Stock Average which is an average price and is suitable for monitoring the level of the market and its changes._ (1)"

The Nikkei 225 index is _"The Nikkei Stock Average is the average price of 225 stocks traded on the first section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange, but it is different from a simple average in that the divisor is adjusted to maintain continuity and reduce the effect of external factors not directly related to the market(2)_ "

Nikkei 300 on Google finance: <http://www.google.com/finance?q=TYO:1319>

Sorry for the confusion.

(1) <http://e.nikkei.com/e/fr/info/nifaq/300.aspx>

(2) <http://e.nikkei.com/e/fr/info/nifaq/225.aspx>

<comment><USER35> Nikkei 300 is not widely used. Without qualification, "Nikkei" is taken to mean "Nikkei 225".

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> This will trigger deleveraging around the world. Specifically, this will impact the venture capital in silicon valley. We'll likely start to see some angel/vc investors start to panic and withdraw from the market, shutting down startups, etc.

<comment><USER37> Wouldn't the money pulled out of Japanese markets be invested in other markets?

<comment><USER38> Not necessarily. For every dollar being pulled out there also a lot of lost value due to the declining prices. Many investors follow a "basket" strategy where if one market goes down they will allocate more money to buying there and pull it out of other areas such as private investments.

This _has_ been seen in prior US public market downturns - if a pension fund is allocating 90% to public market investments and 10% to private investments, and the public market drops 33%, their fund is now split 60/10 instead of 90/10. So to rebalance back to 90/10, they'll need to liquidate 33% of their private investment allocation and move it to public investments. (This is an oversimplification but you get the idea.)</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What real impact does AI/ML projects have at your work/industry? - <AUTHOR> At a lot of companies, the data science group is still analyzing data and providing support for business decisions. Do you have examples of projects in your workplace/industry where ML/AI has a big impact? <comment><USER2> 1.Automation//Efficiency 2.Automation//Cost Savings 3.Automation//Automation</comment>


Show HN: I made a Chrome extension that helps you focus with ambient noise - <AUTHOR> https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/rofocus-increase-your-foc/olomkelphccokjjidpagjpihlnemlpng/ <comment><AUTHOR> Hi HN! Been spending the last week or so hacking away at this side project. I'm hoping it might be useful to some!

I'm really big into ambient sounds when working (e.g. listening to sounds of cafés / rain / etc) and I find that they help me focus, since they don't distract me as much as music. I typically use a number of sites (e.g. coffitivity, brainfm) or find a youtube playlist. Though, I thought this experience could be improved upon + I wanted to learn how to make a Chrome extension, so I made this.

If you have a moment to try it out, I'd love some feedback! Do you see it being helpful? What's it missing?

This was meant to be a small project to get a bit of a break and scratch my itch to design/code something, but I ended up getting really into it and can see this growing into something bigger (e.g. a productivity suite of tools) - any ideas on where I could take this would be awesome too!

P.S. made a quick landing page that has more details too - feel free to have a look here: [https://rofocus.com](https://rofocus.com)

Thanks!

</comment><comment><USER2> This is cool. Have you checked out Brain.fm?

</comment><comment><USER3> That's cool! Thanks for sharing</comment>


How well do facial recognition algorithms cope with a million strangers? - <AUTHOR> http://www.washington.edu/news/2016/06/23/how-well-do-facial-recognition-algorithms-cope-with-a-million-strangers/ <comment><USER2> "We need to test facial recognition on a planetary scale to enable practical applications"

I find that line of thinking disturbing.</comment>


Is it possible to opt out of social networking? - <AUTHOR> http://jonoscript.wordpress.com/2010/02/06/is-it-possible-to-opt-out-of-social-networking/

<comment> rm-rf Opting out of a social network doesn't sound possible, unless you can somehow maintain separate e-mail and phone numbers for each of your contacts, something that would be almost impossible to do, or if you managed to find a circle of friends that understands the privacy implications of social networks, something that is equally unlikely.

Internet social networks are like small town social networks where everyone knows who is doing what to whom, except that instead of a few hundred locals who like to gossip, the community is millions, and the motive is monitization.

</comment><comment><USER2> Opting out in that manner (not _existing_ as far as Facebook is concerned), is effectively flat-out impossible. If other people know you exist, and a HUGE amount of people are on a website, uploading all their info, you can't prevent it. It's entirely out of your control.

As to his fear that they're associating friends by email addresses uploaded, my personal experience implies that they either don't, or it factors in very lightly. A few friends who I email with pretty regularly, and are on Facebook, _and_ uploaded their email lists (which I am most certainly on) didn't come up as possible-friends _ever_. It seems to be entirely friend-of-a-friend based, and as they were in an entirely separate circle of friends, they never came up. I never bothered adding them, because we already contacted each other as needed through email / IM.

The friends it _did_ suggest to me, though, were almost universally friends of my friends, typically with several connections, but I seriously doubt they ever had my email (or many of the in-between links, if any).

<comment><USER3> When I signed up for facebook it suggested friends that I had _no_ connection to outside of e-mail, and afterwards has suggested friends that again I have no connection to outside of e-mail, so my experience is in direct conflict with yours.

They _do_ (or at least did) allow FB Connect using sites to check whether an existing e-mail address was associated with a facebook account via submitting a hashed copy (if memory serves, it's a plain md5 hash). Their developer site is down at the moment so I can't verify the exact mechanisms they (claimed) to be using to store e-mail addreses, and which e-mails they store, and what you can access through the Connect API.

<comment><USER2> * shrug * I may not have had enough friends-through-email for them to crop up. My experiences are also with an account that's been around since I started college 5 years ago, with friends who came at nearly the same time, so it could be that they added it later. Good to know for sure that they _do_ do this, though, thanks for the reply.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> A friend had a similar experience, except that he didn't even try to sign up for Facebook. His email is first name + last name. @ gmail and apparently someone signed up with his email on accident. After that my friend started getting lots of automatic friend requests from people he knew. He was able get the password sent to him, since it was his email afterall, and canceled the account. Like the OP he was pretty freaked out about how much Facebook seemed to know based solely on his email.

