VNC in VR: Synchronized Virtual Desktops - T-A https://blog.highfidelity.com/blog/2016/4/25/vnc-in-vr-synchronized-virtual-desktops <comment><AUTHOR> ACPU VNC-like VR experiments:

JS coding using browser editor: [http://acpul.tumblr.com/image/116464611050](http://acpul.tumblr.com/image/116464611050)

iSimulator on iPad: [http://acpul.tumblr.com/image/116464559770](http://acpul.tumblr.com/image/116464559770)

Video Apple WWDC picture in picture in VR (realtime performance): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubNfWarTawI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubNfWarTawI)

</comment><comment><USER2> When I see these demos or hololens demos I always wonder if the resolution is good enough to code. To read text clearly without blurred effects or jaggies. After all the text is being mapped to a texture in 3d. These demos work but are they usable?

<comment><USER3> I just released a VNC client for Hololens, for the express purpose of exposing my Mac to that environment, for development. The resolution is absolutely _fantastic_. The thing about Hololens is that the resolution all depends on where the window is in reference to you; I don't know how they do what they do, but there's no blurriness, no jaggies in the least. I'm not one for hyperbole when it comes to tech, especially that in development, but I will say this: it's the closest to magic I've ever seen.

Edit: I should probably actually link it, since people might see this! [https://www.microsoft.com/en- us/store/p/vncaster/9nblggh528q...](https://www.microsoft.com/en- us/store/p/vncaster/9nblggh528qx) Don't judge the text by the screenshots; for whatever reason, they threw a 640x480 camera on the front, and downscale everything for that. What looks like magic in real life, looks like shit in screenshots. If they don't fix that with Hololens v2, there's a _serious_ problem with their priorities.

<comment><USER4> Interesting. We've got a Vive in the office, and the limited resolution is a serious downer. Everything looks like it's 800x600, no matter how far away it is.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> What's the FPS like? VNC even on a local network is barely usable.

<comment><USER6> What do you use VNC for? If your local network speed are fast, you can easily code or browse ... etc - if you are watching videos or playing video games forget about it.

<comment><USER5> I have no real use-case. Just making a statement. I wonder why YouTube can stream 1080p at 60fps but VNC on a local network can't.

Not bitching about VNC because it's done a lot of good things and it's very useful, but I think there's a lot of room for optimization.

<comment><USER7> Videos are pre-rendered and compressed which massively reduces filesize

<comment><USER5> Can't the same sort of compression be used over VNC?

That would help.

<comment><USER8> YouTube has the luxury of not needing real-time compression. Latency hurts usability more than low frame rate.

<comment><USER5> OK, but how does Apple's AirPlay work so well, then?</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Android tablets: It's the browser - <AUTHOR> http://www.russellbeattie.com/blog/android-tablets-its-the-browser

<comment><USER3> Yes, Chrome on Android is a travesty, and this article doesn't even list all of the major issues it has.

The fonts being screwed up is a "feature" -- Chrome tries to detect which pieces of text are important and enlarge them (and the reverse for unimportant). I don't think it'd be useful even if the decisions on what's important worked well. And boy, the decisions really don't work well.

<comment><USER4> Interesting.. I had no idea it was the browser that did that - I always thought it was something in HN's styling. My windows phone browser does something similar (e.g., <http://imgur.com/ONCGHL8>), but the decision its algorithm makes correlates with what I find useful most of the time. Does anyone here know how chrome detects the importance of the text? (I'm guessing it's based somewhat on the length of the text and how deeply nested it is in the HTML.)

<comment><USER5> I used Chrome for like a day untill I deactivated it (can't uninstall) and continued to use the stock browser, just because it is so mind-bogglingly ugly.

<comment><USER6> The thing that killed chrome for me was the way it uses the same UI as desktop chrome for browser tabs. On my nexus 7 (I can't speak for larger tablets, maybe it works there?), the tabs are simply too small for me to be precise about any interaction I have with them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Google needs to gift everyone at the Chrome team a random Android tablet, and afterwards take away their main work computers for a day or two.

By the end of the month the browser situation on Android would be greatly improved.

</comment><comment><USER8> My comparison is iPad Mini Chrome to Nexus 7 Chrome, have to agree that Chrome on Nexus 7 is not up to par with iOS. But I do strongly prefer Chrome's UX over Safari's.

Primary issues with Chrome on Nexus 7:

\- Scrolling performance is much slower, especially while loading larger pages.

\- I have a _much_ harder time opening links on the N7 on pages like HN front page where there are clusters of links with fairly small text. The pointer algorithm seems to be all wrong.

\- Android Chrome's popup bubble when clicking links seems cool, and seems like it would solve the previous issue, but it's completely erratic for me. Often doesn't come up at all, unlike the article which says it always comes up.

<comment><USER9> In Chrome for Android beta they've implemented some changes that are suppose to improve scrolling, especially on large pages, and they've adjusted the tap disambiguation popup. If you don't want to use the beta these changes should filter down to the stable release at some point.

<comment><USER10> In my experience the tap disambiguation popup is worse in Beta, not better. They managed to break it so half the time when it pops up, it's empty instead of containing a zoomed version of what you tapped on so you have to tap away to dismiss it and hope it works the next time you open it.

<comment><USER9> Yeah, I was more referring to the change in terms of when it pops up rather than the obvious bug of it being mostly broken at the moment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "2. This is the dialog box that comes up when I click a YouTube link in Reddit. I've chose "Always" about 3,496 times thus far and it doesn't seem to ever last for more than a day or so. Basically, any time any app updates it seems to reset your default choices."

I thought the article was a bit hand-wavy in general but that's something I agree with. I'm a die hard android user and I have this problem. Why do I have to make the choice for EVERY SINGLE BOOKMARK? Can't you remember that I open bookmarks in Chrome?

<comment><USER12> Part of the issue here is that Android lets you map different url/domains to different apps. Because maybe you want to open most URLs in Chrome but you want to open reddit urls in some Reddit-focused native app. (Ditto Play store URLs opening with the Play Market App instead of the default browser). This should only really come into play when you've installed apps with registered handlers for those URLs though.

Having said that, it seems like he's running into a bug where it isn't saving this setting and I can see how in that case it would be hugely annoying to be asked this all the time.

I'm a pretty big Android fanboy and my day job is currently Android programming and I mostly enjoy it, but I've been kind of surprised at the number of "how did they never notice this" bugs that have been introduced in Android over the recent past, especially in the two Jelly Bean releases. It is entirely possible this bug we're talking about now is phone-specific and isn't a general Android bug (I've never seen it nor heard of it being a common problem), but the amount of bugs introduced into the core OS over the past couple of releases is somewhat worrying.

<comment><USER11> I understand how Android works with intents, and I actually think this is a problem with how certain apps are declaring their AndroidManifest files and how the system saves decisions. If I have bookmarks to mywebsite1.com and mywebsite2.com and I select "Always" for one of the links from Bookmarks, it will still ask which browser I want to use when the Bookmarks widget broadcasts and intent for mywebsite2.com. I think the system is probably saying "Use Chrome for all links to mywebsite1.com" when what I really mean is "Use Chrome for all links launched from Bookmarks Widget". I think there should be a new AndroidManifest property where you can simply declare "I open all web links" not "I open <http://*/*> or whatever it is now. I understand that it's useful that I have a choice to open wikipedia links in the official app or in my browser but I see no reason to be asked for links that have no specific app for them. It's a fuzzy distinction, but important.

<comment><USER13> At least for me (Galaxy Nexus), that _is_ how it works. I've set Chrome to "always" and now any links I click on in whatever app open in Chrome.

Maybe is something specific about how the bookmark app I'd launching its intents, though, because I don't use that app (I use a reddit app for launching links mostly).

The exception is links to sites which have their own handlers (reddit, YouTube, etc).

<comment><USER11> It works for me with most things, just certain apps break it. If you use the bookmarks widget or have multiple Wikipedia apps on the GNex you'll see what I mean. And it's (surprisingly) worse on the N7.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Firefox for Android developer here. First of all, thanks for the feedback. Just a quick reply/update on some of the points raised in the post:

1\. We're currently working on a new iteration of the tablet UI which will replace the sidebar on portrait with a horizontal scrolling strip that goes away when you select a tab (see meta bug 817675). The sidebar will not be "stuck" by default anymore and will slide away once you select a tab (see bug 817728).

2\. We mitigate things like this with anti-phishing/malware protection and the identity status icon. However, this is not guaranteed to cover every possible case. Anyway, I filed bug 839994 to get some discussion going.

3\. I agree that the current approach is not ideal if you want to browse through your desktop/mobile bookmarks very often. The current UI is more oriented towards finding your bookmarks through the awesomescreen search. Two points about this: the UX team is working on a new design for bookmarks/reading list. It will definitely involve an overhauled UI for accessing bookmarks. In the shorter-term though, we'll be working on a new iteration of the start page that gives you quick access to your bookmarks from there (no extra taps). Work on some of these changes has already started. For instance, you can now 'pin' sites on your start page.

4\. This is fixed in Aurora/Nightly builds (see bug 786982). You can close the last tab. You'll see the start page when you do so.

Hope that helps. We're an open source project. Next time, I strongly suggest you to file bugs. We're happy to clarify and re-discuss design decisions whenever necessary.

