HBO Max drops Linux support in all browsers? - <AUTHOR> https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/i5tfft/hbo_max_drops_linux_support_in_all_browsers/ <comment><USER4> What's funny is that I'm certain that the vast majority of Linux users who were paying for this were trying really hard to watch these shows legitimately, and almost all of them will be antagonised by this and just download torrents or similar.

<comment><USER5> What's also funny is that if they just use the right abstraction layers developing for Linux shouldn't be much more effort than for Mac

<comment><USER6> Mac is one platform. Linux is tens of different operating systems.

<comment><USER7> If only there were some kind of platform agnostic hypertext language that could be used here so that vendors didn't need to care about the details of the user's operating system.

/s

<comment><USER6> I can hardly get web developers to test on another browser than Chrome, I can't imagine what it will take to get them to test on another OS.

<comment><USER4> If none of the web devs at a big company like HBO use Linux as their daily driver (at least at home), I'd be very surprised...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> The HBO Max saga is really tiresome. They really want you to think of Amazon and Roku as the bad guys, but they really, really aren't.

HBO threw so many loyal customers under the bus by not having Prime Video channels or Roku devices as supported options at launch.

If you have been a loyal, full paying customer of HBO via Prime for years, suddenly you're a second class customer paying the same price as Max, but without access to the expanded content. Even if you were willing to migrate that engagement to HBO's preferred Max app, if you happen to have set up your home to rely on Roku devices, you are out of luck. It's crazy town.

Apparently HBO expects customers to just wholesale switch their preferred home device setup that is working well for use of Netflix, Prime Video, Hulu, Disney+, ESPN, Showtime, etc. etc. just for the Max app. Crazy.

I really hope the pressure ratchets up on them as nobody moves to Max as the early numbers have shown.

HBO is a channel. It is not a competitor of Netflix or Hulu, and its whole value proposition of producing significantly higher quality original content rests on this. It should _want to_ be a channel and not a platform.

The whole strategy is rotten, and the tactical execution of Max is something really HBO should be ashamed of. What a way to damage customer loyalty.

<comment><USER9> Just get a device that supports HBO Max?

I'm pissed they don't support OS/2 but I can view HBO Max on my iPad instead.

<comment><USER8> It's deeply unrealistic to expect customers to change their viewing habits and buy new devices for this. People rely on the supported devices to stay stable over time because they may set up larger aspects of their home entertainment systems to rely on one device in a way that's not cheap or easy to switch.

People using Roku devices to watch HBO on a large television are not going to switch to a tablet or phone. Many of those people don't have a smart TV with built in apps, nor any interest to pay the price for a video game system like PS4, nor the ability to switch everything to Apple TV (which frankly doesn't work as well as Amazon Fire or Roku, just my opinion). And the costs for new devices are totally not justifiable if the only reason is one minor streaming app. Everything _but_ HBO Max works great on my Roku - that sounds like an HBO problem.

"Just get another device" absolutely is not a feasible solution for most customers affected by this. As the numbers have shown, the vast majority of HBO's ~36 million subscribers are not moving to Max, and are more likely to switch back to HBO on a linear cable subscription than switch platforms just for one minor app. If a few people were complaining, it would be their problem to deal with the device change. If 33 million people are complaining and ignoring HBO Max, it's HBO's problem.

To boot, even if today the issue is with HBO Max not supporting Amazon Prime Video channels or Roku, they are just teaching customers to be wary - <USER2> it could be that they don't like the deal from Apple TV or Playstation, and they are setting a disturbing precedent of throwing customers under the bus when that happens.

<comment><USER9> > It's deeply unrealistic to expect customers to change their viewing habits > and buy new devices for this.... People using Roku devices to watch HBO on a > large television are not going to switch to a tablet or phone.

How do you know this? are there any statistics on this? Are you going to bring your Roku TV on the tube on the way to work? You can use your phone to watch HBO Max. I had no problem switching between my laptop and my iPad, I just did it today?

> "Just get another device" absolutely is not a feasible solution for most > customers affected by this.

Well, it solved my problem, what is yours? because I don't see yelling at HBO to support 4% of a userbase a productive use of my time. I normally see people watching their devices anywhere they please, it isn't like they are shackled to Linux are they?

<comment><USER8> I don't know where you're getting this 4% number. Together Roku & Amazon Fire account for about 70% of the US streaming market, 5 million subscribers to HBO do so through Amazon Prime Video channels (that's about 15% of total HBO subscribers).

The customer base being affected is huge, and your comparison with Linux is totally off the mark.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Wait, HBO Max supported Linux?

To be honest this outcome is unsurprising, especially when users using Linux on the desktop (Not Android) accounts for less than 4% market share worldwide. [0]

[0] [https://netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market- share.asp...](https://netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx)

<comment><USER10> Losing 4% is quite a lot actually but probably the actual number of people that watch HBO on a Linux desktop is a lot lower than that.

<comment><USER11> Yeah, it's the poorest 4%.

<comment><USER12> Nah, us Linux users make a decent buck making sure the lights stay on for the rest of you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> > Title: HBO Max drops Linux support in all browsers

Is there some acknowledgment that this is actually official, a statement from their support or anything? Or did they just push some change and not check that it actually runs on all the platforms their customers use?

Neither would surprise me but there's nothing in TFA which says either way.

<comment><USER14> I don't see any official announcement. In my browser's debug console, though, I see plenty of HTTP 400s from a POST to [https://comet.api.hbo.com/drm/license/widevine?keygen=playre...](https://comet.api.hbo.com/drm/license/widevine?keygen=playready&drmKeyVersion=2) with this as the response body: "Invalid License Request".

It would not surprise me if they've intentionally or not changed the supported licensing schemes and invalidated all Linux support without realizing it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Not only did they drop linux support, they dropped support for paying customers via Amazon. I had been paying for HBO via Amazon Prime Channels to watch on my FireTV and also logging into HBO Now on my Nvidia Shield for 2+ years now. HBO just recently shut down HBO Now though and "upgraded" it to HBO Max, but does not allow Amazon users to log back in.

