A remake of the Windows pipes screensaver using Three.js - <AUTHOR> http://isaiahodhner.ml/pipes/ <comment><USER2> I don't know if it's my memory failing me, but something about it feels a little bit off. I looked at videos on YouTube and I think it's because of the timing. I get the impression that right now it's moving much faster than it did originally.

Does anyone else get the same feeling?

In any case, it's still fun! A great bit of nostalgia.

Personally, I was a bigger fan of the maze [0]. Although watching this video made me a little dizzy.

[0] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRL5durPleI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRL5durPleI)

<comment><USER3> Original pipes didn't have knots did it? And there's some pipes that come out through other pipes which I don't think happened in the original. Very cool implementation though.

<comment><USER4> As in spheres at the corners? I remember it having those. Some corners had them and some didn't, same as in this.

<comment><USER5> I think it was a setting.

<comment><USER6> Yep: [http://i.imgur.com/mWXqZh0.png](http://i.imgur.com/mWXqZh0.png)

"Elbow" is just an L-shaped joint. "Ball" is the spheres. "Mixed" is a random choice per-joint. "Cycle" means successive screens will use different choices.

<comment><USER7> Given your tweets I had expected a screenshot in a browser ;)

<comment><USER6> Trying to preview 3D Pipes on win95.ajf.me causes a timeout, alas.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I could have sworn that Microsoft released the source code to this screen saver, long, long ago.

[Edit: Yup, it was in the SDK: SDKs\Win32 SDK\OpenGL\Code Samples\PIPES]

<comment><USER9> OpenGL, interesting. Someone knows more about this choice?

<comment><USER10> Pipes predates Direct3d by a lot. It was first release, IIRC, in Windows NT 3.5. At that time it was novel that a PC had OpenGL.

<comment><USER6> It was one of the four OpenGL screensavers 95 had (presumably NT 3.5 had the same bunch). They used opengl32.dll which provided OpenGL with software rendering, IIRC.

<comment><USER10> Right, these had no requirements for hardware support at all, because if they had had any nobody would have been able to run them. The release of these screensavers for Windows NT predated the release of Windows 95 by a few months, which is why I mentioned it.

Windows NT 3.51 also introduced the inexplicable animated cursors feature later included in Windows 95.

<comment><USER8> Animated cursors, like puppies and kittens, need no explanation :-)

<comment><USER6> Though they do consume rather a lot of conventional memory, which might cause problems :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Here is the repo: [https://github.com/1j01/pipes](https://github.com/1j01/pipes)

<comment><USER11> Do you know any interesting threejs guide/book?

I'm still learning it, my last hack was a (J)SCAD file previewer inside Atom:

[https://atom.io/packages/atom-scad-preview](https://atom.io/packages/atom- scad-preview)

<comment><AUTHOR> This is not my repo, so all creds go to the author: [https://github.com/1j01/](https://github.com/1j01/)

But to reply to your question, what really amazed me a year a go was this demo: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKPYx4CEIlM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKPYx4CEIlM)

After watching that, I feel in love with all the possibilities that comes with interactions one can do with anything that is represented in a virtual 3D environment.

So instead of learning Three.js, I started to work with Unity since they are multi-platform and have UnityScript which is a lot similar to Javascript. Due to my background as a web developer, it was a very comfortable transition.

<comment><USER12> UnityScript seems cool but it looks like I need to download a 350mb executable to run it so I guess it's for a different use case.

<comment><USER13> It's pretty much only for use inside Unity itself as a game development language.

I have a small hope, since Microsoft appears to be opening up DotNet, that Unity will itself one day be able to work with any of the DotNet languages.

<comment><USER14> You can use C# in Unity. I was under the impression that most people do.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The teapots are a nice easter egg! I took a few screenshots: [http://i.imgur.com/PEBxHnTm.png](http://i.imgur.com/PEBxHnTm.png)

</comment><comment><USER16> Just FYI I get a blank black screen in Chrome 45.0.2454.101. Two javascript errors in the console. "Error creating WebGL context THREE.WebGLRenderer @ 3.js:421" and then "Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'getExtension' of null," which is probably just an after effect of the first one. Have ABP extension installed, along with a few development plugins.

Runs great on Firefox. Seems to draw quite a bit faster than the original, which I had as my screensaver for years on my NT 3.5 workstation.

<comment><USER6> > "Error creating WebGL context THREE.WebGLRenderer @ 3.js:421"

Sounds like Chrome is unable to get GPU acceleration. Are you on Linux?

<comment><USER16> That test was on Windows 7 Professional, with a GTX 660 and latest nVidia drivers.

<comment><USER6> Odd. Check about:gpu?

<comment><USER16> Here's the status section from the top. Don't want to post the whole mess so if you want anything else let me know and I will cherry pick. Also, installed extensions: ABP 1.9.3, Evernote Web Clipper 6.7, rest console 4.0.2, xpath helper 2.0.2 and a couple of standard Google shims.

Graphics Feature Status Canvas: Hardware accelerated Flash: Hardware accelerated Flash Stage3D: Hardware accelerated Flash Stage3D Baseline profile: Hardware accelerated Compositing: Hardware accelerated Multiple Raster Threads: Enabled Rasterization: Software only. Hardware acceleration disabled Video Decode: Hardware accelerated Video Encode: Hardware accelerated WebGL: Hardware accelerated

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Even the teapots?

<comment><USER18> "A remake of the Windows pipes screensaver (sspipes32.scr) with Three.js

Includes Utah Teapots and candy cane!"

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> It's running at 15fps in my browser. I remember the original ran at 60Hz 15 years ago in a computer a couple orders of magnitude slower.

<comment><USER20> Buggy GPU drivers weren't an issue back then with software implementations of OpenGL.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Brings back memories ...

</comment><comment><USER22> Marcello Vianna's version of Pipes (included in Xscreensaver) was always much nicer[0], and ran much faster on my box. I wish someone would port it to js.

0\. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsUGENa7jvE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsUGENa7jvE)

</comment><comment><USER23> JS demo scene?

</comment><comment><USER24> Ahhh that's super cool!

</comment><comment><USER25> This is awesome!

</comment><comment><USER11> Really cool!

</comment><comment><USER26> I remember being like 7 and just watching this go off for as long as possible. This and the maze.</comment>


Stop limiting your open source library's potential - <AUTHOR> https://changelog.com/posts/stop-limiting-your-open-source-librarys-potential <comment><USER2> I agree that the adapter pattern is great; however, getting a library to the state where it can be adapted requires either forethought or later refactoring. If this is done too early in the life of the project, the creator runs the risk of optimizing a bit prematurely.</comment>


The Emu War - <AUTHOR> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emu_War#The_%22War%22 <comment><USER2> I miss the "war box" one where it listed the opposing factions leadership and the Great Emu Emperor. Also, in the casualty box, Australia's listed 10,000 rounds of ammunition and their dignity.

<comment><USER3> LOL apparently there's a long history of those edits, reverting + protecting the page, un-protecting it, and it happening again.

Here's one: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emu_War&oldid=477...](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emu_War&oldid=477149005)

<comment><USER4> We have this weird self-depreciating pride about losing the War, and like to talk it up a bit. It doesn't surprise me that a bunch of larrikans keep trying to put it back on the page. Pushing back against Wiki's uptight rules on seriousness like this is a great example of the subversive Aussie humour. Good on 'em!

<comment><USER5> I've never seen the term for my username in the wild outside of a thesaurus and a band that was popular a long time ago.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> > _Instead, the bounty system that had been instigated in 1923 was continued, > and this proved to be effective: 57,034 bounties were claimed over a six- > month period in 1934._

Someone probably started raising the birds to cash in on the bounty.

<comment><USER7> That's what happened with feral hogs:

[https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/gimletmedia.com/amp/shows/re...](https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/gimletmedia.com/amp/shows/reply- all/n8hw3d)

<comment><USER8> The good old cobra effect at work!

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

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> >This time the gunners waited until the birds were in close proximity before opening fire. The gun jammed after only twelve birds were killed and the remainder scattered before any more could be shot

Reading this account almost seemed like the real life version of "Star Trek Crew Meets the Road Runner" [https://boards.fool.com/star-trek-crew-meets-the- road-runner...](https://boards.fool.com/star-trek-crew-meets-the-road- runner-18605364.aspx)

<comment><USER10> It is easy to mock the Australian army but when the Commonwealth needed them they answered the call. Same with the Canadians.

<comment><USER11> Exactly, and the Australians and other colonials died gloriously for the empire. What a waste. I'm a sarcastic New Zealander.

<comment><USER12> We should have sent the emus.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I have been maintaining a list of interesting facts in Wikipedia. It's kind of a supplement to their Unusual Articles [1].

My list can be found here:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chris.sherlock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Chris.sherlock)

Emu Wars is one of the facts I know of.

1\. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Unusual_articles](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Unusual_articles)

<comment><USER13> Thanks for the great list, now to disappear down the wikihole :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXpu6tbFCsI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXpu6tbFCsI)

</comment><comment><USER15> For those who like to laugh about this, one of my favorite subreddits is [https://www.reddit.com/r/Emuwarflashbacks/](https://www.reddit.com/r/Emuwarflashbacks/)

</comment><comment><USER16> I legitimately thought this was just an Aussie joke.

Huh.

<comment><USER7> Wait till you find out about Drop Bears!

<comment><USER17> Some good info on them here from the Australian Museum.

[https://australianmuseum.net.au/learn/animals/mammals/drop-b...](https://australianmuseum.net.au/learn/animals/mammals/drop- bear/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> > The Emu command had evidently ordered guerrilla tactics, and its unwieldy > army soon split up into innumerable small units that made use of the > military equipment uneconomic.