</comment><comment><USER5> The email contact importer thing on facebook is something that many people in my social circle thought was really neat because it made finding their friends so easy. I'll admit, that I used it when I first joined facebook a few years back.

In retrospect I wish I hadn't used it, as this article mentions, I not only gave away pieces of my personal information, I gave away personal information that didn't even belong to me, it belonged to my contacts. Now, it seems quite dubious that facebook has the gall to ask for my email password. It is true that hindsight it 20/20.

</comment><comment><USER6> Eben Moglen's talk 'Freedom in the Cloud' from last Friday might be relevant in this context: <http://www.isoc-ny.org/?p=1338>

<comment><USER7> _"... And they had a lot more than my email address. They had pictures of me, uploaded by my friends and tagged with my name. They knew who my friends were. They knew what my friends liked. They knew more or less how I would fit into their social network. If they wanted to, they could deduce a lot of information about the person behind the email address. ..."_

Thanks greatly for that link. Moglen is a great speaker and his idea of the _"Freedom box"_ (personal servers where you own the logs) goes a long way, to paraphrase Moglen: to put _"Zuc"_ into receivership.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> >Where do we draw the line between my right to control my data, and the right of other people to exchange information about me?

When you make your data public, you no longer have a right to control it. The alternative is that by making your data public, you impose a burden of secrecy on those who hear you talking.

It's mildly creepy that facebook knows so much about you, but it's not a particularly new phenomenon. ("You must be Danny, Jo talks about you all the time! Tell me, did you really...") Facebook just hears more gossip than any one person did in the past.

<comment><USER9> "I don't think that Facebook as a company is doing anything unusual or exceptionally bad."

Yet he offers an example in the article of Facebook prompting for the user's email account password, which, in my book, is insidiously evil. Sending sensitive emails to someone may not be wise, but it's hardly an example of making your data public. Facebook claims to be harvesting email addresses (which is bad enough), but the potential for abuse is enormous, considering that the company is dedicated to monetizing the private details of people's lives. Facebook shouldn't even ask for passwords, and this is one of the main reasons it's banned in our household.

<comment><USER10> Any service that uses any sort of contact importer will need your password if you would like to get any use out of said importer.

How can anyone read your GMail contacts without your logging into your account?

If the utility of this tool is lost on you even though this password is clearly not stored anywhere, you can manually go out and find on-Facebook friends yourself.

<comment><USER11> Here's one way. Its a bit more inconvenient, but I think its worth the inconvenience.

1) GMail has an export to csv feature. Export your contacts.

2) Facebook creates a "import contacts" feature. Import the list.

Done.

I can't think of any right now, but you may be able to come up with a feature that _absolutely_ needs you to put in your email password. However, I suspect that by adding a little inconvenience, one can find a way around it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> How much privacy does one share with his housemates/spouse/siblings? Pretty much nothing. Facebook is one big house where everyone gets to know about each other's activities. Though such sharing might be unacceptable to certain people, most people (especially college under graduates and younger) love it. So this is probably the future!

At the same time, it must be remembered that facebook never forces anyone to share their personal information. You do have control over who sees what.

<comment><USER13> Update your debate stats. Facebook's biggest growth is older women, and they're losing the 20-somethings to Twitter and...

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> We're moving from an information-poor world to an information-rich one. There is really no way to stop the loss of privacy. The draconian legislation required would, themselves, create a tremendous loss of privacy.

We've moved from file sharing "piracy" to personal information "piracy." And, ultimately, neither is preventable.

<comment><USER15> _We've moved from file sharing "piracy" to personal information "piracy." And, ultimately, neither is preventable._

Sounds catchy but makes no sense at all. The two are not even related.

Also "personal information piracy" is a strange description of people giving out their information voluntarily. This can be trivially prevented by simply not typing that information into a website...

<comment><USER14> Piracy can be "trivally prevented" by not publishing content. The similarity is that once it's out there in any form, you lose control over it. The two are most definitely related.

The whole point of the article was that it's not _you_ giving the information out. Once it's out in the world, via your friends knowing it, you can't choose whether or not it gets entered. Tiny bits of periphery evidence end up being a lot of information about you.

They're sharing something of yours without your consent. That's what the term "piracy" is supposed to mean.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Facebook doesn't need your consent to listen to your acquaintances about you. Next soap opera, please.

<comment><USER11> I don't think the debate is, or should be, about if facebook is doing something wrong. The bigger issue is making sure people understand the scope of facebook's information.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> The irony of this article is the only way for him to get the control he wants is to be on Facebook and monitor what is put up about him. Only then will he be able to see what he doesn't approve of and ask those people to not put them up.</comment>


A Proposal: An M-Book for Cities - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@dannysauter/a-proposal-an-m-book-for-cities-75767ffa0da5

<comment><USER2> A few thoughts:

People don't move in and out of a city en-masse, so there are always old- timers who know the way around.

Two, even if you got a wiki version of this, most people would not read it. And it would be politicized -newcomers vs longtime residents.

Still, nice idea, I'd like it, I'd use it if I moved to a new city. But it'd be nice if the content had quality and some structure which one could expect from city to city.

Hope the post inspires someone to begin something like that.

</comment><comment><USER3> There have been various forms of this in real life, ranging from move-in guides provided by local realtors, chambers of commerce, or an official city office. A decade or so back, the phone book offered much of this information -- emergency and local services, city and county agencies and such.

I see no reason why this needs to be a bound book, though there's no reason it _couldn 't_ be published. An online version, in the form of a Web page or ePub book (let's hear it for formats which allow for multiple publication formats), would probably be preferable.