After trying to contact HBO Max and HBO Now they both refused to acknowledge the issue so I just canceled my subscription. The only option I would have to watch on both devices would be to sign back up to HBO Max directly instead of HBO via amazon, but I'm good. They lost me as their customer due to their squabble with Amazon.

<comment><USER16> I recently signed up to HBO and bought a Fire TV stick just to watch it - <USER3> took a month to arrive and by then they had dropped support. Very frustrating.

There is a workaround though - you can sideload an APK of HBO Max. So it works - it's just Amazon preventing it from being in their App Store.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Probably what's happening here is that HBO is requiring Widevide level 1 DRM but desktop Linux only supports weaker Widevine level 3.

<comment><USER18> Still no Widevine crack/emulation after all the Intel CPU bugs?

<comment><USER19> From my understanding, it's relatively well known _how_ to break Widevine L3, but nobody wants to release code (for obvious reasons). Widevine L1 is much better secured, as it's required to be implemented in hardware.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> A webpage should not be making decisions based on the OS running the browser. The web is meant to be platform agnostic.

</comment><comment><USER21> Honest question, does linux support HDCP or other protections they feel they may need? Or is that not even at the OS level and could this be the reason for the dropped support?

<comment><USER22> If HDCP requires any support at all from the GPU then I'm guessing it's hard to do, since GPU drivers other than Intel are usually garbage

<comment><USER23> What is it about Linux and/or GPUs that makes it so hard to write great graphics drivers for it?

Do the two just not inter-operate well?

<comment><USER24> It costs money, and the market share is not so big. It has nothing to do with inter-operation, as Intel has proved. People also say nvidia's driver is great except from the friction coming from nvidia's political decisions not to cooperate with the rest of Linux community.

<comment><USER25> It's not Nvidia's drivers being any good per se (some features are lacking, off the top of my head async reprojection for VR), just the hardware is strong enough to still perform well. With AMD the open source drivers are better than the proprietary ones and generally has an easier time with compatibility, but comes with its own host of issues (e.g. no Freesync over HDMI, no Freesync with >1 monitor if using xorg).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> In days like these I'm glad I have chromebook (then again, I haven't checked if HBO's android app supports such devices). Then again, I wish this didn't happen...

</comment><comment><USER27> Related Reddit thread [https://old.reddit.com/r/HBOMAX/comments/i484wx/hbo_max_has_...](https://old.reddit.com/r/HBOMAX/comments/i484wx/hbo_max_has_stopped_working_on_linux_within/?sort=new)

</comment><comment><USER28> I saw it myself. Fedora user, I've been using it for HBO Max for less than a month. Then POOF, it no longer works.

Really poor handling of the situation, IMHO. You just get a message about 'Not able to play this video now, try again later.' Finding tech support contact links isn't easy. Per Reddit, if you do get ahold of them, they just brush you off.

Overall a very poor user experience. Boo.

</comment><comment><USER29> duse for 20 years thy never supportedit anyways and i never thought thy drpped it o begin with tey never supported it. i thinknyour mistaken ad you should have told them macos but maybe you meed to contact your vendor for support and ot the idiots with the mpeg

</comment><comment><USER30> HBO Max also does not have apps for Roku and Amazon Fire devices. They like to make their supported clients feel exclusive.

<comment><USER31> There are many posts online on how to sideload the APK on Amazon Fire TV sticks, etc. Though I'm not personally looking forward to a future where I can't use a web browser but instead have to run iOS or Android apps on my laptop...

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Tangentially related - I've just checked, luckily HBO GO still works (Fedora 31, Firefox 78.0.2).

</comment><comment><USER33> Uh-oh. So, since they don't count me as a potential consumer of their content, does this mean I can just torrent all their stuff without repercussions?

It doesn't look that such action will result in some lost revenie, right?

<comment><USER34> I can't believe I have to say this to an adult, but:

No, that does not mean you can steal.

<comment><USER33> So, can you please elaborate what exactly I would be stealing? They willingly abandoned any revenue they could get from me by abandoning my platform.

<comment><USER35> It isn't like your 'platform' is a part of who you are. You could buy a device that they support.

Content creators/providers are legally allowed to restrict the platforms they support. For example, you have to watch some live sports through a cable tv subscription. There is no way to pay for it separately.

Does this suck? Sure, but cable companies pay enough money to make it worth all the lost customers (or at least that is what they are betting on)

You have no legal right to access content under your terms. Content creators have (nearly) complete control (there are some laws around what they can do, but requiring Linux support is not one of them)

<comment><USER36> So what? The law is easy to bypass and a very separate thing from morality.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


App development in Python? - <AUTHOR> http://pyzia.com/technology.html

<comment><AUTHOR> Came across this today. Has anyone tried it? What do you guys think?</comment>


What happens when AOL finally decides to go private? - <AUTHOR> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/09/what-happens-when-aol-finally-decides-to-go-private/244426/

<comment><USER2> "Google could pick up AOL Mail and AIM, maybe MapQuest, incorporating them into existing assets. Microsoft might even put in a bid."

Really? Why on earth would Google want AOL Mail? I can't imagine that they want the code, and the users don't sound attractive, either.

"We've built the best, fastest, smartest, most customizable web mail service on the planet. Now where can we get some users who haven't bothered to move off dial-up? They probably won't send all-caps emails to our support people or anything, right?"