</comment><comment><USER15> _And worse? It's not fixable by anyone outside the core team of developers as they've moved away from the standard XUL UI system to a pure Java wrapper. I was going to get in there and whip up some add-ons because I really wanted to use the browser and thought if I could just tweak a few of it's more ugly bits it'd be somewhat usable. But after downloading the code and taking a good long look, it turns out that all the bits that suck the most are outside anything modifiable by add-ons._

Anybody can modify the browser chrome, not just the core developers. All source code is public:

[http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla- central/file/5835bc763be7/mobi...](http://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla- central/file/5835bc763be7/mobile/android)

Instructions for building:

<https://wiki.mozilla.org/Mobile/Fennec/Android>

<comment><USER10> You're totally missing the point. XUL allowed (and for Desktop Firefox, still allows) people to customize UI with addons. The new Mobile Firefox's UI is all android-specific Java you can't customize without compiling Firefox yourself and deploying it to your phone, which is basically something that 0.00000000001% of the people on this planet will ever care enough to do - <USER2> then their build will be outdated 8 hours later after new bug fixes get pushed to trunk and their custom build doesn't automatically update.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> I agree for all Android devices until the current generation. However, with the Nexus 7, Nexus 4, HTC One X, and similar devices I find the Chrome experience to be every bit as good as iOS. Maybe I haven't used iOS long enough to catch the very small differences but I now consider the browsers to be equal. The only area in which iOS still wins is startup/resume time for the browser with a few tabs.

<comment><USER16> Echoing what you're saying, on my Nexus S, Chrome is unbearably slow.

I would bet that the majority of Android smartphones -- the ones that aren't the marquee, top-of-the-line products -- all have a similar quality of experience with Chrome.

In a few years when Moore's Law catches up to the lower end of Android phones, that won't be an issue, but right now I think we're still in a transition period.

<comment><USER17> I'm pretty happy with Chrome on my Nexus 4. Only on this phone do I feel like performance is close to where it needs to be. Nexus One, S, and Galaxy have all been a little sluggish for their contemporary OS. iOS has always been tweaked for its devices to deliver responsive performance, even if it wasn't fast.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I sincerely wish all the tablet browsers had the following things offered/fixed asap:

1\. A full-screen option so that I can experience whatever website I am on with full space and attention. Dolphin (my default browser) on iPad already has this, and it makes good for inadvertent touches on the screen taking me away from the page I am on.

2\. CSS property :fixed, should be fixed you know. Even on iPad the fixed elements jump off the screen the moment you focus on text areas or input boxes. Drives me crazy! And yes I don't want to hide and fade-in that element (like with jquerymobile) just to fool the bug.

3\. Tablets probably do not require pinch-to-zoom like in mobile phones. This could be contested, but seriously double tap screws the experience of clicking buttons. You expect to login, but the site just jumps to a new zoom level.

4\. I played with libraries of text-editor, after text-editor, after text- editor to get the experience right. Figured out that it was the iframe (i.e. DOM within a DOM) that makes it a complete dud on iPad. Tap events bind to the iframe after a significant, unusable, time lag. On other tablets it is worse.

The list can go on. I think the problem is of approach. Tablets shouldn't be porting browser from mobile. It should have been from desktops to tablets. Or something built ground up.

</comment><comment><USER19> The way Chrome messes with the font size is really frustrating. The fact that this is a feature makes it even worse.

<comment><USER20> The font size weirdness is really only an issue on some sites, most notably Reddit. They are treating it as a "known issue", not a "feature". You can go vote (or whatever) for its resolution here: [http://support.google.com/chrome/bin/static.py?hl=en&pag...](http://support.google.com/chrome/bin/static.py?hl=en&page=known_issues.cs)

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Bought two nexus 7 over christmas, one for me and one as a present. I've only read good things about them.

Ended up returning them both due to the bad surfing experience. Laggy, bad scrolling. Sometimes it felt like it missed my swipe as a whole and just got stuck. Switched back to my ipad1 which is much better in that regard.

I liked the rest... but surfing is what I do most on a pad, so that has to be perfect.

<comment><USER22> Did you try using a different browser? I've heard some people say that Chrome performed poorly on their Nexus 7 for some reason, but switching browser always seems to fix it. IRL every Nexus 7 I've seen is buttery smooth, so I don't know what is causing the problem for some people.

<comment><USER21> No I didn't, maybe I should have. Chrome is so good otherwise so it felt improbable that any other browser would be better.

With that said.. I don't understand how google could ship chrome in that state. Or how the reviews (I've read) seems to fail to mention it. Maybe it's just crystalclear when directly compared to an ipad.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Its strange, I've never heard anybody off the internet say that Android broswers aren't as good as iOS.

On the internet, when people complain they are usually told to try Dolphin, so I'm surprised it wasn't included in the article.

<comment><USER23> Dolphin isn't great IMO. There are some real good ideas in it from a usability standpoint, and then others that are just face-slappingly aggravating.

Chrome is the best browser I've used for Android and it has problems that annoy me to no end as well. I don't think the author mentioned this, but one huge annoyance is that the tab bar is _always_ visible no matter where you're scrolled on the page. Vertical screen real estate in landscape mode is really precious and having chrome stuck on top of the view at all times is pretty frustrating. I love how iOS Safari handles this--you see the tab and URL chrome when you're at the top of the page, and you can tap to quickly scroll to the top of the page if you need it.

I agree completely with the author. One of my primary uses of a tablet is using a web browser, and there just aren't really any excellent options on Android right now.

<comment><USER24>
        Dolphin isn't great IMO. There are some real good ideas in it from a usability standpoint, and then others that are just face-slappingly aggravating.

Would you mind leaving a short explanation? Dolphin has been my favourite for a while now because it is well rounded and has brilliant Lastpass integration.

<comment><USER25> I think Dolphin is noticeably faster than Chrome and I appreciate the fact that it supports plugins. However, I recently noticed that it auto plays HTML5 videos which is quite annoying, whereas Chrome requires a manual "start" (at least on USA Today's mobile site).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> _Posted Monday, October 15, 2012 2:26 am_

Things move quickly, I don't know how relevant this is now, especially with the latest (last week's?) version of Chrome for Android.

</comment><comment><USER27> Really, I've consistently credited having a real browser in Chrome was the best part of modern Android. The Google account synchronization especially.

</comment><comment><USER28> The one thing I really like about the default android browser is the fact that it has private tabs. I'm uncomfortable with leaving some things on a portable device that facilitates being left around, picked up by strangers, et al. I can't fathom why it's not more popular on mobile browsers, including most of the third-party Android ones.

<comment><USER29> Mobile Safari has private browsing mode, but it is quite hidden and not as convenient as incognito tabs in Chrome.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> Oddly, I prefer the Nexus 7 Chrome browser experience over iOS iPad. Yes, there is some choppiness in that Android Chrome seems not to properly format via viewport on some sites but the big griefs are absence of "full screen" and no easy goto top of page function (like you can in iOS). Other than that, I prefer Chrome on Android:

* I like its tabs model better and the OS integration (easy to bounce between apps as the browser is a utility that is often popped in and out from another app)

* Most important, it uses the OS wide font size setting and this to me is the biggest advantage over iOS -- it probably just a factor for someone with poor eyesight like me, but I need bigger text and pinching and zooming on page parts just not a joyful exercise.

</comment><comment><USER31> When I got an Nexus 7 finally, I just added the old stock browser for Android to it. It's not too hard to do really (assuming you are rooted/bootloader unlocked [required]). If you're unlocked and rooted, it just takes a few terminal commands to add the old stock browser back.

Tap to zoom works much better on the old browser and the quick controls for it are a feature I can't live without.

I wrote a small guide[1] on how to do it on one of the Android forums for anyone else that prefers the old browser over Chrome on Android.

[http://rootzwiki.com/topic/30834-how-to-install-the-stock- br...](http://rootzwiki.com/topic/30834-how-to-install-the-stock-browser/)

</comment><comment><USER32> I would have agreed with this article 6 months ago, before I found X-Scope Pro, which brings the features to Android that I had missed in iOS, including natural full screen mode options, copy/paste tools, and more.

See [http://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=sui.mRelease...](http://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=sui.mRelease&hl=en&referrer=utm_source%3Dgoogle%26utm_medium%3Dorganic%26utm_term%3Dx+scope+pro)

That said the default Android browsers need a lot of work.

</comment><comment><USER33> Galaxy S3 and Nexus 7 experiences: Chrome on S3 is the fastest browser I've used on a mobile device. Works fine on Nexus 7 as a main browser I haven't noticed any lag (at least nothing that I could notice).

Regarding the bar in the middle of Techcrunch page are we certain is a problem with the particular browser and not the website?

</comment><comment><USER34> So, does anyone consider the fact that most of the mobile web is optimized for whatever apple ships? It is not surprising to me that small annoyances in web pages exist in everywhere but ios. I have no comments on browser chrome though, they all have annoying behaviours in general.

</comment><comment><USER35> I've been a pretty vocal fan of Android for years, but I was oddly in limited company when panning Chrome for Android when it came out. It seemed that every Android advocate, and even its worst critics, were falling over each other to declare it a new panacea.

It was a marked setback from the already weak native browser (I use Android phones, tablets, and iPads. There is no doubt that later versions of iOS shot it far in the lead for browsing). It seems to be a universally single-threaded browser. I'm not talking about the native limits of JavaScript...but rather every part of the browser. If a page has an HTML5 video...there's a several second pause of the entire browser while it considers existence. Layout, loading things...everything seems to stall the main thread. It is abysmal.

</comment><comment><USER36> He's mostly right on the browser issues, but as a non-native speaker it annoys me when he gets 1 out of 7 occurrences of the possessive pronoun "its" right. It's probably the most contagious mistake bloggers make.

</comment><comment><USER37> While I don't disagree with any of his points, I did notice the part where he mentioned not getting a job at either Firefox or Google. A little bit of anger might be seeping through.

<comment><USER38> You're not wrong.

<comment><USER39> Appreciate your honesty. :)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> pasting my comment on the article itself. admittedly this only addresses one of the author's points: On any Jellybean device, if you go to Settings > System > Developer options, and check "Show touches" to do just that, it goes a huge way towards reducing confusion when you're tapping things. Having that visual feedback means you never have to wonder if you tapped something, or what you tapped on. It's hard for me to use an Android device without it now.

