The Unbearable Asymmetry of Bullshit - <AUTHOR> http://quillette.com/2016/02/15/the-unbearable-asymmetry-of-bullshit/ <comment><USER3> The job market right now in the US forces grad students to attempt innovative research with remarkable conclusions. As a consequence, everyone's trying to prove more outlandish things while few are bothering with replications.

If the field were sane, you would train all the apprentices on replication studies. Once they demonstrated dispassionate expertise with the tools, only then would they be allowed to try to use those tools to test their own ideas, where they will have a strong emotional preference for how the study will come out.

If universities hired grad students based on their replication work, not on their eye-popping original research, we'd have better science and better scientists.

<comment><USER4> That is nearly the opposite of what the PhD was designed to do. Modern academic training comes out of the church and the old guilds of middle Europe and is still in use today in many fields (chefs and plumbers to name a few).

The Bachelor's degree is loosely similar to an apprentice's role. The young boy (they were almost exclusively male) worked in a shop or with a priest for some time. He learned the trade, the tools, and gained some experience from 'level 0'. When you are done with the apprenticeship, you are 'cleared' to work in other shops and are known to not be a total moron or break tools or burn down shops.

The master's degree is just that. You are considered a master of the craft (like plumbing or prinitng) or the discipline (like The Book of Mark or Crusader History). As such, you typically have a master's level project. Something that is 'new' or shows that you know your stuff. That might be a very decorative silver bowl or a thesis.

The Doctorate means you are 'world class.' Not just a mastery in a field, but a paragon of it. Today, that means that you are _the_ expert in your little niche of underwater basket weaving. There should be no-one better than you. This means you MUST have produced something new or novel way of thinking about the God or something. This has always been the idea, if not the practice.

To change that and say that the doctorate should be the bachelor's is very big. To suggest that PhDs should just replicate experiments is anathema to the idea of graduate education and would be a tremendous waste of time and energy. When you enter the Phd, you are assumed to already know how to do all the replication and the facts about the field. Granted, fields are exponentially larger than they were in the 1600's, but you still should know stats and biology if your PhD is in cancer biology.

I think you are totally wrong about this. What you are suggesting should be covered in undergrad and I think it largely is.

<comment><USER5> The problem is that nobody's doing replication work in undergrad, either, nor does it happen in Master's programs.

I do think it makes sense to stick with the PhD meaning you're a world class expert in some area, but if so then we need to adjust our expectations for what Master's level work means in the sciences. Right now it seems to just represent a hurdle you need to whiz past on your way to the PhD.

<comment><USER6> A good Bachelors degree will prepare a good student for replicating science, and a good Masters degree will definitely leave a motivated and skilled student with a good advisor a master of his or her specific field.

The problem is that grade inflation means the majority of students will fall short of these goalposts. I agree with your assessment that undergrad degrees represent hurdles, regardless of whether a student is planning to stay in academia or not.

My experience with getting a Masters degree was that it was really tough work that required my full dedication for two years. But I had a world-class scientist as an advisor breathing down my neck the whole time and expecting results, and my experience doesn't seem to match that of many other MScs I know. Some departments seem to be "degree factories"; it takes an unreasonable amount of effort to follow up students in the classical "apprenticeship" tradition described by GP. It would be very strange if every department at every university managed this level of dedication, with student numbers being what they are.

<comment> liviu- > a good Masters degree will definitely leave a motivated and skilled student > with a good advisor a master of his or her specific field.

I'm having trouble believing this.

In UK, most Masters degrees last 1 year, and there are several degrees considered good such as Imperial's MSc in Machine Learning, Cambridge's MPhil in Machine Learning, Speech and Language Technology, Edinburgh's MSc in Cognitive Science, and others. Is it really possible to become a "master" of machine learning in one year?

Also, at least in Computer Science, most of the Bachelors degrees considered good in UK do not seem to focus at all on replicating science. In fact, for my final year undergraduate project, I was encouraged to find something novel, and at no point my supervisor hinted towards focusing on replicability.

Is it perhaps more common in US?

<comment><USER6> An MSc is not an MSc. It can commonly vary from 1-3 years, depending on institution. I was thinking of the two-year variety.

Of course, you can define the term "master" to mean pretty much whatever you like. But I'd say that two years of additional, focused study when you are already proficient in your field should be more than enough to have a mastery of the specific skills and knowledge that is _at least_ on a high national level. I'm from Norway, so the US picture is unknown to me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> And then there is the bullshit that permeates from science research into bullshit blogs that later folk people use to guide their decisions (and editors/writers use to drive ad prints): what to eat or not according to recent research, how to raise children or not acording to recent research, how long a workout, how to be happy, how to this and how not to that. The bullshit then jumps from blogs into everyday conversations and daily live, into arguments over coffee (how much coffee is good by the way? According to quotable recent research that is). The most recent bulshit that really makes me lose hope is the don't vaccinate children bullshit.

I see an entire civilization confused by a ubiquous mass communication tool which they invented to do exactly the opposite: enlight them.

<comment><USER8> "I see an entire civilization confused by a ubiquous mass communication tool which they invented to do exactly the opposite: enlight them."

There was never a stream of pure, refined truth available, that just somehow lacked a distribution method. All there ever was was a confusing mixture of an uncountable varieties of different possibilities, theories, and facts of varying veracity. Now you can have more direct access to that confusing mixture, with all the attendant privileges and responsibilities.

There were things that _claimed_ to be streams of pure, refined truth. Those claims didn't become false. They always were false. Now you can tell that better. It may not feel like progress, but it is.

<comment><USER9> _> There was never a stream of pure, refined truth availablem, that just somehow lacked a distribution method_

Academic educational programs have exactly been the source-without-a-scalable- distribution-method for at least the past century.

You're unlikely to find a treatment of mathematics or physics or even Computer Science that is as well-curated, free of coercive bias, and well-presented as it often is in the undergraduate programs at universities that care deeply about their educational programs. (Such universities and colleges do exist; they unfortunately also tend to be expensive, selective, and not always well- represented in top N lists -- especially in the US.)

The reason the distribution method of university education is lacking has more to do with economics than anything else. Hiring truly high-quality people to teach small groups of people difficult content in a rigorous way is expensive. If you skimp on any of those features, the quality of the end result goes way down (c.f. typical MOOCs and the university courses to which they are purportedly equivalent, in pretty much any dimension.)

 _> There were things that claimed to be streams of pure, refined truth. Those claims didn't become false. They always were false._

Again, I fail to see how this critique applies in any meaningful way to high- quality undergraduate education programs in hard sciences. Nothing is perfect -- and in fact I doubt any of those programs ever claimed to be "streams of pure, refined truth". But they come far closer than your comment seems to suggest.

Now, going back to the contents of the article, universites certainly aren't "streams of pure, refined, _and new_ truth". Such streams very likely don't exist.

<comment><USER10> They are talking about how the internet, which was once seen a conduit of 'truth', is just a conduit which also spreads bullshit, and that there is no 'truth'. You are talking about education and scientific rigor as a means of talking about truth. While what you say may be true it doesn't seem applicable to their arguments.

<comment><USER9> _> They are talking about how the internet, which was once seen a conduit of 'truth', is just a conduit which also spreads bullshit_

That's what bikamonki was saying.

jerf's comment was tangential to the central thesis of bikamonki's post, and stated _" There were things that claimed to be streams of pure, refined truth. Those claims didn't become false. They always were false"_

 _> You are talking about education and scientific rigor as a means of talking about truth_

No, I'm stating directly that there exist educational institutions that, through educational programs, transfer truth from one person to another.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> ' Instead, "It's about a methodology for investigation, which includes, at its core, a relentless drive towards questioning that which came before." You can both "love science," he concludes, "and question it." '

I've noticed that questioning some scientific finding often makes people think I am either anti-science, anti-intellectual, conservative, religious, or any combination thereof (I am none of these). To state quite the opposite, I think not questioning science makes you religious - you are putting faith in the findings, rather than disputing them or scrutinizing them with the scientific method (not that I think there is anything wrong with faith or religion, within their own realm).

<comment><USER12> If the science has "social" before it, it always needs to be questioned - <USER2> much political interference. The entire field is low in actual results, high in political tooling..

<comment><USER13> It seems that's the case with more than just science, but possibly a good rule to follow with anything.

<comment><USER12> True. But social science is where the uncertain standards, and political gains are. No one can, or cares to, taint research into fundamental particles. Studies into any kind of demographic is a different case...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I find it vaguely amusing and ironic that he cites rationalwiki on the gish gallop, given that my impression is they do this themselves a bunch.

(Note that running a gish gallop doesn't mean you're _wrong_ , it just means you're intellectually dishonest.)

(I try not to pay too much attention to them, and I'm not super interested in refuting their bullshit, so this comment is going to be pretty unsatisfying. Sorry.)

<comment><USER15> I haven't read much on rationalwiki, but nothing I did struck me as gish gallop. They might have a lot of angles on attack on some bunk concept, but they expand upon all of them.