<comment><USER3> There are only a few thousand dial-up users left on AOL. I know it's hard to imagine, but there are a lot of people with high-speed broadband connections who download the AOL software for the email and web browser. _shudder_

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> AOL Mail, AIM, MapQuest and other odd services seem like a good fit for IAC [1]. Really, IAC might be able to buy the whole lot and rebrand itself as the new AOL. Barry Diller seems to have figured out how to efficiently run a hodgepodge of unrelated internet content providers and services as unglamorous as Ask.com and Match.com while AOL has failed with arguably better properties.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAC_(company)>

</comment><comment><USER5> AOL is so irrelevant, I can't believe that they still are in business.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> What are the other interesting parts of AOL that could get sold off as pieces?</comment>


Ask HN: Why is Netflix becoming anti-social? - <AUTHOR>

I feel like Netflix is not giving us a straight answer on why they completely removed the Friends features from their service. It was half the reason I even use their service. One commenter left one good theory, but I'm curious if there are other good theories:<p>"Here's why I think NF is killing the friends features. The company is buying fewer DVDs because it's moving towards total streaming. The 'recommendations' the site pushes are only those that are 'available now' or on Instant Watch so the company doesn't have to buy more inventory. If customers no longer have the friend features it makes it harder to find 'unique, classic, independent, etc movies N-F doesn't want to buy anyway."<p>http://blog.netflix.com/2010/03/friends-update.html#Blog1_cmt-4755499758062243309 <comment><USER2> Why would you want Netflix to be social? Fuck, let me watch a movie in peace.

<comment><USER3> I kind of agree, and as a long-term Netflix user, I never really used the "Friends" feature on Netflix. I may have a really strong friendship with someone, but that doesn't mean we have similar tastes in movies.

I _am_ good friends with someone, we'll talk about movies in meatspace, or maybe on Facebook.

The Netflix "Friends" thing seems to be caught in a bit of a void. Your stronger friendships for casual movies discussions are likely to be maintained on Facebook or Twitter. While the hyper movie aficionados seem to be on imdb or other highly specialized movie discussion boards.

I like the recommendations engine on Netflix, the streaming, the ease of finding movies to watch, but I don't see it as a social hub.

<comment><USER2> I think the one thing I might use a friends feature for on Netflix is friending people I didn't already know who had extremely similar taste in films to me, solely for the purpose of seeing what they think about new releases. That would somewhat interesting.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Maybe if folks like Netflix are so bad at the social part, we should separate the place where we _talk_ about movies, from the place where we _consume_ them.

Kind of like how Good Reads + Library Thing are better than Amazon for discovery/listing/reviewing books (I partially take that back, Amazon is pretty good at discovery of "similar.")

Anyway, what this incident makes me think about is: We just need a good social site where the social object is movies.

Is there already a GoodReads.com of movies?

<comment><USER5> perhaps <http://www.flixster.com/> (and its Movies Facebook app) is the closest analogous site.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Inventory costs aren't the factor here. The cost of making films available isn't going to change a lot with streaming. The physical cost of a DVD is very low, it's the content that costs, and streaming vs physical isn't going to dent that.

Now, Netflix's delivery costs are something else. Obviously that's a much bigger factor in the dvd vs streaming debate.

</comment><comment><USER7> To quote NetFlix: "Friends is a feature on the Netflix Web site that's been used by less than two percent of all subscribers since we added the feature in 2004."

That strikes me as a wholly adequate explanation.

<comment><USER4> If you read the (unfortunately unthreaded and super-hard to browse) comment thread, there were a lot of users questioning that.

I guess I'd like to know more about "active" users, and social features.

Also... in 2010 it's just super surreal in a domain as vast as "movies," to not have deep social features to help people manage and discover.

I'm buying the OP's suggestion that Friends was turning up tons of recommendations that you can't stream (that part is the studios' fault, not Netflix's), and it was leading to a lot of dead-end experiences.

But I just really don't buy that Netflix's longterm strategy is to get _less_ social. They are too ahead of the curve, and too smart to think/do that.

My personal theory is that they are overhauling Friends and social in general, behind the scenes.

<comment><USER8> But how many people were questioning as a percentage of their entire userbase?</comment></comment></comment>


What happens when you eject at 780mph (2010) - <AUTHOR> http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/stories/181-back-in-the-saddle <comment><USER2> Great read, thank you.

A very lucky man, especially given that his crew mate bailed out before him, at higher altitude, going slower. The fact that between deciding to bail and pulling the handle took 4,000' is astonishing: 780mph is very, very fast.

<comment><AUTHOR> Really puts into perspective (or doesn't) something like Columbia breaking up at somewhere around 14,000mph.

<comment><USER3> It was also at about 200,000ft at the time. There's not much air up there. I'd bet that in terms of impact, 780MPH at 4,000ft is significantly worse.

<comment><AUTHOR> That's an interesting thought - is 780mph at 4000ft worse or just different? It's clear that the lower your altitude, the more air there will be to "interact" with - however, even at an extremely high altitude (with virtually no air), at those speeds I would imagine that there is absolutely 0% chance of survival given all of the heat generated (among other things).

<comment><USER3> You are surely correct about the heating, what with how it was melting and burning through various hardware on the Shuttle at that point. Expose a human to that and they won't last long, even if the aerodynamic stresses are survivable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This probably helps to explain why aircraft design has flirted with full escape capsules [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_crew_capsule](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_crew_capsule) in the past.

<comment><USER5> Yes, I was thinking about the same thing...

And I feel even a commercial airline could make a similar device a standard configuration...that might make flying more expensive, but perhaps we could be able to reduce the cost somehow when manufacturing in massive scale...

<comment><USER6> Ejector pods a standard part in airlines? My mind boggles at the amount of weight that would be added. Manufacturing scale might bring down the capital cost, but it would never bring down the operational cost of lugging around all that extra weight, not to mention the inspections and tests required to ensure the devices are working as expected. Airline tickets would be 2x the cost, if not more.

<comment><USER5> People were still willing to fly when the crude oil price was at $100+ a barrel, although I am not sure if a well-designed and tested escape capsule is more complicated than the plane it self...

I just feel that is do-able, and had we made a good one now, we could use it for all the years to come -- and that could also be used in other travels or in case of catastrophic event...