</comment><comment><USER40> I'm really happy with Chrome Beta on Android. Easily beats all the alternatives. YMMV.

</comment><comment><USER41> Happy native apps user.

</comment><comment><USER42> >>> Apple doesn't allow any other choice of browser except for those using it's core WebKit engine

1) Not true. <http://www.google.com/intl/en/chrome/browser/mobile/ios.html>

2) "Its".

<comment><USER43> "Rendering and the Javascript engine are provided by iOS through UIWebView." - <https://developers.google.com/chrome/mobile/docs/faq>

<comment><USER42> You're right, I didn't realize that.</comment></comment></comment>


Protecting Mozilla's GitHub Repositories from Malicious Modification - <AUTHOR> https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2018/09/11/protecting-mozillas-github-repositories-from-malicious-modification/ <comment><USER2> > Production branches should be identified and configured:

> ...

> Require all commits to be GPG signed, using keys known in advance.

Is it possible to configure "all commits gpg signed" on Github? I haven't seen this option.

Another interesting thing that Github lacks is signed git pushes (`gpg push --signed`) that allows audit logging who moved which object to which ref.

<comment><USER3> > Is it possible to configure "all commits gpg signed" on Github? I haven't > seen this option.

Settings > Branches > [Add Rule] > <Apply Rule To> "*" > check "require signed commits".

At least according to the help text:

> Commits pushed to matching branches must have verified signatures.

<comment><USER4> I've been signing my GPG commits for five years now.

The problem is that they don't allow GPG keys to be sunsetted. "Verified" should be a property on the commit, not something computed. If I replace my GPG key with something more secure, but I have no reason to believe my former GPG key was stolen, I should be able to keep trusting the other commits.

<comment><USER2> If you rotate your signing subkey then this would work as expected.

Rotating primary/master keys is a problem in OpenPGP in general (not just Github).

<comment><USER4> Yeah.

I guess I've tended to shy away from subkeys because I figure losing the primary is a function of time. Basically at some point a virus, or improperly secured backup, is going to get my key.

Though I suppose the pro way of doing this would be to set up some kind of air gaped PC, generate the subkey, then display it as a QR code or something.

<comment><USER2> Yes, that's what I did but instead of copying the subkey via QR I put it on a Yubikey. Actually it's more convenient that way as it's possible to use it on any computer.

But from my perspective if you keep your master key super secure subkeys can be your "operational keys" that are easily swapped when needed (I rotated my subs when Yubico Infineon bug surfaced).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> It is a shame that a lot of critical projects (including compilers, browsers...) still try to do things a la CVS/SVN (even if they use a DVCS).

Please, stop it. Do it the way the kernel does it. A hierarchy of maintainers that reviews the work sent by others and a single person with commit access to the main repository.

I am amazed that these smart people have not realizead yet that unrestricted commit access is simpy a no-go, with or without signed commits/tags.

<comment><USER6> Github lowers barriers to entry for a lot of people and I guess Mozilla likes that.

Compare creating a one line fix for a project on github and having a discussion and review to sending a properly formatted patch to a mailing list and following up on that.

I know that having properly configured mutt and git send-email eases most of these pains but not everyone uses mutt and browsers have better consistency between them than e-mail clients. You don't need to go through a guide to configure your browser to send patches and participate in a review (vs [https://nanxiao.me/en/configure-thunderbird-to-send-patch- fr...](https://nanxiao.me/en/configure-thunderbird-to-send-patch-friendly/) ).

<comment><USER7> > Compare creating a one line fix for a project on github and having a > discussion and review to sending a properly formatted patch to a mailing > list and following up on that.

For the former:

* Create a Github account

* Fork the repository

* Set up the new git remote

* Push to that remote

* Open the pull request

* Wait for notifications via email

* Go back to the webpage and find the comment

* Modify the code, add, commit, push, and type a comment

* Repeat

Versus

* Configure git to use one's ISP's email server

* Run git format-patch

* Run git send-email

* Check email for replies

* Amend the commit, run git format-patch, and git send-email

* Reply to the maintainer email

* Repeat

To reply to emails, you can use any email client or even do that in the browser. You only need to use the format-patch and send-email commands to send patches.

<comment><USER8> 1\. Bias:

(a) You included setting up your local repo from the fork in the Github list but it's implied in the 2nd list

(b) You included "Modify the code, add, commit, push, and type a comment" in the first list: this is literally _how you use Git for normal development_. It isn't an exclusive part of using Github

2\. Network effect:

(a) Creating a Github account is a one-time step: this will be omitted for any platform with a large projectbase

(d) Most popular modern tooling/documentation/etc. are set up for the Github- ish workflows and general user knowledge of `format-patch` and `send-email` as commands is considerably more sparse.

<comment><USER7> > You included setting up your local repo from the fork in the Github list but > it's implied in the 2nd list

Presumably one would have to clone the repo in order to make the modification locally before forking. But whether or not one would fork the repo through the GUI before cloning it depends on the person. I don't know which scenario is more common. If it's the former, then they would have to handle setting up the new remote for the fork before pushing up their code.

> You included "Modify the code, add, commit, push, and type a comment" in the > first list

In the second list, I did state: "Amend the commit, run git format-patch, and git send-email" which is essentially the same thing. The only difference is that the first list implies that you make more commits (which is in line with the expected pull request workflow on Github) while the second involves amending the commit and resubmitting the patch (which is in line with the expected workflow for email based review).

> general user knowledge of `format-patch` and `send-email` as commands is > considerably more sparse.

Github explicitly tells you how to set up a remote when you create a new repo and tells you how to clone a repo and has pages that tell you how to handle pushing code up to the remote and how to set up your git config for your name and email address. They don't assume that anyone has knowledge of those commands (git push, git config --global --add user.name, git clone, git branch, git remote add, etc). There's no reason why similar quick to read documentation for git format-patch and git send-email couldn't also be provided.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


On behalf of Hims' patients, thank you for copying Ro - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/@zreitano/on-behalf-of-hims-patients-thank-you-for-copying-ro-aba99193d231 <comment><USER2> Ouch, that's blatant.</comment>


Caterina Fake's Pinwheel might have to change its name - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/25/pinweel-vs-pinwheel-caterina-fake/

<comment><USER2> A cursory search of the USPTO's trade mark registry by Pinwheel would have revealed the pre-existing registration for Pinweel.

<comment><USER3> Seriously? Maybe I'm a bit naive, but I never would have searched for pinweel if I was planning to launch as pinwheel (spelled correctly), and I had the domain name.

<comment><USER2> A search for 'Pinwheel' returns 'Pinweel' - so it appears to cover homophones not just identical spellings.

I would always suggest doing a quick search on at least the trade mark registry in the territory where you are based when you are considering a new name. Only takes a very short while...

<http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/index.jsp></comment></comment></comment>


A/B Testing Ideas - <AUTHOR> https://illuminatikarate.com/blog/ab-testing-ideas-19-proven-ab-test-ideas-to-increase-your-websites-conversion-rate/

<comment><USER2> Awesome list, very useful with patio11's article that gave a boost of motivation to A/B test more.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! I'm really glad you found it useful. Good luck with your tests :)</comment></comment>


The problem with reinforced concrete - <AUTHOR> https://theconversation.com/the-problem-with-reinforced-concrete-56078 <comment><USER2> I used to be structural engineer, and while things may have changed in the past 8 years since I left, I doubt it.

The problem with structural engineering is incentives. It is one of the reasons that I left. Most structural engineering companies are filled with conservative, boring engineers that prefer to look up pre-designed segments and don't make full use of the steel design handbook or building codes.

For example, in Canada if you have a non-load bearing brick outer face (most brick buildings in Canada) you're allowed to reduce the wind load by 10%. I was the only person I knew that knew this because I actually read the steel, concrete, and wood design handbooks front to back while I made notes. Furthermore almost nobody has read the building code "just because" they might hop to a section here or there when they need it, but they're generally not going to just sit down and read the thing.

So when I would design buildings I would be able to take advantage of a lot more things than most people. This lead to my buildings being cheaper / easier to build, which of course lead to our engineering fees _looking_ like a larger portion of the job.

The problem with reinforced concrete is the same. Engineers have no financial incentive to make alterations to their designs to make the buildings last longer. It is almost trivial to make sure steel wont rust (or to double or triple a buildings life) but it makes construction costs go up 0.01% and makes engineerings fees go up 0.1% so nobody does it. Regulators are to blame too. There are amazing concretes (Ultra High Performance Concretes) we should be using in our buildings that completely lack even needing steel because they are so ductile and strong (MPa 200 for the one I was familiar with, Ductal by Lafarge), but it's impossible to use in construction in Canada because the code is so rigid.

<comment><USER3> > Most structural engineering companies are filled with conservative, boring > engineers that prefer to look up pre-designed segments and don't make full > use of the steel design handbook or building codes.

I dare say the same is true of software engineering. I, nominally a backend engineer, know (and apply) more about HTTP than most front-end devs and architects I've met, simply because I sat down one day and read the HTTP spec. (It's not a difficult read!)

<comment><USER4> How many of us actually read the documentation and the source for the systems we use? All the options and flags for jq, wget, socat, ssh, rsync, etc. I am trying to spend about 5 minutes a day just reading man pages, esp about things I THINK I know but actually don't.