<comment><USER16> I haven't found them guilty of gish gallop, but some of their articles are very biased and one-sided. They seem to be a reliable source on most issues of philosophy, science, and "woo", but anything political, societal, or remotely controversial usually isn't given a balanced view.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> "In the case of Lord Voldemort, the trick is to unleash so many fallacies, misrepresentations of evidence, and other misleading or erroneous statements — at such a pace, and with such little regard for the norms of careful scholarship and/or charitable academic discourse — that your opponents, who do, perhaps, feel bound by such norms, and who have better things to do with their time than to write rebuttals to each of your papers, face a dilemma. Either they can ignore you, or they can put their own research priorities on hold to try to combat the worst of your offenses."

So the scientific debate equivalent of the Trump campaign.

<comment><USER18> I was just coming here to cite the Trumo campaign as an example. The unfortunate thing is that the amount of effort to counter this bullshit is significantly higher than the initial utterance and most likely will not reach the same audience.

For instance, Trump utters something completely off the wall. Retweets galore. Everybody gets spun up. Let's say it reaches 1million people which some portion now repeats the soundbite. Someone like Politifacts comes along after the fact and points out the discrepancy after fact checking. Reaches a much smaller follow up audience.

This is the sort of informational asymmetry that I find infuriating...

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> "There is a veritable truckload of bullshit in science."

Amen to that. :)

I'm a bit tired of seeing critics of various hypotheses being dismissed out of hand simply "Because Science".

<comment><USER20> Yes but in fairness there is a fair amount of BS in any area of human endeavor. There are BS movies, BS politicians, BS music, BS programming languages; it's certainly not unique to science.

<comment><USER21> But isn't science supposed to be, by definition, the anti-bullshit?

<comment><USER22> science is supposed to be self-correcting.

<comment><USER23> It is. This is just a very slow process.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> >... He Who Shall Not Be Named predictably rejects all of the studies that do not support his position as being "fatally flawed," or as having been "refuted by experts"—namely, by himself and his close collaborators ...

This speaks to part of the problem - the undue weight that non-scientists place on expert opinion. Trained scientists see appeal to authority arguments for what they are: bullshit.

I see this most frequently in areas for which few controlled studies are available to light the way. Human nutrition and toxicology come to mind. Oddly enough, these are the areas that are most likely to be of interest to non- scientists, setting up a vicious cycle of guru-ism complete with economic incentive to continue spouting nonsense.

<comment><USER25> >>the undue weight that non-scientists place on expert opinion

Speaking as a non-scientist, I can recognize an appeal to authority probably just as well as a scientist. But having recognized one, what do I do? I lack the training, knowledge, and time necessary to evaluate the research directly. I can choose to only trust studies that are peer reviewed, or in major journals, or backed by whatever relevant government body there might be, or that my friend who knows about this thinks are right. And maybe that's a good idea, but it's still just appealing to different kinds of authority.

Most of the time laypeople have no realistic alternative to expert opinion.

<comment><USER26> The alternative is consensus. As part of my research I found that a particular method of estimating disease prevalence in small geographic areas performed better than this other method when tested on real data from schools.

The tendency of the general public would be to look at that study and say the first method is better than the second method (assuming the general public would care at all, which they don't). That's incorrect. I would only conclude that method is actually better if several other people found similar results for similar methods in separate studies.

People tend to place far too much importance on one paper or one study. In theoretical research this can be okay sometimes, but in applied research this is almost always the wrong way to go.

<comment><USER27> "The alternative is consensus."

That's still an appeal to authority. It's just the authority of a group rather than an individual.

<comment><USER28> I think he meant consistent experimental results by "consensus" there.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> For anyone thinking, "The words in the title sound sort of familiar, but I'm not sure why", it's a reference to "The Unbearable Lightness of Being", a great book by Milan Kundera which translated into Daniel Day-Lewis' worst film.

</comment><comment><USER30> Author mentions difficulty of reproducing research as one of the issues in passing. There was a recent Nature special edition on the subject:

[http://www.nature.com/news/reproducibility-1.17552](http://www.nature.com/news/reproducibility-1.17552)

I believe this is the _primary_ issue and the cause is from one of two causes:

1) secret sauce in research -- details are lacking because there is a push to commercialize things that come out of academia

2) insufficient experimental design -- small sample size, poor controls, etc.

I would like to see an open publication that as a part of publication the result must be reproduced in a separate independent lab or two. This would almost double the required funding (maybe less because you eliminate false starts). Maybe just a few institutions could handle many reproductions.

There is a bit of a self-healing aspect in that the non-reproducible and non- interesting/advancing studies just get dropped on the floor. However, it would lend a lot of credibility to a journal that required an independent research confirmation.

</comment><comment><USER31> Another tactic I've seen from the Lord Voldemorts I know is to cite loads of references that aren't readily available online. Such a citation can be used to prop up _any_ argument, whether or not the citation actually supports the argument, or even has any bearing on it at all. It's the same trap, though. To disupte the citation, you have to wait months for an inter-library loan, read the cited work in detail, and then decide what it really has to say about the argument.

I personally fell into this trap, not because I was trying to refute something, but because I was trying to back up one of my own assumptions and I found that Lord Voldemort was citing Obscure Reference X to back up the same assumption. The joke was on me when I actually tracked down Obscure Reference X in the 30-years-out-of-print proceedings of a symposium on Y. Obscure Reference X had nothing at all to say about my assumption! Needless to say, I no longer trust Lord Voldemort or anyone who publishes with him.

<comment><USER32> Why can't we name these people? Libel?

Pastebin?

Fuck these frauds.

<comment><USER31> The problem is that saying "Professor Lord Voldemort is a liar and a fraud" puts an end to scientific discussion and forces people to assume nakedly partisan positions. Publicly at least, we have to assume good faith in our counterparts, even if we know in our hearts that they're self-inflated gasbags.

The tactics I and the original article were describing allow Lord Voldemort to clothe any assertion he likes in the robes of science. The root of this problem is a broken incentive system for publication. We're required to publish a lot to show productivity, and we're trained to put in lots of citations to back up our work. This creates an unmanageable avalanche of worthless papers and makes it easy to build a false trail of scammy citations.

Compare this to the situation 50 years ago, before publication inflation had set in. John Nash wrote a 30 page dissertation, and cited two works at the end of it. Simon's classic "Behavioral Model of Rational Choice" cited 5 works. The entire Cowles commission report on Activity Analysis devoted only 4.5 of its 418 pages to citations, and that included a detailed lit review in its introduction. Nothing makes it to press these days without five to ten times as many citations.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I heard a well known neuroscientist suggest that studies should be required to be replicated by at least another lab before being published/ established. That may sound impractical for some fields, but especially in biology/neuroscience most projects are small enough to make this feasible. Is it worth the money? I would say absolutely, not only for the validation of the science, but for the shift in culture, to finally stop designing studies chasing minute (but statistically significant) effects just to make another publication.

I think its also about time we have post-publication peer review and about time scientists get off their high horses and start responding to it.

<comment><USER34> But why would that other lab care enough to replicate? I suspect this would only exacerbate the "rich getting richer" effect whereby well-known labs/professors would have an easier time getting replicated (and thus published).

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Science is an organism that needs an immune system. At a systemic level, it needs to be hard to get away with this kind of thing.

<comment><USER36> The immune system of science is the peer review system and other mechanisms to reduce faulty science. This author points out published papers that made it past that immune system, and it some cases became part of it (e.g. as peer reviewers). What analogous structure in the immune system could repair problems with the system itself?

<comment><USER35> Yes, the article describes how certain "viruses" have learned how to beat the current immune system. That just means the immune system needs to evolve to address the new threats.

In nature, immune systems evolve based on natural selection. We need to keep trying new things and see what works. Maybe "peer review" needs to extend not only to individual papers, but to scientists and institutions themselves. Maybe their reputation needs to be evaluated over time so that a scientist who has been "infected" then has a standing presumption against their work until they can overwhelmingly demonstrate they are "healed."

This idea might be good or might be terrible, but I believe that we should be trying things like this to see if any of them stick and cause more good than harm.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Well, it is still a variation "On Bullshit" (Harry Frankfurt's excellent article). If someone in science is more interested in a position than whether the presented arguments individually holds up or not, that person is unscientifically invested and we should have some kind of mental allergic reaction to that.

The "Publish or Perish" has made Gish Gallops much harder to catch and almost impossible to punish.

<comment><USER38> There's also the entertaining "On the phenomenon of bullshit jobs" by David Graeber, although it has less to say specifically about science: [http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/](http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> There is indeed a lot of bullshit in the practice of science. But that doesn't mean science is flawed, it means people are flawed. Remember Sturgeons Law: 90% of everything is bullshit. [1]

It would be great if we could fund science purely for science' sake, and if scientists didn't have egos or careers or reputations or children, but despite the objections, I will expect a certain amount of bullshit to continue unabated. In the mean time, the author's most important point, IMO is " _if_ you love science, you had _better_ question it, and question it well, so it can live up to its potential." This is true, and always will be, regardless of how much bullshit is involved!

[1] [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law)

</comment><comment><USER40> Alan Sokal's 'Beyond The Hoax' and 'Intellectual Impostures' are good reads about the subject.

</comment><comment><USER41> Bullshit is a byproduct of a highly incentivized research market. This is what respected journals are supposed to help curate. There are opportunities to create better forms of curation with less bullshit and I would bet people will pay for it.