Tie it into the local information / city services systems such as 511 or 311 would also be sensible.</comment>


Ask HN: Please Review Version 2.0 of my Web App  - <AUTHOR> http://www.nobadgift.com

<comment><AUTHOR> In a nutshell NoBadGift.com is kickstarter for gifts and events. So let us know what you think about our new design, execution, and overall idea</comment>


Ask HN: Why are so many .io domains popping up lately? - <AUTHOR> I count 5 stories in the top 120 on HN as of this writing, which are on github.io [6]-[8] or other .io domains [1]-[5].  Why are so many sites on .io domains?<p>I'm particularly interested in comments from people who've chosen (or strongly considered) .io domains for personal or company websites -- why did you choose .io?<p>[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11085078<p>[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11081711<p>[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11082633<p>[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11082359<p>[5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11077222<p>[6] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11083520<p>[7] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11082661<p>[8] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11084580 <comment><USER2> Because we can't get a good .com! And .io is especially nerdy for the whole input/output thing. My current startups are both .io and it's strictly because good .com names are harder and harder to come by but .io fits the technical nature of the startups.</comment>


Thoughts on using SQLite? - <AUTHOR> Hey guys has anyone YCer use SQlite in a production environment? For as long as I can remember I've been using MySQL, and I want to know if SQLite is a viable replacement.
<comment><USER2> SQLite is a great piece of code, but it's intended for slightly different audience than MySQL and other client-server DBs. I'd use SQLite embedded in an application to store internal data, configuration, or as some domain specific file format. This way it is an alternative to xml or inventing your own file formats. (you get SQL queries for free). Where you expect concurrent access and high loads, a client-server still suits better. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

<comment><AUTHOR> Ahh I see I was looking more into using SQlite for client-server purposes. I should have rephrased my question along those lines. But YC won't let me edit my message :-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Use PostgreSQL instead of MySQL. SQlite in a production environment on anything but the most database-light site ever will make you cry.

<comment><USER4> I don't understand this MySQL FUD. Google has done some amazing things with it. Google core, YouTube for example. I wish you would explain MySQL over PostgresSQL with mention of MySQL version,etc.

<comment><USER3> It's not FUD. Most of us just like to use a database whose developers didn't have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age. Remember when MySQL claimed foreign keys and relational integrity were useless?

Sure, they now support referential integrity and transactions in InnoDB, but MyISAM is still the default, because it's faster. I have no idea why you're claiming that 'Google core' (whatever that's supposed to mean) uses MySQL; the only homegrown Google project known to use MySQL is AdWords.

Anyhow, jamongkad wanted an alternative to MySQL, so I gave him one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Yea, like they said, it isn't really for Client-Server stuff. It is a super fast file format though! If you do Mac/Cocoa development you can use SQLite for free with Core Data. By free I mean you don't have to write any custom code for serialization. :-D

<comment><AUTHOR> Nice so what are the better alternatives for Client Server stuff?

<comment><USER6> Firebird

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Not YC, but I know of quite a large web application (in the order of a million users, but not that heavy traffic) that makes use of SQLite.

I don't think it's the right tool for every job but in this case no data is shared between users. Therefore partitioning is achieved by having an SQLite database per user.

Don't underestimate the power of SQLite (and to some extent other flat file databases like BDB, TDB or CDB for fast lookups).

</comment><comment><USER8> not a viable replacement, but definitely has it's place. it doesn't require a server environment.</comment>


Ask HN: Learning C as beginner better than learning C just after python? - <AUTHOR> Freshman Year | Autodictact | Non-CS Major |Knows no programming language. Looking forward to learn coding
for building with best design principles,
 gaining efficiency of data structures and
 thinking abstractedly in algorithmic rollercoaster of fun.<p>What is the cost benefit analysis of Going from 0 to C than Python to C? <comment><USER2> I've already learned Python enough to where I can get almost anything I need to do with it done. This is probably the place you'll want to get to. Someone gives you a problem and then you solve it.

Python's development cycle is so fast that problem solving and debugging is a breeze. (All you need to do is write some code and then run it. No compile/run phase.) But then there comes a time when Python is just plain too slow for what you want to do. For example Image processing/Backend for web/Game development with intensive graphics. After this I found that it was time for me to start learning a faster compiled language such as C. Moving from python to C is a real pain. This is mostly because of all the really nice built in types: dynamic lists, strings, etc. that you get with Python already.

What's really cool is that Python allows integration between C libraries and python code. (ctypes) You can write something that may run really slow in pure Python. After that you can find the slowest parts with a profiler and replace them with external C library calls. (That you've written.)

In the end you end up with the lightning fast Python dev cycle plus the great optimizations and speed that C/native code gives.

In short form, Python is a great first language. C is a great first language too. You can have the best of both worlds with ctypes.

</comment><comment><USER3> This post reminded me when I started programming, very nostalgic. I started out with C as my first programming language simply because the language rankings at the time said it was the most popular. Looking back, I don't think C helped me out as much as I wanted it too.

Now to answer your question by looking at your goals. "Knows no programming language" lets me know that you are starting from scratch. In my opinion, this means you need to answer the following question first: do I even like programming? The best way to answer this is to not abuse yourself with C but instead start with python to get a real feel for what programming is.

"Learn coding for building with best design principles" means you want to learn good habits early on. Python has a stable style guide (pip8) and the zen of python, so at least some good habits can be learned quickly. I don't think there is a comparable zen of C, but maybe that's because I haven't looked.

"Gaining efficiency of data structures" means understanding why data structures are important in program design. Python has some pretty solid built-in data structures (i.e lists, sets, dicts, tuples) that are good for beginners who want to experiment with data structures. C doesn't have lists, sets, dicts, or tuples, but you can implement them if you try hard enough.

"Thinking abstractedly in algorithmic rollercoaster of fun"...I think what you meant is the freedom to think about an algorithm and to implement it with ease. Python is fantastic for this, while C requires a lot more thinking to get a thought manifested to code.

This post kinda struck a chord with me because I wrestled with the same question when I started 4 years ago. Python helped me more than C because I was more creation oriented. I wanted to implement a useful tool as fast as possible. With your questions in mind, I think python would be better choice than C as a beginner.

<comment><AUTHOR> I apologise with the vague description of question details. I have been to a workshop where they demonstrated both python and C. I was fortunate to have a hands on session with few programming tasks and solving problems. The conclusion I came to, is - I love programming.