<comment><USER7> Mid-air accidents are a tiny fraction of plane crashes.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Very touching. He lost his friend during the ordeal.

[https://youtu.be/HecyxhXDepU](https://youtu.be/HecyxhXDepU)

</comment><comment><USER9> Another great ejection story is [http://www.damninteresting.com/rider-on-the- storm/](http://www.damninteresting.com/rider-on-the-storm/)

</comment><comment><USER10> My fighter pilot fried has told me stories, he's said, "Ejecting is the last thing you want to do, you'll come out of it a few inches shorter, if you survived the 10% chance of dying from your neck hitting the canopy."

<comment><USER11> To combat against that risk of hitting the canopy, most modern fighter aircraft do a couple of neat things.

First, there is a linear shape charge embedded in the canopy. This is detonated at the moment ejection is initiated. This charge completely shatters the material. So instead of having a whole canopy flying about, the canopy is retained and the pilot ejects through this shattered material. The charge is supposed to shatter this such that the pieces are very small.

Ejection seats also have a couple of small posts at the top. The purpose of these is to assist in punching through the shattered cockpit.

Ejection is still the last resort, and your friend accurately relates the risks. But work is being done to make the process a little less risky.

<comment><USER10> Yeah, at the time I think they were flying training jets from the 80's haha. I'm not sure of the numbers but the number of fighter pilots who die in training is a real number...

Although, my friend also knows that his piloting days from inside the aircraft are numbered. Manned fighter jets/bombers, etc. will be a thing of the past.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> This guy has certainly earned the definition of "badass". Holy crap.

</comment><comment><USER13> Alexander Konovalov, survived an ejection at Mach 2.6 from Mig 25 [http://www.flightgear.dk/mach26eject.htm](http://www.flightgear.dk/mach26eject.htm)

<comment><USER14> The dynamic pressure of going Mach 2.6 at 61,000 feet is equivalent to 450 knots at sea level—quite a bit less violent than what Udell endured, shockwaves and temperature extremes notwithstanding.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I wonder if he would have made it if he'd tried to pull out of the dive rather than ejecting. I was trying to figure the numbers - I get he'd have to achieve about 3g vertical deacceleration which I guess he could have got pulling the stick back for say 10g?

<comment><USER16> That's how a lot of pilots die in crashes. They think they can pull a plane out of a hopeless dive in time to save it, and they end up cratering. It was pitch black, he had no idea of the attitude of the plane, he was picking up speed, and he was at the absolute minimum safe distance to eject. At that point, it takes a cooler head to punch out than to try to save the plane.

<comment><USER17> Yeah, based on pilot interviews I've watched where they discuss the ejection decision process, this situation was a pretty clear-cut case of "definitely eject immediately". What really impressed me was how quickly he was able to realize there was a mismatch between the HUD data and the ambient sound in the cockpit, consult a second set of instruments, realize what was going on, and make the decision.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Holy shit

<comment><USER19> Indeed. That was a great read, and I said "Wow" out loud when I saw that he flew again after 10 months.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> tl;dr - everything that can break will probably break. Everything else will just get torn to shreds.</comment>


Taking Someone Aside (2018) - <AUTHOR> https://www.jefftk.com/p/taking-someone-aside <comment><USER2> A talk on the same by Deviant Ollam: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVTcifBspRc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVTcifBspRc)

</comment><comment><USER3> > "several people have come up to us to say that you keep asking them to dance > after they told you to stop asking them"

I wonder if there's a better way to do this. It seems to me that you should avoid bringing up -- even anonymously -- the existence of wronged parties who have complained.

<comment><USER4> How else do you convey the fact that what they did was not appreciated by others?

<comment><USER3> That's what I'm asking.

By mentioning "people who have complained," you're putting those people on the spot. The offender now probably knows who complained.

I bring this up because I read a NYT article [0] yesterday. A highschooler was uncomfortable with the behavior of her classmates. She complained to her parents, who went to the principal. The principal dealt with it but, in the course of doing so, it became clear who had complained. This led to an even worse situation and she had to leave the school.

Maybe it's unavoidable to mention that "people have complained" but I wouldn't lead with that. I think it's better for the authority figure to say "I noticed you were doing X" and take that on themselves, at least to start with.

[0] [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/nyregion/new-jersey- antis...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/04/nyregion/new-jersey-antisemitism- high-school.html)

<comment><USER5> Another option (if possible) is to take the burden yourself. "I've seen when you've been behaving in this way and I don't feel that this is appropriate for the club". Rather than the implication of "someone has complained and I am following this through" it becomes "I, on behalf of the organisation, feel that this behaviour is inappropriate. If you're going to take an issue with that, you take it up with me first and foremost."

In the case of the Higheschooler you mentioned, this is less possible due to the parents obviously being told by the daughter and obviously not being party to the grievances. In this situation your options are more limited.

<comment><USER6> It was less possible for the parents to protect their daughter's identity, but it was eminently possible for the _principal_ , who even went to the beach to see for himself. The photo was circulated to a large group after all.

The principle had more than enough visibility on the harrassment and hostile environment, to apply discipline without identifying any particular target of hostility, and anyway it should have been treated as unacceptable behaviour regardless of whether there was anyone in particular targeted.

There was certainly no need to identify the daughter, who was essentially a whistleblower. Now the school is being sued for failing to protect her identity, rightly in my view.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> This is great advice.

As an example of the opposite, with GitHub if your account is flagged (banned), it happens without warning or explanation. Its up to you to contact them to request reinstatement and/or an explanation.

Then I have found they often dont reply even after repeated request via both the website and different support emails. If you try to post something about it on the GitHub forums, they will lock the thread as well.

</comment><comment><USER8> This article is missing a crucial outcome. Likely it ignores it on purpose. The person accused of cdong something might turn out not being wrong. Wrong accusations happen. You shouldn't assume just because an organizer team has detected a problem, that it really _is_ a problem.