</comment><comment><USER42> this is a great time to bring up Bullshit as a topic of study in and of its self. [http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7929.html](http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7929.html)

We routinely say things that aren't quite true -- sometimes with the best intentions or out of necessity. The truth can be a very complicated thing.

What we are calling "bullshit" may go under more serious names (and serious discussions) if we look at specific cases - e.g. finance, medicine, game theory, biology, etc... My back-of-the-envlope definition is that of an "approximation to the truth".

</comment><comment><USER43> That's the reason why theory should be backed by hard evidence or a product that can be experienced. Without this, a theory of any sort whether it turns out to be right or if it is pure bullshit should not be given undue credit.

</comment><comment><USER44> In other professional disciplines particularly ones that require some sort of certification there are ethics tests and ethics committees. For example if your trying to get a CFA half of the test is ethics. Likewise for becoming and being a lawyer.

Given the importance of academia and its impact on policy in general perhaps something similar should exist?

I'm not sure if ethical tests and committees curb bad behavior but it could be a start or at least improve awareness. Maybe there is even something like the above already in place for academia that I'm unaware of?

</comment><comment><USER45> This phenomenon may help to explain the two solitudes in the research on whether salt is harmful:

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/17/scien...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/17/scientists- cant-agree-whether-salt-is-killing-us-heres-why/)

</comment><comment><USER46> I take issue with Brandolini's maxim: "The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it."

This assumes that we know, a priori, what is bullshit and what is not. Sometimes bullshitters know they are bullshitting, but most often they do not.

What I think is really going on here is that the scientific method is crap for this sort of thing, there is no such thing as "empirical truth" that exists in the real world, and subjective debate, reasoning, and so on, is hard and requires enormous effort on all parts.

Let's consider another hypothetical work of bullshit by one Maleficent. I, an oblivious third party, come across her published work. How am I to know that this work is bullshit?

The traditional response is that we use the scientific method, verifiability and empiricism, to test the bounds of a proposed model against observation. "You said Planet X should be at y, but it is actually at z, therefore bullshit." To quote Laurence Laurentz: 'Would that it were so simple.'

The problem here is that observation is fraught, and is usually based on its own assumptions. For example, let's say Maleficent is studying treatments for depression; to do so she must observe whether an individual is "depressed" or "not depressed". How the fuck should she do this? Frequently people use questionnaire measures like the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). Is this a valid tool? I have been heavily depressed when I scored low on the BDI, so I would say not. But what IS a valid tool? Is there any objective criterion we can bring to bear, here? What is it? Does "depression" even exist as a thing?

This problem, that observations are themselves laden with assumptions and based on pre-existing models, is a mire that all science is forced to wade through. Before we make decisions about anything, we must have a lens with which to view the world - but that, itself, is a decision!

More broadly speaking this is a problem with deductive reasoning, and because empiricism claims to be based on deductive reasoning it falls into error as a result. Because it is impossible to begin with truth, any scientific observation must be riddled through with approximations. And usually, we are unaware of the approximations that are blinding us when we build flawed models on top of them.

This is the main reason we get bullshit: _there is no good way to do science._

<comment><USER47> Brandolini's quote is brilliant. Going through evidence and conducting studies and doing research and looking through it with a critical eye is orders of magnitude more difficult than spouting some BS like "vaccines cause autism!!11!!111".

<comment><USER46> I am more concerned about how bullshit operates within the house of science. Creationism is a canard and I wish the OP had not mentioned it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> "Science advances one funeral at a time." \- Max Planck

</comment><comment><USER48> Instead of a sisyphean refutation of every attack, wouldn't a better strategy be to research and prove the attacker's conflict of interests (and thus discredit them)?

<comment><USER49> Arguing against the speaker instead of the argument itself is bullshit too.

Having a vested interest doesn't automatically discredit the things one says for their cause.

<comment><USER50> It is, but where do you draw the line?

In an ideal world where everyone was a rational, disinterested superhuman who devoted themselves to a scientific pursuit of truth, only ever focusing on arguments would be the perfect approach.

Unfortunately there do exist people who deliberately and knowingly bullshit other people in order to get what they want. Such people absolutely win from a policy of "attack the argument, not the person" because their goal is not to further understanding or even win arguments, it's to confuse people into acting a certain way ... often paralysing them into inaction by creating the appearance of an unending debate.

Thus refuting one bullshit argument simply results in two more popping up to replace it. Even if some people remember the first argument that was refuted, this doesn't help, because:

• Lots of other people _won 't_ remember the names of who was involved, or won't be aware of the previous arguments at all.

• Of the people who do remember, the fact that a debate was happening at all may be taken as evidence that the people involved must be "experts", and thus the fact that they lost the argument doesn't necessarily reduce their credibility.

• If someone was a good enough bullshitter to require a response in the first place, they will probably be good enough at it a second time to ensure that if they get no response, some people will start to assume they must be correct.

This can rapidly turn into complete defeat by the people who are actually making reasonable points because they simply become exhausted and burn out faced with an unending wall of plausible sounding nonsense, which then eventually replaces reality with itself.

I've seen this problem play out in brutally sharp detail not so long ago. The people involved _knew_ they were bullshitting, but didn't care because in their eyes it was all for the greater good.

The only solution to this is, in fact, to attack the credibility of the people doing it once they have repeatedly made absurd or invalid arguments, because otherwise it's much harder for people to learn to tune them out.

<comment><USER51> Gee, I can't imagine the event to which you might be referring here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> /offtopic

That 2.8mb .jpg is Bullshit

</comment><comment><USER53> so true! and when you you reward the bullshit artists with money and grants.. it multiplies the bullshit a thousand fold

</comment><comment><USER54> this belongs on medium.com

</comment><comment><USER55> hi

</comment><comment><USER56> I read this as a thinly-veiled attack on prominent climate-change activists. I thought the author ended a bit abruptly; was expecting a comparison of the tactics used by the fictitious "Voldemort" to the real-life actions of Bill McKibben, Michael Mann, etc.

<comment><USER57> So meta...

Notice how a couple Voldermorts have gone through the comments and down-voted anyone who questioned catastrophic global warming predictions. As Voldermorts are wont to do.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: Are we at a disadvantage? - <AUTHOR>

I'm a co-founder of a startup looking to apply to YC.
I'm mainly an artist (musician, producer, sound engineer), but I've always had a strong passion for technology. In the past, I went to school for aerospace engineering before realizing music was my true passion and transferring to a different school.
Our other co-founder is also a musician, but he's much more into the whole programmer/hacker stuff.
Would we be at a disadvantage seeing as I'm not the "ideal" candidate? <comment><USER2> If anything, I'd imagine you'd have an advantage. Silicon Valley is filled with programmers/hackers, but the really interesting people are those that come from other backgrounds with different experiences.

In most cases, making a successful startup is primarily a business problem, not a technical one. Seeing customers' perspectives, knowing the business you're entering, understanding the problem you're trying to solve -- these are all more important than being able to write Ruby quickly.

If your experience outside programming helps you contribute to solving hard problems like these, you're infinitely more valuable than someone who knows only code.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. We truly believe our startup would be successful, because we're right there dealing with the problems and lacking areas within the industry every day.

I guess, we're most worried with accurately and simply conveying how our startup would solve these problems to non-industry personnel.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Think about what's needed to bring your product to market. Does your team adequately cover the bases? If you have to hire to fill the gaps, can you find and manage competent people without excessive hand-holding?

Teams come in all shapes and sizes, what's important is that they have a reasonably viable shot of doing what they propose to do.

</comment><comment><USER4> What do you mean by "not the 'ideal' candidate"? Is your concern that you aren't a hacker? There are plenty non-technical YC founders (I'm one).

Assuming you are building a startup in the music space, it would seem your experience/skills could be an asset.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's more or less what I meant. I'm just slightly overwhelmed seeing so many technology oriented news stories and startups on here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Advantage indeed. I am a hacker and also applying to YC. I am actually looking for musician co-founders or partners. Tell us more about what you do.

<comment><AUTHOR> Shoot me an email and we'll talk: lewisgodowski [at] gmail [dot] com</comment></comment>


Why I Tried To Kill Myself at Penn - <AUTHOR> http://pennmentalhealth.tumblr.com/post/76246077927/why-i-tried-to-kill-myself-at-penn <comment><USER2> _Penn's response? – Sending some administrator to see me in the hospital (HUP). The first and only thing that she said was, "Are we going to make this an annual pattern?" because I had been hospitalized the year before. I said "No" and she gave me her business card._

My kids are going to college in a couple of years. How do I avoid sending them to places like this?

People expect (and should expect) to be treated better than this by their _employers_. But by their _vendors_?

<comment><USER3> I suggest that you think a bit more deeply about this. It's possible that the administrator was being thoughtless, but there's another interpretation -- it's a bad idea to give suicide attempters too much attention. By responding with too much sympathy, one can become a "suicide enabler", the suicide equivalent of a narcissistic enabler.

If a person threatens suicide and gets nothing but attention and sympathy, this can trigger a cyclical, escalating pattern of threats and sympathetic responses that can sometimes trap the person into going through with the suicide.