As I said in other comments before, I was apprehensive if I could deal with initial frustration due to subconscious comparison of how easy life was with python. I asked myself If I would trip off; will I be able to cope up; will my brain be malleable enough or get hardened against the higher cognitive load C poses comparing to python, etc. with no good answers. Hence this question.

Every other commenter echo with your respected opinion and I appreciate your well explained suggestion. I just needed my answers through other's experiences to the above questions.

I will be "starting out with python"(amazon<dot>com/dp/0134444329).

Thank You.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> You'll understand how things work more if you start with C. But, at the end of the day, programming is usually a way to get something done. You're going to get a lot more done in Python than C as a beginner. I have a good amount of experience working on real world embedded applications in C, and I would only recommend it as a first language to people who have a specific interest in real-time embedded electronics, drivers, and operating systems. You can actually emulate a lot of what other programming languages do in C, but you won't until you know it's there to emulate. Additionally, the "Compile/Run/Rewrite" cycle in C isn't as good for learning as the "Rewrite/Refresh" cycle in Python.

I've actually been recommending HTML, Javascript, CSS, and git (specifically with github's "GitHub Desktop" application) to my friends/family that want to start programming. But of the two you'd mentioned, I'd vote for Python.

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting that you recommend Javascript. I was under the impression that beginners have impressionable minds and it goes long way of how good a programmer is with first programming language itself. Maybe that is why Java is not recommended as a first programming language(i.e. "every solution needs hammer" mentality is hard to unlearn in the future I guess).

I am not intimidated by REPL/compile methods per se, but what path of learning these languages bring to the table. As emphasised in question details - "gaining efficiency of data structures and thinking abstractedly in algorithmic rollercoaster of fun.",for it, I will have to learn both. I will have to go through one door to another anyway, its just the order. Python-to-C or C-to-Python?.

Yes, I have operating systems in my bucket list. I must know the nuts and bolts without fail.

I see your point. Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> In my experience, unless you really enjoy programming and want to learn how a computer works, dealing with C is hard. As a professional embedded software developer, even after 3 years of programming in C, I sometimes have to stop and think about complex pointer structures.

So if you just want to play around, do cool stuff quickly and get moderately good in programming start with python, beware it might be hard for you to come back to C.

But if you want to become more than good and really understand what advantages python gives you, start with C. There is little extra effort involved: just implement every data structure in C once and learn about pointers. You will become a much better programmer. Also, you will enjoy coding in python more, once you know C.

I guess the shorter answer is to start anywhere. The longer answer is the question of whether you want to enjoy the act of programming or the results that you achieve with programming. In the former its start with C, in the later its start with Python.

SIDE NOTE: As caseymarquis said, if you want to go the python route, go for javascript. There is little lost in the process, but the value of doing something cool is exponentially increased.

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually, I apologise for my vague description. I did enjoy simple programming tasks and problem solving with python and C in a workshop held in my city. This workshop made me fall in love with code and it piqued my curiosity to know how a computer works. I am totally excited to make this my career.

I must learn C and Python without fail for learning Data Structures and Algorithms. I can't leave any one of them. It was just the order. I am getting more and more convinced with your line of suggestion as other's opinion keep pouring in.

Thank You!

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> C has become a niche language used in some tech companies (for OSes, drivers, embedded etc.), while Python has application also outside tech (finance, e-commerce, etc. etc.). The non-tech jobs far outnumber the tech jobs (maybe at 1000 to 1?), and are also more evenly geographically spread.

Regarding algorithms, even developers who do things algorithmically heavy, such as for example data compression or procedural 3D animation, claim to work on the actual algorithms for maybe 10% of their time. 90% of the job is actually the "everything else" \- testing, optimising, polishing, chasing platform bugs etc.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is something interesting and new to me. I will keep this in mind when I join an internship.

Thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> In my experience, learning C as a begginer is hard. But it also made me learn a lot of things including things like inline assembly. well one may ask how useful all that could be but undestanding the underlying mechanism is always good in my opinion. C would make one use get the habbit of using memory and resources judiciously. Python is an easy way gets things done fast but since it is not a strongly typed language, moving from python to C would probably be a bigger pain. I think 0 to C is better and worth the pain.

</comment><comment><USER8> There's a really great course from Harvard called CS50[1][2]. This course teaches C with training wheels on so to speak and later removes them. Would highly recommend taking it. It's also free!

1\. [https://cs50.harvard.edu](https://cs50.harvard.edu)

2\. [https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-computer-science- har...](https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-computer-science-harvardx- cs50x)

<comment><AUTHOR> These are self-paced! Very handy. Thank You.

<comment><USER8> No problem! I forgot to add in my original post that after the first 5 or 6 lectures the course switches to Python from C. You'll end up hitting two birds with one stone.

Also, there's a very active community around CS50 on Reddit[1] where you can get help when ever you need it.

1\. [https://www.reddit.com/r/cs50/](https://www.reddit.com/r/cs50/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I have tried learning C, C++, C#, Visual Basic, Java. I could not grasp much of these language. I found out Python while working on Ubuntu. Learning Python is much easier. Other languages I find easier are PHP and JavaScript. There are more content, help available online for these language. Most importantly, I enjoy Python.

Great Resource for start learning Python Python for Non-Programmers [https://wiki.python.org/moin/BeginnersGuide/NonProgrammers](https://wiki.python.org/moin/BeginnersGuide/NonProgrammers)

</comment><comment><USER10> I've always found the premise that there's a good order to learn languages in a bit flimsy. If you're interested in Python and C, I say take advantage of that interest and learn both at the same time. I would echo others' suggestions to start a Python project, and then start writing small parts of it in C. I think that would be a great learning experience - comparing the different mental models, and learning how they can interface.

</comment><comment><USER11> I would say learn C first, but only if you _really_ want to understand how computers work. Assembly is too hardcore.