Would like to know what other tactics were employed by the "Emu command". :)

</comment><comment><USER19> The Dollop podcast did a great episode on this: [https://allthingscomedy.com/podcasts/111---the-emu-war- live](https://allthingscomedy.com/podcasts/111---the-emu-war-live)

</comment><comment><USER20> I can't help but notice that the official coat of arms for Australia contains on it an emu.

</comment><comment><USER21> I need to hear an episode of the podcast "The Dollop" on this one

</comment><comment><USER22> TLDR: The Emus won ...</comment>


Feminism and Microcontrollers: Building new clubhouses with the LilyPad Arduino - <AUTHOR> http://mako.cc/copyrighteous/20101001-00 <comment><USER2> And a paper going into more detail: <http://hlt.media.mit.edu/publications/buechley_DIS_10.pdf></comment>


Ask HN: Making source code avaliable for commercial software - <AUTHOR>

I develop a piece of commercial software. It is free for non-commercial use.
I distribute binaries, but many users have expressed interest in having the source code available. I would like that, and think it would be great if users could modify the source and distribute changes, as long as it wouldn't undermine the commercial sales (since this is what is financing the development).
I guess this rules out a "true" OSS license, but I would prefer using an off-the-shelf license if possible.
Some have recommended a CC non-commercial license, but CC themselves discourage using their licenses for software.
Does any HN'ers have experience with this issue? Under what licenses do you distribute your sources in commercial startups? <comment><USER2> I'm not sure but Microsoft has a reference license of some type you probably could copy. The license restricts any modification of the code to internal use and is based upon the original source.

If you can't find anything else, this could be a good starting poing?

</comment><comment><USER3> The commercial software community that grew up around the Borland (now Embarcadero) Delphi development tool is a good language. This was a component- environment. Typically pay one price for the component and a higher price for the sources. Lots of commercial products that distributed source code. Delphi itself distributes source to the entire framework. Might be a good place to look at licenses.

<http://www.embarcadero.com/products/delphi>

</comment><comment><USER4> Can you release it under a dual license? GPL for open source GPL code (or perhaps a custom GPL-like license that does not allow commercial redistribution) and commercial license (with support etc) for commercial use? This is more or less how other open source based companies operate.

This means that non-commercial users get to make changes and distribute them for free and commercial users may not redistribute it.

<comment><AUTHOR> The problem (if I understand the issues correctly) is that the GPL does not allow restrictions on use, like only allowing non-commercial use.

I understand I need some kind of dual-licensing, but I was hoping to be able to use two existing licenses, rater than creating my own. But maybe the combination of charging for the software and available source is uncommon?

<comment><USER4> As the copyright holder you can release under modified version of licenses, so you could use GPL with an additional restriction of disallowing commercial use. I guess the open soruce licenses from companies like Microsoft work something like that (except without being directly based on the GPL).

Well, the commercial license will always be something proprietary (since I'm not sure there are existing licenses you can take verbatim) and for the open source portion you basically want to give people free reign for non-commercial use, but restrict commercial use.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Non-commercial" is apparently a huge can of worms. You could try something along the lines of "if you distribute binaries, you must do so under an OSI- approved license" (or pay for a "commercial" license, obviously). This isn't perfect (people could use your compiler to compile serverside software "for free"), but at least it's unambiguous.

</comment><comment><USER6> I don't know what your application does, but have you considered a plugin api?

<comment><AUTHOR> It's a compiler. There are some extension points where a well-documented plugin-API would be a boon in any case, but users might want to modify the product on a number of levels. Even with some plugin-API's it would still be nice to be able to make the source available.</comment></comment>


System and method for tracking unique visitors to a website - <AUTHOR> http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2014/0156738.html

<comment><USER2> mmm... cookies...</comment>


Antigua gets OK to become copyright haven - <AUTHOR> http://www.sfgate.com/business/technology/article/Antigua-gets-OK-to-become-copyright-haven-4228808.php <comment><USER2> From experience setting something like this up 13 years ago, probably the most successful way for Antigua to do this would be to contract out to a commercial company (incorporated in Antigua, and with no US principals or assets; ideally as Antiguan as possible), for a set fee of $21mm/yr, and to keep warrants or other potential upside (say, profit sharing in years 5+ of a 10+ year contract?)

That way the company can make arbitrary amounts of money, with some value eventually accruing to Antigua, while remaining within the WTO definition.

The company could choose to value its earnings pretty much arbitrarily (either really high, based on retail price times number of downloads; or really low, based on bulk data transfer prices).

The big issue would be keeping international connectivity up -- while the WTO allows Antigua to do this, IIRC most of Antigua's Internet access is on a couple of cable systems owned by non-Antiguan companies (mainly C&W plc); the US could make life crappy for those companies. There are some international law issues with cutting off all communications and with the contracts for service on these cables otherwise, though, but it could be messy.

Ultimately it would be cheaper for the US to just give Antigua an extra $21mm/yr in foreign aid in exchange for them waiving their rights under this judgment. This could be buried in some kind of educational or bilateral trade agreement or something.

<comment><USER3> Ultimately it might be cheaper for everyone involved if the US just complied with the free and fair trade rules that it likes to impose on other nations, but hey, can't have everything.

<comment><USER2> There would be more losses to big casino companies (headed by healthy political donors) than $21mm/yr, if they opened up online gaming.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Sensationalist title.

" _Antiguan officials say they_ could _make up the money through the operation of a copyright haven, although what that might look like and what its scope would be remains unclear. Antiguan officials have kept details vague and the move has_ little precedent."

While the U.S. is is a negligible export destination for Antigua ($9.1 million in 2012 [1], or 0.8% of Antigua & Barbuda's GDP), it is a significant source of imports (17% of GDP). This could produce the seed for regulatory innovation. But concluding anything yet is extremely premature.

[1] <http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c2484.html>

</comment><comment><USER5> In an indirect but personal way, I'm seriously worried about this. My name is Chirag and for well over a decade now, I've shared my life, photos, projects, and art on <http://chir.ag>

I know .ly domains became a concern because of political turmoil in Libya. Is there anything I can do to keep my site (10k+ visitors/day) accessible if US decides to block all .ag domains? I haven't come across any famous .ag domains unlike bit.ly for .ly. Is there a chance my site could be blocked because of the domain name? I have nightly backups of all the data but the site has become so integral to my life (in addition to my email address), that I would be heartbroken if I have to give it up.

<comment><USER6> Wow, small world! Didn't I meet you before sometime? Maybe at a Fark party in Florida?

<comment><USER5> Yup. I remember you. Was it racetrack or HoJos?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Sounds like Antigua is threatening the nuclear option over online gambling. I'm not clear what sort of jurisdiction (or influence) the US should have regarding gambling by American citizens in other countries, but it seems the simplest solution would simply be to legalize it in the US.

<comment><USER8> As a non-American, I've always wondered why online gambling is banned in the US. Is it simply because the casinos and other non-online sources were able to lobby to make it that way?

<comment><USER9> As far as I can tell, yes. This seems particularly clear in cases where states that have otherwise banned gambling run their own lotteries.

<comment><USER10> I think a lot of people don't consider the lottery gambling. Gambling is like a lot of vices. People want to do it, but they don't want other people doing it near their homes. Vegas and Indian casinos appear to be the nimby equilibrium point.

<comment><USER11> The hilarious part is that if the reasoning really is that one doesn't want to see it being done near their home, then online gambling is ideal. People would do it "in the privacy of their own homes", and I think you'd quickly find people preferring it to going to a building (due to ease and sheer variety). The brick and mortar places "attract riff raff" precisely because they are by definition concentrations of theoretically socially unacceptable behavior, which are then additionally usually combined with alcohol sale.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, I don't really know where online gambling fits in. Though some people probably like that gambling is inconvenient because they have poor impulse control. "I want you to stop me from doing this thing I'm gonna want to do later before I regret it."

<comment><USER12> To get a gaming licence for an online gambling game in the UK, you need to provide a mechanism to allow players to block themselves from playing.

It's not hard to make that kind of requirement, if it were the real reason online gambling is restricted.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Would it be beneficial to legalize online gambling in the United States?

<comment><USER14> Massively, yes. We could start seriously betting on real-world events. It becomes harder to make crappy predictions ("If this bill isn't passed, crime will skyrocket!") when people can just check the going odds.

ETA: Much better explanation: <http://squid314.livejournal.com/352406.html>

<comment><USER15> Interesting.

Does something like that exist in other countries?

We've got this in Australia: <http://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/current- affairs> But it's no-where near the level that article describes.

<comment><USER12> I worked next to the guys from Smarkets (<https://smarkets.com>) for a while. It looks like they're focussing heavily on sports betting now, but they'll do politics or media things when there's interest.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Reminds me of Islands in the Net by Bruce Sterling

</comment><comment><USER17> Antigua is obviously a haven for terrorists and trafficking in WMDs. US invasion imminent.

</comment><comment><USER18> it's the biggest honey pot that i ever seen!

</comment><comment><USER19> What happens 5 minutes after this haven opens, and the $26 million in damages is compensation and then some?</comment>


What if Google's EU problems are merely the result of opaque lobbying battles? - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-02-20/google-s-european-union-antitrust-troubles-are-a-lobbyists-war <comment><USER2> As many have pointed out: The most injured party in any illegal antitrust behavior generally is a competitor. It's never been a secret that both Microsoft and Oracle have been involved in funding these efforts, and that doesn't change the fact that the cases have significant merit, and that the EU is right to pursue them.</comment>


Virtual sticky notes based SCRUM-board with real-time updates - <AUTHOR> http://blog.listhings.com/post/394352901/sharing Listhings, a popular web-based note-taking web app now features real-time AJAX Push updates between unlimited users, making it the perfect SCRUM-board for your team. <comment><USER2> Excellent application. Immediately useful and simple. It would be great if I could integrate it with my web apps by giving users a unique URL per project without requiring them to login.