Here's a true story -- many years ago one of my brothers committed suicide. After a few weeks, another brother told me he was compiling a list of people he felt were responsible for the suicide. My first comment was, "Is [the suicide] included on the list?" Of course, he wasn't. My next comment was that the list was dangerous -- the suicide's son would see how attentive and sympathetic everyone was being and he might begin to think suicide was a good idea. My brother didn't really understand what I was saying, the list got created and passed around, and a few years later, the suicide's son committed suicide also.

True story.

<comment><USER4> I'm very sorry you lost people to suicide. Compiling the list may just have been a coping mechanism for your brother, and I don't think it's fair to think it had anything to do with the son's suicide.

<comment><USER3> > Compiling the list may just have been a coping mechanism for your brother, > and I don't think it's fair to think it had anything to do with the son's > suicide.

I didn't say it that way, either here or at the time. I only warned my brother that the list might provoke my nephew to kill himself, not that this would make my brother responsible. The actual suicide was, of course, solely the responsibility of the nephew.

<comment><USER5> Did your brother tell you that he was sorry for ignoring your advise, after your nephew killed himself?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's ridiculous that the author doesn't even consider that her taking prescribed Wellbutrin (and possibly other medicines) could have led to this. I'm quite sure such "anti-depressants" (what a misnomer) had a lot more to do with the suicide than anything Penn or any other institution or individual could possibly have. Of course, this is an extremely unpopular opinion, though based on medical cases and evidence, in our culture which sees drugs as the solution to all mental problems.

<comment><USER7> I took Wellbutrin back when it was popular to prescribe as an aid to get off nicotine. OMG, what horrible stuff (for me, anyway). I wasn't ready to stick a shotgun in my mouth or anything, but it gave me a severe case of what a friend called "the fuckits". Didn't care about anything (including the consumption of nicotine). I would have been content to sit and do nothing. One day when I had some from free time and the house to myself, I decided to go for a motorcycle ride down some twisty road. Got a few miles down the road and decided I didn't care about going for a motorcycle ride. Considering that one of the reasons I moved next to the Appalachian Mountains was for the fantastic motorcycle riding, that was a strong enough signal that I quit taking the stuff.

Now that's anecdotal, and your mileage most certainly may vary, but I now understand how a mis-diagnosis and an inappropriate prescription can cause problems.

<comment><USER8> It's interesting that very safe chemicals like tianeptine and phenibut are not approved and used clinically in America, as they are in other countries. Instead much more profitable chemicals with known dangers are used.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> "The night of my suicide attempt I called a friend and told him that I was contemplating suicide. He told me he was sorry and to call a suicide hotline. We have not talked about my suicide attempt since that night. "

The word 'friend' is used over ten times referring to some human acquaintance or other but it really seems like this person doesn't have a single _real_ friend.

<comment><USER10> Good catch. I feel like the author failed to mention this- There might've been a much different conclusion if she had found her niche.

<comment><USER11> I don't remember a single class or even a single conversation with a parent, pastor, other kind of leader figure, from my youth about "how to deal with friends or people who have problems." Sometimes you're lucky and get the, "How to find help if you feel like you're in trouble" resources but how in the hell does someone know how to handle this situation? I don't feel qualified to help anyone other than my immediate closest friends and family regarding the topic of suicide, and even then I feel overwhelmed just thinking about it. There are professionals out there who know what to say, when the saying is important to be done, as I know for sure that listening is a big component of help. I just have no words other than to share my own struggles, and oftentimes people don't want to hear about anything other than their own pit.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I believe suicidal tendencies is simply when the weight of feelings from depression, anxiety, and psychosis outweigh results from coping mechanisms. I don't think it has as much to do with feelings of sadness or lack of happiness.

<comment><USER13> Is happiness not a coping mechanism for anxiety?

<comment><USER3> > Is happiness not a coping mechanism for anxiety?

That describes happiness as a method, rather than an effect or an outcome. But it's an effect, generally out of people's control except as a desirable outcome of things that really are methods, like jogging or crossword puzzles.

Happiness isn't a switch that you can throw, it's the light that results from throwing the switch.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> > it is that the environment here is so stressful that everyone is driven to > the point where they need to be at CAPS.

I feel sorry for those who suffer from depression, I have been there myself in a rough patch of my life. It seems like the author is indirectly blaming Penn, that it causes all students to "NEED" a therapist. This simply isn't true.

</comment><comment><USER15> That's sad to hear of a suicide attempt and I hope the author finds peace and stability.

With that said, I am firmly of the opinion that it is not the responsibility of an educational institution to change to accommodate people who find an environment too stressful. If one finds it too difficult or stressful and the institution is providing adequate mental health services (which the author acknowledged), you are simply in an environment you should not be in. Go to a college that is more relaxing. You have hundreds of other options that will be much less stressful. Changing Penn to a less stressful environment would not make it Penn anymore. Lots of people thrive at and enjoy Penn.

I do not mean to sound harsh - it's simply a reality. It just concerns me that the author acknowledges the school makes him/her suicidal yet is unwilling to leave and lays the blame on the school for his/her suicidal attempts.

</comment><comment><USER16> As someone who just graduated from Penn last May, I feel inclined to comment.

Penn can be a stressful environment, no doubt. Most of the students who attend Penn were at the top of their class in high school. Many dominated in athletics as well. For these reasons, some students are shocked by the level of excellence, and the rigor of some classes.

That said, I would be cautious to generalize this story. I know people who have received help from CAPS, and they are healthy-minded friendly students today. As with any school, the most important thing you can do is join communities or clubs where there is a collective enthusiasm for something outside of class.

As a graduate, I can confidently say I loved Penn, and my peers would say the same. I'm also glad these stories of students are being shared because there is always room for improvement.

</comment><comment><USER17> Sounds like she had a lot of awful friends who outright refused to be there for her.

<comment><USER3> > Sounds like she had a lot of awful friends who outright refused to be there > for her.

Don't be too hard on them -- it's likely they were also struggling and making difficult choices too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> When I have a broken leg I go to doctors to have it fixed. My friends[1] play an important role in helping me get groceries or chatting to me about the awful itchyness. But qualified professionals do the xrays and put the cast on.

When I have a severe mental health problem why do people think that a few chats with people who have little experience of mentla health treatment is going to help?

Sure, for the mild end society really needs to be better at talking about this stuff. And it's great if people are supportive when talking about the severe end too. But chatting to a pal is 't going to fix my suicidal thinking.

I found the blog post confusing. It refers to an event from a few years ago and MH practice moves rapidly. It mentioned how tricky the author found it to talk about MH problems but then asks other people to be better at talking about MH problems. She mentions a history of depression and anxiety but she didn't appear to have good rainy day action plans or coping techniques.

I'm not sure what the takeawY is: "don't be a high stress environment" seems reasonable but you're fighting a losing battle with that one.

[1] lol as if I have friends.

</comment><comment><USER19> While the OP was focused on Penn (I'm a Penn grad '04, fwiw), I'm sure this is pretty common at a lot of other selective colleges. I wrestled with a lot of the same exact feelings the OP did, although it never quite got so bad for me.

Ultimately I just remember struggling so much with... "identity," if that's the right word for it. Penn basically ended up disproving everything I thought I knew about myself when I was 18. I thought I was a "high achieving" individual, then I was suddenly very average. I thought I was someone that made friends easily, then I found myself on a campus with 11,000 undergrads yet basically felt like I had no friends. I thought my ethnicity was irrelevant because I we now lived in a post-racial America (hah!), but it seemed like so many organizations there defined themselves by socioeconomic or racial lines. I thought I was good at programming, yet I felt so completely lost in my comp sci classes.

It was pretty harrowing feeling like everything I thought I knew about myself was false, and I couldn't figure out what was true, and I was still expected to achieve at a very high level while I was figuring it out. The OP's anecdote about going to Wawa really hit home, because I remember almost literally the same thing happening to me, and that's all it would take to feel like nothing made sense anymore. Am I really the kind of person who doesn't have a single fucking friend out of 11,000 undergrads that would take a 10 minute break to grab a sandwich?

The OP seemed to blame Penn as an institution, and I do think these selective universities could do more to recognize that some of their students will basically feel like they've been abruptly thrown into a crucible, and it's not always painless to adjust. The OP advocates things like publishing suicide rates, but I think that's just another way of advocating, "please tell everyone they don't need to pretend everything is great, because I've felt fucking miserable sometimes and I don't think I'm the only one."

There was a guy in my freshman dorm that basically did "crack" and abruptly withdrew for the semester, and I just remember everyone just kind of smirking about it. "Yeah, Sean went nuts or something. Was spazzing out over a midterm and then next thing I know, all his stuff's packed and he's gone. Guess he couldn't hack it."

I didn't smirk. I just remember feeling sad and wishing Sean had said something to me. Feeling overwhelmed apparently meant "going nuts." Was that fair? That didn't seem fair. I don't think Sean would have thought it was fair either. Maybe we could have gotten a sandwich at Wawa and talked about that.

</comment><comment><USER20> I think a big part of this is "don't go to Penn". It has a bad reputation in Philadelphia in general. I'm not going to get too into detail about what that reputation is[1], but suffice to say, I think OP probably would have a much better time at a different school completely. Even Drexel, which is literally next door to Penn, is nicer in terms of how students are treated and treat each other.