<comment><USER5> In my personal experience, the best engineers I've encountered (and learned from) have understood every system, subsystem, and interaction, all the way down to the most fundamental foundational level. And this understanding allows them to make the best decisions (because they're equipped with the best information). This knowledge doesn't come by sitting down and studying how CPU architecture works when you're building a web application. But it _does_ come from diving as deep as is required for any given task. So maybe if you're dealing with a web app performance bug and you have to crack open Chrome source code, trace it down to something that is compute-intensive, learn whatever C++ code is involved, understand how it utilizes the CPU, and learn about the specific architecture you're using that exhibits the problem, then you have ultimately obtained a significant depth and breadth of information, but at the end of it, you know and _understand_ _exactly_ why your web app performs the way it does, how to workaround it in your app, how to fix it in Chrome (or why you shouldn't), and how the CPU architecture affects the Chrome source code. Now you can apply Chrome, CPU architecture, and C++ to anything that is built upon any one of them (independently or otherwise). That's not to say you know _everything_ about each of them, but you've learned things that will help you in the future in some cases.

The most important skill here is being able to diagnose a problem and fearlessly, relentlessly employ the engineering discipline of solving whatever problem/task is at hand, and not because of observed symptoms ("hey, I turned that knob and everything was OK! I don't know why, but I can close this JIRA ticket and move on with my life. I'm a 10X engineer!") but because you understand precisely what's happening. I made the mistake of the first decade of my software engineering career learning from trial/error and observations, and while those skills are useful in some cases, the best engineers are extremely disciplined about understanding the _full_ depth of a problem before writing a line of code.

In a nutshell, I guess what I'm advocating for is _do not blindly study man pages._ The reason is because without a practical application for the knowledge, it seeps out of your brain and you forget it quickly. The exception (case in point, GP's example) is when what you're studying _does_ have a practical application or is relevant to what you spend your time doing. This has always been my problem with academic curricula (sure, some people can learn well this way, and there's definitely a minimum foundation necessary that must simply be committed to memory). Even in basic subjects like maths -- the work is rote, and we maybe get a passing grade, but often without the understanding (or the _depth_ of understanding) that is really the most important aspect of learning the subject matter.

<comment><USER6> People have time to do that while on the job? To understand something at a deep level?

<comment><USER7> I think everyone has time for it, but it requires nerves of steel. You are thinking "I could just fix this the easy way", you are feeling social pressure to quickly get to the next thing. It's easy to decide "I can't take the time to really figure this out."

But if you can ignore the pressure and stick to your guns, you end up saving time in the long run, sometimes making orders of magnitude more work possible. Most managers should appreciate that.

But it's difficult to have the nerve to do it, and it can be difficult to explain in the short term. Like most opportunities there's a cost to pay up front.

<comment><USER8> Would that we as a profession developed an encyclopedia of ways of pushing back on "Is it done yet? How much longer?" completion pressure. There's certainly a profusion of lore about PFYs and lusers, why not structural business frustrations?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This article has many problems. Most importantly, building techniques such as "steel frame", "traditional bricks and mortar", "mud brick" and "rammed earth" are far less capable than reinforced concrete. The article implies that as these are more "durable" they are superior to reinforced concrete. This is a false equivalence of staggering magnitude. Reinforced concrete is the great enabler of modern high-rise construction and civil engineering; most projects simply would not be able to be built without reinforced concrete. Without reinforced concrete the world would be a very different place.

I take special issue with the article's use of pseudoscientic false analogies.

> This means that concrete structures, for all their stone-like superficial > qualities, are actually made of the skeletons of sea creatures ground up > with rock. It takes millions upon millions of years for these sea creatures > to live, die and form into limestone. This timescale contrasts starkly with > the life spans of contemporary buildings.

This is utter drivel.

There is a valid point in that for smaller scale constructions other techniques may be applicable which are otherwise ignored; also that there are alternatives to steel as the reinforcing material, both for prestressed structures and not.

<comment><USER10> We're not running out of limestone anytime soon, but otherwise this is a bit off-target. All of the alternative construction techniques you mention have advantages over reinforced concrete. Concrete also has its advantages, but TFA is not wrong about the disadvantages.

When I traveled to Philippines earlier this year I was struck by how they use masonry in situations that in USA would be reinforced concrete. Granted, the blocks are all CMUs, but the _technique_ is masonry. I think it's because very few roads (at least in the places I traveled) would be suitable for standard 6-yard concrete trucks, whereas you can always throw a few dozen blocks on the back of a motorcycle. Of course labor costs are also a factor. However, concrete in block form is totally recyclable, while as TFA notes when poured it is not.

<comment><USER11> Aren't blocks supposed to be reinforced with rebar and columns poured through? How easy are they to recycle in practice after this? Just curious.

<comment><USER12> Yes. I believe that's the code in Los Angeles.

<comment><USER13> Yeah, if you're in an earthquake zone, like the Pacific Ring of Fire ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_of_Fire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_of_Fire)), which most certainly includes California and the Philippines, you're eventually going to be very unhappy if you don't reinforce them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I'm a civil engineer. This is bullshit. Reinforced concrete uses much less concrete because, well, you have rebar to take care of tensile stresses and concrete does well with compression so it's much more efficient, which is basic. Also, and a very important point, reinforced concrete (in general) tends to fail in non-catastrophic ways making it safer to use and easier to spot conceptual errors in the project and building process. Reinforced concrete can also be recycled, the concrete becomes structural blocks (I even worked with these before) and the rebar is steel so thats easily recycleable too. In the end, it's cheap and affordable so you can build much more with reinforced concrete than with concrete reinforced with carbon fiber which would last forever but would cost a fortune (this can also be used to reinforce reinforced concrete...) making housing unaffordable to a large part of the world. Do you also really want to spend that much more to make a project to last 500 years without using reinforced concrete? You know that goes into the equation when engineers project strucures right? Oh well, clickbait.

<comment><USER15> Why not just use straw, instead of carbon fiber, in concrete? Straw is comparable to steel. Chopped straw is used for stucco, but it can be used in reinforced concrete too. It is hard to calculate amount of straw, which is necessary to reinforce concrete, because it strength varies, but it cheap, so just triple amount of straw.

<comment> guard-of-terra Straw is biodegradable. It will degrade.

<comment><USER15> When straw/wood is enclosed in concrete with some lime, it does not rot. I saw video[1] of remains of houses built by German prisoners in Siberia using "soft concrete" \- concrete with wood chips (cement bonded particle board, AKA Arbolite, fiber reinforce concrete, Papercrete, etc.). They are looking good after about half of century without any maintenance of houses, even in broken walls without roof.

From my own experience, I saw that wood rots quickly for about 1cm (1/2") when it contacts with concrete or cement stucco, but remains intact when enclosed in cement-lime mix. IMHO, lime is important to save wood/straw from rotting.

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAiT6IRVgTE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iAiT6IRVgTE)

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

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This article makes an interesting comparison to ancient Roman concrete. While the Romans built a tremendous amount of infrastructure in concrete, survivorship bias means that the few bits that have hung around are seen as some sort of superior quality to Roman understanding of concrete.

However, if you go to Rome, _most_ of the surviving bits are millions upon millions of stacked and mortared bricks, and most of what has survived are uninteresting walls. [1] For some reason, our collective memory of Roman ruins is that they're all aged concrete or stone. But when in Rome, you end up seeing lots of this [2], which when built probably had a layer of facade material on it.

And it makes sense, stacked, weather resistant, often covered in a prettier facade, baked bricks should last more or less forever until the elements wear them down.

The widespread reintroduction of concrete as a building material really didn't happen until around the turn of the 20th century. And reinforced concrete didn't find widespread use until a few decades after that. Not particularly confusing, the first generations of buildings built with these fairly new and only partially understood materials are the buildings that the author is mostly writing about.

The real culmination of exposed, reinforced-concrete-everywhere, finally happened in the 50s with the advent of the eye cancer called brutalism. Today a tremendous number of brutalist buildings today are absolutely falling apart, and I blame that on a lack of understanding of how reinforced concrete should be used and the availability of more modern materials and perhaps an overenthusiasm and misuse of materials where they shouldn't have been.

But still, if we fast forward a thousand years, there's bound to be a percentage of those structures still around and survivorship bias in the future will lead some to speculate that the engineers of the 20th century were geniuses unrivaled by any in the future.

1 - [http://previews.123rf.com/images/13th/13th0902/13th090200009...](http://previews.123rf.com/images/13th/13th0902/13th090200009/4338560-damaged- brick-walls-in-the-ancient-Roman-city-Pompeii--Stock-Photo.jpg)

2 - [http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5185/5762585618_10a11f5a38_z.j...](http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5185/5762585618_10a11f5a38_z.jpg)

<comment><USER17> Roman concrete holds up against the erosive properties of seawater better than the materials used today. Scientists discovered it's because they used volcanic ash to make their concrete.

[http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2013/06/04/roman- concrete/](http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2013/06/04/roman-concrete/)

<comment><USER18> That's part of it, but mainly roman concrete holds up much better because they never used reinforcing rebar. Volcanic ash improves longevity further, but if they had included rebar (volcanic ash or no) all those structures would have rotted away a long time ago.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> The very first sentence of this article is a giant red flag, the comparison between the Pantheon in Rome and modern concrete is deeply misleading -- Roman concrete was a different material than modern Portland-cement/sand/gravel scheme, it had better resistance to cracking and could set under water. [1]

The rest of the article seems to be, if you think on different time-scales and use different cost-benefit criteria (e.g. include or exclude environmental effects), you get different answers about the suitability of various materials. This is indisputably true.

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

<comment><USER20> Modern concrete can set underwater, and, at least for concrete where you care about the results, you want to keep the surface wet until the concrete cures appropriately.

(IANAPE, but I took a grad level concrete course in school)

addition/edit: Quick primer. When concrete cures, it's a chemical process that converts free water into an electrostatic gel in the cement crystals. That interlocks the small and large aggregate to make a solid. If concrete dries rather than cures, then that gel doesn't form and you don't get the gel holding it together. If you heat up cured concrete enough, you'll drive out the water and make it a powder again.