</comment><comment><USER3> Good work!

I've been wanting to do something like this ever since Tornado was released and I started playing around with it. Now I don't have to!

</comment><comment><USER4> Nice. Very similar to something I've been working a lot on recently.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> kuhfes, unique URLs that can be shared are coming.</comment>


Things to Know Before Installing Solar Panels on Your Roof - <AUTHOR> http://www.citylab.com/navigator/2016/04/want-solar-panels-on-your-roof-heres-what-you-need-to-know/476805/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheAtlanticCities+%28CityLab%29 <comment><USER2> They missed "Your 25 year warranty is probably worthless." I installed Sharp 185W panels on my roof in 2002, one was damaged due to a rock falling out of the sky (seriously) and Sharp could not replace it, I've now got 3 more which are damaged with some sort of cracking/oxidation creep. Sharp doesn't make the panels any more, they won't replace them. To get enforce the warranty I have to sue them, its really annoying.

<comment><USER3> Also forgot to mention that being locked into a long-term solar contract can impact possible resale of a home if prospective buyers don't want to be locked into it.</comment></comment>


Overbite - Gopher Client For Android - <AUTHOR> http://gopher.floodgap.com/overbite/d?android <comment><USER2> Gopher is awesome. It was my first real TCP/IP Internet experience in 1992. A high school friend and I discovered a terminal server at the local university that would allow telnet out w/o authenticating first. We would telnet to liberty.uc.wlu.edu, which ran public gopher WAIS clients that anyone could use. Having never seen anything like this before and not understanding hyperlinks, we assumed that navigating from one gopher server to another actually created connections between all of the servers. So, as we went from Texas to Virgina to California, Sweden, Japan, etc., we assumed that we were generating thousands of dollars in phone charges and that someone would eventually come looking for us.

<comment><USER3> > Gopher is awesome

No. Gopher is not awesome. It's a terrible protocol and it deserves to die.

<comment><USER4> This is the first time I heard about Gopher.

Why it's a terrible protocol?

<comment><USER5> There are certain modes where it simply cuts the connection when the server is done transmitting. There's no length header or end-of-transmission character or anything like that.

<comment><USER5> I did a more complete writeup on Gopher's problems here:

[http://www.wumpus-cave.net/2013/10/27/why-gopher-is- awful/](http://www.wumpus-cave.net/2013/10/27/why-gopher-is-awful/)

Once I did a little research and wrote it all out, Gopher actually came out worse than I thought. Even if it were brought up to Gopher+ specifications (which haven't been implemented by anyone in 20 years), it would still be way behind HTTP/1.1 in terms of fixing design flaws.

<comment><USER6> You are criticizing gopher from the point of view of "it must have the same features as HTTP". Some of the things you call "problems" are just different ways of doing it.

And if the TCP sliding window is an issue for you, why not fix TCP?

Why should the server send any kind of header?

Doesn't TCP do checksums, already?

<comment><USER5> No, these are design flaws that anything over TCP/IP needs to deal with. In particular, closing the connection to indicate the end of a file transfer is really bad (what if somebody pulls an ethernet cord?)

Fix sliding window? I don't think you understand TCP. This is an optimization to TCP to prevent the need to ACK every packet. It means fewer bytes on the wire and less CPU load for TCP processing, while also maintaining a respectable degree of reliability.

TCP checksums are not sufficient for data streams of more than a few kB.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> My first question, is gopher relevant? is answered here [http://gopher.floodgap.com/overbite/relevance.html](http://gopher.floodgap.com/overbite/relevance.html)

<comment><USER8> It's also my question - and the answer is a good one: Gopher provides one structured menu question answer like method to interface to information. This is why I use org-mode for most of my documentation. The problem with using Gopher space is that most if not all information that I consume, hacker news, social media, wikipedia is available in gopher format. Some have implemented gopher versions of reddit and hn in the past, but these are gone.

In a way google serp, e-mail, twitter already use this simplified UI - now if only we could unify it somehow.

One way of doing this would be by using console browsers to interface the web, or set your browser to use 1 font and style and no images. One of these browsers, Elinks 0.12pre6 has gopher as compile time option as added benefit.

Aonther problem with Gopher is that it doesn't appear to support encryption and compression. I remember the pipe and slash symbols 'spinning' while waiting for a large plain text document to complete downloading in the old days. So the "resource lite" argument doesn't fly completely.

So perhaps the best option is to use simplified and structured gopher like menu-ing system using html, something like markdown did for html as is suggested... but why then not put Gopher to sleep for even and start a www- less project?

<comment><USER5> > I remember the pipe and slash symbols 'spinning' while waiting for a large > plain text document to complete downloading in the old days. So the > "resource lite" argument doesn't fly completely.

There really isn't a significant difference between the two. They both operate over a single TCP channel. HTTP/1.1 has a slightly higher header size, but it's not even half a kilobyte.

The only real difference is that HTTP usually serves up rich HTML, which contains all sorts of graphics and JavaScript toys and other bandwidth-hogging transmissions. If we limited HTTP to using HTML 3.2, no JavaScript, and only the occasional 2kb gif, it'd be resource lite, too.

FYI--I wrote the Apache::GopherHandler Perl module for running a Gopher server under Apache2, which I now consider to be mostly a waste of time. ([https://metacpan.org/pod/Apache::GopherHandler](https://metacpan.org/pod/Apache::GopherHandler))

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Overbite is amazing. They also have a gopher proxy and addons for Chrome and Firefox. Related:

[http://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw?gopher://gopher.floodga...](http://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw?gopher://gopher.floodgap.com:70/0/gopher/relevance.txt)

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm fairly convinced that Gopher is technology that shouldn't really have been abandoned .. and maybe we'll see a return to such tools in the future?

<comment><USER5> I think it had some interesting ideas, but HTTP as it exists now is more flexible. On any given app, you'll run into Gopher's limitations long before doing the same for HTTP.

<comment><USER6> Stop trying to compare it to HTTP, maybe?

<comment><USER5> OK, then we'll just talk about it on its own merits:

* It closes the connection after every request, making poor use of TCP sliding window

* Binary file transfers are finished by the server closing the connection. There's no end-of-file marker or Length header.

* No provisions for caching

* A single ASCII letter identifies all file types

It's just a bad protocol design. HTTP/0.9 had many of the same problems, but that's not where HTTP is anymore. Gopher+ solves the single-letter identifier problem by using MIME types, but none of the other problems above. Not that anybody has ever implemented Gopher+, anyway.

<comment><USER11> Gopher+ does in fact resolve your second point by adding in a length header. All of your other points, with the exception of the TCP sliding window gripe, could be addressed through Gopher+ attribute fields. The Gopher+ specification [1] actually specified a "Mod-Date" field as part of the "+ADMIN" attribute, which could be used for caching. Even checksums could be added as well, through something like a "+SHA1" field.

Both the Overbite clients [2] and the Bucktooth server [3] support Gopher+. Pygopherd [4] also implements Gopher+. Many other clients support it as well; see a partial list in Floodgap's guide on using web browsers to access Gopherspace [5].

[1] gopher://gopher.floodgap.com/0/gopher/tech/gopherplus.txt

[2] gopher://gopher.floodgap.com/1/overbite

[3] gopher://gopher.floodgap.com/1/buck

[4] gopher://gopher.quux.org/0/devel/gopher/pygopherd/About%20Pygopherd.txt

[5] gopher://gopher.floodgap.com/0/gopher/wbgopher

<comment><USER6> Gopher by itself is actually not hard to extend, as far as people standardize on how to extend it. That is why most of the discussions on "gopher enhancement" never resulted in big changes. Several ideas must be spread across the gopher project mailing list (now hosted at alioth, see archives at gmane), and some of them are quite good. The only consensus, though, seems to be that any extension is going to be done over plain gopher, not gopher+.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Weird thought of the day: a true, full REST interface seems remarkably similar to Gopher.

<comment><USER13> Now.. if HTML5 only included the ability to do AJAX gopher calls.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> As someone who formally got involved in the Gopher Revival, I was going to type up a big response to why Gopher sucks and should continue to be ignored. I decided to leave it for a blog post. See here:

[http://www.wumpus-cave.net/2013/10/27/why-gopher-is- awful/](http://www.wumpus-cave.net/2013/10/27/why-gopher-is-awful/)

</comment><comment><USER14> I guess I shouldn't be surprised by this, but I am... my OS X Mavericks system not only has no built in gopher client, but there are zero results for "gopher" in the Mac App Store.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah, it's kind of a bummer how rare Gopher clients are becoming. Since all the major browsers dropped Gopher support (and I think they all have, by now), it appears that ELinks[1] is the best Gopher client remaining, for *nix systems. And Android has Overbite. Not sure about iOS.

[1]: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELinks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELinks)

<comment><USER8> For iOS there is the free gopherbrowse "A small pittance is requested to defray the Apple developer tax". [https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/gopherbrowse/id478840815](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/gopherbrowse/id478840815)

For Elinks gopher support one needs to compile from source with the gopher option (it's not on by default). brew on osx doesn't download and compile the last 0.12 beta version (which includes gopher support). after: "brew upgrade elinks" it says: "elinks-0.11.7 already installed"

In the latest Ubuntu does install 0.12pre6 but it doesn't open gopher urls. Elinks documentation says: "It is still very experimental and the CSO phone- book protocol is not implemented. Default: disabled" [http://chals.sdf.org/gopher.cgi/phlog/2012/10-14-12/](http://chals.sdf.org/gopher.cgi/phlog/2012/10-14-12/)

Lynx works out of the box though, but I prefer elinks as it is the last (to my knowledge) updated console browser and it has features like ipv6, scripting and some javascript support.