<comment><USER9> Indeed. The first paragraph jumps straight to "and now it's time to talk to the person in question to get them to stop".

If you get a complaint about somebody somebody in your organization, the first thing it is time to do is listen to both sides with your best critical thinking hat on. Going into a conversation with the accused party with the intention of getting them to do anything, before hearing their side, is an injustice.

<comment><USER10> This post is trying to give details on "if I've decided that taking someone aside for a warning is the right next step, how do I do it?"

There are cases where a warning would be a bad first step: perhaps you've only heard a report from one person, or it's not clear what happened, or you think there may be a misunderstanding. Then an opening more like "I saw some of what happened back there, can you help me figure out what was going on?" could be good, with more of a "let's find out" than a "let's change behavior" approach.

The cases that prompted me to write this post, however, were ones where a dancer had been doing a minorly harmful thing for a long time. It was very clear that they were doing the thing, and we had dozens of people who had seen them do it, including several organizers.</comment></comment></comment>


What comes after SOPA/PIPA?  - <AUTHOR>

On this day when the focus is on demonstrating the bad effects that unjust and censorious laws would have on the internet, our freedoms and our livelihoods. I would ask that you, my fellow creators of businesses and software; take a few moments to contemplate the positive steps that we could push for that would bring us greater freedom, prosperity and knowledge in the years to come. Both in this country, and the world over.
A few minor suggestions:
1. National bidirectional broadband universally available. If every electrical outlet in the US had a colocated network endpoint capable of a minimum of 10MBPS symmetric; how would that change your world, your scope of potential creations?
2. Digital currency infrastructure. One of the functions of government historically has been to guarantee the safety and integrity of the currency. What could you do if there were a safe and universally available method of digital payment that did not suck 2-5% of every transaction out of your income stream? <comment><USER2> They are like the Terminator, they will not stop. Wait and see, there will eventually be a bill very similar to SOPA that will pass. The population is made up primarily of dumb primates.</comment>


The casualization of the pornography industry - <AUTHOR> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2015/05/29/the-uber-ization-of-porn/ <comment><USER3> Interesting article, but I am having a hard time understanding how the title connects. And I'm actually not sure what the main thesis here is either - <USER2> little-known description of those who end up in porn nowadays? I'm not sure what I was supposed to take away.

<comment><USER4> The title is just typical sensationalism. We changed it to a more representative sentence from the article.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Why is this listed on Hacker News. It does not appear to be related to technology or startups.

My issue with this article is: This article attempts to paint the individual web cam-ers as people that are hurt. They are people who are attempting to engage in a business that is extremely cut-throat, and that is on low margins. (Also, happens to be "socially unacceptable" in many cultures.. that's another story, but it's used to abuse the reader) Additionally these people cut out larger businesses whom are highly regulated for a few more dollars.

I wish that the article would have reported on the people who did this, some of the problems they faced, and left it at that. I'm tried of seeing stories that paints these people as "we need to fix this ill".

<comment><USER6> > Why is this listed on Hacker News. It does not appear to be related to > technology or startups.

HN is not exclusively about technology or startups. From the Guidelines:

       On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find
       interesting. That includes more than hacking and
       startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence,
       the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's
       intellectual curiosity.

       Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime,
       or sports, unless they're evidence of some
       interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls
       or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd
       cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

The fact that you went on to read the article, and evidently put some thought into analyzing its content, indicates that it at least aroused your intellectual curiosity. Assuming you are a "good hacker", that would be a point of evidence toward the article being on-topic.

Note that for many things, they arguably fall under both on-topic and off- topic based on the guidelines, so could probably go either way.

<comment><USER5> The thing is that it didn't raise an intellectual curiosity. (The article was meant to invoke outrage/emotion)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> For more comments see the earlier, dead, discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379)

<comment><USER4> That one was flagkilled, as was this one. We've unkilled both so everyone can see them and so they don't stay closed for discussion.

<comment><USER7> _We 've unkilled both_

If it was flagkilled twice, why bring it back?

<comment><USER4> In the case of the current thread, because when there's an ongoing discussion it seems sporting to let it continue.

In the case of the previous thread, so people who click on tzs' link (and don't have showdead turned on) will be able to see it.

<comment><USER6> I had no idea that links to dead threads did not work for people without showdead turned on. I had always assumed that dead threads were just not shown on thread index pages, but if someone clicked on a link to one they would always see it.

Now I wonder what other things I've mistakenly assumed about how HN works.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10133379)</comment>


It's Coming: The Great Swift API Transformation - <AUTHOR> https://swift.org/blog/swift-api-transformation/ <comment><USER2> I hope they do adopt that suggested change to method calls. Swift is a nice language, but there's still some awkwardness due to its required compatibility with Objective C. I think if you don't come from that background, then having all named arguments _except_ the first one seems really arbitrary and nonsensical.

<comment><AUTHOR> To be honest, even as a fairly seasoned iOS developer I still prefer to have a non-optional first argument in my APIs.

Whereas the post's example compares:

      path.addLineToPoint(CGPoint(x: 100, y: 0))
      -- to --
      path.addLineTo(CGPoint(x: 100, y: 0))

I've been doing it as so:

      path.addLine(toPoint: CGPoint(x: 100, y: 0))

...requiring the "toPoint", which can swapped out true method overloading style:

      path.addLine(toArc:...)

In your internal method implementation, Swift allows you to replace the external method name with an internal one, so that it's still nice to work with:

      func addLine(toPoint point: CGPoint) {
      ...
      }

I personally think it's a lot more readable. Otherwise the first argument has to have a really descriptive class name (recommended for sure, but often not the case).