If you cure something under water, it can technically continue to cure for a very long time. Normally you keep it moist for 24-48 hours, and standard testing is done at 28 days. That will get you something like 90% of the final strength, if it can continue to cure indefinitely. I've tested concrete that was semi-submerged for 40 years where the design strength was 4ksi, and it tested out at 14ksi.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I see a lot of engineers calling the article FUD and BS, what with it mentioning ancient Roman buildings and mud bricks.

I also see several commenters (myself included) wholeheartedly agreeing with the point it makes.

I think _bluthru_ hit the nail on the head somewhere below (which will soon be above?)

> _The point is that longer-lasting structures should be cheaper, but because > we don 't factor in environmental harm and lifecycle cost into the price of > things we end up with cheap buildings that exist to generate ROI ASAP._

Factoring in those kinds of costs runs contrary to mainstream economic doctrine, so the question really is whether you think that capitalism (in its current form) is doing more harm than good for our communities and/or for our species as a whole, especially including future generations.

Do you?

<comment><USER22> Cheap building to generate ROI ASAP sounds a lot like MVP to me. And MVP is what everyone here advises.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> An alternative to steel for concrete reinforcement is glass blown basalt [0], which struck my interest via its use in a project for free-floating, (geopolymer) concrete seasteading vessels [1].

[0] [http://basalt-rebar.com/](http://basalt-rebar.com/)

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

<comment><USER24> That basalt rebar is very interesting - what is the cost compared to steel?

<comment><USER23> I am afraid I don't know specifics. For a while the only suppliers were non- American (primarily Russian), so the market prices were not equitably comparable. /r/floathouse (link [1]) will have up to date information.

<comment><USER25> Interesting. I've made a quick search over Runet, it seems that basalt / basalt-plastic rebar is in large-scale production: [http://nano- sk.ru/stekloplastikovaya-armatura/bazaltovaya/](http://nano- sk.ru/stekloplastikovaya-armatura/bazaltovaya/)

They claim it's better _and_ cheaper than steel rebar. No word about disadvantages, which I assume exist (edit: found, see below).

Edit. Oh, they carry a price: [http://nano-sk.ru/price-list/](http://nano- sk.ru/price-list/) \-- 1m of d=14mm rebar costs ~$0.60. But I don't know the price for the regular steel rebar, though :)

Edit2. There's a list of disadvantages here (sorry, in Russian): [http://www.tdbazalt.com/category/materiali_dlia_stroitelstva...](http://www.tdbazalt.com/category/materiali_dlia_stroitelstva_i_otdelki/armatura_stekloplastikovaya/nedostatki_stekloplastikovoi_armaturi_minusi/)

1\. Can't stand high temperature, as basalt rebar has polymer as a binder for basalt fiber.

2\. Can bend easier than steel; will break easier than steel

3\. Can't stand alkaline environment (there're claims that some newer types of the basalt rebar don't carry this issue)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The depressing counterpoint, I suppose, is that 99% of the time, you're not building the Pantheon, you're building something that was intended to be minimally-acceptable, utilitarian, and disposable from the get-go: a parking garage, a tilt-up big-box building, a freeway on-ramp, a strip mall. All of which may well be obsolete in a few decades just because the urban environment changes rapidly.

If you could figure out a systematic way to cut the cost _and_ the lifetime of such lowbrow, mass-produced concrete structures in half, developers wouldn't hesitate, they'd jump on it immediately.

We revere longevity only in retrospect.

<comment><USER27> Most of the big-box buildings I've seen in UK recently are steel frame/breeze block/metal cladding structures on a poured concrete base. The idea being you can basically unbolt the walls when you want to take it down.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> This reminded me of a bit from 2014 where some researchers claim to have rediscovered the Roman's particular recipe for long-lasting concrete.

[http://www.pnas.org/content/111/52/18484.abstract](http://www.pnas.org/content/111/52/18484.abstract)

For laypersons [http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2877547/Why-C...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2877547/Why- Colosseum-hasn-t-collapsed-Roman-concrete-used-secret-ingredient-stand-test- time-engineers-want-copy-it.html)

</comment><comment><USER29> This article is full of FUD. What is the alternative? All these reinforced concrete problems are well understood and studied. if proper construction and design codes and maintenance guidelines are followed these structures can last a very long time.

In europe we have EuroCodes that account for this problems and to my knowledge concrete cancer is not related with steel corrosion but with a long term chemical reaction between some aggregates and cement. Remember that concrete is cement with sand and stones and the hardning chemical reactions are complex and can last for decades.

<comment><USER18> >to my knowledge concrete cancer is not related with steel corrosion but with a long term chemical reaction between some aggregates and cement.

It's called carbonatation, it reduces the concrete's pH which leads to rebar failure, and it's only going to get worse with climate change.

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

<comment><USER29> I was refering to alkali-silica reactions [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkali%E2%80%93silica_reaction...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkali%E2%80%93silica_reaction?wprov=sfla1)

<comment><USER18> Thanks, TIL!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> The only salient point this article mentions (but only briefly) is that concrete production generates a huge amount of CO2. Everything else is hogwash. In terms of strength, versatility, and cost, steel-reinforced concrete has proven to be the greatest building material humans have ever devised. It is by no means perfect, but nothing is. Concrete needs to be maintained just like anything else. With neglect it decays.

<comment><USER31> I'm a fan of brutalism, so I do like concrete buildings and find them interesting, but there's also a good case to be made about mud bricks, which the author aludes to. Yes, you'll have issues building 10-storey high buildings out of mud-bricks, but it's definitely possible to build structures (like barns) out of them that can easily last more than 100 years, without the builder having to have a civil engineering degree. I've seen one such structure with my one eyes, built by my grand-grand-father who was a peasant. The only thing you have to be careful about when building stuff out of earth is water infiltrations, otherwise you're good.

Buildings made out of earth are also better heat insulators compared to concrete. My grandma's house was always cool in the summer, while my appartment which is part of a building made out of concrete wouldn't be livable in the summer without AC.

<comment><USER30> That's an apples to oranges comparison, though. Mud bricks are a good building material, and so are a lot of other things (e.g. wood, bamboo, paper), when the structure only has to support itself and a roof. But concrete enables structures that cannot (or should not) be built with those materials.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> The real question is do we want buildings to survive 200 years? In 200 years building technology might have advanced far enough that everything is carbon fiber concrete or something far superior. People look at degradation of a structure as some kind of serious issue, but it can also be seen as a positive.

<comment><USER33> To expand on this, will our descendants have the same demands in 200 years? Will a revolution in transportation dramatically change infrastructure needs? What will employment look like, how will businesses operate? Will citizens want the structures we build in the locations we build them?

The author suggests we build structures to stand the test of time and addresses structural, economic, and environmental needs, but not societal ones. The Moai referenced are not artifacts because they weren't engineered well enough, they're artifacts because they outlived the societies that built them.

</comment></comment><comment> guard-of-terra Where I live there's a huge number of apartment blocks, most of them built in 60s and onwards, and the apartments are the sole place to live and the prime asset for most people.

They'll definitely start crumbling in a few decades and not many people will be able to afford a new home as well as deprecation of their main asset. Have no idea how this might ever resolve, frankly.

<comment><USER34> NYC will have fun times with this problem. They have thousands of mid rise public housing projects built from 1945-1975.

<comment> guard-of-terra In NYC at least most apartments aren't owned by tenants (are they?). So it'll be landlords' problems.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Surprised they didn't mention carbonatation and climate chance. tl;dr rising partial pressure of CO2 in the air leads to a spontaneous "reverse calcination" process, lowering the pH which leads to rebar failure. By 2050 most reinforced concrete buildings will be effected.

[https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/10/11/for-concrete- cl...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/10/11/for-concrete-climate- change-may-mean-shorter-lifespan/rJ8vWjSp2xRShwFmDS6lQJ/story.html)

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

[http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsale...](http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/246na2_en.pdf)

</comment><comment><USER35> I haven't been a practicing engineer since 2007 but if my memory serves me well, to avoid problems of corrosion one often used method was to increase the cover [0](distance from concrete surface to top of steel reinforcement using spacers). I can't see it mentioned anywhere in the article, will probably have to re read it...

[0] [http://www.buildinghow.com/en- us/Products/Books/Volume-A/The...](http://www.buildinghow.com/en- us/Products/Books/Volume-A/The-construction/Reinforcement- Specifications/Concrete-cover)

<comment><USER18> As both the partial pressure of CO2 in the air and the concrete temperature rises due to climate change, the depth of carbonatation (the process that lowers pH and initiates rebar corrosion) is expected to increase by 45% by 2100 under the A1FI "business as usual" emission scenario. So expect to hear more about this problem in the future.

[http://www.cipremier.com/e107_files/downloads/Papers/100/37/...](http://www.cipremier.com/e107_files/downloads/Papers/100/37/100037012.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> China has Fiberglass REbar : [https://www.alibaba.com/showroom/fiberglass- reinforcing-bar....](https://www.alibaba.com/showroom/fiberglass-reinforcing- bar.html)

<comment><USER15> Fiberglass does not bend like steel. It will crack instead, which may lead to catastrophic result.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> Research "rammed earth" and "earth ships" for details on why old structures last longer.

Rammed earth has great thermal mass which has huge benifits if controlled.

</comment><comment><USER38> Didn't epoxy coated steel rebar solve the problem of rust and "concrete cancer" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWUpMWJtgvc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWUpMWJtgvc) It's pretty much the standard now.

</comment><comment><USER39> I'm interested in the long term durability of pre-stressed concrete- in its case the reinforcement is critical.

</comment><comment><USER40> I like the look of brick. It lasts a long time too. Why don't we use it more?

<comment><USER34> High labor costs.

Also the postwar construction boom dominated by big projects killed the industry for higher end brick.

<comment><USER41> The high labor costs also resulted in brick masonry becoming a basically lost art. There was a building a few blocks away from where I used to live, where a car crash had led to a catastrophic collapse of a circular structural brick tower. It was an eye sore for years and years. The owners apparently couldn't find the skills to repair it for a long. The repair looks great but doesn't perfectly match.