One can always use OverbiteFF plugin or use the gopher proxies.

<comment><USER15> GopherBrowse is actually free in the AppStore. No pittance required, small or otherwise.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Microsoft's Raymond Chen – Have there really been 14k+ Windows Builds? [video] - <AUTHOR> https://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/One-Dev-Minute/One-Dev-Question-with-Raymond-Chen-Have-there-really-been-14000-builds-of-Windows <comment><USER2> Now that's some real CI for you...

But given the complexity of this, I wonder how many of those builds were seriously broken.</comment>


Show HN: 8192px, an expanding collaborative pixel art canvas - <AUTHOR> http://8192px.co <comment><AUTHOR> Weekend hack, also available over at GitHub ([https://github.com/8192px/8192px](https://github.com/8192px/8192px))

</comment><comment><USER2> This is great! I have a note in my ideas list for an infinitely expanding public canvas. At what point does it expand the current bounds?

<comment><AUTHOR> 8192 became the arbitrary magic number for everything, so every 8192 seconds it expands by 8x8. It was 2x2 but progress was too slow, would take a year before reaching the upper bounds of 8192x8192px.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Your "viewport.onwheel = function wheel" is backwards for zooming in and out. Pushing the wheel forward should zoom in.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah non-functioning mouse wheel on this machine, scaling of the value is also most likely way off :-(

<comment><AUTHOR> Should be more reasonable now, scaling by * -0.1 but it could use more cross browser normalization...</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What are the benefits of working for the government? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> Depends on the government but in the US govt jobs come with stability, since it's hard to fire govt employees, and the govt never goes out of business. Govt jobs typically also come with great benefits like great health care for the whole family, generous vacation and sick days, pensions, etc.</comment>


Napoleon Had His Own American Dream - <AUTHOR> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/06/15/napoleon-had-his-own-american-dream/ <comment><USER2> This makes absolute sense -- Napoleon's conquest of Europe wasn't so much out of disdain for the other countries in Europe as much as it was out of disdain for their aristocracies. America had an aristocracy itself, to be sure, but it was more of a self-made meritocracy than Europe since wealthy American families had only had a generation or two to accumulate wealth. So it only seems natural that he would want to live in a place without a noble caste.

I think the British were nervous about Napoleon setting up shop in America and building a war machine that he would use to dismantle the British Empire. Though honestly, I don't think Americans would have listened to him: his pitch to Europeans was basically that he would give them freedom from the yoke of the nobility. He wasn't offering anything that Americans didn't have already. Many Americans fled Europe and its problems for a reason, and at the time the US had very little interest in getting dragged in to the wars of continental Europe.

<comment><USER3> Talking about meritocracy and the US sounds strange to me. If we agree with use the term "meritocracy" it should be noted the distinction in the meaning with today's.

Today merit means working and generating value for others. In the past, specially in the US it meant killing other people and stealing what they had.

"I think the British were nervous about Napoleon setting up shop in America and building a war machine that he would use to dismantle the British Empire."

The British were not nervous. They knew that Napoleon could not be trusted if left alive, because he could go back to France in order to take the power, like he actually did.

"his pitch to Europeans was basically that he would give them freedom from the yoke of the nobility."

While proclaiming himself emperor and putting all his family in charge as the new nobility, including his son as his heir ...

<comment><USER2> > Talking about meritocracy and the US sounds strange to me. If we agree with > use the term "meritocracy" it should be noted the distinction in the meaning > with today's.

> Today merit means working and generating value for others. In the past, > specially in the US it meant killing other people and stealing what they > had.

Right, and I don't mean to claim that the US was equitable by any means. But in the US, if you had money, that money gave you a certain amount of power over your own destiny. In Europe, being wealthy was not enough; you had to be born into the right family, or be wealthy enough to marry the daughter of a lesser noble family that had fallen on hard times so that maybe your children would have access to some form of power. But there was no social mobility; for the most part, you would die in the same social station you were born into.

> The British were not nervous. They knew that Napoleon could not be trusted > if left alive, because he could go back to France in order to take the > power, like he actually did.

Yeah, this much is true. But IMO Napoleon gets too much credit -- these ideas had been stewing in the populace since the beginning of the Reformation, and they needed to come to a head before the Industrial Revolution could really take off. The British never really addressed this underlying issue either before or after deposing Napoleon, and IMO this led to a century of war in Europe culminating in WW2 -- where the ghosts of the old kingdoms of Europe were finally laid to rest.

> While proclaiming himself emperor and putting all his family in charge as > the new nobility, including his son as his heir ...

Yeah, there is no doubt that he was a dictator. I would argue that he couldn't bring law and order to France without declaring himself Emperor, simply because European political culture was structured around a single ruler. He was able to use his simple origins to build a cult of personality around himself. He saw himself as a self-made man -- and he believed he would be a better emperor because he seized the position for himself. While he predates Nietzsche, he is the perfect embodiment of the "ubermensch" that Nietzsche espouses in "The Will to Power".

His goal may have been to merely "reset" the European monarchy with men of quality who rose to power through their own abilities. There is no doubt he did this within his military officer corps. The main key to his success in Europe was that his officers were smart, motivated and well-trained -- which he ensured by promoting men based off their actions rather than their heritage. His officers (and their men) were literally fighting for a better life for themselves and their families; which motivates a little better than fighting for king and country. But there's little doubt that the core of his motivation in conquering Europe was to destroy the peerage system as it existed in Europe at the time.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The title's wording first reminded me of Last Week Tonight's segment called "Other Countries' Presidents of the United States of America" (playing a joke on the perceived ignorance of Americans about the rest of the world). Glad to see the title is actually correct.

</comment><comment><USER5> > diminutive Corsican

He wasn't short at all. His height was about 1.68m - above average at the time.

</comment><comment><USER6> Yes, he had his American Dream. Conquering Europe and eventually Russia. Went in with 600.000 men and returned with 26.000.

By the way it's funny how western media writes fluff pieces about mass murdering barbarians like Napoleon who were as popular as Adolf Hitler back then and especially in the aftermath for many decades.

I guess we'll see in 50 years from now articles about the unfulfilled American Dream of Adolf Hitler and everybody in the West will be clapping.

<comment><USER7> Napoleon was a far more complex figure than you give him credit for, and reducto ad Hitleram is a very poor rhetorical tactic anyway. While I wouldn't hold him up as some kind of perfect hero, his legacy in a lot of parts of Europe, from east to west, was one of a progressive reformer who brought a powerful civil law code with him[0].

[0]: [http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n24/edward-luttwak/a-damned-nice- th...](http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n24/edward-luttwak/a-damned-nice-thing)</comment></comment>


The Dark Science of Interrogation - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-dark-science-of-interrogation/ <comment><USER2> The essence of the article:

"He found that the most productive interrogations in terms of information were those in which interrogators essentially acted like therapists. Investigators in Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, and the United Kingdom are now trained to focus not on extracting admissions of guilt but on gathering evidence. That information can back up an innocent suspect's story, or it can be used to nail a guilty one."

"Hartwig reasoned, the typical interrogation room—claustrophobic, locked, austere—was exactly the wrong sort of space to get someone to divulge information. In a yet unpublished study, she redesigned the space around the theme of openness: open windows, an open book on the table, open desk drawers, "a picture of open water under an open sky," as the paper describes it. She found that subjects provided more detail when questioned in the redesigned interrogation room."

In other words, "you can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar". If only we had known this before Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. /s

<comment><USER3> > If only we had known this before Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. /s

Somehow I suspect they didn't really want to get more info. They wanted to punish, and to instill fear, mostly because deep down it felt good to them. Officially there was an excuse "War on terror". But it could have been done just as easily under another slogan, maybe "War on Drugs" or "War on Communism" and so on.

Going a back a step, I also believe there is a high number of psycopaths who rise to power in intelligence agencies. Even if you look at something silly like reliance on passing polygraphs, for entering and staying in the organization. Psycopaths would do much better there. After many iterations, shit like that rises to the top.

<comment><USER4> After 9/11, a lot of Americans wanted to see "the terrorists" suffer, but there may be something dangerous about a person who can bear to personally inflict the torture.

Just having people in power who are willing to order torture worries me.

<comment><USER5> More than being able to order thousands of men to storm a beach or an entire city of wood and paper to go up in a storm of fire? Being a head of a state has always required making decisions about using force in horrific ways. Torturing O(30) people is dwarfed by that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Shocking, more evidence confirming what we already have known for decades (at least since WWII), torture is one of the least effective methods for obtaining reliable information from suspects.

Sadly, I wish the debate about torture didn't focus as much on effectiveness instead of morality and legality (since it is neither moral nor legal).

</comment><comment><USER7> It's bizarre.

Pretty much everyone understands that better information can be extracted by gentle methods than by harsh techniques.

That's not why the harsh techniques are used. In the second paragraph of this article it give away the real problem:

 _Sometimes I got to the point where I had to literally order them to stop. Even then there was surprising blowback. People thought I was coddling terrorists._

The priority of those harsh integration techniques isn't to get information. It's a form of punishment, and a threat to stop others acting against US forces.

One needs to understand that frame of thought before one can stop the techniques.