C is worth learning just until you understand malloc and pointers. Know about garbage collection, memory allocation, what an array really is, a lot of the low level efficiency stuff. You'll understand how strings and hash tables work.

</comment><comment><USER12> I learned C in CS major. I was awful, could barely write working code.

Spent a few years writing Python, went back to C... and it was much easier to get right.

<comment><AUTHOR> I was apprehensive if I could deal with initial frustration due to subconscious comparison of how easy life was with python. I asked myself If I would trip off; will I be able to cope up; will my brain be malleable enough or get hardened against the higher cognitive load C poses comparing to python, etc. with no good answers. Hence this question.

Your experience somewhat soothed me. Thank You.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> I'd recommend learning C prior to Python. Although you've stated Non-CS Major, C language can introduce you to many important CS fundamentals better than Python (Not saying Python can't do that). IMO, it's like climbing a ladder, first grasp CS Basics with a simple language like C itself then head towards other language(s).

<comment><AUTHOR> This sounds natural way to go. What exactly do you mean by CS fundamentals/Basics? Any resource I can grab on to learn them?

Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Learn them both at the same time. Pick two small projects. For project 1, implement it in Python, then implement it in C. For project 2, implement it in C, then re-implement it in Python. Repeat for the next two projects.

It will feel slow at first, but you will learn more quickly overall.

</comment><comment><USER15> Python would be easier introduction to programming than C ([https://automatetheboringstuff.com/](https://automatetheboringstuff.com/) is great resource for this)

could you add some more details why you want to learn C as well?

<comment><AUTHOR> The reason for me to learn C is I dislike keeping myself in the dark for far too long (which is the case with Python and other famous languages at production level). I agree with the popular opinion that I should be knowing one layer beneath the abstraction to be a better mechanic. With python its all Magic. I as a magician, oblivious to how my magic tricks work is tragic. If I know something under the hood, I might, just maybe, modify it for better solutions. Isn't that the point of coding anyway?

I am dead serious in writing beautiful code at production level. I am from India and a blanket cloud opinion of Substandard Coders(TM) is already looming heavy. I want myself to notch up and get noticed by differentiating myself apart. Maybe to the levels of Russian/East bloc European countries when it comes to algorithms (I emphasised this is question details). I intend to do freelancing in web products for bread and butter at the start of my career.[I apologize, but I don't intend to be racist here with sterotypes.]

At the same time, due to time constraints, I just can't touch Assembly. So, C.

<comment><USER15> see skymuse's detailed response...

for algorithms, highly recommend [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_Algorithms](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_Algorithms) book.. it uses pseudocode and thus language agnostic

choice of language at production level depends on lot of factors. for ex: you might choose C for speed of execution but Python would win hands-down in time taken for you to write the code, including testing...

getting used to programming takes long time and learning continues life long..

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes of course.

Thank you for the help.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> i was told that c was a tough language and i was apprehensive to start with it in the beginning, i started learning it anyway and wondered what the fuss was all about? it seemed to be easy and i was able to follow without any problem. Mastering it with all undefined behavior,compiler quirks is a different story altogether. I would say give it a try and if you don't like switch to python. I also feel it is easier to go from c to python than vice versa as it takes some time to get around manual memory management in c which is taken care of by the interpreter in python.

<comment><USER17> Was C your first ever language?

Learning about memory management might be better decoupled from learning "programming" in the very beginning.

<comment><USER16> yes, it was..

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> In terms of actual programming, I would start with Python. It's easier to carry momentum and work through fun projects with high velocity. Starting with C, you get a great foundation, but it is a lot of time and work with less instant gratification when compared to Python..

To learn the actual "art of compute". Go from bare metal and then up. In your free time casually learn about logic gates, SR latches and clock cycles. Then to Registers, ALU, Instruction Sets and pushing/popping things on stacks. Then to memory mapping and data buses.Work your way up to the C level of abstraction.

It is a long and brutal road, but it gives a great CS/EE foundation.

I am recommending this route since when they talk about pointers, references,heaps in the C world. It will give you a tangible foundation to built these abstract ideas on.

I vaguely learned the "art of compute" from college via Digital Logic, Microprocessors, and other related classes. Since your in college, I would just sit-in the EE/Comp Sci classes. It is much easier to learn from lectures when you don't care about tests/notes or labs. Then use the internet/office hours to supplement your curiosity/questions.

In conclusion,I recommend casually learning from bare metal and then go up to C then Python. But in terms of actual programming, do Python and work your way down to the assembly level as needed.

I like Python since their are "defacto" ways of doing things. Matrix Math -> Numpy. Lightweight HTTP framework -> Flask. Everything-include web framework -> Django. Web scraper->Scrapy. Need packages -> pip. I know there are other contenders for the things I mentioned, but based on my perception, this is what the Python community is rolling with.

I wanted to recommend doing Javascript/HTML/CSS. It's really cool to work on a project, then publish it on the internet for the world to use/see. But things change so fast, it's hard for a beginner to "sort" through what's needed/useful. React or Vue? Grunt or Gulp? Packages npm,bower,yarn? Async/Promises or callbacks? Don't forget about webpack. Ember or Angular? But wait. There is Typescript,CoffeeScript,JSX which needs to be transpiled. ES6? Here comes Babel. Want to make dev process quicker. Start hot reloading.

The point is,it is a little tough to "sift learn" when picking up Javascript and friends.. The community is moving fast, but it incredibily exciting to watch/participate. But I don't reccomend starting with it.

If you really want to learn HTML/CSS/JS. Start at the Mozilla Developer Network and use vanilla JavaScript. Ignore all the trick frameworks and tools until you understand the problems they are solving. Use them only if they solve problems that you are having.

To go from Python to C. Write some Python app. Profile it. Then write optimized C functions to replace the slow parts of your Python program. Make a Python wrapper with SWIG. Best of both worlds in my opinion.

<comment><AUTHOR> Wow! I am grateful to you for taking time to write this. You have been _very_ lucid and resourceful on this.

I never knew programming community could be this gooood and welcoming.

Thanks a ton man!