<comment><USER3> The point here (no pun intended) is to stop repeating noun phrases at the call site. Your call site says "point" twice for no reason:

        path.addLine(toPoint: CGPoint(x: 100, y: 0))

See the "toPoint: CGPoint". It's useless repetition. The new form eliminates it:

        path.addLineTo(CGPoint(x: 100, y: 0))

It's clear you're adding a line to a point, because it says "Point" right there. Even if you have a variable for this point already, it works great:

        path.addLineTo(point)

Or maybe this is a more specifically named point?

        path.addLineTo(centerPoint)

It's clear from all that you're adding a line to a point. Swift has an emphasis on concise syntax, and removing the repetition, IMO, is a nice win in readability.

<comment><AUTHOR> You do have a good point, and something I didn't explicitly notice before. This does seem to have the indirect consequence of enforcing some sort of type information in the variable name, but I expect many iOS developers do that regardless.

It'd also be interesting to see the impact on readability when you have longer variable names. `point` definitely makes it more concise here. But if you had several points within the same scope, readability may suffer given type information is typically at the end of a variable name?

      path.addLineTo(childViewTopLeftPoint)
      path.addCurveTo(childViewTopRightPoint, withControlPoint1: arbitrary1Point, andControlPoint2: arbitrary2Point)

      path.addLine(toPoint: childViewTopLeftPoint)
      path.addCurve(toPoint: childViewTopRightPoint, withControlPoint1: arbitrary1Point, andControlPoint2: arbitrary2Point)

I feel the second version here allows me to bypass obtaining the type information "..Point" from the variable name when reading.

Interestingly, I wonder how this type of method would be converted:

      addArcWithCenter(center: CGPoint, radius: CGFloat, startAngle: CGFloat, endAngle: CGFloat, clockwise: Bool)

You'd perhaps think of addArcWith(center: CGPoint), but then you'd need to have 'center' in the variable name to convey meaning. Keeping addArcWithCenter maintains obj-c status quo. addArc(withCenter: CGPoint) is more Swifty, but you may have repetition if your variable is named centerPoint, or similar. I have a feeling it would be kept as is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> The title they chose implies that they're actually changing the APIs to take full advantage of Swift language features. Perhaps they should have named the article "We're renaming some classes and methods."

<comment><USER5> They're actually changing the way Obj-C APIs are "imported" into Swift. This doesn't rename the method calls, it does more invasive name changes as part of the bridging.

So the class UIBezierPath and it's method addLineToPoint: haven't changed, and are still written in Obj-C. The difference is in how they're called from Swift code.

Presumably it'll operate the same way in reverse, and this isn't specific to Apple frameworks/classes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> If it is one that that _should_ be known about Apple software by now, is that things _will_ change from under your feet. :)

<comment><USER7> And yet only Microsoft gets criticised for doing it. :)

<comment><USER8> Microsoft is actually the king of backwards compatibility in my view, and anyone who claims otherwise should peruse Raymond Chen's blog.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Could they just go all the way and use a mandatory first argument name to make things even more concise? That would get away from something that annoys a lot of people about Swift, the implicitly unnamed first arguments.

Something like this:

        class BezierPath: NSObject {
          func add(LineTo lineTo: CGPoint) {}
          func add(ArcWithCenter center: CGPoint, radius: CGFloat,
                              startAngle: CGFloat, endAngle: CGFloat,
                              clockwise: Bool) {}
          func add(CurveTo endPoint: CGPoint, controlPoint1 point1: CGPoint,
                              controlPoint2 point2: CGPoint) {}
          func add(QuadCurveTo endPoint: CGPoint, controlPoint: CGPoint) {}
        }

        class main {
            func run() {
                let path = BezierPath()
                let point1 = CGPoint()
                let point2 = CGPoint()

                path.add(LineTo: CGPoint(x: 100, y: 0))
                path.add(ArcWithCenter: CGPointZero, radius: 20.0,
                                 startAngle: 0.0, endAngle: CGFloat(M_PI) * 2.0,
                                 clockwise: true)
                path.add(CurveTo: CGPoint(x: 100, y: 0), controlPoint1: point1,
                                 controlPoint2: point2)
                path.add(QuadCurveTo: point2, controlPoint: point1)
            }
        }

The difference is mostly that it looks even more concise when using code completion. You would see:

        path.add(LineTo: CGPoint)

Instead of:

        path.addLineTo(point: CGPoint)

<comment><USER10> It gets really annoying when you have short single-arg functions. Imagine what swap(_:_) or Collection.suffix(_) would look like with mandatory first arguments.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I do wish the Swift developers had allowed actual Objective-C calls in Swift to make it look the same.

Objective-C

      [aPath addLineToPoint:CGPointMake(200.0, 40.0)];

proposed

      aPath.(addLineToPoint:CGPoint(200.0, 40.0));

the more complicated example would be:

Objective-C

      [object selector1:item1 selector2:item2];

to

      object.(selector1:item1, selector2:item2);

although I'm still not sure about the love of commas

<comment><USER12> Why would that be better than this, which still 'looks the same'?

         aPath.addLineToPoint(CGPoint(200.0, 40.0))

I don't see how your proposal would fit with Swift's syntax.

<comment><USER11> I'm more concerned about multiple selectors and what a mess it becomes, and yes, I wish they'd change the syntax.

<comment><USER13> To me, something like your syntax makes sense when there isn't a clear hierarchy among selectorPart1, selectorPart2, selectorPart3, etc. However, in every case where a method can be thought of as having a single primary action that is refined by arguments, I believe the action(argument1:value1, argument2:value2) syntax makes more sense.

I wouldn't want to see, for example:

      collectionView.(dequeueReusableCellWithReuseIdentifier:identifier, forIndexPath: indexPath)

because that obscures the primary purpose of the method, which is to dequeue a cell. To me, this is preferable:

      collectionView.dequeueReusableCell(reuseIdentifier: "ImageCell", îndexPath: indexPath)

The long first component of the Objective C selector ("dequeueReusableCellWithReuseIdentifier") is just an artifact of ObjC's lack of distinction between method names and parameter names, which forces the API creator to use words like "With" to accomplish what Swift can do natively.

What are some examples of methods you think make more sense with your syntax?