<comment><USER8> Seems to sum up the whole mentality of the US system. And i find myself wondering if it can be traced to the background of the original colonies.

<comment><USER7> No, that's not it! The bizarre thing is the reaction on HN, not the US system.

The US system functions exactly as intended, assuming you realise that it is _designed to punish suspects_.

<comment><USER9> But how could anyone think that _punishing_ in itself is helpful in any way whatsoever? This is an honest question, I really don't get how the American system could have been designed the way it is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Folks interested in an intro to the history and law surrounding interrogation should check out The Illustrated Guide to the Law, drawn by a NYC defense attorney.

Here is where the relevant section starts: [http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2282](http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2282)

It also has sections on a bunch of stuff like...

* Probable Cause and Arrest: [http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1789](http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1789)

* traffic stops, searches, and consent: [http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1859](http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1859)

* self-defense: [http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=864](http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=864)

* entrapment: [http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=633](http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=633)

* memory and eyewitness identification: [http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=3044](http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=3044)

* A flowchart for the 4th amendment: [http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2256](http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2256)

* A flowchart for the 5th-amendment: [http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2897](http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2897)

</comment><comment><USER10> For anyone interested in modern interrogation techniques, I'd recommend the book "How to Break a Terrorist."[0]

[0] _How to Break a Terrorist: The U.S. Interrogators Who Used Brains, Not Brutality, to Take Down the Deadliest Man in Iraq_ [http://www.amazon.com/How- Break-Terrorist-Interrogators-Brut...](http://www.amazon.com/How-Break- Terrorist-Interrogators-Brutality/dp/B0085S1S5K)

</comment><comment><USER11> The dark side of the press trivialiasing an issue, opening the Overton window...

<comment><USER7> One doesn't _open_ the Overton window, ones _widens_ it. It's a window in the "range" sense.

But I don't think one can blame the press. There are plenty of people outside the press who believe the Geneva convention doesn't allow "sufficient flexibility". One can't blame the press for reporting that.

<comment><USER11> Well, one can still blame the press for trivializing that with articles like this.

What happened to the CRITICAL press?

<comment><USER9> It got bought long ago by the people in power?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Is there a lighter side, one wonders?

<comment><USER13> The actual title is "The dark science of interrogation", which makes rather more sense than "The dark side of interrogation" which is the current HN title.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> The title of the article is "THE DARK SCIENCE OF INTERROGATION", not "Dark Side".

<comment><USER15> Thanks, we updated the title.</comment></comment>


A Treatise on Font Rasterisation (2010) - <AUTHOR> https://freddie.witherden.org/pages/font-rasterisation/ <comment><USER2> Discussed at the time (ish): [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2574275](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2574275)</comment>


Ask HN: Is it right to call yourself a Hacker? - <AUTHOR>

Ok, so someone comes up to you and asks you these seemingly simple questions: "So what do you do? What are you?" Oh boy! You think about it for a bit. Software Engineer? Well, you're a programmer and you write business apps, but you've also played with assembly and know what O-notation is... so not quite. Computer Scientist? Well, you also know a lot about computer networks, and you've modded your computer on multiple occasions (you've used a soldering iron)... so not quite. You also know your way around a Linux box. So what the heck do you call yourself, without being self-limiting or bombastic about it? I want to reply, "Well, I'm a hacker" - because the term is somewhat all encompassing (and the term "geek" makes me think of someone with no life outside of computers). But isn't it kind of pompous to claim that you're a "hacker?" Is it a term you should self-apply? What do you guys think?<p>"Now, 'Dude', there's a name no man would self-apply where I come from. But then there was a lot about the Dude that didn't make a whole lot of sense..." <comment><USER2> Now that this subject is open, let me say it: I don't think the term hacker really reflects the concept of Hacker News. Startups are focused on entrepreneurship and revenue, there is a hacker side to it but the hacker aspect is not the central point. If there would be a real hacker news, building exceptional or interesting technology would be more of a central point than entrepreneurship. E.g. Grand Challenge, or some new technology that would change the way internet works.

<comment><USER3> _I don't think the term hacker really reflects the concept of Hacker News._

Sure, but what one word could? I'm not sure there's any word that you could replace it with that would work better.

The mandate of the site is "stuff that would be interesting to a hacker; i.e. an intelligent person who tinkers."

"Exceptional or interesting technology" is 100% on-topic. Please submit some more of it! This site isn't necessarily _meant_ to be "entrepreneur news". One may ask why, therefore, there are so many business-centric articles; I think it's probably because there's a critical mass of YC people here (both funded entrepreneurs, potential applicants, and interested fans). The community works with a lot of different technologies, and a lot of different hobbies which wax and wane over time, but YC people are by definition very interested in business and they're interested _right now_.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> When other people call you a "Hacker", then you are a "Hacker".... until then you are a "Software Developer".

<comment><USER5> I wholeheartedly agree with the first part of this statement. I've been called a "hacker" plenty of times, and once that happens, I say it's fair to call yourself one, but not before.

No one would have ever called me a software developer. There are many kinds of hackers, and not all of them are coders or developers.

<comment><USER6> I whole heartedly disagree with the first part of your statement. I considered me to be a hacker long time before I got called 'hacker' by my peers and clients.

As I already wrote, I do tell some people that I am a hacker. Most of the times this a result of the question: 'So you are a hacker?' After I explained what I do.

Saying you are only a hacker if your peers call you that just raises the mystery around the term hacker.

Last part of your statement I fully agree to. Hacking at first has nothing to do with software or hardware. For me it is using stuff in a way that is was not intent to be used. Being in Africa right now, I see a lot of clever hacks, where people use for example climate control devices to get more or less clean water, reusing garbage to build new stuff and so on.

I am more concerned about the phrase 'expert'. This is imo something you can not label yourself. And even if.. it sounds always kind of strange to me.

<comment><USER5> ++ on "expert"

But seriously, it seems "hacker" is thrown in self-reference too much. While anyone can do something clever to perform "a hack," to actually be a "hacker" takes a mind-set, not an accomplishment.

People can become hackers by taking on that mind-set, and they may very well be a tenable hacker without having been gifted the label by another.

I'll agree with many other comments though, in saying that "hacker" is a label that should only be used among folks who you are relatively certain already understand the concept. Example: Calling yourself a hacker over a business lunch with non-technical investors? Bad idea. Always. Even if you really are one.

Either way, critical thinkers should be able to condense their function to a single sentence without pulling out stigma-laden memes. They should also recognize that "What do you do?" deserves a response more four words long.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I don't think I'd ever use that term. To someone who doesn't know what it is, it sounds shady. To someone who does know, it's overly vague. It's like saying "I'm a businessman."

</comment><comment><USER8> Fair: Answer with a noun, "I am a computer programmer."

Good: Answer with a verb, "I program computers."

Better: Answer with a verb for myself and a noun for the result, "I program web applications."

Even Better: Answer with a verb for myself, a noun for the result, and another noun for my customer, "I program web applications for doctors."

Best: Answer with a verb for myself, a noun for the result, another noun for my customer, and another noun to describe my customers' benefits, "I program web applications that help doctors give better care to their patients."

</comment><comment><USER9> I used to spend a lot of time figuring out which way I would describe what I did to people who weren't in the industry.

Now I just say that I'm in software, and it turns out that's enough 95% of the time.

</comment><comment><USER10> How many regular HN readers think of themselves foremost as computer programmers (by whatever name)?

The responses posted here so far make it sound like the solid majority. Yet there must be more people on here who, like me, just happen to do a lot of programming in the course of pursuing other goals.

In short, I tend to tell people "I do xxx, which involves writing a lot of code" (rather than saying "I'm a programmer"). For this reason, I often find the self-representation here a bit strange. I tend to think of programming as just a tool to get work done, rather than the work in of itself. A lot of HN comments read to me as if a carpenter described his job as "swinging a hammer."

</comment><comment><USER11> I just tell people I'm a software developer, because all I do is develop software.

</comment><comment><USER12> My title is "User Interface Engineer". I tell people "I'm a Professional Nerd for (X)".

It shows that I have a sense of humor about my job (a job that to many people is inscrutable).

Many people in our own field don't know the difference between a web designer/developer/programmer/UI/UX/DBA, and I figure that I'll take a crack at whatever needs to get done, so why be limited to a label?

I feel like hacker has too many negative connotations outside our tiny community that 'gets it', especially since I live in DC, which is more traditional about this stuff.

</comment><comment><USER13> I would say it depends on the person your talking to. To most people, a "hacker" is a "cracker". A geek, loves card games and anime. A nerd loves thick books. But a programmer? They do magical things to computers, something people acceptedly don't understand, and theres no hard stereotypes regarding.

You certainly don't want to have to describe yourself too much. The more you try to describe, the less credibility you'll have. In my opinion, _programmer_ is wonderfully enchanting to people who are not versed in... hacker lingo.

</comment><comment><USER6> I do sometimes tell people that I am a hacker. But I make sure that the people do know or understand that I am refering to the original meaning of the word; and that I am a good guy. For me, boiling an egg in a coffee machine is hacking. I do a lot of security work, but I tell the people that even if I would have nothing to do with security, I still could be a hacker.

About self-applying, imo this is ok if you can tell me about your last hack when I ask you about it.

..."Obviously you're not a golfer."

</comment><comment><USER5> I usually just tell normal people that I work with computers or that I keep bad guys out of bank accounts. It's a word that one can use in self-reference, but only once you've been accepted by other hackers as being one.

It doesn't apply only to the word "hacker", though. Many labels don't mean much until you've really earned it and been validated by peers.