Even with the hassle, structural brick buildings are great.</comment></comment></comment>


What Does the SAT Test? (2004) - <AUTHOR> http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2004/07/04/the_sat_tests/

<comment><USER2> It's interesting that the SAT-IQ "conversion" formula is (.095 X SAT Math) + (.003 X SAT Verbal) + 50.241 = IQ and that therefore one SAT math point is "worth" quite a bit more (about thirty times as much!) in IQ than one SAT verbal point.

(The formula seems suspicious, though -- 800 math, 800 verbal converts to an IQ of 129, and 500 math, 500 verbal, which is supposed to be the average college-bound student, converts to 99. The average college-bound student should have an IQ higher than the average person.)

<comment><USER3> Disagree that college bound students have higher IQs than average. There are many factors that determine one's interest in college, and means and motive aren't tied to IQ.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've never taken the SAT, but here's what I think about the ACT:

It tests the smaller of two things: your test-taking ability and your "knowledge." "Knowledge" in this case is what you have learned and retained through high school. I am being gracious by throwing test-taking ability in there, because I'm not entirely convinced there really is such a thing. I only took the ACT once, as a senior, and scored a 32 (out of 36), so I certainly hadn't specifically prepared for the type of test. I just took the test, and the questions I knew the answers to, I got right, the others I got wrong. But since almost everyone else seems to agree that being bad at test-taking can make you "choke" and score lower than what you should, I will concede that your ACT test score represents the lower of those two attributes.

</comment><comment><USER5> I don't completely agree with the article. I am a firm believer that SAT Score provides some credibility to your thinking ability but calling it an IQ test is not correct. IQ test doesn't require any syllabus, its a general methodology to determine how you intellectually analyze.

We are developing SAT prep apps for iPhone, desktop and web and I believe that people can score higher if they practice a lot which is not true for an IQ test IMO.

<comment><USER6> i agree. and i really don't like the reliance on SAT scores for college admissions. is it an indicator, sure, but it isn't extremely accurate.

<comment><USER5> I don't know of a solution better/more efficient than a written test. The education system is different in India and I like that system somewhat better. There is an entrance exam you need to give to enter into high profile colleges which has a defined syllabus but no questions are repeated and are based on your understanding of the subject rather than rote learning.

<comment><USER6> tests are very efficient, but the SAT only tests one dimension of a person. it provides a very flat picture of a potential student. i agree that the system in India sounds distinctly better, but still not perfect in my opinion.

<comment><USER5> I agree with you, but do you know of a better/more efficient solution?

<comment><USER6> i couldn't say. all i know is what doesn't work, from experience.

i'd really like a college to sit down and do a study on what really does predict success in their student body, looking at and perhaps requiring different things like IQ, SAT, ACT, high school data, etc.. test all incoming freshmen on the things they haven't already taken. etc.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I can say that I got bored during my SAT test. At the time, I was taking AP Calculus (which I also found easy), and the SAT was testing pre-calc. I sped through the answers just to get out of there. If I had actually cared, I'm pretty sure I could have scored 1600.

Edit: My point being, even if IQ and SAT are correlated, I suspect there are a large number of intelligent people for which test does not correlate. i.e. p < 1

<comment><USER8> Perhaps, but your experience does not indicate that the SAT test is not useful for college admissions. Chances are, colleges will want to admit the person who was motivated enough to complete the whole test instead of the person who was intelligent, but lazy. Intelligence without motivation is not of much use.

<comment><USER7> My point was that the correlation between SAT and IQ is not perfect; I said nothing about its usefulness for college admissions.

You also imply that there is a single 'motivation' scale. There isn't. I am highly motivated at my startup and many other things. I'm highly unmotivated at answering the same math problem for the third time with different numbers.

<comment><USER9> The psychologists seem quite certain of their "g" factor, so I assume it exists, but I doubt anyone has ever argued that an intelligence test didn't have statistical errors.

Just consider how differently teenagers mature and how that might affect their learning. Lots of them do sports instead of reading. A friend of mine never studied in school because she had an unknown eye problem; new glasses at 30 and she could read effortlessly. Some are depressed or suffer unknowingly from a disease. Etc.

Edit: As noted, I should have written "any researcher in the subject" instead of "anyone" in the first sentence. :-)

<comment><AUTHOR> _I doubt anyone has ever argued that an intelligence test didn't have statistical errors._

Certainly no professional psychologist would claim that IQ tests have no error of estimation.

<http://learninfreedom.org/iqbooks.html></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


EFF, Reddit, Mozilla, others launch Internet Defense League and Cat Signal - <AUTHOR> http://internetdefenseleague.org <comment><USER2> Well it embodies the best and the worst of internet movements.

While the foundations are good: protecting the web from bad laws, restrictions etc... the execution is really ridiculous. Imagine you're an old style Senator or representative and you see that website with a weird ass looking cat... Do you really think it's going to make them think you're anything but a joke?

I find that the words used are equally ridiculous: "League", "XXX signal".

It really feels like a little club of geeks trying to have an impact in the world and it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It could have been a great idea, it's ruined by a poor execution.

 _edit:_ I have seen a lot of negative reactions and I appreciate people taking the time to answer to me. I won't edit my previous comment but let me add some things:

I didn't mean to be insulting but if you want it to be a democratic movement you have to avoid inside jokes at all cost. It's literally filled with Reddit/ geek pop culture references and it won't take off _in the general public_ because a very large portion of the population do not understand or don't like it. It's like saying a meme out loud: you feel ridiculous.

For old style senators I am talking about basically any person over 35 that has no idea what reddit/ twitter/ cat facts are and who will find that ridiculous. Yes Senators and representatives are supposed to work for you, but it's like for everything they have to take you seriously. We belong to the Z generation but in order to talk to other generations we have to use common references and avoid cats or internet memes or super hero folklore for what it matters. Serious business in two words.

<comment><USER3> What's important is that you've found a way to feel morally superior _and_ do nothing about the problems we face today. A true internet warrior.

<comment><USER4> Whoa whoa whoa... Don't act like signing up on a website is equivalent to _doing_ something.

It's literally the _absolute least_ you could do.

<comment><USER3> No, the least you could do is make snarky comments about the people who are actually trying to do something. This isn't about 'signing up' for a website. This is about trying to mobilize a group of people that often times is not that involved with politics. The idea is that when you sign up, you'll take action on the items that the site informs you about. There is literally nothing like this on the internet for this demographic and the OP gets the most upvoted comment complaining that they used the term 'cat signal'? Politics and protesting can be fun and inviting. This has zero effect on anything except for grump old people who think that they know better. We stopped SOPA with a few days of action and a few big names stepping up. This is simply an attempt to harness that power and dedication. People who are _already_ shitting on this, on day one, while typical is still extremely sad.

<comment><USER4> > We stopped SOPA

This is what I'm worried about. Who _really_ stopped SOPA? You can bet that anyone who signs up for this will go around touting how they stopped SOPA, just like the guy next to me pretty much single handedly saved Haiti in 2010 with his $5 donation to the Red Cross.

There is a disparity between giving money so that others can continue to do work and being the one doing the work. I want that distinction clear, and to remain clear. The doctor who flew down to Haiti to personally help is infinitely more valuable than someone who donated.

EDIT: I'm not saying that this is useless or dumb. It's a step in the right direction, albeit (IMO) a small one. I just don't want to see "I signed up- I'm going to save the internet!" I think the people who really devote themselves to these causes should be respected on a different level than those that, for instance, sign up for this.

<comment><USER5> Why? Why do you need to make those distinctions? The doctor couldn't fly to Haiti if he hadn't been funded. You need a lot of different pieces working together to make big change.

<comment><USER6> But someone who posted "Like this if you love Doctors in Haiti" did very little, just as people signing up for a website do very little. I don't like to belittle "raising awareness" campaigns because I know how important they are. But there is no substitute for getting your feet on the ground or your money from your wallet. I worry that we are creating a generation of people who think posting something in their facebook feed is saving the world. It's certainly helpful, but it has to be in conjunction with real work.

People who aggravated against SOPA certainly did something -- an important thing -- but people who made hard decisions, called or emailed their representatives and really coordinated this effort did more.

<comment><USER7> This is a little different. For every person who felt they contributed to defeating SOPA, that's a person that politicians have to consider when enacting legislation. That's called _paticipatory democracy_ , and it's pretty awesome!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This part makes me uncomfortable:

> Our organization and network helped to defeat SOPA/PIPA [..] The Internet > Defense League continues this work. But it depends on its members' donations

It then goes on to ask for a donation to support staff who 'work behind the scenes'.

I think to people who are unfamiliar with what happen around the community action with SOPA and PIPA this section can be interpreted as the Internet Defense League taking credit for the defeat of the bills.

It also suggests that without financial contributions from members that this work wouldn't happen and SOPA/PIPA/what-comes-next may just succeed next time, even though this organization wasn't even around during the SOPA debate.

There is also no transparency around how this money that is raised will be spent. Who will be hired? What will they do? What will be volunteer roles and what will be hired roles? Weren't SOPA and PIPA defeated by volunteers in ad hoc communities and not paid salarymen working for a quasi online charity? Why is this not structured as a charitable organization? Why is my donation not tax deductible? Who are the people behind this? Where are they based? Why is this so United States centric? Who is backing this financially so far? Where is the about page? Is this a scam?

There should be _a lot_ more details on that page before you ask people for money.

I would have preferred that donations were directed to the EFF, and that the online organization is done by volunteers - as, you know, it has worked just fine in the past.

<comment><USER9> Considering the list of supporting sites, that are behind this project, claiming to play a crucial part of the defeat of SOPA, would be totally correct.