<comment><USER14> Objective-C has no object methods, just pure multiple-dispatch for a generic "select" operation? that's amazing.

<comment><USER15> Objective-C does have object methods, but they're dynamically typed: methods can come and go at runtime, method names can be constructed from strings, and there's no need to downcast an object of a superclass type to the subclass type before calling a method on that subclass. This design choice basically forces Objective-C into doing a hash table lookup and indirect dispatch for all method calls as a base case. This logic is encapsulated in the "objc_msgSend" function, which the compiler compiles all method invocations into a call to.

(If you're thinking "wow, that must be slow", you're right: objc_msgSend is very heavily optimized, but you can't beat one load from a fixed offset and an indirect jump as in C++ and Java. This is why Swift made the decision to abandon this model from the get-go. Other dynamic languages have ways to optimize this and eliminate the hash table lookup in most cases, but these techniques require self-modifying code, which Apple doesn't want to use; the only feasible solution for Apple's native language was to switch to a different semantics.)

<comment><USER16> Swift has not abandoned this dispatch method "from the get-go", it is still very much one of the supported dispatch methods in the Swift runtime.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10725707](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10725707) [https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of- Mo...](https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of- Mon-20151207/001948.html)

<comment><USER15> Well, for Objective-C compatibility, and maybe for interfaces/protocols (depending on whether they use fat pointers or not), they need that capability. But Swift tries to push you into C++-like vtables when possible.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


New MacBook Air with Retina Display, no TouchBar but TouchID - <AUTHOR> https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/ <comment><USER2> Now that they have the Air as the super thin lightweight device maybe they could could make the Macbook Pro a more practical machine with some USB slots and put back the SD reader? Even if that makes it a little thicker.</comment>


Essential Phone review: An arcane artifact from an unrealized future - <AUTHOR> https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/18/16165040/essential-phone-review-android-andy-rubin <comment><USER3> I wish smartphone manufacturers would shift the focus from making better cameras to improving battery life. The performance of every phone becomes zero once the battery runs out. This review claims excellent battery life, but for me to really find the phone compelling, the battery life needs to be more than excellent so that I can believe it will still be able to last a full day two years after I get it. Are magnetic accessories really that great if I'll have to get a new core phone anyway once the battery gives out (from what I understand, the Essential Phone's battery is not replaceable)?

Before 360 degree pictures, VR, or a better AI assistant, I just want a phone that I'm actually willing to use as much as I'd like to instead of dimming down the screen to the point that I can barely see it when I know I'm going to be away from a charger for most of the day.

<comment><USER4> The market has spoken and by far people prefer thinner lighter phones than greater battery life. It's silly to build a fat heavy long battery life phone because it can only ever address the preferences/needs of a small niche.

A thin light phone can always add greater battery life with a battery case, so it can address both markets. My wife is a heavy user, I got her Apple's battery case for her iPhone 6, and she loves it (it's actually works really well). And she can always take it off if she tires of it's heft.

<comment><USER5> The market had spoken in 2003 - people wanted phones with small screens that were indestructible and lasted a couple of days in terms of battery life. Then the iphone happened.

<comment><USER4> The market speaks every year. And it continues to say no to heavy duty battery life phones. If someone ever designs one that comes with substantive user benefits that thin phones can't provide, fat phones can become a standard again.

But again, thin phones can provide as much battery life as you want, just add a battery case. It's like demanding Porsche include permanent, unremovable trailers on every 911, because some minority of users wants to occasionally tow stuff with their sportscar.

<comment><USER6> How can a market "speak" when there's no way of buying anything but the same practially 99% copied black slab for each company?

The basis of market competition (and the ability for market to "speak") is the concept of choice. In mobile phone market there is little choice and the device themselves are more than a single feature.

<comment><USER4> Here is a list of 20 hour battery life phones. You may note they aren't best sellers.

[https://www.cnet.com/news/smartphones-best-long-battery- life...](https://www.cnet.com/news/smartphones-best-long-battery-life/)

While there is lots of similarities, every phone is differentiated in some way. You want bigger differences but right now bigger differences aren't perceived as a plus by most users.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Having held off so far on getting a Galaxy S8 to look at its competitors (HTC U11, upcoming Pixel, Essential, etc.), the S8 still seems to blow them all away as far as what I want, namely:

\- bezel-free screen

\- headphone jack

\- SD slot

The _only_ thing keeping me from buying it right now is Samsung's history of slow updates.

Which makes me think what we really, _really_ need is to bring back the Google Play Edition devices. Looking back on it, they absolutely nailed what the smartphones should be: flagship devices, stock Android, guaranteed updates free from carrier holds. The problem was they cost the full price of the phone at a time when most people were still paying $200 upfront for subsidized phones--so the perception was that the cost was higher. Now that the full price of the phone is advertised upfront, I think we're due for a refresh of the GPE line-up.

<comment><USER8> Do want to add that the S8 has wireless charging. I had a Nexus 6 and a Note 5, both with wireless charging - I can't go back. It is one those changes that impacts how I use the phone. I never need to plug into anything.

<comment><USER4> But you have to charge it in a special spot, while a regular phone can be plugged in anywhere to charge. I still don't get the wireless charging benefit, and I have an apple watch.

<comment><USER9> Wirelessly chargeable phones can typically be charged normally. What it buys you is convenience in that special place or two where you always charge your phone (bedside, work desk, etc.). I really liked it when I did have it and wish Apple offered it too.

<comment><USER4> That's a good point that I didn't consider.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I haven't seen a single reason to buy this phone. I mean, perhaps a few people might _really_ love the design, but that's a matter of taste.

Does this thing do _anything_ that makes it special? Motorola already did modularity better.

In a world where Samsung dominates Android phone sales, another contender has to do _something_ to stand out. It can't be just a good phone. (And to make things worse it's missing some killer features, like water resistance and a headphone jack.)