<comment><USER14> Assuming you work in the security side of tech, would it be possible to ask you a few questions regarding your career? I'm confused about starting my own. :-)

<comment><USER5> I do infosec in the financial industry, mostly UNIX, but a little mainframe and windows stuff as well when needed. I believe you can find my email address in my profile. Feel free to contact me.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> The problem with calling yourself a hacker is that inevitably non-hackers don't understand what you mean. Then you have to explain yourself, and you end up seeming more interested in how you are labeled than what you do.

That or you end up sounding like Lex from Jurassic Park who "prefer(s) to be called a hacker".

</comment><comment><USER16> Depending on the person asking and whether or not I'm in a conversing mood, I'd use either 'programmer' or "I do computer stuff" while making that vague and silly typing-on-keyboard gesture with my hand.

</comment><comment><USER17> I call myself a _computer programmer_ because I program computers. Administration, Theory, Hardware, Engineering, those I consider supporting skills, not the main attraction.

</comment><comment><USER18> Calling yourself a hacker makes you look like an egomaniac.

</comment><comment><USER19> My friends and family say I "type in colors"

<comment><USER20> I'm going to use that when I see family for the Holidays--it's perfect.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I tell people I program robot submarines.

And wait for the awesome to hit them.

<comment><USER22> So you do this? :)

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rpterEeRY8>

<comment><USER21> No. That's our competitor. And uh, they can keep that project :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> The real meaning of the word "hacker" has been lost forever (even in technical circles) so, no, I don't call myself an "hacker".

If I know the audience will understand it properly, I'll call myself a "geek". Otherwise, I'll just call myself a "computer systems administrator".

</comment><comment><USER24> I tell people I'm a mad scientist.

</comment><comment><USER25> dude just say this: "i am a programmer and i write business apps, but i've also played with assembly and know what O-notation is. I also know a lot about computer networks, and i've modded my computer on multiple occasions (I used a soldering iron)."</comment>


Animation of the Cubic of Stationary Curvature of a Fourbar Linkage - <AUTHOR> http://s.goessner.net/#eulersavary <comment><USER2> I have no idea what I'm looking at, but it's beautifully illustrated. (And I wish it was interactive.)

<comment><USER3> The four-bar linkage is a common design pattern in mechanical engineering. With 4 rotating bearings and 4 bars, it allows one to constrain motion to a plane. In particular, along a partucular path both position and angle smoothly change together.

Once you start noticing them, you will see them everywhere (bus doors, clamps, etc.). Their available paths are of course limited, but quite varied with interesting tools for design.

<comment><USER4> there are only three bars in the gif.

<comment><USER5> The base is considered the 4th bar.

<comment><USER4> I thought it might be something like that :).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> In reading the author's other article, "Cross Product Considered Harmful", and I bet he would be interested in section 1.3 (starting on page 13) of the book "An Introduction to Complex Analysis for Engineers" by Michael Alder. That book introduces complex analysis using the matrix form of sqrt(-1).

[http://elibrary.bsu.az/azad/new/2554.pdf](http://elibrary.bsu.az/azad/new/2554.pdf)

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for the link. I was not aware of this. It's very interesting.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Anyone have recommendations for learning about mechanical linkages (books/MOOC/other)? Recently I've been intrigued by things like straight line linkages:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaucellier%E2%80%93Lipkin_lin...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaucellier%E2%80%93Lipkin_linkage)

...and the Chebyshev "paradoxical" linkage:

[https://www.futilitycloset.com/2015/01/03/chebyshevs- paradox...](https://www.futilitycloset.com/2015/01/03/chebyshevs-paradoxical- mechanism/)

...and of course Kempe's "universality theorem", that there is a linkage that traces any polynomial curve.

[https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.09002](https://arxiv.org/abs/1511.09002)

I recently came across "Planar Linkages Following a Prescribed Motion":

[https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05623](https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.05623)

...which looks awesome. Especially intriguing are sentences like:

"In modern terms, the procedure proposed by Kempe is a parsing algorithm. It takes the defining polynomial of a plane curve as input and realizes arithmetic operations via certain elementary linkages. In this work, we approach the question from a different perspective... ...By encoding motions via polynomials over a noncommutative algebra, we reduce this task to a factorization problem."

But currently the terminology used is considerably over my head. Anyone know what branches of math you should study to be able to understand things like:

"...we recall that one can embed SE2 as an open subset of a real projective space. This allows us to introduce a noncommutative algebra K whose multiplication corresponds to the group operation in SE2, hence mimicking the role played by dual quaternions with respect to SE3. A polynomial with coefficients in K therefore describes a family of direct isometries, which we call a rational motion."

...other suggestions for what to study to be able to synthesize new linkages? Places or forums for a beginner to ask questions about linkages?

<comment><USER7> It is really unusual to find "parsing algorithm" and "direct isometries" in the same paper, so it's a bit of a genre-spanning publication. As the arxiv tags say, the key fields could be described as "algebraic geometry" and "rings and algebras". Things like SE2 refer to familiar groups (with useful geometric interpretations) that mathematicians encounter frequently, so group theory is a prerequisite also. Apart from the geometry, most of this is probably covered by "abstract algebra" for which there are good resources online, including lectures on YouTube.

<comment><USER6> Thanks. I'll start looking into algebraic geometry and abstract algebra.

[https://www.amazon.com/Algebraic-Scientists-Engineers- Mathem...](https://www.amazon.com/Algebraic-Scientists-Engineers-Mathematical- Monographs/dp/0821815350/)

[https://www.amazon.com/Book-Abstract-Algebra-Second- Mathemat...](https://www.amazon.com/Book-Abstract-Algebra-Second- Mathematics/dp/0486474178/)</comment></comment></comment>


Martin Odersky, Scala creator, at Stanford 6/1/2011 - <AUTHOR> http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/permlinks/scala.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Ooops, initially announced at HN as 5/1/2011. Sorry for any confusion. Sadly, there is no way to edit a Subject.</comment>


Inside the World's Greatest Keyboard  - <AUTHOR> http://www.pcworld.com/printable/article/id,147939/printable.html <comment><USER2> Buyer beware. I used an M for a few years and it got me in the habit of pounding the keys, which has led to some pretty serious RSI.

Before the M I used to type far more delicately.

Keep in mind that the M was designed so that secretaries who were used to clunky mechanical typewriters could make the switch to computers. Nostalgia for the M is as misplaced as wanting a hand crank starter on the grill of your prius.

<comment><USER3> I suggest reading "The Mindbody Prescription" by John E Sarno. Here is an overview of what it talks about: <http://www.rsi.deas.harvard.edu/handout.doc> (I know it's a Word doc, but that is the best overview I've seen)

It helped me recover 100% from what I thought was "RSI" and I no longer believe that typing can cause injury.

I bought a Unicomp Model M a few years after this recover, not for nostalgia, but to increase my typing speed and accuracy, which it did. The only downside is that it is loud.

<comment><USER4> I'm a longterm RSI sufferer, now largely recovered, and I while I agree that there is certainly something to the theory that stress and reduced blood flow is part of the problem, it seems to me that he's overstating his case:

"To be perfectly clear: in TMS theory, the cause of pain is not the structural abnormalities (tendon or muscle tears, tissue inflammation, herniation, degeneration, decrepit muscles, etc) or behavioral "problems" (poor posture, a bad ergonomic setup, improper typing habits) typically identified by medical practitioners. None of them are responsible for the pain – none."

My personal experience readily invalidates this. I can type for a full day on my Kinesis Advantage practically without a problem these days, but if I sit with the Macbook for a day, I can certainly feel the strain. Doing that for 2-3 days will bring back quite a lot of discomfort. Why would I all of a sudden have more unconscious stress just because I moved from working at my desk to the couch?

<comment><USER3> That experience doesn't invalidate what he says, in fact its right in line with it. I suggest reading his book to fully understand it. Here is my take on it (which probably doesn't explain things as well as the book does):

Your belief is that the Kinesis keyboard causes you no discomfort, but the Macbook keyboard does. You've conditioned yourself to react this way; and your subconcious mind is fully aware of what is going on and is orchestrating the reactions and exploiting your beliefs so that it can cause distractions. The distractions are to prevent repressed emotions from surfacing. The actual physical reaction is real (oxygen deprivation to the areas), it's not "all in your head", but the root cause is psychological. The mind is in control here.

There may be some physical component to it. It may actually be more strenuous to use the MacBook keyboard than the Kinesis keyboard. Or in my case, slamming my fingers down aggressively on an arcade-style game controller for an hour probably could cause some discomfort. But that doesn't mean it will lead to a long-standing injury or chronic pain. Your subconcious mind will use the knowledge of what you think causes discomfort.

Of course you should see a doctor to rule out things like multiple sclerosis. I had been to many different doctors and tried various alternative therapies as well (such as acupuncture), and tried different ergonomic changes (including the Kinesis contoured keyboard), all which did not help me. So I was in a position where I was open to trying anything that could help me, and this was the only thing that did.

<comment><USER2> This is totally fascinating. Would you care to share more about your experience and how you cured yourself?

<comment><USER3> I have been meaning to finish writing some blog entries that detail the whole thing. If you're interested here they are in their not-ready-to-be-published form:

Short version: <http://www.nileshk.com/node/73> Long version: <http://www.nileshk.com/node/71>

I've been meaning to finish editing these entries for a while, so I will try to do that sometime soon. If you'd like me to notify you when I've finished them, you can e-mail me at hackernews /AT/ nileshk.com.