Going to Penn is basically accepting all of the expense and pressure of attending Harvard or Yale, without the prestige. And in my mind, the only reason to put up with the expense of those schools _is_ the prestige. It's not like you can't get a great education at far cheaper schools.

[1] other than to say that the story of the relationship with an emotionally abusive pre-med boyfriend isn't terribly surprising.

</comment><comment><USER21> From my unscientific "splatterwall of experiences", this is pretty much the norm, though I know of exceptions, such as smaller, gender-specific colleges that will bend over backwards to help (e.g. girls or boys-only colleges).

</comment><comment><USER22> I knew multiple people at MIT who used the mental health services/therapists there. My impression was that their experience was positive, and that at least someone was there to listen and have a conversation with them.

</comment><comment><USER23> While in college I also felt out of place and friendless for some time. My suggestion to college students now would be to join clubs around your interests. Soccer, ultimate frisbee, archery, chess, trading cards, what ever. Just make a little effort, and I am sure you will find friends. Join clubs you personally like, rather then clubs that make you look cool or something like that. This way you'll actually hang out with people who like the same things you do, and may give you more of a chance.

To colleges, create a system that makes it easy to organize such clubs and maintain them. Like a college centric meetup. Set it up and promote the hell out of it to the first years. Perhaps there is a startup opportunity here, to make the system and sell it to colleges! Facebook works well for this, but it would be easier to do this if there was a central repository of different group that college students have started, and a simple way to request university resources, like rooms, etc.

On suicide, this may sound cold, but if you want to kill your self, do it. Honestly, I feel it's every persons right to dispose off with their life as they will. But DO NOT threaten suicide as a way to get attention! Doing so is no different then you taking someone as a hostage and threatening to kill that person just to get attention. You are basically saying to the world "Pay attention to me, and if you do not, someone is going to die, and it's YOUR fault." If you feel really sad, call your friends and be honest, tell them that you feel really sad and you NEED someone to talk to desperately. If they are your true friends, they will make time for you. I would, for any of the people I call friends, no matter the time of night or what ever. And if they ignore you, telling them you are going to kill your self isn't going to change anything, they are not your friends, and they don't give a shit. Call your parents or family, if that's an option. Parents may seem like distant and not understanding at that age, but in most cases they will stick by you even if you have no one else.

Finally, just food for thought, my dad once told me this about evolution: In nature the "winners" are those creatures that pass their genes on to the next generation, and the "losers" are those creatures who's genetic lineage is cut off. Just based on the fact that you are alive today you can be assured that you come for a very, very, very long line of winners. So, when you feel down on your self, just remember, there are millions of generations of creatures which came before you. They figured out how to succeed in life, thus making you possible, and so will you, just give it time. Just about the only way to lose in life it to stop playing. So check out if you like, but if you stick around, the odds are on your side.

</comment><comment><USER24> Note that in any sane universe you'd feel able to talk to your parents about this. But we're in backwards-land, where parents exist to be impressed.

</comment><comment><USER25> Suicide doesn't usually happen when people are depressed. It happens when they're going into or out of a depression. Think of depression as night; suicide usually happens at evening or morning twilight. More often, the morning twilight. They're getting out of depression, can see the big picture again (when you're depressed, you can't) and realize what a mess their lives are in. They freak out, for lack of a better word. They're not in the throes of depression, but still emotionally unstable. _That_ is when suicide tends to happen.

Society makes it worse by kicking such people when they're down and making it a lot harder for people to pull themselves out of depression and get the recovery they need.

 _For example, when I missed a midterm exam because I was in the hospital after my suicide attempt, my professor did not allow me to make it up._

See, it's shit like that. One period of illness and now you're playing for a D+. One slip and your life just might be fucked.

Ok, and here's why this will never improve in American society. We run this contest of superficial reliability at relatively easy (intellectually speaking) work, and our corporate overlords are selected based on who drops last. Usually, the culling agent is a short-term episode of anxiety or depression (or "burn out") in a normal person. They're considered "the weak" and pushed aside. That is why our society cannot, on the terms it lives by now, ever accommodate these genuine (and serious) medical problems.

As it's structured now, society is more about competing for position than excellence, and the result of that is that people _have_ to be kicked when they're down.

I would argue for scrapping the whole thing (society, that is), rethinking all assumptions, and gearing our society toward genuine excellence (and toward helping the sick, unconditionally) rather than mindless, senseless competition... but that's just me.

</comment><comment><USER26> A member of our year took their life at college. None of us knew whatever was going on in their life or mind. And that is the hardest part - societal stigma prevented the person reaching out to peers and friends, and probably stopped us collectively being proactive in stepping in, in case we mistakenly labelled someone as appearing in need of help.

It transpired they had tried to reach help online, the place where most youth head these days, but instead of help they received encouragement to kill themaelves.

Cracking the very tough nut of getting people actually talking would save more lives and disrupt more attempts.

</comment><comment><USER27> attention seeking behavior- attempting suicide and then blogging about it and then possibly posting it here and elsewhere.

also not sure how this story relates to hacking, computers, etc

Why didn't the college do more? Because it's a place intended for learning, not mental health rehabilitation.

<comment> josh-wrale The word "university" has in it a form of "whole". As such, IMHO, this "place for learning" should strive toward teaching AND fostering coping mechanisms. Coping is, after all, and again IMHO, a key component to success. Tell us, without the basic will to live, what is success or "higher education"?

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> > I tried to kill myself at Penn because I felt so utterly alone.

If I was the only person on Earth, I wouldn't kill myself. Life isn't about feeling happy all the time.

<comment><USER29> Suicidal ideation is, in general, not a choice a person makes. It's the result of a combination of depression and lack of inhibition, due to anything ranging from psychosis to extreme anxiety or stress. If you were sufficiently depressed and stressed from being the last person on Earth, you'd most likely commit suicide.

<comment><USER30> Exactly, so the statement "I tried to kill myself at Penn because I felt so utterly alone." is probably wrong. I mean it's probably subjectively true, and it's informative, but loneliness probably didn't cause this person to attempt suicide.

<comment><USER31> That was her description of her subjective experience, but she made it clear that it was most likely due to the stress & anxiety.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Consumer Electronics Hall of Fame: Tandy/RadioShack TRS-80 Model 1 - <AUTHOR> https://spectrum.ieee.org/consumer-electronics/gadgets/the-consumer-electronics-hall-of-fame-tandyradioshack-trs80-model-1 <comment><USER2> This was the very first computer I ever got to write a program for.

Was a neighbor up the road. They had it, and found out a friend and I were interested. To their credit, they gave us a good enough introduction to write some BASIC programs that would calculate radio related things.

It was all serious and magical at the same time.</comment>


Ask HN: What do you hate/dislike the most about your favourite prog language? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Javascript: lack of stability caused by rapidly changing ecosystem.

</comment><comment><USER3> Python: Less than graceful 2->3 transition. Making things fast and making things obvious is often at odds with each other.

</comment><comment><USER4> C++: compiler errors thrown from heavily templated code

Python: incompatibility between 2 & 3, especially next( )

</comment><comment><USER5> Erlang: the general disinterest of Ericsson and the hapless stewardship of Erlang Solutions.

</comment><comment><USER6> Python: the GIL.</comment>


You Don't Need News - <AUTHOR> https://icyphox.sh/blog/dont-news/ <comment><USER2> > As an example, to readers living outside of the US, news regarding police > brutality & the Black Lives Matter movement are unactionable.

This is a spectacularly wrong example. Dozens of countries in every continent but Antarctica[1] are holding support protests of their own.

While I agree with the larger point that the way most people consume news—and the way they are fed to us—is problematic, the author's tone felt almost insulting. I recommend Aaron Swartz's take on the subject instead.[2]

[1]: [https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/map-george-floyd- protests...](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/map-george-floyd-protests- countries-worldwide-n1228391)

[2]: [http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/hatethenews](http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/hatethenews)

</comment><comment><USER3> > News today is literally just this: "<big name person> did/said <dumb > thing>!", "<group> protests against <bad thing>!", and so on.

> News is entertainment. Quick gratification that lasts a day, at max.

I would say an important qualifier here is that _most_ news is entertainment, but the very long-tail of what we might call news -- actual high-quality journalism (investigative or not) -- is critically important.

I agree here that the majority of news media is infotainment. But there is an important place for high-quality long-form journalism, which effectively exists in society to do hard thinking and investigating that's basically impossible without the resources, infrastructure and support of a news organization.

Yes, "news" is trash, and some "journalism" is too, but the very long-tail, the 1% of the really high-quality stuff, is critically important, and a free and open society probably collapses without it.

</comment><comment><USER4> News is designed to make you fatigued. OP is suggesting that we succumb to the fatigue and stop reading it. The SNR on good news is very small, but massively important. Even if the news is "non-actionable" it's important to inform oneself.</comment>


Would you trade your Google chrome browsing data for money? - <AUTHOR> http://infworm.com/would-you-trade-your-google-chrome-browsing-data-for-money/

<comment><USER2> Not for $25.</comment>


Interactive film built with Three.js and WebGL - <AUTHOR> http://thecarpandtheseagull.com

<comment><USER2> Hi, the director / coder here. Crazy to see on hacker news. We had to have it on just Chrome because of the twin pains of time (never enough) and money (added code, more testing, etc). For most of the project there were only myself and one other coder doing the work.