<comment><USER18> No problem! I'm glad to help. Aim to build something cool and useful, the rest of the pieces will figure itself out. Enjoy your Sunday!</comment></comment></comment>


How to Be Healthy, in Just 48 Words - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/03/opinion/simple-health-advice.html <comment><USER2> I doubt the veracity of the factoids of this article. For example, more recent studies have shown there is no safe level of alcohol consumption that improves health overall. And, if someone were looking for resveratrol as a rationalization to drink red wine, maybe they should just take resveratrol itself rather than take on the rest of the anti-nutrient ingredients and alcohol side-effects? But that doesn't fit in bullshit soundbite Twitter- length articles, does it?

<comment><AUTHOR> Dr. Freedhoff provides a longer explanation for each of the points he makes where you may check their veracity. I don't see how this article resembles a Tweet except in the author's aim to keep the advice list short.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> This gives the reader too much leeway. What if I hate exercise and love to drink?</comment>


(STUDY)Can Better Customer Service Be Used to Increase Prices? - <AUTHOR> https://www.helpscout.net/blog/price-increase/

<comment><USER2> I'm curious to see if this actually works in practice. Surveys are great, but...yea.</comment>


DHS' SkunkWorks Needs to meet Y Combinator - <AUTHOR> http://idolator.typepad.com/intelfusion/2007/11/dhs-skunkworks-.html

<comment><USER2> YC can get away with providing such small amounts of seed funding because of the nature of the companies and founders they fund -- companies with almost zero capital costs and no marginal cost of product, and founders who are willing to work for equity.

The DHS Skunkworks funds projects which require significant capital costs and are expensive to scale up -- and because the government doesn't want to end up paying market rates for the product of R&D they funded, they have to pay their "founders" with cash instead of equity.

The YC model works fine when applied to the right fields, but notion that YC's success can be replicated in completely different fields is downright silly.</comment>


Super-fast Wi-Fi coming: 802.11ac-2013 - <AUTHOR> http://www.zdnet.com/super-fast-wi-fi-coming-802-11ac-2013-7000025352/ <comment><USER2> I read this stuff and just think "so the SoCs just have to be 3x as expensive and power consuming to manage double / triple the channels, while still broadcasting at a higher frequency, plus doing computations for beamforming and its ilk".

Pretty much all this guarantees is that wireless n routers will stay $50, AC will stay $100 - 150, and AC-2013 will be $200+, due to complexity. Maybe in a few years n routers will spin down demand and AC will have market effects drop the price, but then I worry about spectrum limitations. We already see huge issues with n routers congesting on the 2.4 band, and making channels even wider for AC means congestion leads to even worse bandwidth and range loss.

<comment><USER3> 802.11ac is the same as 11n in the 2.4 GHz band. All the new features are for the 5 GHz band, and its support is required for 11ac. At 5 GHz there's plenty of spectrum so wider channels still make sense there. But not at 2.4 GHz indeed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I honestly don't see the 2.4Ghz standards going away any time soon.

Sure, 2.4Ghz is hilariously congested, buy as 5Ghz devices are sold, it will be less so and what I half expect is when people start trying to beam 5Ghz through three office walls (and fail), they'll want to know why and eventually find themselves back on a 2.4Ghz solution, simply because it's not so sensitive to solid objects.

<comment><USER5> _I honestly don 't see the 2.4Ghz standards going away any time soon._

I don't either, which is part of the reason I've spent a couple dollars on ethernet cables that connect some of the obvious places. A year ago I wrote this comment ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5192451](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5192451)):

"Ethernet was developed in the context of the internet with its seven levels of the ISO reference model," he said. "So we had a job to do at level one and two, and we didn't burden Ethernet with all the other stuff that we knew would be above us. We didn't do security, we didn't do encryption, we didn't even do acknowledgements."

Very interesting story—I wish it had been more detailed in places, but I love this middle section, about how simplicity sometimes beats complexity.

It's also amazing how prevalent Ethernet still is, even when wireless is a competitor. The other day I left this comment: [http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5052448](http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5052448) on HN, because in some circumstances running a cheap ethernet cable from a router to a desk, couch, or other work station can still be a real win, especially given how inexpensive even very long ethernet cables are from Monoprice.com.

They last forever, aren't subject to the level of interference wireless is, and, in many conditions, have faster data transfer speeds. Ethernet is still great.

<comment><USER3> I have to disagree with your comments on Ethernet:

\- there is security at the Ethernet level with 802.1x. Mostly used in professional settings, to prevent anyone with access to an area to plug into an Ethernet jack and sniff traffic with ARP poisoning or access anything;

\- the ACK support for WiFi is perfectly fine at L2. The reason Ethernet doesn't do ACK is that the PER is very low so there's really no need for it. The reason why all wireless standards do some form of ACK is that wireless is very lossy and relying on higher layers for retransmission would give poor performance (retransmission at L2 is faster, and transparent to TCP). There's ACK for WiFi but in wireless LAN (e.g.: 4G/LTE) that are also lossy and with a relatively high latency you even have two levels of ACK: at the L1/L2 with HARQ, and at L2 with ARQ. Different contexts, different mechanisms.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> That's all great, but without a commensurate increase in broadband speeds, will real life consumers see any benefit? I'm thinking you might if you live in S Korea, but probably not the USA.

<comment><USER7> I bounce a lot of files and do a lot of screen sharing between my laptop and my AppleTV - 802.11n can get bogged down with that - and so the increased speeds would be something I could get behind. Unfortunately neither my laptop, nor my router, nor my AppleTV support it so it's a "moo" point.

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> I'd be fine with a 100Mbps Wi-Fi which would be as reliable as a wired connection.

<comment><USER9> What do you mean by reliable?

My main snag with WiFi right now is its half-duplex nature and dropped packets. 100Mbps WLAN is horrendously worse than 100Mbps LAN for networked storage

<comment><USER10> OP was a bit oddly worded but I think nawitus meant that he or she would be happy with 100Mbps wireless _if_ it were as reliable as a wired connection, so basically exactly what you're saying.