But they dont actually do that. They use "we" in a politically rethoric form, where they try to convince the reader what their position already is. Its like saying "we the american people, need lower taxes to be free".

Its a marketing trick.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Just donated - now a member. Will be installing the code on my blog.

If you think this is stupid and ridiculous, what exactly are _you_ doing to save the Internet?

[edit]I just became an EFF member too.

<comment><USER11> >If you think this is stupid and ridiculous, what exactly are you doing to save the Internet?

I'm holding my rock. It keeps internet-killers away.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> NEWS FLASH: Being bitter, apathetic and contrarian does not make you sound smart. This is undeniably an awesome idea. Stop searching for flaws and help.

<comment><USER13> But, but, I _am_ bitter, apathetic, and contrarian!

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> Why make the tracking code so complicated ? Couldn't it be simply written like this ? :

       <script async src="//members.internetdefenseleague.org/include/?variant=banner">

Also the url is the referrer no ?

<comment><USER15> The async property doesn't work in IE

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> It seems a little strange that they want their users to put hosted JavaScript on their sites. Just doesn't feel like "freedom" to me. Couldn't they control a lot of sites or steal information by changing that script to something malicious?

<comment><USER17> Do you have g+ / tweet / like buttons on your site? Google Analytics? Disqus? jQuery CDN?

<comment><USER10> For that matter, have you ever run "yum update httpd" without reviewing the source code first?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Really? A giant cat?

<comment><USER9> It is not supposed to be a lobbyist. It is supposed to be a poltical movement.

Its political marketing aimed at voters. It should target the type of teens on facebook, that you and i may look down upon.

As far as im concerned, they dont even go far enough. We need a comic. We need memes.

RESCUE MONORAIL CAT FROM THE CLUTCHES OF THE EVIL INTERNET HATE LEAGUE. FIRE UP YOUR MEMES AND BLAST THESE CORRUPT SENIORS OUT OF CONGRESS.

That kind of stuff!

<comment><USER19> > It should target the type of teens on facebook

The type of teen who legally can't vote? Sounds effective.

<comment><USER9> Many of them can. And they are still easier to convince, that an 80 year old that still uses racial slurs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Any idea on how this league will be governed? Does each participant vote on what should become actionable? Will it's governance be by elective representation?

<comment><USER21> Any idea on what it actually does? How does it detect "danger"? It seems more like an attempt to co-opt internet freedom movements than actually do anything at all.

<comment><USER9> Theyll be able to spam, hopefully millions of websites, at once, with the same exact political message.

If they use this sparringly ( only for things as big as SOPA ), most site owners wouldnt mind.

And the impact, together with all major cities suddenly blasting a cat light, will likely reach the news.

At which point, people like the EFF ( which are also part of this initiative ), will likely have serious, well spoken individuals available for interviews and such.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I can't believe there is so much negativity. I'm usually the guy who has something negative to say about everything, and end up in these threads where other people ask, "why so negative?"

But this? This political action is literally what killed SOPA; that's not me talking, that's straight from Dodd's mouth. Now they've developed an easy call-to-action for future, similar bills? It's genius. Politicians thrive on the historical forgetfulness of the public. It was a matter of weeks before another bill similar to SOPA was in the works. The politicians will adjust their strategy and count on less political action the "next-time-around". I hope this can prevent it.

Who cares if it's about cats and comics? That's the theme of a generation and internet culture. And (combined with their high unemployment and lower expectations of future standard of living) this generation is going to be a political force. Bank on it.

</comment><comment><USER23> Oh man, oh man, oh man, I miss putting little blue ribbons on all my Web pages' footers!! [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ribbon_Online_Free_Speech_...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ribbon_Online_Free_Speech_Campaign)

</comment><comment><USER24> As a multicultural person who has lived in more than one country, as usual when I see initiatives like this, I wonder how well they will work in China, behind the Great Firewall.

<http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/>

<http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17910953>

I posted a Chinese saying attributed to Confucius the last time we discussed an effort to use the Internet to bring about more transparency.

始吾於人也,聽其言而信其行。今吾於人也,聽其言而觀其行。"At first my attitude toward people was to listen to their words and to trust their deeds. Now my attitude toward people is to listen to their words and observe their deeds."

I listen to the words "Internet freedom should not be restricted" and I say, as people did during the 1960s civil rights movement, "Right on!" But then I observe deeds and I wonder if anyone has an effectual plan to stop the prior restraint of all print publications in China or the direct party cadre oversight of all broadcast media in China. I can access the Chinese media (and do) just fine, via the World Wide Web, but the common people of China, even the many who now have Internet access, are far from being able to access any available news source from anywhere around the world to the same degree that most Hacker News participants can.

All kinds of tough world problems would be easier to solve if the common people of China (and Russia, and a few other countries) had less restricted access to news and information, both about the country they live in and all other countries, and more opportunity to practice political dissent and open discussion of public policy, culminating in voting for national leaders in free and fair elections. If an Internet Cat Signal helps bring that about, I'm all for it. But if the Cat Signal serves mostly as yet another silly publicity tie-in for a Hollywood movie, I have better uses of my time and the server for my personal website than to link into the project.

I would really like to see an Internet freedom project that has significant advice and direction from political dissidents experienced with one-party dicatorial regimes, such as the current regime in China. Such a project could help Western Internet freedom activists better understand what issues really matter, and what technical means can overcome determined governmental opposition.

See

[http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/july- dec12/dictators_07...](http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/world/july- dec12/dictators_07-16.html)

for examples of research on this important topic.

Best wishes to everyone working for more free flow of information to more people all over the world.

<comment><USER25> I think the point of the cat signal is nothing to do with promotion of Hollywood movies and everything with trying to rally the people who have a strong understanding and interest in the freedom of the internet.

Think something like the NRA or NAACP, but for the internet. Things like the EFF are cool but not nearly as popular and accessible as things like NRA.

Unfortunately there is very little which western political groups can do to force the hand of the Chinese government with regard to censorship.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> From Techdirt:

 _"Earlier this year, I wrote about the Hacking Society gathering, put on by Union Square Ventures. During that discussion, Clay Shirky brought up the idea of an "Internet Volunteer Fire Department" and Tiffiniy Cheng, from Fight for the Future, explained the IDL and how they were already working on it. You can watch that discussion to get a sense of the thinking behind this effort:"_

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=X...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XDTD9laPQWo)

</comment><comment><USER26> Too bad this seems very US centric...

<comment><USER27> If you're in the UK you could do a lot worse than join the ORG[1]. Maybe non- US resident HN'ers can co-opt this thread to post their own local feline alert movements.

[1] - <http://www.openrightsgroup.org/>

<comment><USER28> It's a shame non-US residents would have to set up something locally.

I had hoped for a truly global 'Internet Defense League', which then could have smaller branches for country/region specific issues.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Cripes, they've still got that shitty name.

Anyone from the United Kingdom will immediately associate the name with the English Defence League, a violent far-right Islamophobic street protest movement.

As branding ideas go, having a name that has that connotation is a really dumb choice.

</comment><comment><USER30> Did they avoid using bats for copyright reasons?-) Cat doesn't cut it as much as bat I guess.

<comment><USER31> It's the internet. We like cats. Cute cat pictures make the internet work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> <http://i.imgur.com/K5Y88.png>

</comment><comment><USER33> At the risk of being productive, what is the benefit of using this "service" over posting my own message on my website? (Honest question)

</comment><comment><USER34> Oddly, signing up wouldn't work for me in chrome...only Firefox worked. When I submitted the form in chrome, is just reloaded the page.

<comment><USER35> Worked for me in chrome.

</comment></comment><comment><USER36> "bad monopolies".. so which monopolies are good?

<comment><USER37> Monopolies are not inherently bad. A monopoly on some good or service might be that way because it provides the best product at a fair price and there's no way somebody else could beat them. It's only when a monopoly starts using its position of power to either unfairly gain advantage in a similar market, start screwing over customers that they become "bad," or some other tactic that ruins competition or hurts consumers.

<comment><USER38> > Monopolies are not inherently bad.

Yes they are. They are bad because they are a massive risk center to their customers. For a small industry this is just kind of annoying, but for a massive one it can have a detrimental effect on the entire economy and not having massive single points of failure in your economy should be (and sometimes is) considered a matter of national security.

<comment><USER6> What about wireless spectrum? Should we just give access to spectrum to everyone who wants it? Your radio, cell phone and wireless Internet would stop working within weeks, I'm sure. Sometime monopoly is not only good, but necessary.

<comment><USER38> That the status quo for RF spectrum is that of government granted monopoly in most of the world is not evidence that this is a necessary way to operate. In fact there have been numerous proposals to change the regulation of important RF ranges into a more typical commons based usage model. e.g. the "whitespace" wireless broadband systems that are still fighting their way through the FCC regulatory quagmire in the US.

I'd even argue that the regional monopoly system we currently have actually frequently does have to act in communal ways in the best interests of different providers across regulatory regions. People without billions of dollars on the table just aren't allowed in those conversations.

<comment><USER6> I'm not entirely sure that we have locked out people without billions of dollars. I followed closely and commented on the low power FM rollout (I managed a college radio station at the time) and though it wasn't perfect, I do feel it was a major step. It allowed many small broadcasters to enter the market that would not otherwise have had an opportunity.

I don't have anything against whitespace spectrum (though I do feel it becomes a shoving match of who has the biggest tower), but there are certain applications that demand a monopolized spectrum, such as cell phones. If providers were not able to provide national, dedicated networks, the cell phone industry as we know it could not exist. This is not to say that cell phones wouldn't exist (perhaps just a patchwork of regional providers), but the level of seamless service that consumers have come to demand would not. Even a patchwork of regional carriers would require regionalized monopolies. Why would you go to the trouble and cost of building a tower if someone can just build another, larger one next to it?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Haha yeah! Fuck 'thinking,' I want a cat on the internet to tell me to yell at senators! Absolutely nothing about this feels like mob rule!