If it isn't working for you or have questions, feel free to let me know...

<comment><USER3> What aspects of this are not compatible with other browsers?

<comment><USER2> WebGL isn't supported by IE. Firefox and Safari have patchy WebGL service.

Firefox works but grinds to such a slow pace, so we disabled it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> 2002 "This site is best viewed with Internet Explorer"

2012 "The film is optimised for viewing on Chrome."

Not interested in a browser-specific web experience.

<comment><USER5> Microsoft hasn't bothered to touch WebGL, clearly more interested in their own proprietary Direct3D and Xbox ecosystem.

Apple has had partial WebGL support for years now (started with iAds), but has never switched it on by default, not on OS X or iOS.

What exactly do you expect web developers to do? Keep making the same shitty sites?

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow that was incredibly trippy, a great mix of technical ability with an artistic side, it's nice to see..

</comment><comment><USER7> Pretty disappointed by the top comments here.

IMO, this is a pretty cool "interactive film" (I'd call it a video game) that is extremely well done via Three.js (and therefore WebGL). Good job to the developers.

I will say that due to time, I didn't figure out what to do in each chapter. Instead, I clicked a few things and then moved onto the next chapter.

</comment><comment><USER8> WebGL is really the trend at this time! Good job. Really liked the interactive part.

<comment><USER9> I think trend is the wrong word, possibly shift?

It's been pushed more mainstream than other new elements for the web because of the visual appeal.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> This is trippy and awesome :))

Here's hoping we see a lot more interactive experiences soon!

If anyone is inspired to try to build something of their own using Three.js, we're working on tools that will help. More here: <http://verold.com/blog/2012/11/6/threejs-needs-a-cms>

</comment><comment><USER11> Hi guys great job on the technical aspects!

I feel like the emotional and film aspects are still slightly a leap. I didn't really feel much for the fisherman or the seagull, I was just banging away on my spacebar.

The initial description got me interested, you are definitely trying to explore a new concept and for that I give you props!

</comment><comment><USER12> No, I don't want to download Chrome.

<comment><USER13> why not?

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> latest version of Chrome, on OS X 10.7.5 and it's only rendering wireframes.

<comment><USER2> It supposed to be wireframes. There should also be some fog that's not? Try chapter 3. Has loads of colour once you get started.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> I love these artsy indie video games I seem to be noticing more and more of lately. The graphics and music are really cool!</comment>


Joseph Stiglitz: the euro may not survive - <AUTHOR> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financetopics/financialcrisis/8039041/Joseph-Stiglitz-the-euro-may-not-survive.html <comment><USER2> The dream for many speculators is to break the euro, at this moment as blue1 says is unthinkable in practical terms, and China is coming to the rescue, first with Greece and we can think that if needed then Spain. What i find funny (sad) is that the markets still believe in Moody's and their friends, after the disaster thet help to create with their ratings.

</comment><comment><USER3> Withdrawing from the euro is unthinkable, in practical terms.

However, what if national currencies are reintroduced _in addition_ to the euro? (just some lateral thinking...)</comment>


Problem with Open Textbooks: They are Free - <AUTHOR> http://www.ezran.org/blog/2009/03/problem-with-open-textbooks-they-are-free/

<comment><USER2> _...just a few weeks ago CK12 and the State of Virginia launched the first ever open Text Book..._

Really? What about all the stuff on Wikibooks? (<http://en.wikibooks.org>)

<comment><AUTHOR> They are all books, but not text books approved for classroom teaching yet. This is the first open textbook approved by a US state.

<comment><USER3> Certified by the State or not, they are still open textbooks.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> "Even Microsoft certified open source software to run on it's platform."

They've done a lot more than that- they actually release open source software.</comment>


Half-Life: Alyx Gameplay Videos - <AUTHOR> https://steamcommunity.com/games/546560/announcements/detail/1710743290795360946 <comment><AUTHOR> There's also this video by IGN containing 9 minutes of uninterrupted gameplay: [https://youtube.com/watch?v=30v1UWkMBlU](https://youtube.com/watch?v=30v1UWkMBlU)

The level of immersion is insame to me. This is the first physics-based VR game that isn't full of jankiness like boneworks is.</comment>


We need a black Macbook Air. - <AUTHOR>

How cool would a black Macbook Air be. Black anodised aluminium unibody, looking like a beautiful Thinkpad... I am pretty sure that the technology is here. Also I haven't actually hold a Nokia Lumia but how his the material. Would a MBA be attractive in polycarbonate? <comment><USER2> how cool would a white Thinkpad be looking like a a beautiful Macbook Air...

I hope Lenovo gets their shit together and release a sexy version of Thinkpad with Apple's trackpad. So I am no longer hooked on Apple and can get back to Ubuntu, as it is a far more superior platform for development.

Until then, a touchpad alone on my Mac Book Pro kills all the laptop wannabes..

</comment><comment><USER3> IMHO, high DPI displays are way more needed

<comment><AUTHOR> Totally agree but that also means more GPU which means more battery. Apple really does have to strike the perfect balance.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Apple would probably charge $150 extra for it, though.

<comment><AUTHOR> true, talking about extras, a matte display would also be good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Yep!</comment>


First fine for the application of GDPR Article 25 in Romania - <AUTHOR> https://www.dataprotection.ro/?page=Comunicat_Amenda_Unicredit&lang=en <comment><USER2> Note this seems to be the first fine in Romania. It's far from the first fine ever: [http://www.enforcementtracker.com/](http://www.enforcementtracker.com/)

<comment><AUTHOR> There are _two_ firsts here:

1) The first fine by the Romanian supervisory authority; and

2) The first fine for breach of Article 25.

That's why I chose first Art. 25 fine as the original submission title.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> 130.000€ fine for a bank with 320M€ of revenue in 2015 (see [0]) doesn't seem too much...

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

<comment><USER4> My understanding is that the first fine is a shot across the bow. Now that they've been found in violation, any future violation will hold a harsher penalty.

<comment><USER5> also: the collaboration of the party is accounted for when applying the fine. The regulation attempts to get parties to behave well, not just to punish them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > The sanction was imposed following an intimation addressed to the National > Supervisory Authority

Can anybody just shoot them an e-mail to start an investigation?

<comment><USER7> I'm in the UK, and yes you can just send an email to ICO here. I contacted them about an issue with Amazon using their order update system for marketing purposes despite having opted out of marketing communicatoins, they weren't very helpful.

<comment><USER8> I have an outstanding complaint about illegal collection of biometric information and they have proved less than helpful also. The ICO doesn't really function, it never did enforce the data protection act before and so far there appears to be little change with GDPR.

Justice is not just about the law as written but also whether it can be enforced, the GDPR is not enforced in any meaningful way in the UK and companies know that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Do you know some case of a foreign company outside Europe being fined about GDPR?</comment>


New Mac Pro will be iblack - <AUTHOR> http://bringtherainbow.tumblr.com/post/59482154330/new-macpro-will-ship-soon-in-new-colour-iblack

<comment><USER2> Had a laugh after the revelation :)</comment>


How Events Are Reshaping Modern Systems [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.infoq.com/presentations/systems-event-driven <comment><USER2> I've worked with event driven architecture and it's always been a nightmare. Essentially, you're reinventing a commit log, about 1/4 of a really shitty custom database. Once you have aggregates you've basically gone full wheel.

Add to that, the fact that normal RPC is "forbidden", so you end up with like 10 copies of each aggregate across various services.

The killer feature is "replays", but trust me, after storing every state change for even a few weeks those replays are going to start taking hours if not days. And your services are all down while they happen.

Pretty soon you start understanding the wisdom of databases not keeping commit logs around forever.

If you value your sanity wait this one out

<comment><USER3> I think it helps to distinguish between (A) event sourcing and (B) systems that emit events as a coordination and communication mechanism only.

In the first case, you're able to do those replays but you also have the pain of somehow controlling the evolution of that system over time, as event- definitions and the consuming code behavior changes constantly.

I think the second case has a lot more "easy wins" and is a better fit for most systems that do not require exhaustive auditing. You might keep all of the events around in a durable store, but they're more like hieroglyphics in a museum than a library book that is constantly retranslated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Hmm...

"Event Driven Services

1\. Receive and React (or not) to facts

2\. Publish new facts (immutable events)

3\. Invert the control flow"

How is this different from "objects receive (or ignore) messages, send new messages, invert the control flow"?

Except of course for the new and shiny.

"Mutable State Needs to be Contained (within the service)"

-> (mutable) state is contained within objects

"Use the Event Stream as the Consensus Fabric"

-> TeaTime, David Reed's Multi Version Concurrency Control

etc.

Have we really not understood OO at all so that we have to reinvent it all the time? Or maybe this should be seen as a validation of those principles, because we keep coming back to them even when we don't know it.

<comment><USER5> > Have we really not understood OO at all so that we have to reinvent it all > the time?