I personally ended up using power-line ethernet to replace a lot of the wireless throughout my apartment. While the wireless connection was much faster in theory (and in practice when everything was perfect) than the powerline ethernet speeds, trying to stream HD movies and such was always an exercise in frustration with the wifi no matter how good the routers and/or repeaters were on the wifi connection and how well they were set up. With the powerline ethernet adapters, OTOH, I just plugged them in and everything Just Worked, much slower peak speed, but nice and consistent and more than enough bandwidth for HD movie streaming.

In any case the horrible state of US ISPs is the bottleneck for networking at home for me right now regardless of how I wire myself internally. My two options are Time Warner Cable (which cuts out between the modem and their headend for minutes multiple times a day and was never fixed despite half a dozen on-site technician visits) or AT&T DSL which has been much more reliable but is annoyingly slow for big downloads and such. I'm currently using the AT&T connection, but both options are terrible in their own way and nothing else usable is available to me.

Fuck you, US ISPs.

<comment><USER11> > _I personally ended up using power-line ethernet to replace a lot of the > wireless throughout my apartment. ... With the powerline ethernet adapters, > OTOH, I just plugged them in and everything Just Worked, much slower peak > speed, but nice and consistent and more than enough bandwidth for HD movie > streaming._

Powerline networking is still a shared medium. You're sharing the available bandwidth with all of the neighboring houses on the same utility transformer.

It does have the benefit that signal strength drops off with linear wiring distance. Thus, you're farther from your neighbors than you would be with Wi- Fi.

However, as with 5 GHz, you're getting good results right now because powerline networking isn't too popular. But if every house were to get powerline networking, then you would start encountering interfering networks.

<comment><USER9> Circuit breakers have pretty dramatic attenuation. You go through at least two to get from your power sockets to your neighbor's.

<comment><USER11> > _Circuit breakers have pretty dramatic attenuation. You go through at least > two to get from your power sockets to your neighbor 's._

Yes, but not enough attenuation to block powerline communications.

This is not a theoretical concern. People have tested HomePlug units and successfully connected to neighboring houses. There's even explicit provision in the spec for neighboring networks, so that they share the bandwidth instead of stomping all over each other.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> How is Linux support for these?

I had tough luck getting even 802.11n speeds on Linux. Are there any USB WiFi cards which actually work? I got D-Link DWA-160, but it never connects on the n band, only on b/g which limits it to approx. 50 Mbit/s. (I'm using rt2800usb driver).

</comment><comment><USER13> Super-fast is not what we need. We need super-low-power for the next tier of internet of things battery devices - when are we getting that? :)

<comment><USER14> Why does everybody have such a raging hard-on for the IoT these days?

Especially when we know machines are routinely compromised to circumvent user freedom, why on earth would you want to help give a foothold to others in your personal space computationally?

<comment><USER15> Atomic power gave rise to both the nuclear bomb and the nuclear power plant. Does one justify the other? Probably not, but it sure is nice to have a source of clean energy available.

I don't think that Internet of Things is that big of a practical gain, but I do see the potential there for some pretty cool applications. Imagine if every power switch in your house could be controlled from your phone. Or if you could do inventory in a warehouse by asking each crate what its contents was. Or a farm where every tomato plant can tell you if it needs more water.

The privacy issues are separate from the possibilities that the technology provides. Surely we can figure out a way to build a system that's secure. Or choose not to introduce these things into our daily lives. I think just the industrial uses are very interesting here.

<comment><USER14> Atomic tech is a red herring here--note that many are still not sold on the utility of nuclear power plants (even if those people are being silly). This is a very real, well-documented problem, and one we have at least a chance of defusing.

Let us draw a difference between private and industrial IoT. IIoT (your tomato example, maybe shipping, etc.) is done for practical logistical reasons, and likely as not will end up on a private network or embedded system. There is little likelihood that a government acquiring the tomato files is going to ever truly hurt the consumer, because there is an airgap of commerce between that information and the consumer--I buy the tomato from a supermarket with cash, and the trail goes cold.

PIoT, though, means that I have dozens of little spies all reporting on every aspect of my life, and that eventually that data is collected and correlated in one place--as it must, if it is to be of maximum utility. And that data, once concentrated, is something worthy of scrutiny by third parties. It suddenly makes it a lot more useful to spend a little effort to break into a management system or throw the book at a service provider, because the return is so great.

Moreover, even without extracting the data, the devices required afford computational capabilities, and the only truly trustworthy computer systems that exist are those that are powered off and disassembled--anything else is suspect (for the truly paranoid).

I just don't think that the personal internet of things is a good idea.

<comment><USER15> So we agree that the technology behind IoT (IPv6, low power connectivity, low power small form factor highly perform any computers) is valuable. We also agree that industrial usage of IoT is probably a net gain. We disagree about the PIoT. I believe it can in fact be built to be secure from spy agencies provided that the hardware and software are OSS. You believe it will be too much of a target for the spy agencies to ignore (I agree with this) and that the agencies will find a way to break any implementation (I disagree).

<comment><USER14> In essence, yep. The tech behind IoT is basic enough that it is widely valuable--especially because it is not solely for IoT; instead, IoT is a side- effect of those technologies.

I would be curious how you think that open source will make PIoT any less risky or a compromise any less dangerous.

<comment><USER15> The compromise would be very dangerous. It's something to design against. Using vetted OSS software, running atop open hardware, and being able to verify that neither has been tempered with is the way to do it. If I decide to run an IoT based on some very basic microcontrollers + bluetooth adapters + a Cubieboard, running OSS software I verified myself, behind a firewall I set up myself, I'd give it a decent amount of trust (all of the above are examples and of course can be swapped for parts that we can give more trust).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Is my understanding that higher frequencies mean less range and more interference correct? I want good coverage and uniform performance over extra bandwidth. I also want good latency over speed in lots of cases.