<comment><USER13> You're not terribly familiar with the concepts of democracy, right?

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> I just cant take such initiatives seriously if they have Facebook-Buttons...

<comment><USER40> How else do you propose they get the word out without Facebook/Twitter etc. buttons?

<comment><USER39> I'm not against using these buttons, the harmful/annoying thing is that they're used to set tracking cookies. The most simple solution would be to put them on an extra page or only enable them when the user clicks some button. But I'm sure if smart people think about it they find much more solutions. Obviously the designers of this site didnt, and thats what I dont like- being against "bad monopolies" and giving FB more data? Seriously?

<comment><USER8> use a browser that blocks third party cookies by default. safari does, opera does and google has an option buried somewhere 9 clicks away in the settings.

<comment><USER41> I think the poster has a legitimate point. As an end user you can protect yourself, but as an organization that cares about Internet freedom it's a legitimate concern to consider: "Are we enabling tracking through the use of our advocacy, and if so can we avoid that."

Although, I wouldn't go so far as to say that I can't take them seriously because they decided to use the buttons.

<comment><USER42> And this is why movements fail, because everyone wants to add their own agenda.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that privacy is not a worthwhile concern, but this movement seems to be about protecting the Internet from government abuse, not about privacy practices of private companies. Sure, it _could_ be about both, but that would dilute the message and create a handicap, especially if it means having to avoid some of the primary methods of communication online.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


BeanIO for .NET as PCL - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/FubarDevelopment/beanio-net

<comment><AUTHOR> This is a hand-made port of BeanIO from Java to .NET which was changed in the following aspects:

* Support of .NET generics

* Availability as PCL (.NET 4.5, Win8, Win Phone 8.1, Xamarin.iOS/Android)

* Scheme handlers to support loading of mappings from any place

* Available as NuGet package

All original unit tests were ported (over 300) and should therefore mostly behave in the same way as the original BeanIO project.</comment>


Ask HN: Which game engine is the easiest for a Beginner to learn? - <AUTHOR> Hi, I'm a student that has been self-teaching coding for a while now. I'm trying to create a game just to challenge my capabilities.<p>If I were to develop a simple Android game, would Unity be a good choice? <comment><USER2> For mobile game development, I started with Unity. The video tutorials on their website are free and helpful to get at least a basic understanding of game development.

Then I tried out Unreal. I found that the concepts I learned in Unity carried over to Unreal.

I'm not a pro at either, but I did release a couple small games in Unity. I would start by at least watching the videos on Unity's website.</comment>


How do people working at twitter feel about benefiting from swine flu? - <AUTHOR>

True, most news organization do benefit from bad news.<p>But twitter would probably benefit much more and play a greater role in spreading panic (e.g., from unfounded rumors, exaggeration of the threat, etc.). <comment><USER2> But this is only the latest in a long list of events that has flooded twitter with useless/false/panicky/retarded comments. Do they censor/moderate all stories? Or none? It seems hard to draw a line in between (blatant illegality aside)...</comment>


Show HN: Swagger Inspector - Test APIs and Autogenerate OAS 3.0 - <AUTHOR> https://inspector.swagger.io/ <comment><USER2> I'm a heavy OAS 2.0 user, but I'm terrified to upgrade because existing tools barely work with 2.0. Not many are available for 3.0. Even official codegen is mostly broken, in my experience.

I haven't yet found a single tool that correctly, fully supports the spec (except Swagger Editor). Many don't even support references! The most egregious is possibly the AWS API Gateway implementation, which is just false advertising, really.

<comment><USER3> Did you try Spotlight.io's tool? They're local to Austin, TX (where I live) and seem to work heavily on this.

<comment><USER4> FYI for anyone who hadn't heard of this tool, the parent made a typo -- it should be stoplight.io

<comment><USER3> Yes, you're right - it's an unmemorable startup name and I admit I made a typo</comment></comment></comment></comment>


NSA disguised itself as Google to spy, say reports - <AUTHOR> http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57602701-38/nsa-disguised-itself-as-google-to-spy-say-reports/ <comment><USER2> Here's a direct link to the NSA slide explaining the MITM attack (originally published by Fantastico in Brazil):

[http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130910/10470024468/flying...](http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130910/10470024468/flying- pig-nsa-is-running-man-middle-attacks-imitating-googles-servers.shtml)</comment>


Python Library for Amadeus Travel Innovation Sandbox API - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/ardydedase/amadeus-python

<comment><AUTHOR> Features include:

\- Flight Inspiration Search allows you to answer the question: Where can I go within a given travel budget?

\- Extensive Flight Search allows you to answer the question: When is the best date to fly?

\- Low-Fare Search lets you find the cheapest one way or return itineraries.

\- Hotel Lowest Price Search by center point/radius and by latitude/longitude window.

\- Car Rental Availability Search by center point/radius and by airport.

\- Trains & Rail supports Rail station auto-complete and information.

\- CO2 Emissions Data average per passenger by origin and destination.</comment>


Chinese farmer builds his own prosthetic limb - <AUTHOR> http://kotaku.com/5935251/chinese-farmer-is-both-luke-skywalker-and-iron-man

<comment><USER2> See also the Jaipur Foot, a $35 prosthetic leg used by hundreds of thousands of people:

<http://www.jaipurfoot.org/03_Technology_history.asp></comment>


Show HN: Kyso – Publish Your Jupyter Notebooks as Blog Posts - <AUTHOR> Hi HN - the founders of kyso here.
Kyso (https://kyso.io) is a blogging platform for data science. We render your jupyter notebooks, including all code, interactive visualisations and rich markdown, as awesome data blogs.
Upload existing notebooks, import your repos from Github and start brand new Jupyterlab environments in the cloud, all for free.
And then publish and share your blogs with the community!
Have a look here for a few example posts on our platform: https://kyso.io/jamesle/fifa18 https://kyso.io/vanaurum/algorithmic-portfolio-optimization https://kyso.io/Don/a-journey-to-the-tip-of-neural-networks https://kyso.io/waldohiding/twitter
Happy to hear any and all feedback! <comment><USER2> Looks cool. What are the main advantages of using this over something like nbviewer or even binder?

<comment><USER3> Kyso is kind of like nbviewer + binder.

With nbviewer you need to self host the notebook somewhere, and there are no profiles - so you can't keep all your work together.

With Kyso you can upload a notebook, import from github, or open Jupyter in the cloud and then publish your work, its all integrated.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Great Product! Love to use it By the way it would be great if you configure the swap file to be setup for each new instance.

</comment><comment><USER5> Very exciting product!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you! Let us know if you have any questions..

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> Hi all - Eoin one of the founders of Kyso here, happy to answer any questions!

<comment><USER6> What do you think of Github acquisition? I know it's offtopic, but you see yourself as a Github for data science, right?

<comment><USER3> Kind of like Github + Medium - because a lot of data-science is narrative based, so the presentation of results and insights is very important.

Thanks why we hide the code by default on the notebooks and we work hard to make interactive charts (like bokeh, d3) work perfectly.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> gryd also has similar functionality (gryd.us)

<comment><USER8> [https://gryd.us/one-click-jupyter-notebook-sharing/](https://gryd.us/one- click-jupyter-notebook-sharing/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Looks really cool, awesome work.</comment>


Apple says no to app that detects net neutrality violations - <AUTHOR> https://boingboing.net/2018/01/18/apple-says-no-to-app-that-dete.html <comment><USER2> Apple says no to just about every app.

This app seems to offer low functionality. The way around this is to add more features, the re-submit. I've been through the process before, sometimes what you add doesn't have to be much.</comment>


What Is Business Waiting For? Start hiring today. - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/16/opinion/nocera-what-is-business-waiting-for.html

<comment><USER2> Uncertainty leads to more conservative investment and a greater demand for savings to absorb exogenous shocks. There is a great deal of regulatory uncertainty about obamacare amongst other things.

<comment><USER3> Honestly, the fact it might be _Defunded_ is the issue to me. I can't afford to offer healthcare in the old regime.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> If businesses aren't hiring, it's because they don't see the benefits of a new hire exceeding the costs of a new hire. Begging businesses to please please ignore the costs in the spirit of amity and, ahem, not proving the numerous policies the NYT has agitated for that have the effect of raising the cost of an employee a bad idea (a full listing of which would take quite a while!), isn't going to work. Any business foolish enough to do so will simply find itself outcompeted. It turns out employers are not in fact a font of endless money that can be without cost harnessed for the purposes of social engineering by the government. Cost/benefit analyses can _never_ be ignored.

<comment><AUTHOR> Did you read all the way to the end of TFA?

<comment><USER4> Yes. It solves the _wrong problem_. The problem is that the cost of an employee exceeds the benefits. Everybody agreeing to take on employees whose costs exceed their benefits is just a mutual suicide pact. You can't get around that fact. If the benefits exceeded the costs, they would already be hiring, and there would be no problem to solve. If the costs exceed the benefits, then slapping _yet more_ costs into the equation, even if everybody agrees to shoulder them, doesn't solve the problem!

And the idea that you can get entire industries to agree to mutual suicide is just idiocy. In the startup world, we call that a "boil the ocean" plan. Businesses would have massive incentives to defect.

This is all just blithering economic idiocy from top to bottom. (Of course, in NYTland, people never respond to economic incentives, and a business is _prima facie_ acting immorally if their income exceeds their expenditures. Also, cost/benefit analysis is a radical and controversial political idea that must be downvoted, rather than a simple, direct consequence of basic economic reality.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> The interesting part of this article is the "contingent commitment facility"... kind of like Kickstarter for new jobs. Or maybe more like the opposite of mutually-assured destruction?

</comment><comment><USER5> As far as I know, the NY Times itself has been laying off staff for the last few years, not hiring new people.</comment>