The "long version" doesn't talk much about how I actually cured myself yet, but really details everything that lead up to it. But really, there wasn't much to the actually cure. I read the outline that I linked to, and it just made sense to me. I immediately read The Mindbody Prescription and it was like it explained everything that I had been experiencing and why it happened the way it did. After I finished reading it, I immediately just started trying to go back to normal and doing the things I do without restrictions. I started repeatedly telling myself "there's nothing physically wrong with me." After a week my pain was almost gone, and I told my employers that I'm ready to start working full time again (I was working part-time at that time). A month later I was completely back to normal, typing without pain and without fear of the pain returning, playing my musical instruments without pain, and using my hands and arms without any restrictions.

I did also take a look at the things in my life that could have caused repressed emotions. Things that had emotionally effected me, but I just wasn't dealing with. I tried to force myself to face these things by just thinking about them and trying to "feel" the emotions that they caused. This was a gradual process over the course of the next months, and is an ongoing thing I continue to do.

Now the reason this worked for me was because I immediately completely believed the ideas it presented. In my case things were lining up for me to come to this realization, I just needed it explained to me the right way (in a scientific, concrete sort of way that I can make sense of and believe). So there is this "leap of faith" you have to take with this approach, which makes it difficult for a lot of people. For me it was easy to take, because it made sense of everything I had experienced (even some things before the wrist pain), whereas before I was confused as to why such a thing could happen and only had useless diagnoses such as "fibromyalgia" or "thoracic outlet syndrome" from my doctors. For me, there had been lots of hints as to what was really going on, but no clear explanation until I came across this.

What I'd suggest (assuming you've already seen a neurologist and eliminated diseases like MS as possibilities) is read this book, and if it doesn't immediately make sense to you, just keep it in mind and start observing the patterns of how your pain occurs. Give it another read after a while and see if it makes sense.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Yes, yes. I've owned several Model M's myself (probably still have one around here somewhere). They are a _very_ solid keyboard.

They are also loud enough to wake the dead!

Seriously, has anyone else here tried to type on one of those while talking to someone on the phone (like, when doing tech support)? Anyone else here used one of these to work on a school assignment, or a work project in the wee hours of the night--in a house where others are trying to sleep nearby? That's a recipe for disaster.

I do like the weight of the Model M (it stays put), and I like the feet that prop up the back of the keyboard to put it at a nice angle. While those features are nice, I still prefer a keyboard that doesn't scream out my every keystroke as if I were typing with a nailgun instead of a keyboard. I prefer my slightly-less ancient keyboard (only about 12 years old). I use an IBM model KB-8923 (which I believe was manufactured in 1997). It has a very similar layout to the Model M, except it does have those 3 nasty "Windows" keys (which I ignore). It is also heavy enough to stay put while I type, and at the same time is _much_ quieter (without being "mushy", like a lot of keyboards are -- providing no pushback to the fingers at all). Like the Model M and many (most?) keyboards, it also has the feet that prop up the back corners. Fortunately for me, I bought this keyboard at a liquidation store (there were probably 20 or 30 of them in a stack for $1 to $2 each (in 2001). I think I bought 4 or 5 of them which I have used with different computers since then, perhaps giving some away with machines I gave to others. I wish I had bought the entire stack for that price. I have been that happy with them. I think one of the ones I bought started being unreliable, but only after much abuse (cracker/cookie/sandwich/whatever crumbs and probably one too many coffee/soda/water spills probably did it in). The rest are still in service.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> The major thing missing from this article is any mention of Unicomp, which makes contemporary versions of the Model M called the "Customizer" and "Space Saver." I wrote a review of the Customzier here : [http://jseliger.com/2008/05/07/product-review-unicomp- custom...](http://jseliger.com/2008/05/07/product-review-unicomp-customizer- keyboard) , which also explains how to use it with Macs.

<comment><USER6> Thanks for the pointer. They sell a keyboard I've wanted for ages, a buckling spring keyboard with a thinkpad "nipple" mouse - <http://pckeyboards.stores.yahoo.net/en104wh.html>

<comment><AUTHOR> Nice. It's always wonderful to find the exact thing one wants. I thought I'd found the right keyboard with the Matias Tactile Pro Version 1, but the "ghost key" problem scuppered that idea, and Version 2 was so bad it inspired this pan: [http://jseliger.com/2007/10/18/product-review-matias- tactile...](http://jseliger.com/2007/10/18/product-review-matias-tactile- pro-2) , ultimately leading me to the Customizer.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I bought an old model M a while back, and I didn't really like it. Too much travel in the keys for me to really get going fast. As heretic as it sounds, my favorite keyboard right now is my Apple one that's about a quarter inch thick. It doesn't make me feel like I'm typing on a typewriter and cleans with a quick swipe from a damp cloth. Plus, it's tiny and wireless.

<comment><USER8> Have to agree. I really like the new Apple keyboards. They feel minimalist but with enough key travel that I know when the button has been fully pressed.

<comment><USER9> Indeed, if you ask me, Apple has dethroned IBM for the go-to keyboard... especially for programming, there's nothing that's not perfect about it.

<comment><USER10> How about the lack of the insert key?

<comment><USER11> or page up and down

<comment><USER9> It has page up and page down. This ([http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/07/imac- slim-...](http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/07/imac-slim- keyboard-1.jpg)) is the keyboard I'm referring to. Still, I don't ever use those, vim supplies plenty of navigation methods that can be used from the home-row.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> A few years ago I earned the wrath of my coworkers when I cleaned up and started using an old model M that was lying around. Apparently it was quite loud :)

These days I'm happy with my Kinesis Advantage (seen here <http://files.getdropbox.com/u/31884/desktop.jpg> ).

<comment><AUTHOR> Nice keyboard. For $300, though? That seems like a bit much. Still, I might request a review unit from them and see how it goes.

<comment><USER13> $300 is _nothing_ if you type for a living and it can save you from chronic wrist pain. I've had my Kinesis for a year. I was suffering from a good amount of pain, especially in my pinkies. It evaporated in about two days once I started using my Kinesis. Now I only get pain if I switch back to my old keyboard (it comes back in a few hours) or if I type for 8 hours straight or with bad posture.

Highly recommended.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> No, this is not a great keyboard. Not even close. It's terribly unergonomic. When I worked at IBM, I had this keyboard, and it seriously hurt my hands. I pulled off the keys and purposefully crimped the springs so that they'd be weaker and it would have a lighter action.

IMHO, most modern non-ergonomic (straight) keyboards are bad for you because they force wrist deviation (bending). That would include Apple's, and this is the one area where I really dislike Apple's design principles.

</comment><comment><USER15> It seems like there's a simple design spec for a very nice keyboard:

       - Buckling springs, for that clicky feeling
       - Split, or somehow ergonomically enhanced
       - Columns instead of staggered keys

Anything else? Any disagreements with the above?

It might be interesting to see if home-designed keyboards could be built using 3d printers and ordered parts. Anyone up for writing a how-to?

</comment><comment><USER16> I won't deny that the M was a great keyboard. I also used one for a number of years. Very reliable. But the idea for the layout did not come from IBM. It came from DEC. The VT220 keyboard was on desks and in use by the thousands a year and a half before IBM shipped the M.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VT220>

<comment><USER17> I have an incredible d|i|g|i|t|a|l keyboard someone gave me in 1997, and it clunkers away incredibly nicely. Same layout as the M.

I cleaned and even repaired it, supergluing the rubber thingies back onto the membranes. I also had to solder some wires back on.

I'm running it off a PS2/USB adapter for my Linux laptop and I can easily reach 100 WPM on this.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I'm a contractor working on the new NYC 911 system and the supporting IT infrastructure. The current system, at the desktop level, is all old IBM AIX boxes and every single one has one of these keyboards. The monitors, mice, etc have all been replaced due to wear and tear, but these keyboards have put up with the abuse of 24/7 constant typing for the last 15-20 years. Pretty amazing. I wouldn't mind grabbing one or two once they cut over to the new system.

<comment><USER19> Why not just buy a new one from Unicomp with modern USB ports and etc etc?

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> My dad had a keyboard just like that. Looking at this makes me wish he never threw it away (I assume that's what he did with it).

I'm currently using an Apple keyboard, one of those thin ones, and I'm incredibly happy with it.

<comment><USER21> I hear that! I have one of the same new "thin" aluminium keyboards and I love it! I find it easier to use than anything else I have tried...

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Fantastic! I love seeing things like this. It's a shame so many of the products we use these days are so under-built. Having to throw things away a year after I buy them seems like a sin to me...

<comment><USER22> Why? I don't use most things for 22 years, so I've found it rather convenient that laptops hard drives go after 5 years or so, since it's a good reason to buy a new one.

<comment><USER23> But how much longer will it be economically viable to build stuff with an artificially limited lifespan?

<comment><USER22> Indefinitely, I hope... organisms have a limited lifespan. Why does my stuff need to last eternity?

<comment><USER21> Because great design/construction has it's own value? I think Apple computers prove this pretty well.

Building/owning something that has been constructed with great attention to detail is an absolute pleasure. As a quick example: There are many custom knifemakers worldwide making a living off of knive that they hand-make for up to several thousand dollars per piece. Owning one of their pieces is amazing because you can be absolutely confident that you'll have to try _very_ hard to break it.

Making something like this is a labor of love and is definitely it's own reward.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Yes, absolutely the best keyboard ever. I'm still using mine to this day, and it works as well as it did in 1991 when my older brother bought it with his 286.

Nothing I've tried comes close (although I have tried those high end M-inspired keyboard they make today). There are some disadvantages, like not having the command key when I VNC into my Mac box, but I can live with that.

I've spilled juice on the keyboard twice, short circuiting the electronics, and crashing my PC. But after opening it up and drying it off, it was as good as new.