<comment><USER3> Higher frequency means less range (everything else being equal) but not more interference. Interference depends on how used / crowded a given piece of frequency is, and the 5 GHz band is much less crowded than 2.4 GHz: there is more spectrum there, less 5 GHz devices, and because the range is smaller the interference from neighbors is lower.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> Seems the article confuses the raw symbol rate with delivered L3 bandwidth (as evidenced by the testbench comment in the beginning).

See eg. [http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/wireless/2003/08/08/wireless...](http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/wireless/2003/08/08/wireless_throughput.html)

</comment><comment><USER17> I would be glad if I could get 1Gbps Real World Speed from behind a wall. Added with Low Latency, I could finally ditch the Cable and use WiFi instead.

Then I would hope Router could work on their software and not crash every month or so. It would be great if they could restart itself every week during at night when there is Zero activity.

Added with a decent implementation of USB 3.0 / 3.1, so i could use the external USB HDD as an NAS instead or buying a separate unit.

</comment><comment><USER18> I don't suppose beamforming also self-moderates the power used to send?

I have plenty of 100mW APs, and AFAIK they use that power all the time. Sure would be considerate if they'd scale down to use the appropriate amount of power required to reach each particular node.

<comment><USER3> The transmit power budget allowed by the standard is shared with the various antennas at least. Even if a given transmission uses the maximum power to maximize the modulation and coding scheme used BF will at least reduce the interference to other AP and devices, so it's still has a positive impact on interference, which is reduced.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Wait - they integrated WiGig into 802.11ac? Interesting, and a better way to go than releasing a separate 802.11ad actually (even though the routers would obviously have both ac and ad, just like we see b/g/n support today).

<comment><USER18> Not at all. Channel sizes in 802.11ad's 60GHz spectrum space are 2.16GHz wide, and can fit four of those channels in most countries. 802.11ac is still 80MHz channels in 2.4GHz space and now 160MHz channels in 5GHz space, and can fit two and three or four of those "big" channels". 802.11ad is definitely a major user of beamforming, relying heavily on reflectance, as it doesn't penetrate solid stuff very well.

802.11ad also has engineering work being poured into protocol adaption layers, so interconnects such as DisplayPort or PCIe can run atop it and presumably the 802.11 MAC that's supposed to be core to 802.11ad.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> _A further doubling of the data rate is achieved by increasing the maximum number of spatial streams to eight._

Does that mean you need 8 antennas to max out the range and bandwidth? Cool!

</comment><comment><USER21> Does anyone really need this kind of speed in their home? A fast internet service may provide 20mbit/s so no benefit coming from the internet side. Streaming music locally does not consume much bandwidth either. Locally hosted video is the only place I could see this making much sense. This is somewhat of a niche market though. How many people rip their DVD and blu-ray disks for local hosting? Not that many. I suppose More people pirate HD MKVs, but I guess the underlying question is, does the performance difference really make a significant difference? The movie may start half a second sooner - so what?

Network backup is another potentially time consuming task, but this is typically done late at night. Enterprise WiFi adoption is unlikely because this makes a company vulnerable to hacking and DOS (via interference or jamming) attacks.</comment>


Ask HN: How to make home users ditch IE6? - <AUTHOR>

There are a whole lot of chain-emails circling around the internet. We tech savvy people ignore them as they are full of BS. But your regular user (who is probably still using IE6 at home) takes them very seriously and almost always forwards them. So I was thinking, what if we would use chain-emails for something good for a change? If we would write-up a email saying that IE6 will get you a broken internet and a handful of viruses, accompanied with simple instructions on how to upgrade/switch, maybe we could make a change in the browser statistics.<p>What do you think? At the very least we can't do any harm this way. <comment><USER2> I'd guess that most people using IE6 at home don't know what a web browser is. A chain e-mail to enable Windows Update would be more likely to work, I'd guess, and would have benefits beyond killing off IE6.

I thought the main reason IE6 was still in use so much was intranet sites requiring it? So I'm not actually sure this would do much to kill off IE6.

<comment><AUTHOR> The majority of IE6 are "corporate" users, yes. But there is still a great deal of home users who just don't know better. I realize those users don't know what a browser is, the email would try to explain that. Advocating for enabling windows update is not a bad idea also!

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> At least you've offered up an idea for debate. I don't have an opinion as to its efficacy, but it addresses an annoying problem. Last I checked our user base has been hovering at about 10% IE6 for at least the last 4 months. It seems the decline in use has leveled off.

<comment><AUTHOR> I've also noticed that % is no longer dropping as it used to :\

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Where are you based?

I'm finding most technically naive computer owners have at least IE7 now - their IE6 bearing computers having got a glitch and been replaced. Isn't this remaining percentage supposedly business users or those using corporate owned computers?

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm based in Slovenia. IE (all versions) has 46.00% share on one of our webpages (one of the biggest in Slovenia), IE6 has 23.98% share (inside the whole IE share).</comment></comment>


"It couldn't be stupider, and that's why it's brilliant" Yishan Wong on Dogecoin - <AUTHOR> https://www.quora.com/What-does-Yishan-Wong-think-about-Dogecoin/answer/Yishan-Wong

<comment><USER2> For those who don't know, Yishan Wong is the CEO of Reddit.</comment>


The court's decision to allow TMobile and Sprint to merge is clear: Sprint sucks - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/12/21134278/sprint-tmobile-merger-court-ruling-opinion-decision-explainer-carriers-antitrust <comment><USER2> > While the mobile cores of traditional networks require large amounts of > hardware that are costly to install and maintain, DISH plans to construct a > "virtualized network" that relies more heavily on software and cloud-hosting > services provided by potential partners like Amazon.

Quote from the _JUDGE_ ; expressing why Dish will be a 4th "5g" network.

Nothing in the world of telecom has any connection to reality anymore, does it?</comment>


HTML plays GBA - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/comex/demos

<comment><USER2> Live, running version: [http://htmlplayspokemon.qoid.us/](http://htmlplayspokemon.qoid.us/)

Although it doesn't seem to be working properly for me. From the looks of the JS console, it seems to keep resetting.

</comment><comment><USER3> README? A description?</comment>