<comment> amiga-workbench I wish shipping unbastardized software was enough to do so, but people keep going back for more TouchWiz. Baffling.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> My semi-budget android phones just get worse, appart from the camera.

My first smartphone, the desire-z had a physical keyboard. My current, the moto-g 1st gen still fits in my pocket comfortably.

My next will have a screen far bigger than I asked for, specs would still be upper middle-class and just the camera is better. There is no semi-budget android that is not large. I'll probably get the moto g5+ when prices drop with the g5s+ coming out.

<comment><USER12> I feel your pain. My all-time favorite phone was the Moto E2 (4.5-inch screen), and would still be using it if I hadn't dropped it in water. I don't think I'll ever get a budget or semi-budget phone that is as comfortable to use.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Android? Ugh!

What's with all the hardware worship, while totally ignoring the software? Hardware is cheap, low-hanging fruit. If you're going to push technology boundaries, try a more interesting, forward looking OS _to start with_.

Both Sailfish and QNX really are 'arcane' and 'futuristic'. Android apps can run alongside Sailfish, so why aren't these glitzy manufacturers aiming just that little bit higher?

<comment> amiga-workbench That would be like trying to sell the average consumer on a laptop running Gentoo.

<comment><USER13> Chrome OS is based on Gentoo... ;-)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> In contrast to the author's main complaint: For me, the camera is one of the least important features on the phone, and I'd actually appreciate a phone that did _not_ have a front-facing camera.

I really wish it was waterproof though... that would have made the transition a _very_ tempting value proposition...

<comment><USER15> The only two features that keep me on high-end smartphones are the cameras (I have kids—Apple's live photos are basically magic) and GPS. If it were only the latter I could probably drop to a dumbphone and just use physical maps, and/or scribble directions from a Maps search before leaving.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I'm actually impressed by the design focus they kept to. Rejecting bloatware not only a user benefit, but it probably removed a lot of outside dependencies from their project and likely was a significant reason they were able to get to market so quickly.

</comment><comment><USER16> Yeah so can I get a phone with the thickness of the old Motorola Milestone/Droid but with current guts and a proportionally higher capacity battery?

Edit: grammar

<comment><USER17> [https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/moto- turbopow...](https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-mods/moto-turbopower- pack-battery)

[https://www.androidheadlines.com/2017/07/motorola-moto- turbo...](https://www.androidheadlines.com/2017/07/motorola-moto-turbo-power- pack-moto-mod-review.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> I made a promise to myself that my next phone will be waterproof - <USER2> for a device this expensive.

</comment><comment><USER19> I can't understand the hype, will someone explain why this isn't just another mediocre $700 Android phone?

<comment><USER20> There's a novel wireless accessory system allowing for functional phone accessories, such as cameras. This is like the moto-z system, but wireless.

The screen has a smaller bezel and there's no 3.5mm headphone jack.

Truly, the future.

<comment><USER21> > there's no 3.5mm headphone jack

All I need to hear. No thanks.</comment></comment></comment>


How-to Convert a Command Line Result into an Image in Linux - <AUTHOR> http://www.cnx-software.com/2011/09/22/how-to-convert-a-command-line-result-into-an-image-in-linux/

<comment><USER2> Fancy, but you're throwing away all the usefulness of text.</comment>


UK is deploying a surveillance state as British are focusing on Covid-19 - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/iamBorjaMoya/status/1246721750852870144 <comment><AUTHOR> I've just released a short film (free) about the UK's surveillance state and the live facial recognition deployments by UK police forces, where thousands have been scanned without consent, and many have been racially profiled.

During 2019 and 2020 I witnessed several live facial recognition deployments by the Metropolitan police and South Wales police. And I was able to capture first hand the behind the scenes of what the police do during these deployments.

The first thing I noticed in these deployment is how the UK police forces target certain people—especially racial minorities. Which is extremely worrying. But after you deeply analyze their modus operandi, the threat of their surveillance goes much further than the already grave threat of racial profiling: it is the beginning of a state of surveillance and a roll-back on human rights and fundamental freedoms.

In this short film I show you the behind the scenes of what the police do during live facial recognition operational deployments. And I give you a sneak a peak of where the UK is heading with its surveillance state. And maybe this video will serve as an example of other countries that are also walking down this road.

You can watch the full short film here: bmstudios.org/uk-surveillance-state/

<comment><USER2> Not wishing to downplay the subject, but the surveillance state is not a recent development in the UK. Tony Geraghty [1] was writing about this over 20 years ago. Back then, it was about how techniques developed for use in Northern Ireland during the troubles were beginning to be applied across the UK as a whole. This involved things such as the mass-interception of communications, or automatic scanning of car number plates on a massive scale with the aim of tracking all car journeys within the country. Recent developments are unfortunately just a continuation of a trend started a long time ago.

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

<comment><AUTHOR> You're absolutely right. The thing is that they have access to way better technology--and they're not shy about it. I'm not just talking about their live facial recognition. But also their access to Cleaview AI's database ([https://metro.co.uk/2020/02/28/met-police-used- controversial...](https://metro.co.uk/2020/02/28/met-police-used- controversial-american-facial-recognition-firm-data-breach-reveals-12320552/))

Or just consider what Cressida Dick said (Metropolitan Commissioner) regarding how they should use data: "we absolutely must be in the exploitation business"([https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/2020/02/the-guardian-big- brot...](https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/2020/02/the-guardian-big-brother- watch-responds-to-met-commissioners-attack/))

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> 1984 came like 40 years late.

<comment><AUTHOR> 2020 is the new 1984...</comment></comment>


Machine intelligent mapping of cancer-beating molecules in foods - <AUTHOR> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-45349-y <comment><USER2> That is a decent write-up. I found a few components missing from their diagrams, including Sulfurophane (for atophagy, benzine excretion and up- regulating NRF2) and Berberine (AMPK activation, mTor dampening, p-53 signalling, anti-tumor and anti-cancer).</comment>