I have some RSI problems as well, and they're entirely caused by use of the mouse and other keyboards (especially recent Mac keyboard), but the symptoms go away quickly when I'm back on the model M.

As long as I can get my hands on a working model, I'll be using one!! (and screw the sleeping roommates :)

</comment><comment><USER25> That looks like a very nice keyboard. I liked the description of the "bucking spring" design behind the perfectly clicking keys.

Most modern keyboards can't recreate that authentic, high-quality feel.

<comment><AUTHOR> "Most modern keyboards can't recreate that authentic, high-quality feel."

I would rather say that they can, but not at the $5 – $20 price point that many if not most modern keyboards sell at. Other gourmet keyboards like the Filco Majestouch and Das Keyboard go for ~$130. By that metric, used Model Ms and contemporary Customizers/Spacesavers from Unicomp (at $69: see <http://www.pckeyboard.com> ) are a bargain.

<comment><USER25> Yeah, but most keyboards are in the $5 - $20 range. It's the expensive high- quality keyboards that are in the minority because most people don't see the value in buying such an high performance keyboard.

I'll have to check out those keyboards you mentioned.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I bought one of these model M keyboards out of pure nostalgia. It is superbly built and I love the sound of the keys. However, by today's standards it's an ergonomic disaster, as it forces you to rotate your wrists to an uncomfortable degree. And I quickly tired of how much pressure it takes to depress the keys. My new favorite keyboard in the world is the aluminum beauty that came with my iMac. Oh well.

</comment><comment><USER27> No, those keyboards are pikers in both quality and unbelieveable silky-smooth touch compared to the Microswitch-built Hall-effect keyswitch-based custom keyboards used at Stanford and MIT, aka The Knight Keyboard.

<http://world.std.com/~jdostale/kbd/Knight.html>

Even the later versions that Symbolics and Sun used were inferior in quality and feel to these old TK keyboards.

Sigh.

</comment><comment><USER28> I don't understand what the problem with 'dome' keyboards is. I've used the same standard one for years, and it hasn't failed on me yet. I rarely mistype, and when I do, it isn't because didn't feel the keypress. Sure, I could probably break it over my knee, but it's light and if someone had to subject it to that kind of abuse it would mean they were doing something wrong.

</comment><comment><USER29> The model M keyboard I'm using right now actually came from the trash, all that was wrong with it was some ribbon cable being loose (very easy to fix). The fact that this keyboard is actually older than me just shows how durable they are.

Also it is pretty loud, I'm used to it, but whenever I'm talking with friends over voice chat they begin to complain about it.

I recommend it whole-heartedly.

</comment><comment><USER30> It's hilarious that today, decades after its release, the Model M (and keyboards like it) still seem to be the defacto standard for the entertainment industry to convey characters are typing. Only very recently I've noticed a shift towards a softer, more realistic, typing sound.

</comment><comment><USER31> Am I the only person in the world that prefers large enter key to the small, shift-like, key?

</comment><comment><USER32> Das Keyboard is a great (albeit a bit expensive) replica of Model-M, it's even available in a key-less design: <http://www.daskeyboard.com/>

<comment><USER33> I love my Das Keyboard. I used to get some painful cramps during work (programming). I tried a couple keyboards that helps somewhat, namely Microsoft's old-school natural keyboards, and also the happy hacker keyboard, but I'd still get wrist cramping if I typed long enough. Haven't had any issues at all with Das Keyboard.

The only drawback is that now it feels strange to type on keyboards without mechanical switches.</comment></comment>


Tell HN: Downvotes and Upvotes - <AUTHOR> Just a suggestion, but it strikes me, votes in general should be disallowed.
Simply make your points and counterpoints.
I vote that the Earth is not flat.  I don't want to hear down votes or up votes, I want to hear coherent and concise theories why I am right or wrong.
Down votes are cowardly without comments at the very least.
This place should be a venue for peer revue, not an exercise in US politics.
Just a thought. <comment><USER2> Previous discussions:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1188859](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1188859) "Downvotes", 7 years ago, 94 comments

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1987201](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1987201) "Hacker News, now with downvotes", 6 years ago, 45 comments

"Ask HN: What is your method for up/down votes?", 721 days ago, 68 comments

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=214398](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=214398) "Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?", 3107 days ago, 62 comments

You can see more previous discussions in this query:

[https://hn.algolia.com/?query=downvotes&sort=byPopularity&pr...](https://hn.algolia.com/?query=downvotes&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story)

</comment><comment><USER3> While no system is perfect, I disagree. Mainly b/c I find it too limiting to bubble up a link based on comments count alone; and secondly, a down-vote with no explanation will teach new users _group etiquette_ more effectively. On down-votes some false positives will happen but overall the system works and HN has avoided the fate of many other forums filled with flames and trash.

<comment><USER4> I like your response.

Do you think there's any value in ordering by read count? Or by randomly pushing a new or unread comment to the top? I'm wondering if we're ever missing a good comment or thought because it's late to the party.

<comment><USER3> Maybe read/click count is hackable (bots?) and there is plenty of motivation to taint the system (new products would love to make it to the top of HN). Humans up/down voting seems fairer, no?

<comment><USER4> You're absolutely right. I was thinking about that while posting my original comment. I wonder if you can ensure that "read/click" is only incremented if the appropriate cookie is present.

That, too, I'm assuming is hackable. Then again, up/down seems as hackable. I mean, the link click is just calling a handler:

Perhaps the auth attribute is a random CSRF token, while the end of the href appears to be this comments URL. It seems like we could use the same idea, hijacking the navigation event on the link itself, applying a CSRF/auth token, and incrementing the read/click count. Seems like this would basically be the kind of granular auth allowed by service like Google Docs.

Just spitballing.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Down votes are a good thing. When I get them, and I do, I wonder why I got them. Sometimes I'm OK with that. Sometimes I wonder if I've been misunderstood and could have written it better. Either which way, it's blunt, simple and useful feedback.

<comment><USER6> > Sometimes I'm OK with that. Sometimes I wonder if I've been misunderstood > and could have written it better.

And if you had an actual reply telling you what "wrong" with your post, wouldn't that be more useful? Sometimes people downvote simply because they misunderstood/misread your post.

> Either which way, it's blunt, simple and useful feedback.

I'll give you "simple" out of those three. What is "blunt" about it? And for useful, see above.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> _This place should be a venue for peer revue_

Upvotes and downvotes are part of the peer review here. It helps signal who tends to say something of value consistently.

I have been here a while. This issue gets brought up over and over, presumably by new-ish people who didn't see the last zillion discussions.

They used to show vote count next to comments. It caused nasty discussions as people vied for the most validation for their side of the argument. This got the then mod dragged into a lot of things, a thing he didn't appreciate. So he hid the counts and saw a steep drop in how much he got dragged into such messes. So he was not inclined to go back to showing them when this caused a stink from the user base as people felt that knowing the score for each comment was useful information...blah blah blah.

Social stuff is inevitably a messy affair. HN does it far better than average. I respectfully suggest you consider the possibility that what you consider to be a bug is really a feature and part of why things run as relatively well as they do here, in spite of being a space where (large numbers of disparate) people come together.

Best.

</comment><comment><USER8> I prefer to be replied to rather than downvoted - the discussion here is of greater value to me than blind attempts at operant conditioning without context, and some of the best conversations I've had here have been with people who disagree with me.

Unfortunately, downvoting without comment has been baked into HN culture since the beginning, and as long as it's not explicitly against the guidelines, people are free to do so without consequence.

However, given how diverse the userbase seems to be here, in terms of age, locale, income, political alignment, etc, expecting a single definition of what HN "should be" seems destined to fail, because there are multiple groups with multiple, contradictory ideals. Just look at the reaction to dang's attempt at banning political articles for a week to see an example of this in action.

What would be more likely, that requiring comments for downvotes would result in deeper engagement and higher quality discussion, or more flamebaiting and divisiveness? In comment threads that are already volatile (and garner a number of downvotes) I'm not certain the better angels of our nature would win out. It would just result in more noise and more downvoting, as people began to argue about the reasons provided for their downvotes.

Then again, I think HN should get rid of voting and karma altogether, so I'm even more of an outlier than many here. Simply ignoring a comment with which you disagree, but have no coherent or intelligent response for, is always an option, and this community would be a better place if more people considered it.

</comment><comment><USER9> Upvotes help get great comments near the top of the page. It is not perfect but better than simply being in time order and a great comment getting lost in the middle.

Downvotes mean you can get bad comments towards the bottom. So that is good too. But if you people reply instead of downvote, then trolls know they will get lots of free troll food when they comment, so that will encourage them to post more.

</comment><comment><USER6> Agree. Actually, just posted a related question a while ago ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13171928](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13171928)).

And if you're going to have votes, at the very least those should be public, as they are in some forums that I've come across and in some bug trackers.

Upvotes: the only point of those seems to be to serve as a form of "reward", like "badges" and the like, to entice those with an insecurity problem to seek some validation. The only ones benefiting from it are the site admins though, as people tend to generate more content in order to collect "upvotes". Note I said "more", not better quality. See Stackoverflow for example.

</comment><comment><USER10> Are there any published stats about voting in HN? Like daily/monthly number of upvotes/downvotes, etc.

<comment><USER11> I think you might be able to get at some of that through one of the HN APIs, but it would be aggregate in the sense that you would get the total score of a story, not the votes that comprise it.

\- [https://github.com/HackerNews/API](https://github.com/HackerNews/API)

\- [https://hn.algolia.com/api](https://hn.algolia.com/api)</comment></comment>