We haven't. I think the popular OO languages shows this. In both Java and .Net the focus is on classes, not on messages passed between objects. But class hierarchies are not essential for message passing. Classes are mainly a way of decomposing an application into manageable logical parts of interacting chunks. Looking at how many language features center around classes and class hierarchies (interfaces, abstract classes, generics, inheritance etc) as opposed to how many facilitates different forms of interactions between objects (you basically have method calls and arguably async/await) it seems clear to me that these languages are more "class oriented" than object oriented...

<comment><USER6> I think it is more a matter of people not understanding their tools.

React UI? Smalltalk already had Observer and event messages.

java.util.Observable exists since version 1.0.

Interfaces are lousily based on Objective-C categories, and the first edition of "Component Software: Beyond Object-Oriented Programming" using Component Pascal, COM, Java was published in 1997.

The second edition added C# examples.

Which are concepts that now everyone is discussing as Entity–Component System.

Our field would be much better if there was less pop culture and more book/paper reading.

EDIT: forgot to add the publishing date

</comment></comment></comment><comment> jarl-ragnar All of this reminds me of Channels and Pools in MASCOT

[http://async.org.uk/Hugo.Simpson/MASCOT-3.1-Manual- June-1987...](http://async.org.uk/Hugo.Simpson/MASCOT-3.1-Manual- June-1987.pdf)

Having been involved in the delivery of a complex distributed software system designed using MASCOT, I can attest to it being instrumental in the creation of one of the most robust pieces of software I've ever seen. Consistently topping the System Prime's quarterly metrics for up-time.

</comment><comment><USER7> [https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13508035/general- purpose...](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/13508035/general-purpose- databases-that-never-delete-or-update-data-in-place/35635528)

</comment><comment><USER7> i did quick review of slides. hope this video will allow to shift some enterprises.</comment>


Apple is reportedly putting Mac development on the back burner - <AUTHOR> https://www.engadget.com/2016/12/20/apple-mac-development-on-the-back-burner/ <comment><USER2> Is there a shred of evidence in that article that anything has changed at Apple? How much more on the back burner can the desktop product line be, considering Apple already only updates the line every few years? The only information I can glean from the recent spate of overly negative Apple articles is, people click on them, the sites make money.

<comment><USER3> Other than the multiple statements in Bloomberg today from anonymous sources, there's:

\- changing the name from "Apple Computer" to "Apple Inc"

\- Tim Cook talking up the iPad as a replacement for a PC

\- a lack of new OS features in macOS that didn't begin in iOS

\- discontinuing Xserve

\- discontinuing half a dozen Mac pro apps

\- discontinuing cinema displays

\- discontinuing 17" MacBook Pro

\- letting go of Sal Soghoian, their scripting/automation guy

\- not refreshing Mac Pro in three years

\- not refreshing most other Macs in years

Put it all together, and it doesn't seem like a company that has enthusiasm for desktop computing.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Which seems contrary to [https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/19/apples-tim-cook- assures-em...](https://techcrunch.com/2016/12/19/apples-tim-cook-assures- employees-that-it-is-committed-to-the-mac-and-that-great-desktops-are-coming/)

<comment><USER4> The title does, the article doesn't

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think this message is clear to developers. I have been a loyal mac user for 10 years but will be replacing my iPhone with the pixel and my next laptop will probably be a Dell XPS 15 with 32Gb of ram running Linux. I couldn't believe the increase in base price of the 15" given the gimmicky feature improvements. Disappointment.

</comment><comment><USER6> "let me be very clear: we have great desktops in our roadmap. Nobody should worry about that"

Sounds like that meeting with Mr. Trump included some lessons in communicating with the public.

<comment> m-p-3 They'll make the desktop great again.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> the article talks about the Mac Pro, I considered it but never pulled the trigger in part because OSX slows down dramatically when it is multitasking too much. Using large Linux machines for computation seemed much more appropriate.

</comment><comment><USER8> Tim Cook, you're slowly killing the company! Only you can save it!</comment>


JQuery is not enough - Why should I start using a MVC framework? - <AUTHOR> http://netengine.com.au/blog/jquery-is-not-enough/index.html

<comment><USER2> Because living in the 80s was never a good idea? I'm still dumbfounded by how many people don't think mvc is industry standard, or by how many think they're doing their boss some big favour by catching up 20 years on their own time.

That may sound a little harsh but im not the one comparing "jQuery programming" to mvc. JQuery never claimed to fix your shitty inline JavaScript, it just makes it easy to write really bad code.</comment>


Are all the MS Zunes dying? - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/5121311/30gb-zunes-failing-everywhere-all-at-once

<comment><USER2>
      AT AN early morning hour
      On the last night of the year
      The Zune did sit and cower
      For it knew its end was near

      The Zune was cold and tired
      And although it was un-wired
      It had no friends to squirt
      No friends to be inspired
      And it feared the end would hurt

      But when the clock ticked "Two"
      A byte did move; a bit was flipped
      The program shuddered; then it tripped
      The old brown Zune was through

      Thirty gigabytes are soon made full
      Thirty gigabytes are what it's got
      Thirty gigabytes are quite a lot
      Thirty gigabytes of cotton wool

      The Zune has passed; it took a fall
      The music's stopped
      the stock has dropped
      It never "Played for sure" at all

      We wonder where is Balmer
      And imagine that he's ranting
      And raving at his crew
      They wish he would be calmer
      And stop his sweaty panting
      Oh look! He's thrown his shoe!

<comment><USER3>
      12pm day before New Years
      My zune resets in the dark
      The loading bar
      Logo screen is freezing
      My music is sleeping
      I am numb

      Press up and back it isn't working
      It just lies there on the couch
      Microsoft went down to Charlotte
      They're not home to fix this bug
      And we wait
      For the next bugfix
      I'm feeling more alone
      Than I ever have before

      It's a brick and I'm drowning slowly
      My zune's a ghost and I'm headed nowhere
      It's a brick and I'm drowning slowly

      I call tech support at 12:30
      I pace around phone lines are busy
      Then I plug it in nothing happens
      This shitty gift that I got
      Can't you see
      It's not me you're dying for
      Now I'm feeling more alone
      Than I ever have before

      It's a brick and I'm drowning slowly
      My zune's a ghost and I'm headed nowhere
      It's a brick and I'm drowning slowly

      As Hours went by
      It showed that it was not fine
      They told me, "son, it's time to tell the truth"

      It broke down, and I broke down
      Cause I was tired of waiting
      Let the power drain
      For the moment we're alone
      Yeah Its alone
      I'm alone
      Now I know it

      It's a brick and I'm drowning slowly
      My zunes a ghost and I'm headed nowhere
      It's a brick and I'm drowning slowly

PS: huge apologies to Ben Folds for this irreverence.

<comment><USER4> Its so irreverent it hurts. Upvote for balls.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Thinking about this - I bet it's a Leap Year issue (some dumbass set a "days in the year" upper bound at 365 days) and since it was first released in 2006, this would be the first time it has occurred.

<comment><USER6> It's odd that it's only affecting the 30GB version though. I would expect the software to be the same unless one version was just manufactured with different software.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This isn't great news for Microsoft. All of their "flagship" products have a terrible reputation right now:

Vista - not worth the upgrade (I use Vista on one machine and don't really see a big issue with it either way).

Xbox 360 - Red ring of death problems

Zune - Apparently hit by a date bug

<comment><USER8> Does the 360 really have a terrible reputation right now? I rarely hear about RRoD problems anymore in the sphere these days.

<comment><USER9> I still like the 360 (games) over the wii and ps3, but console itself is still plagued with problems; most recently related to the latest xbox live update

MS still seems to care more about meeting the shipping date than it does about quality

<comment><USER8> If they cared about meeting the shipping date, Vista would have been way worse than it is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Microsoft's response is great:

Q: What fixes or patches are you putting in place to resolve this situation? This situation should remedy itself over the next 24 hours as the time flips to January 1st.

Q: What's the timeline on a fix? The issue Zune 30GB customers are experiencing today will self resolve as time changes to January 1.

Q: Why did this occur at precisely 12:01 a.m. on December 31, 2008? There is a bug in the internal clock driver causing the 30GB device to improperly handle the last day of a leap year.

Q: What is Zune doing to fix this issue? The issue should resolve itself.

<http://gizmodo.com/5121822/official-fix-for-the-zune-30-fail>

</comment><comment><USER11> almost certainly some time-related software glitch. so microsoft will be able to fix it with a patch, and everybody will be happy again.

this reminds me of the first year i was using windows 95. i just happened to be awake one night at 2:00am when the daylight savings time change kicked in, and the computer dutifully changed the time to 1:00am. cool, i thought. then, an hour later, when it was 2:00am, once again it reset the clock to 1:00am. and so on, and so on ...

microsoft issued a patch a few days later, and all was well.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> More here - [http://gizmodo.com/5121311/reports-30gb-zunes-failing- everyw...](http://gizmodo.com/5121311/reports-30gb-zunes-failing-everywhere- all-at-once) not good news for Microsoft and even worse news for those that have 30GB Zunes

</comment><comment><USER12> If a Zune dies in the forest, and nobody owns one, does Microsoft still hear the bloggers complain?

<comment><USER13> John Gruber wrote:

> Last night, between midnight and 2 am, all 30 GB Zunes in the world > apparently broke.

I stared in wonder. They sold _thirty_ Zunes!? Then I figured it out. I need more coffee.

<comment><USER12> Ha, I'm pretty sure they sold at least 50.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> This title led me to believe this was about market-share not some publicity glitch.

Well I think they are dying! I mean I can't make fart noises with it - MeH!

</comment><comment><USER15> I'm surprised they've stuck with the tagline "Experience the Social".

<comment><USER16> Having a buggy mp3 player that crashes at the same time for everyone brings you all closer together. That's the social element. Then presumably you discuss music, make friends etc while ms releases a patch.

<comment><USER17> Hey, do you see iPod owners all flocking to iPod forums at the same time? Zune's like an mp3 player with a flash mob built right in!

<comment><USER18> And everyone has a brick to throw...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Some guy on Reddit thinks he has a solution see [http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/7mnmo/zune_fix_g...](http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/7mnmo/zune_fix_get_a_tiny_screwdriver/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Turns out this may only be a temporary fix...

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> The solution is to "wait until tomorrow".

Quite embarrassing... but thankfully benign.

[http://zuneinsider.com/archive/2008/12/31/30gb-zune- issues-o...](http://zuneinsider.com/archive/2008/12/31/30gb-zune-issues- official-update.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER20> Does a blue screen accompany the freeze by any chance?

<comment><USER21> No, just the way a beach ball doesn't show up on my iPod, which I have to reset every few days.

<comment><USER20> I should know better on a thread of mostly Zune users eh? ;) Truthfully, my iPhone acts up sometimes. The browser randomly crashes, and I'll occasionally need to reset when it freezes. It's nothing bad enough to cause me to want to switch, but it does happen.

<comment><USER22> A thread full of Zune users? So that's why there are so few messages ;-)

Now, seriously, that's a sign of pretty bad QA to let the device almost brick itself (there is the hard reset fix) because of a buggy firmware update.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> mine is working great. i've never had an issue with it. best purchase i've ever made from woot.com :D

</comment><comment><USER24> how appropriate...a message board about zunes, not working.

</comment><comment><USER25> Both of them?!

</comment><comment><USER26> What does this have to do with hacker news...

<comment><USER7> You don't have any interest at all as to what would cause an entire product line to fail essentially simultaneously?

<comment><USER26> If Google News and mainstream media cover it, as well as all sites that bash Microsoft, is it really hacker news-worthy that a Microsoft product fails at something?</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: Working in Google London? - <AUTHOR> Hi,
I'm planning to be moving to the UK within the next year or so and just wondering what teams/opportunities are there at Google London?
My background is in Computer Science and Business. I started off as a software/business intelligence engineer in a fintech company before leading technology and analytics in several large Canadian banks. I've also been driving the agile and collaborative mindset across these large organizations and we're slowly changing the culture to be more data-driven. <comment><USER2> how to resolve problem:- contact your system administrator to upgrade windows server or enterprise windows 10</comment>


San Francisco Vs. Silicon Valley: Where Should You Build Your Business? - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/19/san-francisco-vs-silicon-valley-where-should-you-build-your-business/

<comment><USER2> San Francisco seems to be too noisy and expensive. I'd prefer fremont and milpitas.</comment>


Netflix and Comcast have reached a peering agreement - <AUTHOR> http://gigaom.com/2014/02/21/comcast-netflix-peering/ <comment><USER2> I'm not 13, technically, but I initially read that as "peeing agreement." And was confused.</comment>


Learning to code is overrated - <AUTHOR> http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/jeff-atwood-learning-code-overrated-article-1.2374772 <comment><USER2> Would love to hear some comments about this, that's what we've been doing and saying at Bubble for a while ([https://medium.com/inside-the-bubble/you- shouldn-t-have-to-l...](https://medium.com/inside-the-bubble/you-shouldn-t- have-to-learn-how-to-code-96adc7d7c23d))

<comment><USER3> It's really tempting to say "well I didn't have formal HS programming classes, and I turned out just fine" but it obscures the much larger demographic issue in Computer Science: studies show that when computer science is taught to all kids, those who take that teaching further are far more representative of the general population than if you leave it up to the kids to discover CS on their own.

Given the power that programmers wield in today's world (and the much greater power they're likely to have in tomorrow's) it's increasingly problematic that we're so predominantly male and ethnically-homogenous.</comment></comment>


White House petition to protect Tesla from auto dealers close to 100k signatures - <AUTHOR> http://www.treehugger.com/cars/tesla-white-house-petition-almost-100000-signatures.html

<comment><USER2> Does anyone know what legal basis the president could use to preempt state laws in this case?

</comment><comment><USER3> "allow Tesla Motors to sell directly to consumers in all 50 states."

I fail to understand why people think that dealers make tons of money selling cars and "duping" the public (my words, a summary the essence of this story). Dealers make money doing service, financing and a host of other things. They will still be needed unless of course Tesla decides to duplicate dealers everywhere (something that's not going to happen).

<comment><USER4> Electric vehicles need _drastically_ less service than an internal combustion vehicle. Brakes every ~100K miles or so, tire rotations every ~10K miles, both which can be done by almost any shop.

There should very little need for as many dealers as there are now when electric vehicles start being sold in large numbers.

<comment><USER3> Post warranty repair to correct imperfections and adjustments. A car is still a mechanical device even if the engine is electric. Recalls also for that matter. Not arguing whether less but still needed.

Also, one of the things that dealers do is get people to buy. Fixed pricing doesn't work as well in selling autos which is an emotional purchase. People need to have an incentive to buy now and a human (with all the bs) can be helpful with that.

Because the dealership makes a small margin they have actually moved over the years to mega dealers who are able to sell multiple brands and move tons of product. My point is simply there isn't that much to wring out of the dealer system as people think.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> At 98,000, with 2-3 days to go:

[https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/allow-tesla- motors...](https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/allow-tesla-motors-sell- directly-consumers- all-50-states/bFN7NHQR?utm_campaign=NA_HQ_June282013_WHpetition.html&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua&elq=181c87a61cd74b7d93c1f7ff7ce1fca8&elqCampaignId=194)</comment>


Privacy for Piracy.  Exclusive Interview with Suren Ter of YouHaveDownloaded - <AUTHOR> http://privateinternetaccess.com/blog/2012/03/privacy-for-piracy-exclusive-interview-with-suren-ter-from-youhavedownloaded-com/

<comment><USER2> Duplicate of: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3701650>

<comment><AUTHOR> For some odd reason, the other post disappeared.

<comment><USER2> Not on my screen, this one is currently number 2 in the new posts feed, and the other is number 17 and I can click into/access it without problems.

 _shrug_</comment></comment></comment>


Ever wondered your friend's to-do's? Get an early invitation from Gonnasphere. - <AUTHOR> http://gonnasphere.com

<comment><USER2> seems cool. i'm waiting for it</comment>


U.S. identifies suspect in major leak of CIA hacking tools - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-identifies-suspect-in-major-leak-of-cia-hacking-tools/2018/05/15/5d5ef3f8-5865-11e8-8836-a4a123c359ab_story.html <comment><USER2> > But despite months of investigation, prosecutors have been unable to bring > charges against the man, who is a former CIA employee being held in a > Manhattan jail on unrelated charges.

They don't have enough to bring charges, but they're happy to go to the press with a name?

</comment><comment><USER3> This is the complaint that led to Joshua Schulte's arrest for Child Porn charges:

[https://www.scribd.com/document/379346745/Joshua-Adam- Schult...](https://www.scribd.com/document/379346745/Joshua-Adam-Schulte)

<comment><USER4> _On or about March 15, 2017, members of the FBI searched the Residence. During the source of that search, law enforcement officers recovered, among other things, multiple computers, servers, and other portable electronic storage devices (the "Subject Devices"), including SCHULTE's personal desktop computer (the "Desktop Computer")..._

 _During the course of reviewing the Desktop Computer, CACS agents encountered a volume of files in an encrypted contained, approximately 54 GB in size._

 _... law enforcement personnel were able to defeat the encryption used to protect the encrypted container by entering passwords recovered from a cellular telephone belonging to JOSHUA ADAM SCHULTE, the defendant._

It then goes into some detail regarding the files found, which I didn't have any desire to read.

They resume later with the technical details regarding a VM that was found, with an encrypted partition, which itself contained some VeraCrypt volumes. And how they found the passwords.

And then, to top it off, some incriminating IRC discussions involving the defendant.

In other words, this guys defense that "it wasn't me" is a load of shit.

<comment><USER5> Yep, along with his admissions during the interview, well, it certainly doesn't look good for him.

<comment><USER4> I'm curious if the password was in a password manager in the phone (or some other leak), or if he was just dumb enough to use the same password on his VM as he used everywhere else.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This reads like a Mr Robot episode...</comment>


Text analysis answers: Is the Quran really more violent than the Bible? - <AUTHOR> http://odintext.com/blog/textanalysisbible2of3/ <comment><USER2> So why doesn't this analysis include the Hadith?</comment>